5 ms·

This is very interesting. One data point for this are the standards for medical device compliance (e.g. for medical software). You can buy them from different i

This is very interesting. One data point for this are the standards for medical device compliance (e.g. for medical software). You can buy them from different institutions, the content is the same, but the price varies from anywhere between 30€ to 500€. Yep, for a PDF file. It's an unholy mess and literally every person I've encountered in the system, even auditors, think that it's ridiculous. The PDF-selling companies argue that they need that money to organize committee meetings for developing further versions of standards etc., but that leaves me wondering - we have so many other standards-setting institutions which don't rely on shady PDF sales, so why not take that model instead? [1] https://openregulatory.com/accessing-standards/ https://openregulatory.com/accessing-standards/ (Disclaimer: My company)

jtwaleson 3y ago
Don’t forget the mandatory mention of evs.ee where you can buy standards way cheaper thanks to the Estonian government.
- jaybeavers 3y ago
  Thank you from someone begrudgingly paying thousands of Euros for IEC medical device standards pdfs!!!!
immibis 3y ago
Most standards organizations have SOME way of making money, because we live in capitalism. Some of them take hefty fees for membership; some of them take hefty fees for compliance certification; some of them take hefty fees to use their trademarks (as in putting the USB logo next to the USB port); and some of them take hefty fees to see the standards.
- robomartin 3y ago
  > because we live in capitalism No. Because it costs money to run these organizations. They are either funded by the government (which means taxes, which means us), membership fees or other activities. Last I checked everyone needs to feed themselves or their family. This "it's because it's capitalism" thing gets old pretty quickly. What should be objectionable is precisely when organizations are government (taxes, us) funded and they sell us standards you are supposed to work and test against for, well, government-mandated certification requirements. So...we pay for their work through taxation...for them to sell us the products they create...and then we pay for the testing services against documents we cannot freely access even though we paid for their development. That's just messed-up. This is where it gets complicated. If USA or European taxpayers fund the development of these standards, should others outside of those regions have to pay or contribute in any way? China is no-longer a poor agrarian society. And yet they benefit from work done in the EU and USA for decades at great cost to taxpayers. Not sure what the answer to this is other than to point out these things are not simple. There's the "well, it benefits everyone" angle, which brings us back to "Why are these organizations charging for PDF's at all?".
  - themitigating 3y ago
    :No. Because it costs money to run these organizations. They are either funded by the government (which means taxes, which means us), membership fees or other activities. Last I checked everyone needs to feed themselves or their family. This "it's because it's capitalism" thing gets old pretty quickly. What's the difference? What you described is capitalism.
    - uraniumjelly 3y ago
      But standards organizations would need some way of making money regardless of the economic system we lived in. People aren't going to do that work for free. If we lived in an economic system that didn't pay those organizations, they simply wouldn't exist.
      - geysersam 3y ago
        > regardless of the economic system we lived in. Nitpick: if we lived in an economic system with universal basic income it's not unlikely people would decide to work on standards anyway. > People aren't going to do that work for free. Counterexample: all open source software.
        robomartin 3y ago
        > Counterexample: all open source software Reality example: Open source only exists because people earn a living doing something else. It’s cost is very far from zero. In fact, if we accounted for it I would bet FOSS is, as a category, the most expensive software on the planet. Nothing is free. A sad yet necessary truth that must be understood.
        necovek 3y ago
        But that is the point. With basic needs covered, people work on stuff that they care about personally regardless of how much or how little it earns them. Do also note that most people spending countless hours on standards work on them either on their own time, or more usually, their affiliated organisation time (university, company...). Standard bodies rarely pay for actual standard development.
- tialaramex 3y ago
  It's true that this costs money, but it doesn't cost that much money. The EU or US could just decide to pay for it. I would guess that this is politically easier to swallow in Europe even though it makes as much if not more sense economically in the US.
  - RHSeeger 3y ago
    > The EU or US could just decide to pay for it. That sounds logistically very difficult. The government would need to decide _which_ standards are worth paying for. You certainly couldn't have everyone who wants to just bill the government for however much they decide their standard "costs" to develop. Unless it's a standard that you need to follow by law, it doesn't make sense for the government to be in charge of making it public.
    - 6510 3y ago
      > The government would need to decide _which_ standards are worth paying for. We'd want to pay for that too!
    - eternityforest 3y ago
      Standards are an insanely large part of tech, and the government funds lots of stuff. Is it that much different from building a bridge or something? Or we could (And I have always thought this would be helpful) have a FOSS standards forum. Want a standard, make a Git issue, people discuss it for a bit, someone makes a markdown pull request.
      - immibis 3y ago
        It's different if you say all standards, but if you only want the government to fund standards relative to government, then no, it's not different. It would be pretty sensible for the EU to pay the USB consortium enough money to make the standard free for all EU citizens - I think that one is already free but you get the idea. Especially because the EU wants USB ports to be mandatory on cellphones.

jtwaleson 3y ago

Don’t forget the mandatory mention of evs.ee where you can buy standards way cheaper thanks to the Estonian government.

jaybeavers 3y ago
Thank you from someone begrudgingly paying thousands of Euros for IEC medical device standards pdfs!!!!

immibis 3y ago

Most standards organizations have SOME way of making money, because we live in capitalism. Some of them take hefty fees for membership; some of them take hefty fees for compliance certification; some of them take hefty fees to use their trademarks (as in putting the USB logo next to the USB port); and some of them take hefty fees to see the standards.

robomartin 3y ago
> because we live in capitalism No. Because it costs money to run these organizations. They are either funded by the government (which means taxes, which means us), membership fees or other activities. Last I checked everyone needs to feed themselves or their family. This "it's because it's capitalism" thing gets old pretty quickly. What should be objectionable is precisely when organizations are government (taxes, us) funded and they sell us standards you are supposed to work and test against for, well, government-mandated certification requirements. So...we pay for their work through taxation...for them to sell us the products they create...and then we pay for the testing services against documents we cannot freely access even though we paid for their development. That's just messed-up. This is where it gets complicated. If USA or European taxpayers fund the development of these standards, should others outside of those regions have to pay or contribute in any way? China is no-longer a poor agrarian society. And yet they benefit from work done in the EU and USA for decades at great cost to taxpayers. Not sure what the answer to this is other than to point out these things are not simple. There's the "well, it benefits everyone" angle, which brings us back to "Why are these organizations charging for PDF's at all?".
- themitigating 3y ago
  :No. Because it costs money to run these organizations. They are either funded by the government (which means taxes, which means us), membership fees or other activities. Last I checked everyone needs to feed themselves or their family. This "it's because it's capitalism" thing gets old pretty quickly. What's the difference? What you described is capitalism.
  - uraniumjelly 3y ago
    But standards organizations would need some way of making money regardless of the economic system we lived in. People aren't going to do that work for free. If we lived in an economic system that didn't pay those organizations, they simply wouldn't exist.
    - geysersam 3y ago
      > regardless of the economic system we lived in. Nitpick: if we lived in an economic system with universal basic income it's not unlikely people would decide to work on standards anyway. > People aren't going to do that work for free. Counterexample: all open source software.
      - robomartin 3y ago
        > Counterexample: all open source software Reality example: Open source only exists because people earn a living doing something else. It’s cost is very far from zero. In fact, if we accounted for it I would bet FOSS is, as a category, the most expensive software on the planet. Nothing is free. A sad yet necessary truth that must be understood.
        necovek 3y ago
        But that is the point. With basic needs covered, people work on stuff that they care about personally regardless of how much or how little it earns them. Do also note that most people spending countless hours on standards work on them either on their own time, or more usually, their affiliated organisation time (university, company...). Standard bodies rarely pay for actual standard development.
tialaramex 3y ago
It's true that this costs money, but it doesn't cost that much money. The EU or US could just decide to pay for it. I would guess that this is politically easier to swallow in Europe even though it makes as much if not more sense economically in the US.
- RHSeeger 3y ago
  > The EU or US could just decide to pay for it. That sounds logistically very difficult. The government would need to decide _which_ standards are worth paying for. You certainly couldn't have everyone who wants to just bill the government for however much they decide their standard "costs" to develop. Unless it's a standard that you need to follow by law, it doesn't make sense for the government to be in charge of making it public.
  - 6510 3y ago
    > The government would need to decide _which_ standards are worth paying for. We'd want to pay for that too!
  - eternityforest 3y ago
    Standards are an insanely large part of tech, and the government funds lots of stuff. Is it that much different from building a bridge or something? Or we could (And I have always thought this would be helpful) have a FOSS standards forum. Want a standard, make a Git issue, people discuss it for a bit, someone makes a markdown pull request.
    - immibis 3y ago
      It's different if you say all standards, but if you only want the government to fund standards relative to government, then no, it's not different. It would be pretty sensible for the EU to pay the USB consortium enough money to make the standard free for all EU citizens - I think that one is already free but you get the idea. Especially because the EU wants USB ports to be mandatory on cellphones.