It's completely bonkers that JPEG-XL is as good as it is and no one wants to actually implement it into web browsers
flameguy21
Knowing this site I thought you just put Linux on all of them until I actually looked at the picture
Can confirm. I don't talk much lol.
A feature so useless that I use VS Code almost daily and had no idea this existed
Even worse when the song doesn't have lyrics
Now we gotta do this with Windows 11.
Yeah but I'll be dead so not my problem lmao
Everyone's wondering where we went wrong as a society but honestly a year of game pass during a time of my life where I didn't get new games very often sounds way better than getting like three games for Christmas.
It sounds stressful but it really isn't. Just destroy random crates/dark plant things with the dark/light beam and you'll have basically all the ammo you need.
Wait, this is AI? (looks at hands) oh goddammit
People actually CLICK on ads???? Genuinely never had even an iota of desire to do that. I forgot it was even an option.
Basically smaller file sizes than JPEG at the same quality and it also automatically loads a lower quality version of the image before it loads a higher quality version instead of loading it pixel by pixel like an image would normally load. Google refuses to implement this tech into Chrome because they have their own avif format, which isn't bad but significantly outclassed by JPEG-XL in nearly every conceivable metric. Mozilla also isn't putting JPEG-XL into Firefox for whatever reason. If you want more detail, here's an eight minute video about it.