4 ms·
Why go forth with these "futuristic" means of optimizing/compressing current formats, when these said, current formats will with all likeliness be abandoned soo
by hackermom 16y ago
Why go forth with these "futuristic" means of optimizing/compressing current formats, when these said, current formats will with all likeliness be abandoned soon enough in favor of something better? It appears as if this company's business idea is entirely redundant. After all, shedding the past in favor of the future is the exact history of all we've done in computing since... since... since before dinosaurs died.
I fail to see the point of this in the light of a much smarter idea: keep this approach in mind when developing new formats. Maybe I'm just not thinking outside the "boxeola" enough here... (or maybe I am?)
- adamsmith 16y agoSo for example a future image compression algorithm should define how to compress a single image, and how to compress a group of compressed images? Interesting thought. The downside of this coupling might be slower adoption of new cross-file compression algorithms if there is going to be a string of them, which empirically there seems to be. It's kind of funny that the de facto image compression algorithms haven't changed in ~10 years whereas video compression algorithms change flavors every two to four years.