The only "drama" I recall is that one guy, who ran an unofficial forum, went on a weird rant about how Godot is a scam because he thought development was too slow or something. He then shut down his unofficial forum. That's a long shot from "being destroyed".
But maybe I missed something?
(Edit: I had misspelled "forum" as "form". Sorry if that confused anybody)
yes these are the terms that are not supposed to be used in product naming or by consumers and are just intended for use by people developing USB devices.
Well you have to differentiate somehow and USB 5, 10, 20, 40 or 80 gbps sound like reasonable terms for normal people.
Yes it was never intended that any consumer hears about something like "USB 3.2 Gen 2" that was strictly internal naming for people developing USB devices.
In fact the naming guidelines we're simplified even further than in the older version you linked: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/USB-IF-language-usage-guideliens.pdf
But yea borderline fraudulent manufacturers and uninformed tech journalists are to blame for all this confusion
The v2 part here really just refers to the fact that it's version 2 of the specification. Consumerrs only need to know the term USB4 and the speed that their device operates at. It's sort of like complaining that the ietf has terrible naming schemes because HTTP is defined in half a dozen RFCs with 4 digit numbers. This versioning is just meant for people developing USB things.
Actually this article here is one of the few times where even mentioning the version 2 part is reasonable since the details of these specifications actually matter to kernel developerrs. For everybody else it's just USB4 80 gbps.
Anytype looks interesting but it looks like most of it is non-free non-opensource software:
While our core solutions, the infrastructure protocol any-sync, and the data protocol any-block, are released as open source under the permissive MIT license, we distribute the remaining layers, including the middleware library any-heart, and applications like anytype-js, anytype-swift, and anytype-kotlin, under the Any Source Available License. This license grants individuals the freedom to review, modify, and utilize the code for personal, academic, scientific, research, and development purposes. However, for commercial use, consent from the Any Association is required.
Well you don't get long COVID from the flu so it's not like the flu at all.
Sorry to ask but why is get/set facl not sufficient for acls on linux?
They had some serious cryptography issues (including no perfect forwards secrecy!!!) but they have promised to fix that. I've not yet seen any paper analyzing the new protocol. But maybe it could be good?
Edit: Here's a paper with some of the issues: https://www.research-collection.ethz.ch/bitstream/handle/20.500.11850/623004/main.pdf
They conclude that:
The seven attacks we have presented highlight fundamental weaknesses in the design of Threema. Indeed, the Threema protocols lack basic properties that are nowadays considered de rigueur for a messenger app to be regarded as secure: forward secrecy with respect to a malicious server, and protection against replay, reflection, and reordering attacks. We believe that the cryptography in Threema has design flaws that need to be addressed in order to meet the security expectations of its users
They have redesigned their protocol since then but again i have yet to see a third party look at it but TBH i haven't looked into it.
But here it's deleting /* and not / so I think it won't prompt you for that flag, but I'm not about to try it
Well if they are in the repos i assume it be less likely to have incompatibilites when updates happen?
It might sound surprising but it makes a lot of sense to have different standards supported over USB-C. USB-C is just a form factor of the connector.
For USB 3 or USB4 speeds you physically need more wires in the cable, while for USB 2.0 you only need 5 wires. Also if you want really high data transfer rates of 40 or 80Gbit/s the cable can only be around 1 meter or 3 feet long.
So because USB-C supports different USB versions, a charging cable can simply be USB 2.0 and be cheaper and long and do it's job just fine.
If USB-C was only USB4 it wouldn't be all that useful. Devices like wireless mice or DACs or game controllers wouldn't/ couldn't use it and the cables would all be thick and expensive and short. And for charging regular things we'd still be stuck with micro USB.
The only downside is that, yes if you are doing a thing where you need high speeds such as connecting a screen or external disk to a PC you do need to check that you're using a high speed cable, but pretty much all good quality fast cables have the speed printed onto the connector housing.
But yes the iPhone restricting speeds to 2.0 is strange and most definitely just a trick to sell more pro models. There are plenty of devices that simply have no need for anything besides 2.0, be it because they send no data or just very little. But phones really aren't in that category.