lonjil

5 ms·

1.
by lonjil 3mo ago
> Those methods include covert measures to ensure NSA control over setting of international encryption standards, the use of supercomputers to break encryption with "brute force", Things that definitely don't happen. Those
2.
by lonjil 7mo ago
> I guess I wasn't aware that Wine pivoted from trying to be a general purpose, drop-in replacement for Windows to being a platform for games that only supports a subset of Windows functionality. It didn't.
3.
by lonjil 7mo ago
> I AM saying "people don't want ride trains that allow 5% of the riders to smoke cigarettes on enclosed train platforms and in enclosed train cars." Just don't allow that then? > Public transit advocates need to b
4.
by lonjil 8mo ago
> That's not the reason, but the excuse. The reason firefox doesn't have jxl is that it is funded by Google, and someone at Google decided that it has to die. So what, you think they were just lying when they said that they&#x2
5.
by lonjil 9mo ago
what exactly do you mean by "trivially and stably mapped to a unique subnet"?
6.
by lonjil 10mo ago
WUFFS only works for very simple codecs. Basically useless for anything complex enough that memory bugs would be common.
7.
by lonjil 10mo ago
Some years ago, the Google Photos team asked the Chrome team to support JXL, so that they could use it for Photos. The request was ignored, of course.
8.
by lonjil 10mo ago
> If they successfully contribute an implementation that satisfies these properties and meets our normal production requirements, we would ship it. That's what they said a year ago. And a couple of Mozilla devs have been in regular
9.
by lonjil 10mo ago
long term support is actually being provided by google... just a different team in a different country :D most jxl devs are at google research in zurich, and already pledged to handle long tetm support
10.
by lonjil 10mo ago
Since the person you replied to mentioned MozJPEG, I have to assume they meant that WebP's lossy capabilities were a marginal improvement.
11.
by lonjil 10mo ago
The JXL spec already has gainmaps... Also, just because there's a spec for using gainmaps with JPEG doesn't mean that it works well. With only 8 bits of precision, it really sucks for HDR, gainmap or no gainmap. You just get too m
12.
by lonjil 10mo ago
I don't understand what you're trying to say. Mozilla said over a year ago that they would support JXL as soon as there's a fast memory safe decoder that will be supported. Google on the other hand never expressed any desire
13.
by lonjil 10mo ago
With incredibly bad compression ratios.
14.
by lonjil 10mo ago
> Both Qualcomm and Mediatek have mobile SoC which are more performant than the M2 and the X2 Elite is in the ballpark of Apple top SoC. At what power consumption? And is that both CPU and GPU, or just GPU?
15.
by lonjil 10mo ago
In my experience, hardware companies all believe that software is trivial nonsense they don't need to spend any effort on. Consequently, the software that drives their hardware really sucks.
16.
by lonjil 10mo ago
> Often the update are just windows only.. That's a choice the vendor makes, and Tuxedo Computers is the vendor in this case. Since they control the product they're making, they should be able to provide nice firmware updates f
17.
by lonjil 11mo ago
Not particularly difficult. The main Typst crate should have you covered. I've seen quite a lot of projects that do it already.
18.
by lonjil 1y ago
Google is not a monolith. The Chrome team doesn't want it in Chrome, but many other parts of Google likes it.
19.
by lonjil 1y ago
> We barely even have movement to webp &avif If you look at CDNs, WebP and AVIF are very popular. > From what i understand avif gives better compression (except for lossless) and has better decoding speed than jxl anyways. AVIF is
20.
by lonjil 1y ago
> (surprisingly, Firefox is not attributed this - they also do not support it yet, and they are not doing anything _other_ than awaiting Chrome's work for it!) The fuck are you talking about? The jxl-rs library Firefox is waiting on
21.
by lonjil 1y ago
Other than Jon at Cloudinary, everyone involved with JXL development, from creation of the standard to the libjxl library, works at Google Research in Zurich. The Chrome team in California has zero authority over them. They've also mad
22.
by lonjil 1y ago
FreeBSD does as well, but old ABI versions aren't kept forever.
23.
by lonjil 1y ago
> stubborn devs, a loaned Milk-V box, and a middle finger to pragmatism. That's not what's happening here though? With skepticism, they're willing to give it another try because someone loaned them the needed hardware. The
24.
by lonjil 2y ago
You mention only producing a limited quantity, but do you have any plans to do a second batch next year? I know that knowing the future is impossible and that you thus can't make any promises, but are you at least hoping to be able to
25.
by lonjil 2y ago
> The maintainers of core subsystems are the people he trusts, at least trusts as much as you can in this space. He'll take their opinions before anyone else, since they know best about the subsystems they maintain But there were no
26.
by lonjil 2y ago
I find this reply interesting. Linus says that what matters is technical stuff, but even before the social media brigading, the whole thread was nothing but non-technical drama. So why is Linus focused only on that and not Hellwig's be
27.
by lonjil 2y ago
But preventing memory leaks is actually impossible. Even with garbage collection, memory leaks are common.
28.
by lonjil 2y ago
Not for a long time. The WebP encoder has improved a lot since MozJPEG was released. But these days we have Jpegli [1] which beats WebP at higher quality levels. [1] https://github.com/google/jpegli/
29.
by lonjil 2y ago
> "Worse" in what sense? Worse as in not compressing as well. As I said, at high fidelity or lossless. At lower quality levels, AVIF files are smaller and JXL files are bigger. At higher quality levels, JXL files are smaller an
30.
by lonjil 2y ago
I don't think you can use Chrome to view any raw image files...

More ›