cm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 11 hours agoWebplemmy.mlimagemessage-square78fedilinkarrow-up1376arrow-down176 cross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1300arrow-down1imageWebplemmy.mlcm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 11 hours agomessage-square78fedilink cross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
minus-squaretyler@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up9arrow-down3·10 hours agoBut that’s not got anything to do with quality. That’s compression size
minus-squareflamingos-cant (hopepunk arc)@feddit.uklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up45·10 hours agoLossless encoding, by definition, won’t have any quality loss.
minus-squareCarighan Maconar@piefed.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down1·5 hours agoWatch some startup “invent” a revolutionary lossless format that discards some information.
But that’s not got anything to do with quality. That’s compression size
Lossless encoding, by definition, won’t have any quality loss.
Watch some startup “invent” a revolutionary lossless format that discards some information.