I know the editors visit these discussions: please, next time use a more descriptive title! I nearly had a fit when I saw that, really thought LWN is going down like it almost did 20 years ago.

Happy to pay the new price, even though I can only afford the cheapest tier.

You'll be happy to know the title has been updated. Apologies for any undue concerns we have caused. :)

Now we need the HN mods to come in and edit the title of this thread, I had the same thought as OP when I first saw it lol

Just curious: what was the original title?

"A Note from LWN"

HN needs to update the title too!

> even though I can only afford the cheapest tier

Their pricing is at US levels not world levels.

They're one of the few remaining air photography providers for OpenStreetMap editors with worldwide coverage (much of it high quality and regularly updated), so they have their uses.

LWN tends to be the best bet for these things, but you have to follow their reporting long term, or at least look for specific things you're interested in.

https://lwn.net/Articles/1081557/

https://lwn.net/Articles/1039623/

Thank you, those were very helpful backgrounds on the situation in Fedora. I suspect it will take some time for their community process to digest and it suggests there is no explicit ruling at this time.

But I would still love a page that was basically a table of distro, decision status, decision, etc. so that anyone interested could make an informed choice without having to scour forums, wikis, mailing lists, chats, etc. for each and every distro

The author explains it well in the last few paragraphs if you don't want to bother with the rest. The point isn't in the "funny" apps at all.

It's a verb, "to rice" means to deeply customize your system to suite your needs and/or preferences. Install a desktop environment, setup it however you like it, add panels with system information, etc etc.

The more h4xx0r-like and minimalistic, the more street cred you get.

See https://old.reddit.com/r/unixporn (or https://reddit.com/r/unixporn without an account).

avif also supports lossless, but it's so inefficient it might as well not exist.

Lossless webp is a completely different image format compared to lossy webp, even though they come under the same file extension. Unlike lossy webp, it's a good image format that has excellent compression ratio compared to png. I've often been using it for screenshots to avoid damaging text clarity and still maintain acceptable file size.

jxl has excellent support for both lossy and lossless cases, and can replace both lossy avif (even if somewhat less efficient at low file sizes), and lossless webp.

Note also that converting jpeg to jxl is 100% reversible, you can convert it back to exactly the same image (byte for byte identical) if you need to.

>Note also that converting jpeg to jxl is 100% reversible, you can convert it back to exactly the same image (byte for byte identical) if you need to.

Speaking as someone who loves JXL, I have a serious question: I once used ImageMagick to convert a JPG to a JXL, and then back to JPG, and the final JPG was a noticeably different file size compared to the source JPG.

What am I misunderstanding here?

Not sure imagemagick supports lossless transcoding. This old discussion from 2021 mentions that it didn't (in 2021):

https://github.com/dlemstra/Magick.NET/discussions/872

cjxl / djxl do lossless transcode reliably when called with all defaults (no arguments). Just re-checked:

  $ cjxl src.jpg out.jxl
  (some output)

  $ djxl out.jxl rev.jpg
  (more output)

  $ cmp src.jpg rev.jpg 
  (no output: files identical)

JPEG to JXL transcoding and JXL to JPEG reconstruction are different from converting an image in either direction, it's gonna be a specific option (in something like xl-converter), so maybe it wasn't what was used and it was just a "reencode" into jxl and then into jpeg.

It probably used pixel-by-pixel conversion (decode input format -> encode output format), which is lossy, not the libjxl native way to convert JPEG (it needs to know about the original JPEG data, not the raw image data).

Image Magick re-encodes into an internal format, before output. If reproducibility is the goal, I'm afraid it just isn't the right tool.

(The IR used to be PixelPacket. Not sure how modern versions handle it.)

> Unlike lossy webp, it's a good image format that has excellent compression ratio compared to png.

Last I checked cwebp still messed up the color space when converting from png so be careful how you use it.

Depends on where you live, it's a decent chunk of income for every developer I know, and a significant one for those less experienced. If you have other priorities (family, mortgage, so not a hermit like myself), you won't be able to pay that here.

Then they will survive with Opus on the $20 plan.

The "Uncle Bob" school of thought follows this pattern. Look at his projects, I personally find them unreadable.

https://github.com/unclebob/fitnesse

It's been cheap again on openrouter for the past few days. No idea how long it will last, but I've been using it from Baidu over the weekend, and it was about half the cost of the old DS prices, before the increase. Looks like people are figuring out how to offer it for peanuts.

Awesome. Thanks for the heads up.

Sure. I can live for a day on those five bucks. You wouldn't believe what people in low income countries go through to save a bit of money: I've seen people I know (but couldn't stop in time) send copies of their ID to some shady company to get a five percent discount on gasoline.