This affects all browsers and not just Chrome, as the media falsely reported it. Mozilla just rolled out a fix, and Brave is looking into it. This bug is likely related to the “zero-click” iOS 0day that was reported by Citizenlab last week.

  • zeus ⁧ ⁧ ∽↯∼@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sorry, 5 graphics programs isn’t “support”. You need support from the millon mobile apps, web sites and image and web libraries. A format that you can only use by yourself or with a handful professionals is useless in practice.

    i gave those because they’re the most pertinent programmes for people dealing with creating & editing images. there are mobile (or at least android) libraries; and web is the issue i’m talking about - it’s hampered by chromium. there are more here if you’re interested.

    and i’d say that’s not bad for a format that’s only a few years old

    Ed: look at the list of formats supported by XnView

    i don’t know what this is supposed to mean. xnview supports jxl

    There’s been hundreds of new image formats in the last ~20 years, and none has gotten anywhere.

    because png is good. i’m not defending gif or jpeg, they suck. but png is simple, fast to decode, and open by design. there have been better formats, but not paradigm shiftingly better. it may not be the best as an image format, but it is good

    Even PNG needed a decade for some things to support it properly, and that one really had a brand new massive use case.

    yeah that’s my point, jxl has been adopted faster than png or webp (it was only officially standardised in 2022!)

    People use gif to make videos for crying out loud, and bitch about webp all the time, that’s how massive the pushback against new formats is.

    i really don’t think many people use gif. most people use gifv or similar (usually webm) without realising it. apart from its very specific use case, gif sucks; so most software automatically converts to something else

    Do you really think jpegxl would get anywhere by itself? No, it would be the same as with jpeg2000 and tons of other formats - first supported by a handful of programs, but not used by anyone else and then forgotten.

    jpeg2k had issues other than a lack of support - jxl has deliberately avoided those pitfalls