• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 23rd, 2024

help-circle





  • mke@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I think I know what you’re talking about, and I think you might have misunderstood a few things. I’ll explain my point and I’d appreciate it if you could confirm later whether it helped, or if I’m the one who misunderstood you.

    “Saving as…” is, usually, just for setting the name of the file. The full filename, extension included. The extension is just another part of the name. It doesn’t define what rules the file’s contents actually follow. They’re for other purposes, such as helping your operating system know which software to use when opening each file. For example:

    User double clicks a .pdf System: Oh, I should try opening this in Adobe Acrobat.

    But that doesn’t mean the file is actually a PDF. You can change the extension of any file, and it won’t automatically be converted to that extension (unless a specific feature has been added to make that implicit conversion). You could give an executable a .pdf extension and your system might then try opening it in Acrobat. Of course, it won’t work—there’s no way the system could have automatically made that conversion for you.

    So you might wonder, why does your (fake) PNG—which is really just a webp with an incorrect extension—still work just fine? You can open it, view it, send it. What’s the trick?

    Thing is, the software that actually deals with those files doesn’t even need to care about the extension, it’s a lot smarter than that. These programs will use things like magic bytes to figure out what the file they’re handling really is and deal with it appropriately.

    So in this scenario, the user could save a webp file as PNG.

    funny cat.png (still a webp!)

    Then they might double click to open it.

    System: How do I open a .png again?

    • .webp -> try the image viewer
    • .jpeg -> try the image viewer
    • .png -> try the image viewer (there it is)

    And finally, the image viewer would correctly identify it as a webp image and display it normally.

    Image viewer: reading magic bytes… Image viewer: yeah, that’s a webp alright

    The user might then assume that, since everything works as expected, they properly converted their webp to a PNG. In reality, it’s all thanks to these programs, built upon decades of helping users just make things work. Same with Discord, Paint.NET, etc. Any decent software will handle files it’s meant to handle, even if they aren’t properly labeled.

    If you were to check the file contents though, using a tool like file, czkawka to find incorrect extensions, or even just checking image properties, it should still be identified as a webp.

    I didn’t try it myself as you said because, to my understanding of files and software, doing so made no sense. But again, do tell if I got something wrong or misinterpreted your comment.


  • mke@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Hey, thanks for the input. I’d like to read more about this, but I can’t seem to find anything related online. Anything else you could share?

    Just checking, you sure you’re not confusing fallback-to-another-format when the browser doesn’t support webp? Because that’s a bit of separate issue, and not a terribly relevant one since all major browsers have supported webp for a while now.


  • mke@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Sorry, is this comment meant in jest? If not, could you explain what exactly you mean by “no need for a converter?”

    I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works. No actual file data conversion is happening when you do that unless you’re using additional tools e.g. browser extensions.


  • mke@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Semi-related, I’m still salty about Google’s rejection of JPEG XL. I can’t help but remember this when webp discussion crops up, since Google were the ones who created it.

    Why care about JPEG XL?

    Because it seems very promising. source with details.

    Rejection?

    Google started working on JPEG XL support for chrome, then dropped it despite significant industry support. Apple is also in, by the way.

    Why do that?

    Don’t know, many possible reasons. In fairness, even Mozilla hasn’t decided to fully invest in it, and libjxl hasn’t defined a stable public API yet.

    That said, I don’t believe that’s the kind of issue that’d stop Google if they wanted to push something forward. They’d find a way, funding, helping development, something.

    And unfortunately for all of us, Google Chrome sort of… Immensely influences what the web is and will be. They can’t excuse themselves saying “they’ll work on it, if it gains traction” when them supporting anything is fundamental to it gaining traction in the first place.

    You’d have to believe Google is acting in good faith for the sake of the internet and its users. I don’t think I need to explain why that’s far from guaranteed and in many issues incredibly unlikely.

    Useless mini-rant

    I really need a single page with all this information I can link every time image standards in the web are mentioned. There’s stuff I’m leaving out because writing these comments takes some work, especially on a phone, and I’m kinda tired of doing it.

    I still hold hope for JPEG XL and that Google will cave at some point.



  • You’re right, regarding Mastodon. I won’t edit my other comment, though, both to preserve the original chain of thought and because that brings up another discussion.

    To quote the EFF:

    We feel that the intended usage of the feature will not determine people’s expectation of privacy while using it.

    Offering people a feature with preexisting expectations, similar to other things that fulfill those expectations, then telling people “We know it looks like a duck but don’t expect it to quack!”

    …It begs the question: was the feature really a good idea?


  • And it’s also damming for private messaging on mastodon.

    I once read vague complaints about it being a rushed implementation. While I won’t trust those without evidence, I for sure wouldn’t trust mastodon with my PMs. At least, not until how this was allowed to happen is figured out and fixed if necessary.

    P.S. I’m still not sure I believe in PMs in the fediverse. If I need to share something and care about keeping it private, I’d rather move the conversation elsewhere.


  • It seems less anti-theft and more “data protection in case of theft.”

    I’m not sure that’s a fair assessment (after all, what should a proper anti-theft measure even look like, then?), but that’s the best way I can describe it. From what I can tell, it’s more tech that attempts to lock the screen when it believes your phone isn’t safe.

    More data protection is always nice, provided it works. Was AI the best way to do it? No idea. Don’t know if it’ll help with the actual theft any, since I believe the stolen phones are usually factory reset and then resold all over. User data was never the main appeal.

    It’s mildly funny that this will be tested in Brazil. Something that is a bit fitting, a bit sad, yet I can’t help snorting at.


  • mke@lemmy.worldtome_irl@lemmy.mlme irl every time
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    It’s always interesting to see random activities highlight how different people’s lives can be. As of the time I’m posting this, half of the comments mention a dishwasher.

    I’ve never been in a house with a dishwasher, and literally just realized I couldn’t tell you if I’ve ever seen one, outside of a screen. To my perception, they’re like a magical tool that supposedly exists… somewhere. Maybe.

    That’s not a complaint, and not really noteworthy. I’m pretty sure most of humanity doesn’t have one, after all. I just think it’s funny when you stumble into another bubble, inside your bubble.

    I know that I, too, enjoy things that don’t seem real to someone else. Even being able to read this post is a privilege. Now, that’s funny.



  • While I agree with you, I just want to mention that not necessarily all fediverse users have a formed opinion (at least at first) about open platforms, sharing content with other websites, and so on.

    Some people just suffered from platforms like ex-Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, etc. enshittifying, heard that other victims were trying to build something better, and (generously, might I add) decided to give it a chance.

    That doesn’t excuse any horrible behavior they might’ve engaged in. But remember that just because someone is surprised and reacts negatively at how their content is handled on the fediverse, that doesn’t mean they were in the wrong to join.

    Folks can jump into things without fully understanding them, and sometimes it’s nice to, circumstances allowing, take that as an opportunity to inform, rather than question “Why are you even here?”


  • There’s quite a bit to unpack in this article, even if some of it is only mentioned.

    It’s a saddening read. There are issues with Fediverse culture and surrounding technical discussion at wide, but also with interactions between law and new technologies like ActivityPub—and that’s on top of the law, on it’s own, already doing a horrible job way too often, in my opinion. None of this is news, but it always hurts a little to be reminded so.

    I’ve been thinking about trying to get into mastodon, to form my own opinion on several topics it intersects with. I’m a little uncomfortable with how popular it is compared to other fediverse software, considering how poorly they seem to integrate. I hoped some time on mastodon would dispell this feeling, or at least give me insights I could work with. To be honest, every day it gets a little harder to justify that idea.

    But that’s just a personal thing. Maybe I’m simply not fit for micro-blogging. Really, I don’t care which software is the most popular, I literally just wish they’d integrate better. Despite my misgivings, I’m grateful for the positive impact mastodon has made in the social/tech circles, changing how many people see social media and their relationship with it.

    The us-versus-them mentality is unreal. The only valid them, to me, is proprietary closed platforms. We should strive for more decentralized networks that shift control over user experience back to its users, because we need and deserve safer, healthier social networks. This is not it. I can only hope culture will improve, because I’m not sure how you’d tackle a problem on this scale.

    And if mastodon can’t fix itself? Screw it, and keep an eye on what comes next.

    It’s not a competition, we’re in a team effort to build a part of the internet that can resist enshittification inevitable in closed platforms; so long as the platform is open, I’ll keep my mind open as well. If my lemmy instance decides to migrate to Sublinks, that’s fine. Worst case, I’ll migrate elsewhere. Assuming Bluesky turns out OK as a company, even atproto taking the lead over ActivityPub might be fine. Hell, some of the original AP creators are still experimenting with new ideas.

    I fully agree with the point that too many people act like the fediverse, or their specific brand of it, is more open-minded and kinder than what they’re trying to replace. I hope it’s possible to make that true, one day.

    P.S. Sorry, brevity is the soul of wit, and I’m an idiot. This ended up as an outlet for issues that have been frustrating me for a while.