Of course it makes sense for the LittleFuse company to participate in standards development. Not only do they have quite a bit of experience in the field, but since they are mainly a producer of circuit protection devices, it is certainly to their advantage to help prevent any really dumb requirements, typically driven by emotions rather than any data, which some may choose to present. It is seldom useful to have the emotionally driven ideas from the technically ignorant entering into engineering decisions. We have a few examples of that mode already.
I agree with the point about fledgling engineering teams at startup companies. Exposure to other more experienced, cross-functional members on standards committees can rapidly develop new engineers and also help reduce the 'hard and expensive' lessons of going back to the design drawing board when simple mistakes were not avoided.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.