Firefox 93 • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox 93

#21

Post by Spivak » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

noteboom wrote: post #13

huuuz wrote: post #2

How are downloads performed over http "potentially malicious"?

Mozilla is foolish to buy into Google's bad faith attempt to create barriers to entry for small/old sites and further centralize the web.

Yeah how dare Mozilla force sites to pay for TLS certificates! It’s a racket I tell you! If they’re going to be required in order to be on the internet they should be free

Mozilla: Okay, done.

Re: Firefox 93

#22

Post by mijailt » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

akie wrote: post #17

Give me a way to pay for Firefox, please, and use the proceeds to hire a full development team that can hopefully catch up and overtake Chrome? Please?

https://donate.mozilla.org ?

Re: Firefox 93

#23

Post by MauranKilom » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

huuuz wrote: post #6

CodesInChaos wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A MitM (e.g. an untrusted WiFi network) could replace a download by a malicious version.

In that case the html text of the page could be replaced by the attacker so the download link points to an https link.

At least it can't be an HTTPS link to the same domain. But even if a user notices this, it's not worth a lot in the age of CDNs on weirdly abbreviated separate domains...

Re: Firefox 93

#24

Post by Flockster » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:14 PM UTC

yboris wrote: post #10

theandrewbailey wrote: post #7

> Firefox now supports the new AVIF image format PARTY! I've been waiting for this for a long time. The last big hurdle for this was that color spaces weren't applied correctly. If you haven't taken a look at AVIF, do. You can get a similar looking image in AVIF at half the size as a JPEG. I find AVIF's image artifacts preferable to JPEG's.

I'm looking forward to the wide adoption of JPEG XL (.jxl - "jixel") file format. It's the format that will replace JPEG! https://jpegxl.info/

It's already in Firefox Nightly and Chrome Beta as far as I know.

Re: Firefox 93

#25

Post by yboris » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

bla3 wrote: post #18

yboris wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm looking forward to the wide adoption of JPEG XL (.jxl - "jixel") file format. It's the format that will replace JPEG! https://jpegxl.info/

I kind of doubt it. JPEG is good enough, and is pervasive. JPEG XL is better, but removing an incumbent file format requires more than just being better. We'll see.

Unlike preceding formats that tried to replace JPEG, this one was designed with the replacement challenges in mind.

A great blog post on this by one of the creators of the format, Jon Sneyers:

https://cloudinary.com/blog/time_for_next_gen_codecs_to_deth...

Re: Firefox 93

#26

Post by HMH » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

huuuz wrote: post #2

How are downloads performed over http "potentially malicious"?

This would be massively annoying for my local network. I trust that I do not mitm myself for malicious reasons and really do not feel like setting up certs on my lan...

Talking about certs, nowadays it seems browsers want to make you believe that self signed certs are some diabolical work straight from hell. Using self signed certs with websockets on Firefox is actually nearly impossible [1].

[1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1187666

Re: Firefox 93

#27

Post by k4c9x » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

yboris wrote: post #10

theandrewbailey wrote: post #7

> Firefox now supports the new AVIF image format PARTY! I've been waiting for this for a long time. The last big hurdle for this was that color spaces weren't applied correctly. If you haven't taken a look at AVIF, do. You can get a similar looking image in AVIF at half the size as a JPEG. I find AVIF's image artifacts preferable to JPEG's.

I'm looking forward to the wide adoption of JPEG XL (.jxl - "jixel") file format. It's the format that will replace JPEG! https://jpegxl.info/

It's pronounced "jizzle".

Re: Firefox 93

#28

Post by theandrewbailey » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

teekert wrote: post #11

theandrewbailey wrote: post #7

> Firefox now supports the new AVIF image format PARTY! I've been waiting for this for a long time. The last big hurdle for this was that color spaces weren't applied correctly. If you haven't taken a look at AVIF, do. You can get a similar looking image in AVIF at half the size as a JPEG. I find AVIF's image artifacts preferable to JPEG's.

Do you know when we can expect .heic?

If you mean the container format, AVIF uses it natively.

If you mean the image format, probably never. It's based on the HEVC/H.265 licensing minefield. For that reason, I don't expect it to ever be supported on Chromium or Firefox based browsers.

Re: Firefox 93

#29

Post by MrRadar » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

bla3 wrote: post #18

yboris wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm looking forward to the wide adoption of JPEG XL (.jxl - "jixel") file format. It's the format that will replace JPEG! https://jpegxl.info/

I kind of doubt it. JPEG is good enough, and is pervasive. JPEG XL is better, but removing an incumbent file format requires more than just being better. We'll see.

JPEG XL has a party trick where you can losslessly transcode JPEG files to JPEG XL for a ~20% size savings. I imagine that every CDN out there will enable transparent conversion of JPEG to JPEG XL and that will drive adoption just by itself.

Re: Firefox 93

#30

Post by Nextgrid » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

mijailt wrote: post #22

akie wrote: post #17

Give me a way to pay for Firefox, please, and use the proceeds to hire a full development team that can hopefully catch up and overtake Chrome? Please?

https://donate.mozilla.org ?

> Contributions go to the Mozilla Foundation, a 501(c)(3) organisation based in San Francisco, California, to be used in its discretion for its charitable purposes.

This goes to the Mozilla Foundation and not to the browser's development. As far as I know there is currently no way to donate to the browser's development.