Comment on Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL

carlytm@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I read it four times and I still don’t understand what love-in means.

  source

  • Orbituary@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Dumb way of saying orgy.

    source

    • red_pigeon@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I still don’t understand. WTF are we talking about. This is tech news, not a celeb scandal. Why can’t we just use simple words !

      source

      • Raptor_007@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Why say lot word when few word do trick?

        source
    • swayevenly@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What’s the smart way?

      source

      • uninvitedguest@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Orgy.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Orbituary@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I believe you just responded to a message with the answer to your question.

        source
• ted@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Horrible headline.

  Browser maker love-in

  Chromium (used by most browsers)

  snubs

  doesn’t support

  Google-shunned JPEG XL

  JPEG XL (because Google doesn’t like it)

  source

  • psud@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It was chrome and Firefox both who were against the format, both saying too expensive to implement for too small a benefit

    source
  • Squirrel@thelemmy.club ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Thank you. I legitimately could not understand the title.

    source
• nikt@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Something about love in subs for Google ? And also JPEG?

  source
• faintwhenfree@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I think these days that’s the rule, if it piques your interest but you have some trouble understanding headline, you may just click on the article

  source
• dukatos@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The register is doing this shit for years. They are trying to sound smart…

  source