> But the idea that a trans-national government over 750M people should be trying to regulate in this level of detail is just obviously a recipe for disaster
Why? Standards harmonization has big upsides too.
For example, the EU PPE safety standards are so good that there aren't even North American equivalents for many products.
If you buy a climbing carabiner in the US, it's being tested according to a test procedure defined by the same EU bureaucracy you deride.
What's the electrical failure rate of every appliance in your home, and the associated risk of death by electrocution? If you don't know offhand, it might be that you are implicitly relying on UL standards to keep you safe and whole.
Consumers don't have perfect information, so the risk is asymmetric. If you assume the market will sort out risk and quality so we don't need standards and enforcement thereof, I don't believe your model is aligned with reality.
Many responses to my comment made the same argument, so I’ll just reply here.
What do you see as the main safety differences between Lightning and USB-C? As both systems have been in use at scale for some time now, this should be easy enough to answer quantitatively.
My understanding is that they offer equivalent safety, in spite of Lightning not having been standardized by the EU, but I may be wrong.
The person you replied to did not imply that there was a difference in safety between lightning and usbc, they just used safety as an example of regulated standards with which to attack your reasoning. The EU is mostly seeking to reduce waste by standardising common parts.
You're missing the point. It's not that Lightning is bad, it's probably great (I don't have any iThings to compare). But left to themselves, it's entirely plausible that Apple will just abandon it in a few years in favor of some exciting new technology called Laser or Quantum or Telluric. Sure, people will complain, but they'll upgrade because there are some other great new features on the iPhone 17, plus clinging to old stuff makes people feel poor.
Lighting has been the standard for Apple devices longer than USB-C existed, since 2012. The previous standard, the 30-pin connector was introduced in 2003.
Your response does zero to address (absolutely rightful) negative comments on your original comment, nor is it related to your original comment that sounds like a parody of a Wall Street liberals before they start crying for government bailouts.
It's just a poor Red Herring argument that you provided.
Nonsensical. Many companies cut corners to save a buck. You're assuming companies want to be in markets for the long run under conditions of perfect competition (ie total market transparency). In reality many business owners are more than happy to make a million $ selling a shitty product then move on to some other market under a new name. You have to make quite a lot of money before the advantages of a reliable brand that consumers can readily identify exceed the incentives to make a quick buck.
Proof: look at all the craptastic companies that sell ersatz products on Amazon. For some kinds of products they can be almost as good as much more expensive offerings, for others you might get a great deal or you might get an explosive paperweight.
This is not how incentives work. Companies can and have creates inferior and dangerous products for the sake of profits. See the Phoebus cartel and the BMW emission scandal.
Without government force companies will not act in the interest of the consumer or employees. Seatbelts, airbags, and crash testing are obviously fantastic standards, but require significant and continuous cash expenditure. Few or no auto companies would invest in them without the public mandating it. Indeed, many companies lobbied and vehemently protested it when first implemented.
Why? Standards harmonization has big upsides too.
For example, the EU PPE safety standards are so good that there aren't even North American equivalents for many products.
If you buy a climbing carabiner in the US, it's being tested according to a test procedure defined by the same EU bureaucracy you deride.