3 ms·
Waawh, one would think (certainly, I personally thought) that all the _simple_ compression algorithms would have been discovered and build by now...
by janandonly 5y ago
Waawh, one would think (certainly, I personally thought) that all the _simple_ compression algorithms would have been discovered and build by now...
- rowanG077 5y agoInteresting I have the opposite view. From intuition I would think there is an unbounded set of simple compression algorithms. You can probably make much more effective simple compression algorithms by making basic assumptions about the type of image.
- EmilioMartinez 5y agoThis is patently so. Taken to absurd proportions, you can compress a specific rendition of the Mona Lisa with just one bit. 1 means Mona, and 0 is undefined behaviour.
- FooBarBizBazz 5y agoTaking this a step further: 0 means that all subsequent bits contain an arbitrary PNG. Now your algorithm encodes any image, and still does Mona Lisa in one bit.
- selcuka 5y agoIt's also almost as effective as PNG (plus one bit) for non-Mona Lisa images.
- mijoharas 5y agoAre we about to talk about Kolmolgorov complexity? you're damn right that we're about to talk about Kolmolgorov complexity! :) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity
- vintermann 5y agoWell, this is a combination of simple approaches which have all been used before, though put together in a nice way. And it's not benchmarked against modern formats like lossless webp or jpeg-xl.