It's one thing if an enthusiast made a mistake putting together a one-off breadboard for a board they're hacking on. But it's entirely a different problem if a

It's one thing if an enthusiast made a mistake putting together a one-off breadboard for a board they're hacking on. But it's entirely a different problem if a professional engineering organization, with a hardware release process, a factory build process, and a QA process didn't read the spec properly and didn't catch this bug. If it's someone's profession to do engineering, don't give them a pass for not being able to follow an industry specification. Engineering is all about following arcane rules in various specs. If it's not USB, then it's Wifi or Bluetooth, or whathaveyou specs, which are all similarly complicated. For what it's worth, the USB spec is complicated, but in this case, there's actually a picture in the USB Type-C Spec you linked to which tells hardware designers exactly how to put together this circuit. They should have just copied it directly instead of going off-script. I wrote about it here, and included the figure from the spec: https://medium.com/@leung.benson/how-to-design-a-proper-usb-c-power-sink-hint-not-the-way-raspberry-pi-4-did-it-f470d7a5910 https://medium.com/@leung.benson/how-to-design-a-proper-usb-...