That's a fair criticism. I did conflate two different things there, and I was needlessly snarky. (And I upvoted your comment for pointing it out.)
I also failed to address the thing that bothered me in the comment I replied to:
> Far from a cartel, we should let the government create a standardized LED lifespan rating based on the actual needs of consumers. For example, if we know the average renovation cycle for single family houses in the US is ten years, then we should make LED bulbs that are rated for 10 years.
Why should it be the government's business to determine what "the actual needs of consumers" are? How does the government know what the average renovation cycle for single family homes is? What about people who want to spend more for longer-lasting bulbs, or spend less for shorter-lived ones? What about other types of homes that don't fit the government-specified "average renovation cycle"?
How do companies innovate when the government has said, "This is the standard specification for an LED light bulb. You will make them to our standard or you won't make them at all."
I just find the very concept offensive that this should be any business of the government. Life is full of trade-offs, and it seems to me that the government - the instrument of force - is least capable of anyone to make these trade-offs.
Regardless of my personal feelings, there is a real cost in getting the government involved in these things. Government intervention never comes for free.
> Why should it be the government's business to determine what "the actual needs of consumers" are?
The government has signed up to various international treaties around ewaste and other eco indicators.
Consumers only buy on price.
Government sets minimum standards, which forces manufacturers to build their minimum cost devices to that standard. Manfs can also offer better devices for more money.
> How do companies innovate when the government has said, "This is the standard specification for an LED light bulb. You will make them to our standard or you won't make them at all."
Your mobile phone is intensely regulated across a number of different regulators. There seems to be plenty of innovation in cellphones.
Thanks for your comment, you raise some good points. I do have to question a couple of things:
> Consumers only buy on price.
Really? Everyone I know also looks at reviews, brand reputation, and other factors. Of course you're right that sometimes we just buy the cheapest option. :-)
> Your mobile phone is intensely regulated across a number of different regulators. There seems to be plenty of innovation in cellphones.
Is the innovation in the areas governments regulate, or in the areas they don't? I just made a list of 20 or so key attributes of a cellphone, and I don't think they are things that are regulated. (I was going to post the list, but had second thoughts that it may seem argumentative, and they seem pretty obvious anyway.)
> Really? Everyone I know also looks at reviews, brand reputation, and other factors. Of course you're right that sometimes we just buy the cheapest option. :-)
Anecdata time! :).
I think that this sometimes turns out to be more often than not :). Not many people have time to read reviews and check brand reputations for everything they buy. Personally, I divide shopping decisions into two groups - where I care about quality, and where I don't. In the former group, which includes mostly expensive stuff, I'll check some reviews. In the latter, I don't care. The latter group mostly consists of things that cost about as much or less than my time spent on doing research.
But from what I've seen (and experienced), a lot of things move from the "check reviews" to "buy on price" group the moment one is low on cash and/or low on free time. Anecdata - my mother used to buy CFLs but at some point switched back to incandescents (the ones that are illegal in EU, but are being sold in every corner shop anyway, just labeled as "not for household use") just because she didn't have time / energy to go to the big store that sells decent CFLs at a reasonable price. I only upgraded her apartment to LEDs after few of those cheap-ass incandescents literally exploded, sending glass shards all over the kitchen.
> I was going to post the list, but had second thoughts that it may seem argumentative, and they seem pretty obvious anyway.
Please post that list, I'm interested. Even if it seems obvious, it may not be obvious to everyone.
(Pun unintended, but now that it's there I'll take credit for it...)
Yeah, when I said "everyone I know looks at reviews" I meant "at least some of the time". :-)
So my list of cellphone characteristics I didn't post - I was thinking of things like this:
Size, shape, and weight. Battery technology and capacity - removable or not? Display technology, size and resolution. Resistive or capacitive touch? Stylus? Physical keyboard? Processor technology, how many cores, what instruction set, what GPU? Memory size? Storage size? External storage (SD)? Charger standard? External audio and digital ports? What kinds of sensors? Operating system and application software. What programming languages are used. How software is distributed. Who is allowed to write software.
I don't think many of those are specified by a government agency. At least I hope they aren't!
I also failed to address the thing that bothered me in the comment I replied to:
> Far from a cartel, we should let the government create a standardized LED lifespan rating based on the actual needs of consumers. For example, if we know the average renovation cycle for single family houses in the US is ten years, then we should make LED bulbs that are rated for 10 years.
Why should it be the government's business to determine what "the actual needs of consumers" are? How does the government know what the average renovation cycle for single family homes is? What about people who want to spend more for longer-lasting bulbs, or spend less for shorter-lived ones? What about other types of homes that don't fit the government-specified "average renovation cycle"?
How do companies innovate when the government has said, "This is the standard specification for an LED light bulb. You will make them to our standard or you won't make them at all."
I just find the very concept offensive that this should be any business of the government. Life is full of trade-offs, and it seems to me that the government - the instrument of force - is least capable of anyone to make these trade-offs.
Regardless of my personal feelings, there is a real cost in getting the government involved in these things. Government intervention never comes for free.