271
submitted 2 months ago by that_leaflet@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Tiuku@sopuli.xyz 83 points 2 months ago
[-] shadowtofu@discuss.tchncs.de 55 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I took my existing JPEG file, compressed it using JXL, 15% smaller.

Then I decompressed it again into JPEG. The file was bit-for-bit identical to the original file (same hash). Blew my mind!

Directly using JXL is even better of course.

[-] Eiri@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 months ago

So it's called xlarge... And it makes files smaller.

Why.

[-] shadowtofu@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 months ago

The same amount of JXL gives you more image than JPEG? Also, it supports ridiculous resolutions (terapixel).

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 months ago

this has been a bit of a meme, but if you wanted to look at XL as extra large, then that could refer to the max resolution which is far great. I've seen people refere to it as "extra long-term" but I think the real reason is they just wanted to fuck with us

[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 41 points 2 months ago

Google's involvement should always raise concerns but I guess it's good Mozilla is trying to improve stuff.

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 77 points 2 months ago

this is from the google research team, they contribute a LOT to many foss projects. Google is not a monolith, each team is made of often very different folk, who have very different goals

[-] 1984@lemmy.today 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

As long as their goals suite the company, sure. The endgame of Google is very clear and it doesn't include a free and open web.

[-] haerrii@feddit.org 10 points 2 months ago

they are making it seem just free and open enough to avoid regulation

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago

I don't even think this is the case, google does a lot pretty much everywhere. one example is one of the things they are pushing for is locally run AI (gemini, stable diffusion etc.) to run on your gpu via webgpu instead of needing to use cloud services, which is obviously privacy friendly for a myriad of reasons, in fact, we now have multiple implementations of LLMs that run locally in browser on webgpu, and even a stable diffusion implementation (never got it to work though since my most beefy gpu is an arc a380 with 6gb of ram)

they do other stuff too, but with the recent craze push for AI, I think this is probably the most relevant.

[-] that_leaflet@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

LLMs are expensive to run, so locally running them saves Google money.

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

ehh... not really, the amount of generated data you can get by snopping on LLM traffic is going to far out weigh the costs of running LLMs

[-] that_leaflet@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There's nothing technical stopping Google from sending the prompt text (and maybe generated results) back to their servers. Only political/social backlash for worsened privacy.

[-] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

I doubt that. I'm going to guess that Google is going towards a sort of "P2P AI"

[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Well Google can still lock Mozilla out of the features and cooperation if they do something Google doesn't like. It's just one example. Nobody should ever trust Google.

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

like what? I can kinda understand them not cooperating but how on earth could they lock them out of features?

[-] jokeyrhyme@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

One example I can think of is Widevine DRM, which is owned by Google and is closed source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widevine

Google currently allows Mozilla (and others) to distribute this within Firefox, allowing Netflix, Disney+, and various other video streaming services to work within Firefox without any technical work performed by the user

I don't believe Google would ever willingly take this away from Mozilla, but it's entirely possible that the movie and music industries pressure Google to reduce access to Widevine (the same way they pressured Netflix into adopting DRM)

[-] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

yeah, that could indeed happen I suppose, didn't think of that. Though I wonder if because of EME, an alternative drm solution could be viably implemented.

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Its 2024 and this guy is telling us that google is not so bad.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

It's 2024 and this guy still can't read.

[-] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 2 months ago

Think the headline kind of buries the lead. Firefox is basically holding google by the balls and saying "Make a better decoder if you want this shit to become standard" which imo is great. Force them to do what they should have done already.

[-] JustMarkov@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

if you want this shit to become standard

Since when Google is interested in promoting jxl and not webp?

[-] fossphi@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago

This is not right on multiple levels. Google, or at least the chromium team were not interested in implementing jxl at all

[-] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 2 months ago

maybe i misunderstood what they were saying on github then cuz to me it sounded like they were using their leverage as firefox to get a decoder made that was more secure.

[-] daggermoon@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Please let this happen!

[-] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Google's involvement is weird, not for any conspiracy reasons but because the chromium team previously cancelled JPEG-XL.

[-] Redruth@feddit.nl 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I have a nagging doubt; jpeg-xl has a very extensive feature set (text overlays, etc). meanwhile, tech/media consortia want a basic spec for AV1 + OPUS on chip and push that to all media capable devices. we can expect av1, avif and opus to be ubiquitous in a few years. So i think they will prioritise AVIF.

[-] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

I did some reading in AV1 and it's derivative formats - are they any more accessible to Linux than HEVC/H265? Fedora IIRC removed support for them and a few other codecs out of the box over some patent concerns or something.

this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
271 points (99.6% liked)

Linux

48147 readers
1037 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS