5 ms·

It doesn't make sense to require authentication on chargers, because then either only a small elite group can make chargers and charge insane prices, or everyon

It doesn't make sense to require authentication on chargers, because then either only a small elite group can make chargers and charge insane prices, or everyone can make a charger after licensing the authentication procedure and then we're back at square one. It doesn't solve the problem, it moves the stupid somewhere else.

f_allwein 11y ago
well, there is a growing problem around counterfeit chargers and there are good reasons to use (more expensive) original ones - see e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 So it makes sense to regulate chargers somehow. Not sure if this is the best solution, but if we can prevent the small elite group from charging insane prices, that could work.
f_allwein 11y ago
well, there is a growing problem around counterfeit chargers and there are good reasons to use (more expensive) original ones - see e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 So it makes sense to regulate chargers somehow. Not sure if this is the best solution, but if we can prevent the small elite group from charging insane prices, that could work.
foota 11y ago
Not necessarily, the certification could involve testing, similar to how I believe wifi certification works.
MichaelBurge 11y ago
If you have an authentication procedure, you can do things like force the manufacturer to put down a security deposit, do background checks on the applying company to make sure they have history, or force him to undergo some kind of standardized testing on the product. It doesn't help on a technical level, but helps on a social one. Game consoles historically have done all of these: You have to spend tens of thousands on a developer kit, they often prefer to see companies with a history, and they review your game before they allow you to sell it. I think all of these do help increase the quality. The negative of course is that you end up with a walled garden.
- striking 11y ago
  That means we'll get to see low or slow (or no!) rates of adoption, like with Thunderbolt. Instead of getting cool, inexpensive eGPU or other external PCIe tech, we have to pay upwards of $200 just to connect our existing PCIe cards. And take note of the cost difference between external hard drives that incorporate Thunderbolt rather than USB3.0: they're way more expensive. What's more convenient for consumers? USB3.0, not Thunderbolt. Even though Thunderbolt is way more interesting and has way more promise (it's the entire PCIe bus, exposed!), it was nearly stillborn because of its inane licensing.
  - anexprogrammer 11y ago
    I'd prefer rigorous licencing and somewhat expensive authentication to the current USB free for all where a £5 charger can destroy your £500 device. If we end up replacing the current market where chargers run £1-£30 with one where they're £8-£35, but can be confident of reasonable levels of basic electrical functionality and safety, I'd be happy enough.
    - noja 11y ago
      Good for you. Then you can go and buy the authenticated charger, and others can move on to something else.
    - MichaelBurge 11y ago
      My surge protector comes with a $10,000 mini-insurance policy if it fails to protect against a surge. It seems like something similar could be done for any market: Buy up 10,000 USB chargers for cheap, have them all inspected, underwrite an insurance policy that reimburses the customer for manufacturing defects, and charge more. Have a backup policy with a big insurance company for the sole purpose of assuring customers that they have someone to file a claim with in the event that you're bankrupt. You don't even need a standards consortium to do it.
ghshephard 11y ago
Well, define "Insane" - if we're talking an extra $5-$7 on a $20 charger, I, personally, am completely fine with that as long as it means I can rely that it will perform to spec, not damage my equipment, and provide full data rate performance. Particularly how important USB chargers are every single day of my life. This is a much bigger deal with USB 3.1, as according to http://www.extremetech.com/computing/197145-reversible-usb-type-c-finally-on-its-way-alongside-usb-3-1s-10gbit-performance http://www.extremetech.com/computing/197145-reversible-usb-t..., we're looking at up to 100 watts of power being sent down the wire - I very, very, very much want to be certain that the gear I'm connecting to the charger doesn't get torched by the wrong power levels. I think there is a reasonable middle ground between "Small Elite Group" and "Everyone" - I.E. given that the global market for USB chargers will be on the order of approx 1 Billion units/year (certainly more than 100 million, and probably less than 10 Billion) - and given that a 4-port charger goes for about $20 today, presuming the cost of those chargers goes to, say, $27, then that's $27 Billion revenue/year. (Some chargers will be single/dual port, but other chargers will be more expensive/featured - we're schwagging here). Probably sufficient to support on the order of 2-3 thousand companies that have been certified, presuming that each company needs to drive around 10mm revenue/year after certified their product(s). I'm satisfied with being limited to 2000 or so USB charger vendors of hopefully higher quality, than 10,000+ of who-knows quality.
- gambiting 11y ago
  The problem is that there are other countries out there apart from UK, US, Germany and other rich western ones. Where I'm from(Poland) the minimum wage is about $2.60/hour at the moment. And it's not like Apple/Samsung/Sony/any other big manufacturer sell chargers cheaper just because we earn less. Original Apple USB charger costs about $30 here - that's more than a day of work for a lot of people. Those people are going to look for cheap USB chargers, even if they are sub standard quality - and the market will fill that niche one way or the other.
  - saiya-jin 11y ago
    buying overpriced equipment (apple) while complaining that with low wage you really feel the difference of price for a freakin' charger doesn't make much sense.
mtgx 11y ago
If they are certified I don't think that would happen.

f_allwein 11y ago

well, there is a growing problem around counterfeit chargers and there are good reasons to use (more expensive) original ones - see e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11325150 So it makes sense to regulate chargers somehow. Not sure if this is the best solution, but if we can prevent the small elite group from charging insane prices, that could work.

f_allwein 11y ago

foota 11y ago

Not necessarily, the certification could involve testing, similar to how I believe wifi certification works.

MichaelBurge 11y ago

If you have an authentication procedure, you can do things like force the manufacturer to put down a security deposit, do background checks on the applying company to make sure they have history, or force him to undergo some kind of standardized testing on the product. It doesn't help on a technical level, but helps on a social one. Game consoles historically have done all of these: You have to spend tens of thousands on a developer kit, they often prefer to see companies with a history, and they review your game before they allow you to sell it. I think all of these do help increase the quality. The negative of course is that you end up with a walled garden.

striking 11y ago
That means we'll get to see low or slow (or no!) rates of adoption, like with Thunderbolt. Instead of getting cool, inexpensive eGPU or other external PCIe tech, we have to pay upwards of $200 just to connect our existing PCIe cards. And take note of the cost difference between external hard drives that incorporate Thunderbolt rather than USB3.0: they're way more expensive. What's more convenient for consumers? USB3.0, not Thunderbolt. Even though Thunderbolt is way more interesting and has way more promise (it's the entire PCIe bus, exposed!), it was nearly stillborn because of its inane licensing.
- anexprogrammer 11y ago
  I'd prefer rigorous licencing and somewhat expensive authentication to the current USB free for all where a £5 charger can destroy your £500 device. If we end up replacing the current market where chargers run £1-£30 with one where they're £8-£35, but can be confident of reasonable levels of basic electrical functionality and safety, I'd be happy enough.
  - noja 11y ago
    Good for you. Then you can go and buy the authenticated charger, and others can move on to something else.
  - MichaelBurge 11y ago
    My surge protector comes with a $10,000 mini-insurance policy if it fails to protect against a surge. It seems like something similar could be done for any market: Buy up 10,000 USB chargers for cheap, have them all inspected, underwrite an insurance policy that reimburses the customer for manufacturing defects, and charge more. Have a backup policy with a big insurance company for the sole purpose of assuring customers that they have someone to file a claim with in the event that you're bankrupt. You don't even need a standards consortium to do it.

ghshephard 11y ago

Well, define "Insane" - if we're talking an extra $5-$7 on a $20 charger, I, personally, am completely fine with that as long as it means I can rely that it will perform to spec, not damage my equipment, and provide full data rate performance. Particularly how important USB chargers are every single day of my life. This is a much bigger deal with USB 3.1, as according to http://www.extremetech.com/computing/197145-reversible-usb-type-c-finally-on-its-way-alongside-usb-3-1s-10gbit-performance http://www.extremetech.com/computing/197145-reversible-usb-t..., we're looking at up to 100 watts of power being sent down the wire - I very, very, very much want to be certain that the gear I'm connecting to the charger doesn't get torched by the wrong power levels. I think there is a reasonable middle ground between "Small Elite Group" and "Everyone" - I.E. given that the global market for USB chargers will be on the order of approx 1 Billion units/year (certainly more than 100 million, and probably less than 10 Billion) - and given that a 4-port charger goes for about $20 today, presuming the cost of those chargers goes to, say, $27, then that's $27 Billion revenue/year. (Some chargers will be single/dual port, but other chargers will be more expensive/featured - we're schwagging here). Probably sufficient to support on the order of 2-3 thousand companies that have been certified, presuming that each company needs to drive around 10mm revenue/year after certified their product(s). I'm satisfied with being limited to 2000 or so USB charger vendors of hopefully higher quality, than 10,000+ of who-knows quality.

gambiting 11y ago
The problem is that there are other countries out there apart from UK, US, Germany and other rich western ones. Where I'm from(Poland) the minimum wage is about $2.60/hour at the moment. And it's not like Apple/Samsung/Sony/any other big manufacturer sell chargers cheaper just because we earn less. Original Apple USB charger costs about $30 here - that's more than a day of work for a lot of people. Those people are going to look for cheap USB chargers, even if they are sub standard quality - and the market will fill that niche one way or the other.
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  buying overpriced equipment (apple) while complaining that with low wage you really feel the difference of price for a freakin' charger doesn't make much sense.

mtgx 11y ago

If they are certified I don't think that would happen.