Shitty Add-On Upgrade Path Naming Scheme

A project log for Shitty Add-Ons

Stop calling it 'SAO'.

BenchoffBenchoff 03/28/2019 at 19:265 Comments

The hardest problem in computer science isn't integer factorization, and it isn't proving P != NP. It isn't the knapsack problem, the boxcar problem, or rotating a red black tree on a whiteboard. The hardest problem in computer science is naming things. The last loop you wrote used 'i' as the control variable so don't talk to me about how hard naming things in code is.

There has been a lot of confusion about the naming scheme of subsequent versions of the Shitty Add-On standard. First it started off without a version, then it immediately jumped to V.1.69bis. It's almost as if the people in charge of this are idiots, they don't know what they're doing, or these naming schemes are just gigantic immature jokes. I assure you, all of these are true. Here's the naming scheme for future versions of the Shitty Add-On standard.

---------- more ----------

Bis and Terds

The most confusing aspect of the Shitty Add-On V.1.69bis is the use of the word bis at the end of the name. This comes from the ITU-T V-series recommendations, specifically the V.22bis and V.32bis specifications. The logic behind these names comes from Latin; bis means 'repeat' or 'twice'; when the protocol ends in 'bis', it's the second version of the protocol.

This was extended for a few V-series recommendations that had a suggested third version of the protocol. The suffix 'ter' comes from Latin for 'three times', so eventually you get V.32ter, but since the early 90s were the coolest, they called it V.32terbo. Because it sounds like 'turbo'. Because 'turbo' means it's faster. Because someone got the fish instead of the chicken and it was 'turbot'. Here's the relevant press concerning the V.32terbo standard:

Yes, modems actually shipped with the V.32terbo standard printed on the box:

But what about the next standard after that?

Going by the current pattern of just slapping a Latin suffix on the end of a number, the fourth revision of a standard would use something like 'quater'; Latin for four times. Logically, the standard after V1.69terbo would be V1.69qua or something. That's not cool, though; 'terbo' is a much cooler word than 'qua', and we have to keep increasing coolness. Again modem manufacturers in the 90s provide us with an answer. V.EVERYTHING

This naming system will continue; since V.EVERYTHING is the set of all sets and contains itself, we must pick something else for the fifth revision of the standard. V.ASYMPTOTE or V.SINGULARITY is a possibility, but I'm inclined to call it V.Cthulhu. This standard will add a standard for add-on to add-on communication, so it's sorta like Kubernetes, and I already bought, so we're just going to go with that.

The naming scheme so far is:

This list will be appended as required, and once we can comprehend something more than something that is incomprehensible.


Tillo wrote 03/29/2019 at 10:35 point

So there will only be five revisions then.

  Are you sure? yes | no

Vittorio Loschiavo wrote 03/29/2019 at 06:18 point

When will be Hackaday Prize 2019?

  Are you sure? yes | no

davedarko wrote 03/29/2019 at 11:03 point

pretty sure in 2019 :p

  Are you sure? yes | no

Killergeek wrote 03/29/2019 at 06:05 point

I2C multimaster for the badge to badge communication ?

  Are you sure? yes | no