3 ms·
I don't know why you want to coddle normal people with those friendly names. I propose that they version each standard with the last 8 characters of a hash of
by function_seven 4y ago
I don't know why you want to coddle normal people with those friendly names.
I propose that they version each standard with the last 8 characters of a hash of the standard itself.
Using your humble list, here's the improved one:
USB 845fee48
USB cf580d60
USB ea95d69e
USB 1e0cdbcc
USB ee846eec
USB 1c0733ea
USB 7b36fc51
USB b5db768f
USB 47bd0646
- demindiro 4y agoWith 32-bit hashes you risk a collision. You should use at least a 128-bit GUID for each standard.
- function_seven 4y agoNo no no, if there's a collision, just append "Full Speed" on the old one, and "High Speed" on the new one. Much simpler.
- speed_spread 4y agoThen encode GUID as emojis.
- usui 4y agoThis is actually better than the human-readable scheme because then you can go on AliExpress/Google and actually land on the exact product by matching the hash. With human-readable names, the product pages start to have too much creative freedom like "USB 3.0 3.1 Gen 1 2" which becomes hell for browsing, as now the people buying get to be blamed if they make a wrong purchase
- function_seven 4y agoHeh, good point! But I'm a pessimist. New product names you'll see: "USB 1e0cdbcc works with 47bd0646 for power" "USB b5db768f (compatible with 7b36fc51, and improves 1c0733ea; KHTML, like Gecko)"
- scoopertrooper 4y agoUSB b5db768f Pro MAX Gen 2 Founders Edition
- HKH2 4y ago> then you can go on AliExpress/Google and actually land on the exact product by matching the hash. I'm fairly sure some people would split the hashes up like phone numbers.
- alexdumitru 4y agoI'd go straight for sha512 naming, to make sure there won't be any naming collisions.
- TaylorAlexander 4y agoNo no this is all too confusing. They should take the Apple laptop approach and just come out with new standards every year named like this: “USB Pro (2022)” “USB Air (2022)”