this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
29 points (96.8% liked)

Linux

47237 readers
3343 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
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

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

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

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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.

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

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

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

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

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

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)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week 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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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

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

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

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

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.

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

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

Why.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week 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

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

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

if you want this shit to become standard

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

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

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