4 ms·
> Please tell me which authority is in charge of password complexity. There are numerous authorities around the world who mandate this. Last time I checked, th
by AmericanChopper 4y ago
> Please tell me which authority is in charge of password complexity.
There are numerous authorities around the world who mandate this. Last time I checked, the PCI DSS required conventional password complexity, and if you want to process credit cards, then you must comply with the PCI SSC’s standards. Central banks all around the world impose security standards on retail banks. Governments all over the world impose security standards on their vendors, and upon other industries that they regulate. NIST and the NCSC should be applauded for their innovation here, but they’re absolutely not the only regulating authorities in the world, and it took them a shockingly long time to adopt this incredibly simple change.
> What makes you think that the USB standards committee didn't create the USB-C standard in anticipation of this and are happy that their connector became standard?
I’m sure there’s not a standards committee in the world that would be unhappy about being enshrined into the law. But that doesn’t mean it’s appropriate to regulate this with legislation, and doesn’t change the fact that legislation like this stifles innovation. Innovation is a bottom up process. Innovation happens when small groups of people come up with something new, and gradually convince other people to adopt it by demonstrating its value to them. Changes to regulation can only happen top down. Any attempt to innovate in a regulated context eventually hits a wall where innovative experimentation must gain the blessing of the regulating authority before it progresses any further.
It’s easy to advocate for this trade off when safety is involved. It’s no less stifling, in fact when a regulation is created to prevent a serious harm, it’s substantially more stifling and difficult to change. But the benefit of that trade off is very simple to understand. Regulating cellphone charging cables however, does not fall into that category, and the costs imposed by the regulation are of a highly dubious value. How many cables did you use 20 years ago, that you’re still happy using today? I can’t think of a single example in my personal life. I can only think of one that I begrudgingly use. The USB C connector will be 14 years old by the time the EU’s regulations are done rolling out.
- Eisenstein 4y ago> How many cables did you use 20 years ago, that you’re still happy using today? I can’t think of a single example in my personal life. Just off the top of my head... * SATA * USB-A * 1/8" / 3.5mm * 2.1/2.5mm DC barrel jack * RCA * RJ-45 * Molex * Phono / 1/4" * BNC
- AmericanChopper 4y agoI find it rather unlikely that you used SATA 20 years ago, given that 20 years ago there was only one SATA HDD on the market, and it had only been on sale for a few months. RJ-45 is the only one of these that I use on a regular basis, and it’s a terrible connector. But if you’re so happy using USB A in 2023, then why would you want regulators to interfere with your freedom to choose that?
- Eisenstein 4y agoIf you can give me the reason why 20 years is a significant unit of measure in cable type obsolescence instead of a round number you picked off the top of your head then I will concede that I wasn't using SATA in April 2003 and that it matters in this context. I contend that it isn't and it doesn't. USB-A: The fact that connectors can coexist seems obvious to me. RJ45: Sorry you hate it -- it works well for its purpose.
- AmericanChopper 4y agoMy point is simply to demonstrate that the things we thought were great 20 years ago, we tend to feel differently about now. 20 years ago I definitely thought USB A was great. Today I don’t think it’s anywhere near as good as USB C, and I expect in 20 years time I’ll have a different perspective again. But the innovation that got us to here will clearly be hampered by legislating standards into law, for the reasons I explained above. So perhaps not. Perhaps in 20 years will all still be using USB C connectors, living in complete ignorance of what innovations we forewent in order to legislatively solve a problem that barely existed in the first place.
- Eisenstein 4y agoBut your example is trying to prove a negative. "How many innovations are stifled by regulating this connector?" Unknown. Try this: how much e-waste is created by not having a standard connector? Also: will you trade your children living knee-deep in a toxic sludgepile so that we can continually keep innovating? Maybe new iterations of connectors making entire devices obsolete every 'less than 20 years' isn't the great outcome you think it is.