
The Joy of Standards - fanf2
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/opinion/sunday/standardization.html
======
metaphor
> _Access to standards also poses challenges. Since the consensus-building
> process is costly, organizations like ANSI often try to cover expenses by
> selling or licensing access to standards documents. For example, the book of
> standards for concrete blocks and masonry structures costs $150. This
> business model strikes many critics as unjust, since private standards can
> be built into regulations, yet sometimes only citizens who pay can look at
> them._

This. Incorporation by reference is a real problem.

Carl Malamud--the lawyer behind law.resource.org and public.resource.org--has
spoken a bit on this topic.

Just wanted to highlight this blurb[1] from a PHMSA committee discussing the
impact of commercial standards incorporated by reference as it applies to
federal regulation:

 _The only common thread that I see in associations in terms of their business
model--and they are businesses despite being not-for-profit, and 501(c)(3)s or
(c)(6)s--that you charge somebody to be a member, you use those members and
their intellectual property to develop products, and then you sell them back
to them. It 's a crazy business model in some way. You can't imagine how that
would work._

[1] [https://youtu.be/Sdm698P2AkA?t=88](https://youtu.be/Sdm698P2AkA?t=88)

------
_asummers
Coding to an API spec is one of the most freeing things I have done as a
backend engineer. We use JSONAPI at work, and while it still leaves things
open to interpretation and places to fill in gaps, having a standard just
frames everything for the better. Tooling can be created on either side with
explicit expectations, and we can give new employees a link to the spec to
know how things are supposed to work. It's great.

------
gcb0
I grew up referencing RFCs in network software land. Then I got a few gigs
with eletronics and the first years were the most depressive of my life. every
step started with a research for some standard, then the request to purchase
it, then in some cases the mailing of some agreement contract, then the wait,
to finally see the standard just referenced some other standard, so back to
step one.

~~~
Freak_NL
It's the same in information technology too when you move beyond the actual
protocols and languages (which tend to be free and open). You get the joy of
having to buy some healthcare related standard from your national registry,
only to find that it refers to the corresponding ISO standards with hardly a
change, so you get to shell out some Swiss Francs for one of those.

Sensibly enough, the Dutch government made a set of related healthcare IT
standards free of charge when the legislature started mandating their use (NEN
7510, 7512, 7513), but they still reference loads of non-free ISO standards
for the most trivial of things. You don't really know whether a reference is
relevant or not without looking it up.

When you read these things it is always a relief to find a reference to an
IETF RFC; that at least means you get a searchable HTML document available at
a reliable location for anyone to read.

------
my_first_acct
A pitfall not mentioned in the article: a private-industry member of the
standard-setting body may fail to disclose that they are applying for a patent
on an essential component of the standard.

For instance, in the 1990s, the oil company Unocal managed to insert a
patented technology into the mandatory Reformulated Gasoline standards in
California [1]. Eventually Unocal was hit by a class-action lawsuit and an FTC
action, but that took years, and in the meantime all refiners in California
had to pay royalties to Unocal in order to comply with the state mandate.

[1] [http://www.greenpatentblog.com/2008/09/01/chevron-to-pay-
cal...](http://www.greenpatentblog.com/2008/09/01/chevron-to-pay-california-
drivers-48m-to-settle-unocal-patent-suit/)

~~~
philpem
This has happened with the ETSI DMR spec. Several key technologies needed to
implement it require patent licences from Motorola. On the plus side, ETSI
requires patent disclosures, and those are on their website.

MPEG is similarly encumbered.

------
type0
Not all standards are for the good, sometimes it's just part of the anti-
competitive measures

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel)

~~~
appleiigs
Thanks for the interesting read. I think the WSJ should have touch upon “open
standards” vs. the standards aka patents. They may have alluded to it, but
only slightly. WSJ kinda missed the boat here.

~~~
frosted-flakes
This is a New York Times article.

------
subjoriented
Overall I loved this article, in particular the anecdote about construction
materials. One sentence jumped out for me.

> These facts should prompt some reflection about the exercise of power in a
> technological society: Amid concerns about the excesses of market power and
> government regulation, nobody seems to worry much about the private groups
> of experts who created 80 percent of the laptop’s standards.

While I think this is overlooked, sure, I don't think this holds very true. I
and other engineers I know do worry about which private companies and
interests are controlling standards, and what perverse incentives are
associated with them.

Recently, there was a big scandal and worry around the NSA creating
subvertible weaknesses in technologies deployed worldwide by working on
standards committees (a reason academics and the open source community has
worked hard to produce alternatives).

Another example that comes to mind are the stardards around
Javascript/ECMAScript. During the first few "rounds", there was an
anticompetitive effort being waged against browser giants like Microsoft, who
were thought to have been pursuing standards choices that favored their market
positions.

I'd say there's lower public visibility into these processes, but it isn't
like these conversations aren't happening.

------
austincheney
> Our modern existence depends on things we can take for granted. Cars run on
> gas from any gas station, the plugs for electrical devices fit into any
> socket

As a world traveler I can attest to how untrue that statement is.

~~~
wink
Eh, it could be a lot worse. In my limited experience it works fine in regards
to "one plug per country" in most of the developed world.

------
Existenceblinks
The web stuff standard, lately, is more like big corps' OSS projects, some are
marketing heavy.

~~~
a_imho
[https://www.w3.org/2017/09/pressrelease-eme-
recommendation.h...](https://www.w3.org/2017/09/pressrelease-eme-
recommendation.html.en#testimonials)

~~~
kkarakk
C level management gotta get their name out there somehow

------
ChuckMcM
Something I liked about the IETF, no cost to get the standard, there was
always a running code example. It changed as it go too dangerous.

There isn't any reason to have these big organizations as "standards bodies",
all you really need is trademark protection and a test suite. And not even
that some times.

I often point people to the Arduino "standard" which immortalized some poor
sods PCB layout mistake in spacing the shield connectors.

Basically you define a standard (no consensus required, it just has to be
useful). Give it a trademarked name. Offer to let anyone use it on their gear
for a one time license fee. Then market/sell/advocate things with the
trademarked name until you get people associating the name with the standard
thing you have. And at that point you're done. If your licensing price is
reasonable (say under $25,000), people will just license it and use it rather
than try to compete with it.

~~~
fanf2
I'm curious about the Arduino mistake - do you have a reference or URL?

~~~
JdeBP
[https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/941/7277](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/941/7277)

------
ggm
USB-C and the resisting walk of Apple.

The mandatory XKCD comic.

The last minute envelope (or napkin) design job Pike and Thompson did on UTF-8

Its 220 volts right? not 240, or 250. Or that abominable 110. Anyway, at least
its 50 hz. Sorry, sorry, 60hz. Except when its DC and its 48v. Except when the
DC is PoE and its 32V to 60V depending...

~~~
gpvos
And the metric system.

~~~
philpem
At least the 1-10-100 scaling makes metric easy for critters with 10 digits...

And calculations like "how much energy is needed to heat 1 litre of water by
10 Celsius" are a simple multiplication task.

