Linus Gabriel Sebastian & Linus Media Group / Linus Tech Tips - Narcissistic corporate shill YouTuber driving his media empire into the ground. KILL COUNT: 2

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Name/Thread?
Note that the thread is basically dead, it's all in Polish and uses words that no translator will understand, the OP is unfinished, and the main source of information about those lolcows is down because of a certain person who wants to completely ruin everything what's fun about them all in the name of personal monetary gain by exploiting the said lolcows. Also the guy on the photo is called Wojciech Suchodolski.
 
@Haru Okumura what is your setup doing on Linus Tech Tips?
1674606095412.png
 
Your post is really slow to load.
You uploaded huge PNGs image files when they should be JPG. The first one is 2 MB. Then you inserted them rather than thumbnails.
I notice that if you copy and paste images, including jpgs, they will often get uploaded as PNGs. Bit gay tbh, probably Google's fault..
 
I notice that if you copy and paste images, including jpgs, they will often get uploaded as PNGs. Bit gay tbh, probably Google's fault..
Speaking of Google, a lot of their own products don't even support their image format webp. I'm convinced webp stands for "web penis" which despite being a micro with that file size it still manages to ass rape me when I'm doing the online.
 
Speaking of Google, a lot of their own products don't even support their image format webp. I'm convinced webp stands for "web penis" which despite being a micro with that file size it still manages to ass rape me when I'm doing the online.
Now that I think about webp more, it pisses me off more.

Google has set up its fucking monopoly browser so that it copies WEBPs as WEBP. I don't even really have a problem with that, because WEBPs support both lossless and lossy encoding. It is, in theory, 'good for the web', to force things towards a single format where you just have to accept one single type of 'web image'. I assume that at some point in the future they will make it so that when you copy GIFs or PNGs or BMPs or TIFFs it just automatically converts to WEBP-lossless.

But they insist on making JPEGs copy as PNGs, despite the fact that probably more sites on the internet support JPEGs than fucking PNGs, let alone WEBP. It's deliberately retarded. I can't believe there's no way to turn it off.
 
I notice that if you copy and paste images, including jpgs, they will often get uploaded as PNGs. Bit gay tbh, probably Google's fault..
Any time you "copy" an image by right-clicking "Copy image" in a browser, you're copying a raw bitmap representation of the image, not the actual file served. This is quite sensibly automatically converted to a nice lossless PNG when pasted to most locations. Absolutely nothing to do with Google.

webp is better btw, better compression ratios, transparency in lossy images, transparency in animated images, more customization for animation settings than gif, and only one file extension needed for all these benefits!
 
Any time you "copy" an image by right-clicking "Copy image" in a browser, you're copying a raw bitmap representation of the image, not the actual file served. This is quite sensibly automatically converted to a nice lossless PNG when pasted to most locations. Absolutely nothing to do with Google.

webp is better btw, better compression ratios, transparency in lossy images, transparency in animated images, more customization for animation settings than gif, and only one file extension needed for all these benefits!
This just isn't true though. Windows, and even X11 allows clipboards to hold multiple different representations of a file, hence why you can copy and paste rich text from Word into other rich text editors, or into Notepad.

A company that conspired to create an entirely new image format is quite capable of pushing web standards that would allow the likes of Sneedforo to explicitly flag what image formats it will accept, and allow the browser to pick on the fly whether to use an original jpeg or a png or webp representation of the same when pasting a copied jpeg.

If they weren't retarded faggots that is
 
This just isn't true though. Windows, and even X11 allows clipboards to hold multiple different representations of a file, hence why you can copy and paste rich text from Word into other rich text editors, or into Notepad.
Just because it's possible doesn't mean browsers do it. Haven't you ever tried to copy a gif and only gotten the first frame? Cause that's why.

It should be noted that it is *possible* (for chromium-based browsers, at least) to copy the actual delivered image blob + mime data to the clipboard, but it requires specific scripting in webpages. It just doesn't do it in the generic, global, rclick+copy image context.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of Google, a lot of their own products don't even support their image format webp. I'm convinced webp stands for "web penis" which despite being a micro with that file size it still manages to ass rape me when I'm doing the online.
I don't even bother with webp; I go to save something and if it tells me webp, I just back out and find it somewhere else. I don't know what the fuck Google was thinking when they tried to make right click save as more difficult.
 
Linus, his wife's bull, and Chinese Andy roast Chinese Viewer's setups.

Apparently, they have a million subs on the Chinese yt equivalent.
I know there's a lot of hubub about protectionist Canadian content laws or whatever but I think it's a little extreme to say Vancouver has its own YT spinoff.
 
webp is better btw, better compression ratios, transparency in lossy images, transparency in animated images, more customization for animation settings than gif, and only one file extension needed for all these benefits.
WEBP currently suffers from many of the same issues that so many emerging standards (official and defacto) have suffered from over the years, along with the blind enthusiasm from its supporters that are either unable or unwilling to accept that it's not quite ready for all users just yet.

I'm old enough to remember when HDMI was a crapshoot, and it wasn't unusual to have compatibility problems with certain cables and certain devices. Ditto USB-C (which has only really improved in the last couple of years). Then there's H.264 and H.265; the former being quite problematic when folks were still using DivX/Xvid compatible DVD players to watch downloaded content (but the market eventually caught up). Many brand new media devices sold today still won't play H.265-encoded files.

WEBP is currently a pain in the ass, but it probably won't be such a pain in the ass in a couple of years time once the internet and operating systems eventually catch up.
 
Back