@WiteWulf @gsuberland ISO would like to have a word.
*sigh*
@datenwolf @WiteWulf @gsuberland
Obviously I'd never advocate anything naughty on social media, but is there a sci-hub homologue for standards?
@gsuberland @blinken @datenwolf @WiteWulf
Interesting! Very good points. Yes, as a lay-person, I tentatively held the view that after the Grenfell Tower fire, there might be some sort of interest in open standards. 🤷 I realise though that lay-people usually don't have a good grip on complex systems failures.
@doboprobodyne @gsuberland @blinken @datenwolf @WiteWulf
Not relevant for BSI, and not free, but Latvia has (had?) some of the lowest costs for EN, ISO, IEC standards.
https://www.lvs.lv/en/products/index
@geoffl @gsuberland @blinken @datenwolf @WiteWulf
Bloody good Intel, much obliged!
#openStandards #standards #teamwork #leadership #systems #safety
@blinken @gsuberland @datenwolf @WiteWulf
That's a very good point. Any entity that indemnifies the standard authority (and that might the standard authority itself, forking out money for lawyers) might need paying. If I lived in a country where I trusted the House of Lords to work constructively to design a civic and legislative framework to support standards setting authorities who published open standards, I might have hope
@gsuberland for those that must, the Estonian standardisation organisation (evs.ee) provides the most reasonable pricing. What you then do with the DRM on the PDF is up to you.
Why people pay full price to BSI I have no idea, but they are literally printing money [standards]
@blinken @gsuberland They also have a very cheap "browse this standard online for X hours" feature for certain standards.
This works through an embedded pdf.js viewer on the website and a highly sophisticated encryption scheme that would prevent anyone from simply downloading the PDF file
@gsuberland but if the NFPA NEC was free, libraries would see far less foot traffic. It's a good thing!
(It's a bad thing actually)
(Libraries are good of course)
@gsuberland There is an even more insidious behavior: Even after you got a copy of it, you may not quote from the spec in your software implementation because of copyright issues.
That makes the code real easy to maintain!
(IEEE)
@gsuberland I completely agree...but, somebody's to pay for them. Standards require expertise and stakeholders to devote time, they need drafting and editing and change control. And every couple of years you need everyone back in the room just to check if the standard is still applicable or needs updates. Then it needs to published, so severs and bandwidth security.
It's not a huge burden but some needs to do the work and we need to figure out how to pay them. Save apples to academic publication.
Charities do all of that with and more with no cost to the end user.