Yea, sure, the genre is the problem. Certainly not the fact that 90% of all the modern anime just feels like you have a ready preset of character types and reactions, couple stereotypes about Japan and world building blocks, then you just mix and match those together.

There are plenty of good isekai anime, the genre rarely defines whether the show is good or not. It’s just that if your main character is a regurgitated Mary Sue (or a male version, doesn’t really matter), your world is a dead standard LitRPG teen creation and supporting characters only exist for the sake of posing as a harem, maybe the show being isekai is not the problem?

I suppose this message was meant for me even though you didn’t reply to mine.

Well, the show switched studios, it was produced by 亜細亜度 (Ajiado) before, now it’s Wit Studio. It makes sense that the style’d change.

The most appreciated more or less recent work by Ajiado would be Yubisaki to Renren, which is a slow paced one with a lot of sign language there. The only heavy action title drawn by them I’m familiar with would be Shuumatsu no Izetta, which I can’t say I like.

Wit Studio is the one behind AoT, Vinland Saga, Mahoutsukai no Yome and stuff like that, a lot more action focused.

That’s pretty much why it looks so different. I also prefer Ajiado style, but maybe there’ll be more action scenes this season which they are not that good with? And yes, Wit gets a lot of critique for their CG.

Am I missing something? We only had one episode so far and it’s more or less in line with what I expected it to be.

RWBY is the name of the show. Though, it’s not an anime in the strict sense of the word, was made by RoosterTeeth and almost completely CGI, as far as I’m aware.

It’s a decent show, mostly because they used their CGI stuff to incorporate pretty choreography into battles and their sound design is cool, but with RoosterTeeth now practically dead, I doubt we’ll ever get to see the end of it, sadly.

I think it’s around 9:04 of 7th episode.

魔法少女特殊戦あすか

You may want to try again.

What’s the name of the show, though?

Probably not, if we’re speaking about the next adapter in the line. They both use 4 pins, and there are no active conversion in the adapter itself, it just connects the pins like this:

USB ↔ PS/2
+5V ↔ +5V
D-  ↔ D
D+  ↔ CLK
GND ↔ GND

So, as long as next adapter is not doing something funny with PS/2 signals, it should be ok for bare USB 2.0 connection.

Might depend on where you were learning.

On paper, when I was learning Descartes’ coordibate system, we used Y as up and X as left-right. And when it was time to plot in 3D, we used Z to “extend” the plane into yourself and away from yourself.

You just hold your sheet of paper perpendicular to the ground (or just use a whiteboard) and it all makes sense.

Sometimes inline stuff is more readable.

Don’t worry, I’m quite sure your kind will find something to trip over eventually. No thing can be fully dumb-proof.

You can’t fix stupid.

A slight word of correction, looked at the pinning again, it won’t short circuit them, but one will try to charge the other. It will still be a fire hazard, just not as violent.

If you have two devices with female USB A ports that both provide power via said ports, connecting them with male-male cable will create a short circut. Best case scenario: a current protecting fuse breaks the circuit. Worst case: both processors on both motherboards are dead. Better not think you can connect two computers with that evil thing. That’s why type B connector exists, it’s about the same size, but it never connects to a port that provides power.

The point is that manufacturers can screw up standards and being a symmetrical connector does not cure idiocy in the heads if some people. Yes, the standard explicitly says you have to short opposing data lines for 2.0, but that does not mean everybody will comply with it. (The author of the video is not an idiot, they just demonstrated that it’s possible)

The most common example of this I can think of right away is male-male connectors with type A USB. They are explicitly prohibited, yet many manufacturers create them and use in their products.

That’s why I said that no standard can protect you, you’re just relying on people not being dumb and actually reading the paper you published.

Sure.

You don’t need to check female port orientation, it’s always the same, pins inside the port are looking at the board the connector is soldered to. Of course, unless manufacturer decided to do something funny, but no standard is protected from that.

Except it’s a proprietary piece of junk stuck on USB 3.1 (and I love my thunderbolt connectors too much to let it slide), that can’t offer proper power delivery because of power pin literally burning out.

The only thing they did good is fixing the need to check cable orientation before inserting it (yes, you don’t have to try three times, you can just actually use your eyes, USB-A connector’s orientations can easily be told apart just by two square thingies on each of it’s sides).

But as USB-C came out two years later, it wiped the floor with lightning. Anyone saying otherwise is either insane, didn’t read the specs or purposefully misleading you. And only now Apple is switching over. Freaking 7 years later. Though, not because they realize how inferior their connector is, but because they were made to.

If I ever have to write some kind of huge load balancer, I’ll do my best to call it “The Queen Bitch of the Universe”.