Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.cringecollective.io/post/75583
why isn't it ok? why????
Meme "the number of people who think this is an abomination" over a photo of a USB-A to USB-A cable, "but think this is perfectly acceptable" over a photo of a USB-C to USB-C cable, "makes me sick."
Huh, I'm not sure they are comparable.
Didn't USB A and USB B use a master-slave relationship in which the male would (generally) always be the slave, whereas USB C uses agreement and discussion to decide the master and slave roles regardless of connector gender.
Please do correct me if I'm wrong. Also, do we say "agent" now instead of "slave", or what is the new term?
I think the biggest problem I see with A to A is: who's delivering power, and who's receiving it? Maybe if you use it only with the device it came with then it'll be fine, but if anyone tries to just hook up that cable to two random computers, it might actually cause a short circuit and fry something.
Whereas Type-C was explicitly made to handle such situations.
Or a shorter reason: Type-C cable is allowed by the spec while Type-A is not.
Hrm. I have a keyboard that requires an A to A cable and I think it works with the cable any way around...
Might be wrong.
It makes sense, if I remember correctly the older USB cable (i.e. everything before Type-C) are passive, so as long as the pins are wired symmetrically it wouldn't matter which side is which. But whoever made your keyboard really blundered, there is no reason in the world why anyone would do this. There's so many options: the B connector, mini USB, micro USB. All would make sense to put in the keyboard. A just doesn't.
Let me guess: you got it from an ultra cheap online store? AliExpress/Wish/Temu?
You guessed wrong.
It's a ridiculously expensive and "home made" looking, but it saved my hands from OCD.
Ooh, I did guess wrong! That is an interesting specimen.
My suspicion is that they are experts in ergonomics, not in electrical engineering, so they probably aren't aware of how silly and possibly dangerous what they did is. Or perhaps they simply don't care because "it gets the job done", standards and specifications be damned.
Anyway, in this case I'm happy to be proven wrong. Thanks.
I known they outsourced the firmware development, so who knows, maybe the electronics hardware too.
I've actually used this to my advantage. I bought some cheap speaker/light combos which basically made the lights dance to the music. The only power connector was a wire that comes straight out of the device and into an outlet. But it did have a USB port for loading music from a USB stick. So naturally I plugged one side of a USB A into the port and the other side into a power bank and it just straight up worked.
I believe the common terms now are "domme" and "sub"
I can't tell if this is real life or sarcasm....
Did I really miss the memo on this one?
No that's the lingo the professionals use these days
I can confirm, I'm called sub at work
Ah yeah, I've heard that offices are rolling out a new role of office cumdump. Glad to hear from someone already in the role
journalctl --cumdump
I'm going to refer to myself as USB-B from now on
In the usb world its "host" and "device", not "master" and "slave".
But yes you are right
master/slave could be primary/secondary, primary/subordinate or principle/agent, so you're correct on that replacement.
I personally am a big fan of "Mantrap" becoming an "Access Control Vestibule" mostly because it's fun to say.
I like controller/peripheral, which is the most descriptive in my opinion. That's what's commonly used for SPI.
Type C sounds like a healthy relationship.
I have a healthy relationship with my Master uwu
USB-A male to USB-A male is not in any USB standard (not entirely true, but compliant cables are very rare and don’t connect voltage), and if you plug it into a device it’s not meant for, the behavior is entirely unspecified. It will probably do nothing. But it might fry your USB controller that is not expecting to receive voltage.
USB-C to USB-C is in the spec, and if you plug in two host devices, they won’t hurt each other. You can actually charge a host device over USB-C, unlike USB-A.
That’s why it isn’t ok. It’s not the same thing, it’s not in the standard, and it can even be dangerous (to the device).
I think the argument that A-A should be in the spec.
But usb-c is just so much better all around.
USB-A requires three attempts to connect, C only one.
Six since it has A at both ends.
I absolutely have some Type C cables that only work one way because there's no enforced standards and the manufacturer will wire them however is cheap, throw on another company's logo, and sell it to Amazom.
Don't buy electronics through amazon. This is precisely why.
The USB spec requires one master and one slave device, which is usually decided by which type of connector each side has. USB OTG can bypass that restriction, but I've only ever seen it done with micro USB or type C.
I actually thought this was about rolling up cables: circling on the top and over-under at the bottom
What if I put a C-to-A Adapter on both ends? Is that okay?
C to A adapters are sick and illegal
I still have some
Why would that be illegal? Shouldn't there be some way to plug an older flash drive or console cable into a laptop that doesn't have a type A port? (Ahem, Mac)
This is what I mean. This won't help in your case.
Yea but it's inefficient. USB-A has a significantly lower transfer rate than USB-C so it'll bottleneck
What's a common thing that would require the use of USB A on both ends?
nothing worthwhile, as it's not allowed (for a good reason)
We peaked at USB mini B.
As it being disgusting or great?
Objectively disgusting. How can one connector be so chunky while still being asymmetric?
actually they would be correct :
USB began as a protocol where one side (USB-A) takes the leading role and the other (USB-B) the following role . this was mandated by hardware with differently shaped plugs and ports . this made sense for the time as USB was ment to connect computers to peripherals .
however some devices don't fit this binary that well : one might want to connect their phone to their computer to pull data off it , but they also might want to connect a keyboard to it , with the small form factor not allowing for both a USB-A and USB-B port. the solution was USB On-The-Go : USB Mini-A/B/AB and USB Micro-A/B/AB connectors have an additional pin which allows both modes of operations
with USB-C , aside from adding more pins and making the connector rotationally symmetric , a very similar yet differently named feature was included , since USB-C - USB-C connections were planed for
so yeah USB-A to USB-A connections are explicitly not allowed , for a similar reason as you only see CEE 7 (fine , or the objectively worse NEMA) plugs on both ends of a cable only in joke made cables . USB-C has additional hardware to support both sides using USB-C which USB-A , neither in the original or 3.0 revision , has .
With USB-C isn't there still a slave-master dynamic that is now negotiated via software rather than hardware?
a slave-master dynamic
please don't use that term, every time i see it i immediately verge on orgasming. you've already made me ruin 2 undergarments today. i have a serious bdsm kink and this is not funny.