this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
365 points (94.0% liked)

linuxmemes

20880 readers
5 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
365
"Free" as in royalty-free (lemy.lol)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Reposting this since the original got deleted (except on the instances where it was federated in time) when my beehaw account was erased alongside a week worth of data a few months ago.
Came across the image and thought "why not post again?", I don't know if I still stand by the meme, but frankly I don't care...

I just want to schizopost

⠛⠛⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡷⢶⣦⣶⣶⣤⣤⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠉⠙⠻⣿⣿⠿⠿⠛⠛⠛⠻⣿⣿⣇⠀
⠀⠀⢤⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⢸⣷⡄⠀ ⣀⣤⣴⣿⣿⣿⣆
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⠏⠀⠀⠀⣿⣧⠀⠹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠿⠇⢀⣼⣿⣿⠛⢯⡿⡟
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠦⠴⢿⢿⣿⡿⠷⠀⣿⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣷⣶⣶⣤⣤⣤⣤⣤⣶⣦⠃⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢐⣿⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠻⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 96 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I have mixed feeling here.

On one hand avif is a libre format.

On the other hand:

  1. Avif has MAJOR limitations for a long term use (i.e. 65.538x 65.538 max resolution among other things)
  2. JpegXL has REVERSIBLE in place conversion to and from jpeg. You can convert jpegs into jpegXLs and gain the size benefits. You can undo the change and convert jpegXLs back into original jpegs all losslessly.
  3. JpegXL has progressive loading which supports people on slower internet speeds. AVIF does not.

Like I want to like avif but it’s hard for it to compete here I think. It’s like cheering for Theora over x265 just because it’s libre. Ideologically yes it makes sense to do so but good god is x265 better than Theora. (Not saying Theora is a representative open video codec though) Just that JpegXL is that much better.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My internet is so bad that on some tests I've gotten ~1mb/s. It averages about 5mb/s, so progressive loading is important for me.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Look at this guy flexing his internet speed. I have 4G because despite fiber being less than 300m away they won't bring it. Am near a freaking Olympic stadium so you my think I'd have the best internet but nope, it gets as slow as 32kb/s and even lower. I had times where images gradually load like it's the 90s again and even sites telling me am not connected/going offline mode randomly. I think i need to also mention websites never loading or taking literal minutes to do so.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You wear the crown of the shitty internet king

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

As the king, i declare that all images must be jpegxl and videos must be x265 with variable resolutions available. Seriously, why some images are so big ? Not compressing them is the most wasteful thing ever.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Few seconds GIFs: let us introduce ourselves

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

The bane of my existence.

[–] LaggyKar 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Videos should be AV1

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Completely forgot AV1. Decree changed : it's AV1 now.

[–] LaggyKar 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'd also like to add that all lossy audio must be Opus (or codec 2)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You've been appointed minister of technology.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I'd use opus for live audio and low bitrate content e.g. audiobooks. For music ogg vorbis. But probably opus can do that as well and even better.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

With those speeds I'm surprised you haven't gone back to QuickTime and RealPlayer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

QuickTime ? you mean going back to old format like .3gp or .mov ? I said i have a slow internet not that I am some kind of psychopath.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I feel your pain, I'm in the same boat regarding fiber, it's so unfair. Luckily I was able to move to a home 5G plan and I've been having a blast with the speeds I get sometimes (granted they are still laughable in comparison to the big boys with 1Gbps fiber in big cities), I think you'll have better luck seeing that kind of thing becoming available to you before any kind of fiber

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not in my country. 1Gbps isn't a thing here. Heck, we only recently went from* 1mb to 2mb to 4mb to 10mb in like the past 6 years or so. Admittedly, it's the cheapest offer but that's what most people are able to afford anyway.

*the real download speed is that divided by 8 so it's 1mb/8 --> 128kb/s and so on.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn, that's really shitty

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I used to be in camp AVIF, but I've changed my tune to supporting JXL after running some of my own tests. The main things that caused me to change my mind were the better compression ratio, progressive loading, and lossless conversion from JPEG. Those last two in particular are very useful features which AVIF simply doesn't have an answer to.

AVIF is a video format masquerading as an image format, and while that's not a bad thing, it's definitely not as good as a purpose-built image format.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

JXL rocks! Its so sad that some browser vendors are seemingly trying to kill it. It has basically all the features you could want for a JPG replacement and also has a reference implementation that implemented all that stuff as free software and with good documentation without any patent bullshit attached.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

Give me JXL or give me death

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I only do SVG 😎

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Based, I'm having a lot of fun with Inkscape

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

😃I have coded my SVG using VScode with a plugin which renders it in real time (and stole some paths from other SVG)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Interesting, link to the extension?
By the way, is that actually efficient or just a challenge? The editor result always seems so long and complex that I never bothered to try

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had do design a local user interface for an embedded system and our design language is very rectangular 😂 so just a bunch and with some CSS for color / font etc The icons, where designed by an external partner who works wit Illustrator where I just saved as SVG, snitched the and placed it with transform translate(x.x,y.y) and scale(z.z). I just searched SVG in VS code and took the first best one, let me check, Wait Yes, I think it’s this (I’m a bit sick, so not at my PC): https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=jock.svg

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ohh ok, that is more reasonable. And that extension looks insane!
Link to Open VSX for us Codium plebs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

😄thank you for the link. I have that on my personal PC 😇 for work I have to use windows on a surface book 3. I’ll get an upgrade in 1 to 2 years and can buy this book for private use. Hope it makes a good linux tablet 😃 looking forward to that

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep! I heard Surface products are pretty great though with some touch/stylus quirks I think

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Nice! I’m looking forward to that fun project 😁

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://jpegxl.info/why-jxl.html

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm curious about the "not encumbered by patents", in the last thread someone pointed out that the base JXL implementation has a Google patent too, which I found odd, but it is there, so what about that?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Both of them are royalty-free.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yes, the title refers to AVIF in fact

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AV1 is at least better than or comparable to H.265

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

True, great technology, not so great backing corporations.
I believe that, intuitively, AVIF beats JXL when it's about animated images, so technically they even complete each other in a way

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't understand any of those at all. Anyone got an idiot's guide?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Someone linked this: https://jpegxl.info/why-jxl.html
I think explains well why it's good, here's a comparison linked from within that website

TL;DR If in the past, to achieve the best file size to image quality efficiency, you had to choose to use PNG for clean graphics (like to export simple vector drawings, text, etc.) where boundaries are clearly defined; and JPEG for photography where the subject is very complex (think trees, rich landscapes, etc.); now you can scrap all that and use JPEG-XL to deliver all kinds of images on the web.
It's not a new thing, in fact WebP (literally Web Picture) and AVIF want to do the same, but they're simply worse in performance and both are Google's ~~bitch~~ creation, where AVIF (and AV1, which is it's "parent" codec) has some patent shenanigans that could in theory stifle competition, while JPEG-XL supposedly doesn't have that crap

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

WebP is more On2's creation and AVIF created a lot of people ouside of Google. Google's codec is WebP2 and it is crap.

has some patent shenanigans that could in theory stifle competition

No, it's just MPEG-LA being patent trolls.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Good info, i don't know much about MPEG-LA, I guess they have a bad history from what you say though haha

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Long life to jpegxl

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Does Google also have a chokehold on AV1? I thought it was an industry wide project?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Does Google also have a chokehold on AV1?

Not by itself

I thought it was an industry wide project?

It is, it's just that it is based on some patents held by Google as well as other patents in the hands of other companies