[lug] Why is it SO easy to destroy cloud environments?

[Bear Giles]

Standards, like patents, can also be used to stiffle competition if they
make that 'level playing field' one that you can only play in if you're
already a major player. But if a government-backed standard creates an
unreasonable burden I can call my representative. If an industry-backed
standard does so I'm utterly powerless.

But overall, yeah, it's a complex issue with no single answer. Ad hoc,
industry-based standards can be a lot more responsive to new technologies
than a process that has to go through a government bureaucracy. On the
other hand the cost of Microsoft doing things its own way in MSIE must have
cost tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars as individual
sites had to put massive resources into making their sites work with
multiple browsers AND the fact that so many sites refused to created a high
entry burden for new browsers.


On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Jeffrey S. Haemer <jeffrey.haemer at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Bear Giles <bgiles at coyotesong.com> wrote:
>
>> The cynical among us would say it's also because we leave no stone
>> unturned in our efforts to maximize profits for some (but not all)
>> businesses.
>
>
> The cynical among us would say any number of things about any subject
> under the sun. God knows I have. :-)
>
> I was only pointing out an objective difference between standards here and
> elsewhere that lots of folks, in the US and out, are unaware of.
>
> If anyone out there is interested in standards, and wants to swap
> standards-related opinions and experiences, come to the Southern Sun some
> Thursday night and we can do it over beer.
>
> I, myself, may have one or two things to contribute, and I'll be there.
> You too, Bear?
>
> I don't know if or what other countries pay for their standards but here
>> it can be quite expensive to get a copy of the actual standards.
>
>
> Depends. All standards cost money, but different production models have
> different funding methods, even within the US.
>
> When I wanted my own POSIX 1003.1 standard, I paid the IEEE directly. When
> I wanted my own ANSI C standard, I got one from the federal government,
> which had printed up copies as a FIPS (Federal Information Processing
> Standard). The first, I paid for directly. The second, all of you paid for
> in taxes.
>
> Each model has pluses and minuses, both philosophical and practical. How
> they balance out depends on who you are.
>
> There are a lot of problems with government-backed standards but there's
>> also a lot of benefits in making sure there's an even playing field.
>>
>
> Absolutely!  All standards, government or not, level playing fields to
> different degrees and in a variety of ways.
>
> And although I've been describing de-jure standards, even de-facto
> standards level playing fields. I don't have to argue the relative merits
> of M$ Word and troff to admit that if I'm hiring an office admin, I'll find
> more candidates who know Word.
>
> --
> Jeffrey Haemer <jeffrey.haemer at gmail.com>
> 720-837-8908 [cell], http://seejeffrun.blogspot.com [blog],
> http://www.youtube.com/user/goyishekop [vlog]
> *פרייהייט? דאס איז יאַנג דינען וואָרט.*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: irc.hackingsociety.org port=6667 channel=#hackingsociety
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/pipermail/lug/attachments/20121022/09bfb0ce/attachment.html>