4 ms·

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 comp

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.

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.