this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
74 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37551 readers
555 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A shame the writers of the law didn't have good enough knowledge of the underlying technology to mandate not just the USB C connector, but specific USB C standards. The fact that USB C cables are very much "you can't even tell what it does without plugging it in" is a bit of a nightmare.
But on the other hand, there's always changes for further revisions in the future.
And fortunately they made the law future proof. It doesn't say that "hey, you should use USB-C" but it says "hey, you should use the connector mentioned in Appendix H which is defined by committee R". That way they don't need to start over the whole bureaucratic process the pass the law, just ask a committee to reevaluate the tech and they change the appendix. It can be USB-D from tomorrow.