This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
Thomas Hobbes titled his book “Leviathan” (1651) as a metaphorical representation of the powerful and all-encompassing state. In it, he proposed a social contract theory, arguing that individuals willingly surrender some freedoms to a sovereign authority in exchange for protection and order. The Leviathan, a biblical sea monster, symbolizes this sovereign entity’s immense power and control. Hobbes believed that without a strong central authority, human life would be chaotic and marked by a “war of all against all.”
The Leviathan concept underscores his advocacy for the largest possible administrative state to provide jobs that claim to maintain social stability and prevent anarchy. We cover the topic today because insofar as technology standards are concerned, federal involvement has run to excess (ignoring market signals), is just another form of market-making that ignores the limits placed upon us by Mother Nature.
Keep in mind that the American National Standards Institute administers a relatively small part of standards-setting in the United States. (Click here for a complete list; updated frequently. A great deal of ANSI resources are devoted to supporting members that run “conformance shops” essential to safe and fair trade. Other standards setting is done by governments, open-source, and other ad hoc consortia.
The culture of the standards-setting domain in every nation rests upon the culture of conformance. “Standards are the seed corn for conformance revenue” we are fond of saying and most of the expertise in the standards setting domain rests with people who make a living making sure others conform to the standard; whatever that standard may be. Conformance (product testing, installation certification, periodic re-commissioning and audits, etc.) is where the money is so we should not be surprised at the degree to which the user-interest (represented by the third gray column in our logo) is outnumbered.
That much said, having the global standards system is better than not having one at all. This system places a check on oligarchies that make central governments grow. The topic is relevant to our work because a surprising measure of influence over technical standards is undertaken by non-technical people who lack the sensitivity to technical and economic trade-offs — many of them presented by Mother Nature herself.
0. Leviathan.
Office of Management and Budget
United States Department of Education
United States Department of Commerce
United States House of Representative Committees
United States Senate Committees
Health, Education, Labor & Pensions
United States Constitution 10th Amendment
The foregoing block of content will be re-configured to another, more dynamic post that synchronizes with state and county-level standards action. Reminder: We do not advocate with governments at any level; merely follow it since the action of government appears routinely in the leading practice discovery activity of standards setting organizations.
IEEE-USA Government Policy Committees
House Committee on Education & The Workforce
Curated list of legislative proposals that influence the milieu of education communities:
Today at 16:00 UTC update our understanding of construction spend in educational settlements every month and find that our industry ranks near the top of United States annual spend reported by the Census Bureau — about $100 billion annually — greater than the gross domestic product of more than half the world’s 200-0dd nations. Economic activity at that level, and in this industry, has a few codes, standards, and guidelines related to the financing of public buildings. They vary widely — by country, region, and even at the local level.
Join us with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Related:
What is getting built now: A selection of available building construction cameras:
Management of University Endowment Fund Archives under the Background of Big Data
"The City" 1952 | Edward Bawden https://t.co/An3zzyTSvdhttps://t.co/V0nw80umD4 pic.twitter.com/zm0yvDAdnl
— Standards Michigan (@StandardsMich) November 29, 2023
IEEE P2418.7 Standard for the Use of Blockchain in Supply Chain Finance
In traditional supply chain finance implementations, the compliance check is often done manually by financial institutions to compare the different paper-based trade finance documents. In such scenarios, high labor costs need to be spent while high fraud risks still exist, and it’s hard for small and medium enterprises to be covered. Blockchain technology can play a vital role in solving many SCF-related problems
Blockchain technology, as a basic infrastructure for exchanging value and information over the Internet, has been tried to create new solutions for SCF, aiming to reduce the complexity and make data sharing more transparent, accurate, efficient and secure, which could facilitate the businesses to come together in partnership, to fulfill small and medium enterprises financial demand and to speed up the funding flows throughout the supply chain.
Different Blockchain-driven SCF implementations may lead to fragmentation and it’s hard to be expanded in the future. Standardization of blockchain use in SCF will define a general framework, provide a base common understanding enabling innovation in supply chain finance and promote industry development
Public consultation closes July 23rd.
The U.S. Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a draft report — and a commenting opportunity the repport — that details a high-level technical overview of blockchain technology, its architecture, and how it works as the foundation of modern cryptocurrencies. NIST requested feedback from the public and private sectors, national and international, for the final publication. The document, Draft NIST Interagency Report (NISTIR) 8202: Blockchain Technology Overview, provided an in-depth look at the technologies that compromise blockchain systems and breaks down how blockchains can best be utilized, and how blockchain technology can be an asset to a business and its products.
“We want to help people understand how blockchains work so that they can appropriately and usefully apply them to technology problems,” said Dylan Yaga, a NIST computer scientist and co-author of the report. “It’s an introduction to the things you should understand and think about if you want to use blockchain.”
The report appears to have integrated public comment and now a landing page for NIST work in this area — as well as contact information for project leaders — is linked below
NIST Report on Blockchain Technology Aims to Go Beyond the Hype
Blockchain Technology Overview
Blockchain technology is a standing item on our Blockchain and Finance colloquia; open to everyone. Keep in mind that blockchain is a nascent (or “pre-adoption”) technology.
Issue: [18-25]
Category: Finance, Academics, Administration & Management
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwB pic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
— USPTO (@uspto) July 13, 2023
Standards Michigan Group, LLC
2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA
888-746-3670