Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

hydrogenaud.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 201 posts

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#71

Post by RaisingSpear »

bsder wrote: post #10
sgbeal wrote: post #2

Tip for those who are looking at the compression ratios thinking "so what?": look at the run-times. It's a minimum of 3x faster than its contemporaries.

FLAC level 5 encode times should be WAY longer than decode times. FLAC level 0 to FLAC level 5 is a huge step up and encoding should be way longer (like factor of 3). Under no circumstances should FLAC level 5 decode be faster than FLAC level 0 decode. These are basic sanity checks. Something is wrong in the benchmark.

> Under no circumstances should FLAC level 5 decode be faster than FLAC level 0 decode.

I don't know about FLAC, but from my knowledge of compression, this result seems sensible to me.

Smaller file = less bits to process = faster. FLAC level 5 is expected to give a smaller file than level 0, so it makes sense that decoding it will be faster. Of course, it's possible that some codecs enable more codec features at higher compression levels, which makes decoding slower, so it's not always a given, but higher compression giving faster decode doesn't seem unreasonable.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#73

Post by wokwokwok »

Dalewyn wrote: post #68
p-e-w wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about whether this particular announcement, with these particular executables, is trustworthy or not. It's about the whole process of regularly downloading and running executables uploaded by individuals to a BBS-type forum being unimaginable in most other parts of the software world, and violating every security "best practice" written about in the past 30 years. I know that this is how things were once don…

Are we even in the same universe? The vast majority of the world still downloads and runs executables uploaded by individuals, albeit perhaps not on a bulletin board or forum (most of those have been killed and replaced by social media).

This argument comes up reasonably regularly.

No, the majority of the world does not download and run binaries from non-reputable sources.

The distinction between reputable and non-reputable varies, but broadly easily spoofable user uploaded content falls into the non-reputable.

Most people download software from trust worthy websites like the official chrome website.

Indeed, the fact that people are continually scammed by this sort of attack is why Apple now refuses to run unsigned binaries by default.

To pretend nothing is wrong here is like pretending JavaScript supply chain attacks don’t exist because you don’t want them to exist.

…and yet. They do exist; wanting it not to be true does not make it so.

Likewise, downloading and running arbitrary binaries from a forum is naive.

You simply want nothing bad to happen.

That does not mean nothing bad will actually happen.

Even if you trust the authors of the posts, how reputable is the forum itself? Are the binary hashes posted? (No, they aren’t).

> I'm new in this forum

^ does not inspire confidence.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#74

Post by RockRobotRock »

p-e-w wrote: post #8

For what looks at first glance to be a potentially impactful development, this post and the "encode.su" one linked from it are extremely sparse on details. Where is the source code? A detailed description of what the codec actually does? References to relevant publications? All I see are two mystery Windows binaries, hosted on a forum I've never heard about. The fact that "encode.su" uses the world's most notorious d…

Really? Tearing down the OP because of the TLD the forum uses? That's just lame.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#75

Post by jiehong »

fbdab103 wrote: post #7
sgbeal wrote: post #2

Tip for those who are looking at the compression ratios thinking "so what?": look at the run-times. It's a minimum of 3x faster than its contemporaries.

It seems the world made a collective yawn about flac. Hard to imagine that would change much with a new format. I personally keep everything in flac, but Bandcamp is seemingly the only service where that is a given.

Qobuz also offers flac downloads for albums, but also linnrecords does that.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#76

Post by junon »

HakanAbbas wrote: post #62
dark__paladin wrote: post #49

Novel, but until it's open source, it will never be taken seriously.

There are things I should add to Halic and Halac. When I complete them and realize that it will really be used by someones, it will of course be open source.

Open source it anyway. Things don't need to be perfect to be useful. The spirit of OSS has a lot of iteration, anyway. :)

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#77

Post by HakanAbbas »

wokwokwok wrote: post #73
Dalewyn wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we even in the same universe? The vast majority of the world still downloads and runs executables uploaded by individuals, albeit perhaps not on a bulletin board or forum (most of those have been killed and replaced by social media).

This argument comes up reasonably regularly. No, the majority of the world does not download and run binaries from non-reputable sources. The distinction between reputable and non-reputable varies, but broadly easily spoofable user uploaded content falls into the non-reputable. Most people download software from trust worthy websites like the official chrome website. Indeed, the fact that people are continually scamm…

Yes, I'm new in hydrogenaud.io. However, I have been active since 2018 in "encode.su".

This year, "3rd Global Data Compression(gdcc.tech)" organized by Huawei and Barcelona Autonoma University was held. In this competition, I have the world 3rd place in the "Professional Task 6 - Ultra Fast" category(JABBAR). And I spent only 2 weeks of the 5-month competition process for this degree.

We can only share and test such a specific work in specific environments.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#78

Post by HakanAbbas »

ur-whale wrote: post #72

[flagged]

My works are fully cross-platform. There is no restrictive situation. I also prepared Linux and ARM versions for HALIC, but I didn't compile new versions because it didn't get much attention. When my Linux test machine is ready(crashed), I compile the Linux version of HALAC.

Re: New Ultra Fast Lossless Audio Codec (HALAC)

#80

Post by jstsch »

adzm wrote: post #22
prvc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's a minimum of 3x faster than its contemporaries. Ok, but what would make that useful?

Lower latency for real time streaming over the Internet, for one

Whilst faster decoding is always useful, most audio decoding can easily happen within the typical output buffer size (e.g. 512 samples at 44.1KHz ~ 12ms). As long as your machine can decode within that timeframe, there is no difference in latency.
Post reply on HN