3 ms·
Can you provide any concrete indication that anyone was actually discouraged from researching general-purpose lossless compression by a "system that maintains a
by brazzy 12y ago
Can you provide any concrete indication that anyone was actually discouraged from researching general-purpose lossless compression by a "system that maintains an eagle's eye on new ideas"? Looks to me like forcing a social explanation on a technical problem.
To me it simply looks like there just isn't much possibility of improvement in that field. Ultimately, you're limited by the pigeonhole principle.
Special-purpose lossy compression, i.e. video - that's where you see leaps and bounds in active research and improvement.
- khitchdee 12y agoMost of the past algos that have been developed have been done by commercial development teams. This means they are typically driven by the current requirements of the user market. The techniques that get developed therefore tend to be mostly increments to older techniques and since corporates value their IP, these get patented, everyone is happy. If we could step out of this corporate context, we would likely do better on the algos. On the topic of video, the latest stuff is still based on decades old core technology. Its still block-based motion compensated transforms which has been around since at least MPEG-1. Don't see any leaps and bounds in what's used now. No wavelets, no fractals, no other new stuff. Just better optimized versions of the base.