Darn, today I learned that Mr. Rogers was ready for war.

Neat, I really like the gray one. Are they comfortable to rest your arms on? As in, does the texture not bother you?

Were the community rules copied straight out of Reddit or something? 3 and 9 are a bit funny.

Yeah, sorry, that part I didn't fact check myself so I didn't even want to mention it. Like I said, there's many possible reasons.

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.

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.

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.

We would be happy to connect with your technical team to help them make sure your paywalled content isn’t served to people using Poe.

What a joke, Quora needs to reevaluate whose responsibility that is.

Basic reasoning time: was it an accident?

• If not, then it was at least immoral.
• If so, then it was incompetence.

What a surprise, both possibilities seem to point towards the project being a pile of crap.

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

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.

Apparently, according to at least one known car wash scare and the user manual, there is risk of damage if you don't set it to car wash mode first. I don't know how this compares to other electric vehicles.

Unrelated, but I just found out there's a .youtube TLD. Not sure how to feel about this.

Some features of premium actually sound really interesting, but I find myself struggling to reconcile my interest in both those features and the general idea of an internet that isn't built upon ads with my strong dislike of Google and a sincere wish to give them as little money as possible.

Just don't let your partner put it in the car wash while you sleep.

Firefox + uBlock origin with the annoyances filter list enabled did the trick for me, I think. I assume reader mode works just fine too, but I'm not a fan.

We need to get our politicians to do a lot more, a lot faster.

So we're still doomed, then? I'm sorry, I'm sure lots of this is meant to be incredibly uplifting, but it reads an awful lot like "green is cheaper, trust the market! Numbers go up, up, up!" when you consider that:

• Climate change is impacting countless people in horrible ways
• Climate change is still getting worse

The important thing to note here being that, even if a brighter future awaits beyond, the worst is yet to come. I'll get back to this in a moment.

Yes, that the science to save the human race exists is nice. Really nice. There was a period in which I genuinely wondered if there was any chance humans wouldn't extinct themselves. But that was years ago. I've since learned that "saving the human species" is a terrible, disgusting metric. The future of what I consider humanity remains grim.

Now, if the worst is yet to come, and we can't yet even accurately predict how much worse the worst really will be, take a moment to reflect on this: which part of humanity is better prepared to weather the incoming changes, and which part is more likely to be labeled "climate change refugees?"

Humanity isn't only the richest. It's not merely the wealthiest and most developed nations. Humanity is also a lot of people who will suffer, people who I'm unconvinced will receive the aid and support they need and deserve.

Because the root cause of these issues, the systems that govern our society, have led us here and are unlikely to go away anytime soon. Because these systems have shown incredible prowess at protecting select groups of people from certain issues, while failing at completely fixing them, despite not struggling due to a lack of resources and continuous technological advances. If the pattern holds...

Then humans will survive. Many will live well.

Humanity is still pretty screwed.

TL;DR:

"The tools are here, we'll be alright, just need political will!"

Who's we? And if getting politicians to do what's right was that simple, we wouldn't be in this mess.

P.S. I'm not advocating for doom here, I just wish more people understood that Americans buying cheap Chinese electric cars won't save the people living nearby the mine in Africa where the cobalt for those batteries was extracted.

"All content I dislike must've been upvoted by bots."

No, real life is often just like that. It helps to remember that people tend to focus on the bad, and reddit culture isn't known for its tendency towards sensible takes.

Try to keep the good stuff in mind, I quite enjoyed reading through the recent AMA in r/firefox, for example.

Mozilla is a big entity. Regardless of your views, there'll always be both good and bad brewing in there. I think a disproportionately loud group of people need to learn to accept that, and reflect a bit more before commenting.

And yes, getting some distance from internet bubbles can help. Reddit is not the only culprit.

"The elephant in the room – and the opportunity – is how to solve for the industry-created problem that people don’t like and don’t trust advertising," said Garcia. "Privacy-enhancing tech doesn’t make creepy and disruptive ads less creepy or disruptive in the eyes of the average user."

Emphasis mine.

Betting on your reputation that users will trust you to adequately handle an issue that really seems like it'd end up with a conflict of interest seems like a fancier manner of saying you're risking taking a dump on your reputation.

No way through but forwards now, eh. Not feeling particularly optimistic, but I'm cheering for them all the same. Their concerns and observations about the direction the industry is headed in are valid.

The extremely friendly, companionship loving, and exasperatingly dumb kind. The fond type of exasperation, mind you.

As for the breed, he's a Shih Tzu :^)

Am I missing something?

Firefox is Mozilla's most profitable product. Its millions of users enable Mozilla to make deals for sponsored content (e.g. shortcuts), integrations, and biggest of all: the default search option with Google.

Responsibilities keep piling up, but I currently lack the necessary tools to do anything about most of them, which has me in a state of constant minor anxiety.

On the other hand, I just ate a tasty sandwich, so that was nice. Also, my doggo is snoring right around the corner and the sound is so funny, I love it.

You?

Not that it means much, coming from a stranger on the internet, but I hope you get well soon.