this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
1278 points (98.2% liked)

memes

14893 readers
4739 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

fucking Telegram automatically converts any webp sent in a message to a fucking sticker

I didn't want that. I want the ability to view the image, including zooming in and panning, and telegram forcing it into a sticker kills that completely

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

Whatsapp is marginally better but outside of regular sms texting I fine Facebook messenger to be the best.

Now don't get it twisted, it's still shit just the best of the shitty messaging apps.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I came to bitch about the same thing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

This looks like the most relevant bug on Telegram's bug tracker for the issue: https://bugs.telegram.org/c/4360

[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago

Thanks, I thumbs upped it.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 day ago (3 children)

webp is absofuckinglutely inferior to JPEG-XL and that one is where you actually have that problem. I’m literally providing an avif-fallback on my website, because otherwise pretty much no browser would support anything.

(Speaking of it, avif is also superior to webp.)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'll take ASCII art over webp.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The true best form of image storage. Nothing beats .txt

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

miss the days when I could watch the entire matrix movie on ascii before BitTorrent and streaming

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Some dude ran a public telnet server, which upon connecting, would present to you the entirety of Star Wars: A New Hope in ASCII. It was glorious.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Avif, the only one that I hate more than webp. 😞

[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Why? It’s definitely better than webp, even if google’s chrome team uses it to justify not including JXL.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

I recognize that avif and webp may have their uses, but for me they are a nuisance every time I encounter an image in those formats.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Wait am I the only one who actually likes WEBP and is cheering for JPEG to finally die ? 😭

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

Webp can die. JpegXL is better in every metric and can losslessly compress existing jpeg images. The chromium team has been notably trying to kill JXL because they spent so much time on AVIF and Webp despite neither offer anything close to JXL.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

No, I've heard there is dozens of you, dozens!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If webp didn't come from google I might cheer it. I refuse to adopt any standard made by google if I can help it. If google made it, they made it with some reason or ability to alter it that's nefarious and anti consumer. They wouldn't make an improved open standard that wasn't going to allow them to do shady shit.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

They made it because better image compression means less storage is required for images. Even if it's a small upgrade, over trillions of images or exabytes of data saved translates into millions of dollars saved. This is the same thing for the delta format as another example

By making .webp an open standard, more people will use it, thus more space savings will be had by default

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] TriflingToad 24 points 1 day ago (4 children)

for my use cases of memes or a PowerPoint type thing once in a while for school. Literally any image format works for me. I don't care about quality (as long as it's not REALLY bad) and just want to get the image from Google to the PowerPoint, and somehow GOOGLES own image format fails to work for GOOGLES PowerPoint product.
I don't understand how you can not support your own format 10 years after it came out.

pro tip by the way, you can open it in Microsoft paint then "save as -> .PNG" to get Google slides/whatever to accept it.

(before someone recommends alternatives, im talking about use on a locked down school computer. I can't use alternative software that's better because they block images in WIKIPEDIA, no shot for using an actual foss software lmao)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

use on a locked down school computer.

Shift + Win + S

I'll bet they didn't disable that in Group Policy. Lasso that sumbitch right off your screen and then just paste it into whatever.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Paint trick would leave the option for higher quality, a screen grab leaves you at screen grab resolution.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

in my honest opinion, it’s a real shame that webp isn’t widely supported. it’s actually really great: it has awesome lossless compression, it’s so much smaller than a png while not losing any quality, it supports animation and loops, etc. it’s like jpg, png, and gif rolled into one format.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 168 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I recently put in a lot of hours for a software system to be able to handle webp just as well as every other image format it already accepted. I put in a lot of work as well. Hadn't heard about it for a while, but saw the feature release statement for the new version I knew my changes were in. It wasn't on there. So I reached out to my contact and asked if there was an issue or did it get bumped to a later version or what? So she told me the marketing team that do the release statements decided not to include it. They stated for one, people already expect common formats to be handled. Saying you now handle a format looks bad, since people know you didn't handle it before and were behind the curve. The second (probably more important) reason was nobody knew what webp even was and it's only something technical people care about (they probably said nerds, but my contact translated). So no regular customer would be interested and it could only lead to confusion and questions.

I hope somebody is happy with the work I put in tho. Somebody is going to drag a webp into the system and have it be accepted. Someday.... I hope...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

The only ones reading the changelog are nerds anyway

[–] [email protected] 107 points 1 day ago (2 children)
  1. Fuck those people for telling you this after you did the work
  2. Those reasons are hard-stop stupid. If they REALLY cared about the marketing they'd release it silently or add a "improvements to image format handling" line and leave it at that.
[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 day ago* (last edited 35 minutes ago)

Maybe I worded it incorrectly. The feature was released in that version. They just didn't mention it in the release statement they put out to their customers. I'm sure there's some changelog somewhere people can dig into where it says something like what you mentioned. Or it can just be under "Various small improvements" which they always add as a catch-all.

So I'm happy, I did the job and got paid. Everyone I worked with was happy. And the feature got released. It's was just a let down it didn't get mentioned at all, even though I put quite a lot of work into it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

I will second the suggestion at something like "expanded support for more image formats". One of my responsibilities is rolling the development log into customer release notes and I agree with the "changes that highlight a previous shortcoming can look bad", and make accommodations for that all the time. I also try to make sure every developer that contributed can recognize their work in the release notes.

"Expanded image format support" seems like something that if a customer hasn't noticed, they would assume "oh they must have some customer with a weird proprietary format that they added but have to be vague about". If it were related to customer requests, I would email the specific customers highlighting their need for webp is addressed after pushing the release notes

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

a bit related.

Was working for a comparison engine. Back in the day things where slow. But i made it lightning fast. Pretty proud.

Untill a few weeks later the manager comes up, and tells me to make it SLOWER!

apparently users thought it was suss that it was so fast and the results therefore where fake…

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The giant jpeg square artefact on the side of Homer's head in the first frame undermines the message somewhat.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I'm not sure that's a JPEG artifact. It looks more like a video compression artifact (since the image is probably taken from a video).

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 112 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Just change the file extension to *.png. Works every time.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

surprised_pikachu.webp.png

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 73 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (41 children)

I'm working on a project which generates images in multiples sizes, and also converts to WEBP and AVIF.

The difference in file size is significant. It might not matter to you, but it matters to a lot of people.

Here's an example (the filename is the width):

Also, using the <picture></picture> element, if the users' browsers don't support (or block) AVIF/WEBP, the original format is used. No harm in using them.

(I know this is a meme post, but some people are taking it seriously)

load more comments (41 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›