5 ms·
We all know what the real argument is: NIH.
by mgaunard 3y ago
We all know what the real argument is: NIH.
- bbatsell 3y agoOne of the three main authors of JXL works for Google. But in the Google Research Zurich office, so he might as well not exist to the Chrome team, I guess.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- masklinn 3y agoAh yes, NIH from a contributor to the spec, makes complete sense.
- mrguyorama 3y ago[flagged]
- pgeorgi 3y agoSame with av1. It's not verbatim vp10, but incorporates concepts developed by xiph.org and Cisco (and whoever else).
- ruuda 3y agoThis is definitely not the case, the team behind Pik is eager to get JPEG XL deployed, but Chrome is blocking it.
- mrguyorama 3y agoI'm not sure what we are misunderstanding from each other. I'm saying google could very well be blocking it's deployment in chrome because it is not the implementation they originally came forward with if they are that petty and NIH.
- vanderZwan 3y agoThe team that wrote the original Google proposal (PIK) joined forces with the team that wrote FUIF and together they created JXL, so no, those particular Googlers are not petty about this. They're a distinct team from the Chrome team though.
- alickz 3y agoWhile that's a possibility the article made it seem like Google's PIK team and Cloudinary worked together on JPEGXL
- mgaunard 3y agoI've seen people rage-quit because their work was standardized but with modifications they themselves didn't approve of.
- hortense 3y agoLast time I looked, all the top commiters were from Google.