this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
340 points (92.3% liked)

Technology

59207 readers
2513 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 406 points 3 months ago (85 children)

TL:DW, JPEG is getting old in the tooth, which prompted the creation of JPEG XL, which is a fairly future-proof new compression standard that can compress images to the same file size or smaller than regular JPEG while having massively higher quality.

However, JPEG XL support was removed from Google Chrome based browsers in favor of AVIF, a standalone image compression derived from the AV1 video compression codec that is decidedly not future-proof, having some hard-coded limitations, as well as missing some very nice to have features that JPEG XL offers such as progressive image loading and lower hardware requirements. The result of this is that JPEG XL adoption will be severely hamstrung by Google’s decision, which is ultimately pretty lame.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Look it's all actually about re-encumberancing image file formats back into corporate controlled patented formats. If we would collectively just spend time and money and development resources expanding and improving PNG and gif formats that are no longer patent encumbered, we'd all live happily ever after.

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

its royalty free and has an open source implementation, what more could you want?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

No patent encumbrance. That was the entire point.

Clawing control of patent infected media standards is far more important for a healthy open internet built on open standards that is not subject to the whims and controls of capital investment groups eating up companies to exert control of the entire technology standards pipeline.

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

JPEG-XL is in no way patent encumbered. Neither is AVIF. I don't know what you're talking about

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

https://encode.su/threads/3863-RANS-Microsoft-wins-data-encoding-patent

https://www.theregister.com/2022/02/17/microsoft_ans_patent/

https://avifstudio.com/blogs/faq/avif-patents/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26910515

https://aomedia.org/press%20releases/the-alliance-for-open-media-statement/

If AVIF was not patent encumbered, AOMedia would not need to have a Patent License to allow open source use.

A majority of the most recent standards are effectively cabal esque private groups of Corporations that hold patents that on the underlying technology and then license the patents among each other as part of the standards org and throw a license bone towards open source. That can all be undone by the patent holders at their whim.

There's no need to create a standard format that's patent encumbered especially if they don't ever intend to monetize that paten,t. It's all about maintaining control of intellectual property and especially who was allowed and when they are allowed to profit from the standards.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago

Royalty-free blanket patent licensing is compatible with Free Software and should be considered the same as being unpatented. Even if it's conditioned on a grant of reciprocality. It's only when patent holders start demanding money (or worse, withholding licenses altogether) that it becomes a problem

load more comments (82 replies)