https://opensource.googleblog.com/2 017/03/guetzli-new-open-

>now with added tracking and botnet in every jpg

>>59433347
Why don't you find the code that tracks you and sends you to the botnet?
https://github.com/google/guetzli/

File: 1469309230745.png (2MB, 1011x3032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1011x3032px

Pretty pointless since webp already exists.

>>59433347
Do you even know what "open source" means?

>>59433330

> Guetzli uses a large amount of memory. You should provide 300MB of memory per 1MPix of the input image.

hahahaha

>CIA rolling out a patch for their embedded data after the recent Wikileaks leak

File: website.png (28KB, 1667x1434px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1667x1434px

>current state of the web

>>59433373
webp better stay the fuck inside browsers to save bandwith and nothing more

>>59433373
which is only supported in one browser, whereas jpg is supported everywhere.

>>59433330
Why would you use this shit if mozjpeg has both empirically and provably the best compression rates of all encoders?

https://github.com/mozilla/mozjpeg/

>>59433373
JPEG is better than WebP.

https://blog.mozilla.org/research/2013/10/17/studying-lossy-image-compression-efficiency/

https://blog.mozilla.org/research/2014/07/15/mozilla-advances-jpeg-encoding-with-mozjpeg-2-0/

>>59433330
>Make something useful and impressive
>Call it such a dumbfuck name you'll never be able to remember the command for it

>>59433373
>Do you even know what "open source" means?
Irrelevant unless they perform code audits, which nearly no open source project does.
In practice, agents are able to infiltrate backdoors just as easily in open source software by disguising them as features or innocent patches. When the backdoor's found, they simply go like "whooops! it was just a bug, here's another nice new feature for the project btw...", and inject another backdoor.
By my experience, about half the vulnerabilities you'll find in popular open source projects these days were not injected by accident.

>>59434664
Hmmm i dunno man, webp would eliminate the nasty violent jpg artifacts most people hate. Could be useful for other things than saving bandwidth.

>>59434788
Palemoon, brave, and a bunch of other browsers support it too you filthy SJW freetard.

File: caQlmH1.png (27KB, 91x132px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 91x132px

>>59433373
>Find a cool image on Google Images
>Drag it to my desktop
>Turns into a fucking Chrome icon because it's WEBP

>>59435785
>"WebP Codec for Windowsthat implements the Windows Imaging Component decoder interface and allows you to open WebP files using Windows Photo Viewer, view WebP thumbnails in Windows Explorer, and support WebP in other programs that use WIC (such as Microsoft Office 2010)."

https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/download

>>59435785
There's also a webp import/export plug-in for gimp as well

http://registry.gimp.org/node/25874

File: 1455772555764.png (1MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2000px

>>59433330
Kiitos Jyrki

>>59433382
Not a big deal we have computers that average like 64 gig now

File: 2017-03-16 15_26_06-.png (39KB, 525x578px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 525x578px

Fucking inexcusable

>>59433330
>using a format that was made to compress camera shots for 2D content

>>59435785
>right click -> copy image
>paste on editor
wow, that was hard

File: montage-cats-zoom-eye2.png (6KB, 570x240px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 570x240px

The colors in the cat's eye are completely fucked up in the example (new google shit on the right).
How is this good?

>>59436285
You wouldn't notice on a full sized picture.

>>59436291
How do you know I'm not Superman?

>>59436332
Oh, I'm sorry Clark

>>59436285
yes but jpg is worse still

>>59433330
I'll have to add this to my brute force chain.
Thanks.