Given these positive signals
Those idiots waited for 4 years because they followed the hype of the moment. I'm glad I removed Google from my life.
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
530 points (99.3% liked)
Programmer Humor
27673 readers
720 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This must be your first time seeing what Google support looks like
This is pretty standard unless you can get an exec’s personal attention.
Beyond this, even if you can get engineers to look at a bug ticket, this is how long it takes. It's months just to get a follow up.
something tells me they wanted their own formats to catch on.
Absolutely, google does that shit constantly, well known within the internet standards community
That used to be what Microsoft (Internet Explorer) was famous for. I guess Chrome has lived long enough to be the villain, but Firefox is still the hero to me.
Sorry to break it to you, but you might want to start looking at Firefox forks.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Given these positive signals, we would welcome contributions
Poor Google doesn't have the manpower to implement it. They can only accept contributions from volunteers.
Google is just a small indie company after all.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"we would welcome contributions to integrate a performant and memory-safe JPEG XL decoder in Chromium. In order to enable it by default in Chromium we would need a commitment to long-term maintenance."
yeah
I.e. the existing implementation is not usable because it's not written in rust
Or would they demand it in Go? Or have they abandoned that?
That might work but didn't think go was
- as safe as rust
- built for CPU intensive operations (aside from potentially concurrent tasks)
The name of the format makes me think it's regular jpeg, but bigger. Wouldn't it be better to be smaller? 🤔
No. They increased the max "canvas" size and increased encoding efficiency. You'd want the file size to be smaller but the file itself to be larger (and consequently more detailed)
It's even more confusing than that; the X is for revision 10, and the L is for long term.
It's an update to the JPEG standard intended to cover expected future uses and capabilities.
~~"10 LTS"?~~
load more comments
(1 replies)
Finally.
I just want a picture of a got-dang hot dog.
view more: next ›