18 ms·

Google argued that duplicating largely (I know JpegXL does support a bit more, but from most users' perspectives, they're largely right) what AVIF provided whil

Google argued that duplicating largely (I know JpegXL does support a bit more, but from most users' perspectives, they're largely right) what AVIF provided while being written in an unsafe language was not what they wanted in terms in increasing the attack surface.

adzm 9mo ago
And it really was the right move at the time, imo. JXL however now has better implementations and better momentum in the wider ecosystem and not just yet another image format that gets put into chrome and de facto becomes a standard.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- klglrksbjkt 9mo ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=what+the+old+man+does+is+always+right https://www.google.com/search?q=what+the+old+man+does+is+alw...
  - actionfromafar 9mo ago
    Hahaha perfect! Can't believe I never heard this story before.
  - robocat 9mo ago
    http://hca.gilead.org.il/old_man.html http://hca.gilead.org.il/old_man.html Aviso: http
- _ache_ 9mo ago
  I can confirm. I found multiple problems in the "official" cjxl encoder back in 2023 contrary to the webp2 (cwp2) implementation where I could not find any bug or error. If the encoder have obvious problems it is not a big deal, but it doesn't bode well for the decoder.
  - adzm 9mo ago
    CVE-2023-0645 in libjxl that year too, and several since
    - rurban 9mo ago
      It's also a horrible API. Will start working on the rust lib then. Hopefully it's better, because I really want to use it.
- Dylan16807 9mo ago
  Forcing other companies to override them is a way to prove momentum but it's not a good way to prove momentum.
Dylan16807 9mo ago
> duplicating largely what AVIF provided That's not a great bar since both of them showed up around the same time. And importantly JXL hits many use cases that AVIF doesn't. > while being written in an unsafe language They put little emphasis on that part when they were rejecting JXL. If they wanted to call for a safer implementation they could have done that.

adzm 9mo ago

And it really was the right move at the time, imo. JXL however now has better implementations and better momentum in the wider ecosystem and not just yet another image format that gets put into chrome and de facto becomes a standard.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
klglrksbjkt 9mo ago
https://www.google.com/search?q=what+the+old+man+does+is+always+right https://www.google.com/search?q=what+the+old+man+does+is+alw...
- actionfromafar 9mo ago
  Hahaha perfect! Can't believe I never heard this story before.
- robocat 9mo ago
  http://hca.gilead.org.il/old_man.html http://hca.gilead.org.il/old_man.html Aviso: http
_ache_ 9mo ago
I can confirm. I found multiple problems in the "official" cjxl encoder back in 2023 contrary to the webp2 (cwp2) implementation where I could not find any bug or error. If the encoder have obvious problems it is not a big deal, but it doesn't bode well for the decoder.
- adzm 9mo ago
  CVE-2023-0645 in libjxl that year too, and several since
  - rurban 9mo ago
    It's also a horrible API. Will start working on the rust lib then. Hopefully it's better, because I really want to use it.
Dylan16807 9mo ago
Forcing other companies to override them is a way to prove momentum but it's not a good way to prove momentum.

Dylan16807 9mo ago

> duplicating largely what AVIF provided That's not a great bar since both of them showed up around the same time. And importantly JXL hits many use cases that AVIF doesn't. > while being written in an unsafe language They put little emphasis on that part when they were rejecting JXL. If they wanted to call for a safer implementation they could have done that.