A standard that is actually standardized in practice.
To this day I still don't know exactly how to buy a cable for my raspberry pi 4s. (Yes more a USB c than USB 3 issue but you get my point - a standard that isn't standardized fails at it's raison d'etre)
Now, why that passed muster is a valid question.
[1] https://medium.com/@leung.benson/how-to-design-a-proper-usb-...
If that's wrong, can you clarify?
It was an example of "layman has no idea which side is up"...but yes the rasp is the culprit here...for not following a rather complicated standard.
It needs more simplicity.
Like the rasp issue - the cables marked active work while the ones not don't. Or vice versa? I don't recall. Never seen any such markings - but apparently there is a distinction there that some how interacts with raspberry not having enough capacitors.
^^ See that paragraph of confusion? That's what standardization chaos looks like. Neither I nor apparently raspberry foundation know whats going on.