"A major blocker to free and open source multimedia is isostandards" (twitter.com) 6 points by dtquad 1y ago ↗ HN
[–] rty32 1y ago ↗ I once heard colleagues talking about ISO 26262 and went to look it up. Apparently I need to pay CHF 42 to figure out what's in this "industry standard".Sometimes I don't know which is worse, Elsevier or ISO. [–] actionfromafar 1y ago ↗ ISO 26262 was pretty hard to understand last I had a glance. I'm happy to no longer be directly affected by it in my work.
[–] actionfromafar 1y ago ↗ ISO 26262 was pretty hard to understand last I had a glance. I'm happy to no longer be directly affected by it in my work.
[–] curtis3389 1y ago ↗ ISO standards have always reeked of EU regulatory capture to me. [–] DerekL 1y ago ↗ How? ISO membership isn't limited to EU countries.
[–] thesuperbigfrog 1y ago ↗ This is absolutely true and the primary motivation for the AV1 codec:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#PurposeOpen and royalty-free standards mean anyone can create an implementation:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Software_implementationsHopefully this leads to broad adoption and more open, royalty-free standards.
6 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 33.6 ms ] threadSometimes I don't know which is worse, Elsevier or ISO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Purpose
Open and royalty-free standards mean anyone can create an implementation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Software_implementations
Hopefully this leads to broad adoption and more open, royalty-free standards.