if you could pick a standard format for a purpose what would it be and why?

e.g. flac for lossless audio because…

(yes you can add new categories)

summary:

  1. photos .jxl
  2. videos .av1 (someone mentioned mka or something like that, cant recall but thet mentiomed it being a ‘container’)
  3. daw session files .dawproject
  4. documents .odt
  5. archive files (this one is causing a bloodbath so i picked randomly) .tar.zst
  6. models .gltf / .glb
  7. plain text utf-8
  8. interchange format .ora
  9. configuration files toml OR yaml (disagreement)
  10. typesetting typst
  11. open domain image data .exr
  12. lossless audio .flac
  13. lossy audio .opus
  14. subtitles srt/ass
  15. container mkv
  • DigitalJacobin@lemmy.mlEnglish
    5·
    10 months ago

    The problem here being that GnuPG does nothing really well.

    Could you elaborate? I’ve never had any issues with gpg before and curious what people are having issues with.

    Unfortunately currently there aren’t many options to use AV1 in a very meaningful way; you can encode your own media with it, but that’s about it; you can stream to YouTube, but YouTube will recode to another codec.

    AV1 has almost full browser support (iirc) and companies like YouTube, Netflix, and Meta have started moving over to AV1 from VP9 (since AV1 is the successor to VP9). But you’re right, it’s still working on adoption, but this is moreso just my dreamworld than it is a prediction for future standardization.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        2·
        9 months ago

        Encrypting Email

        Don’t. Email is insecure . Even with PGP, it’s default-plaintext, which means that even if you do everything right, some totally reasonable person you mail, doing totally reasonable things, will invariably CC the quoted plaintext of your encrypted message to someone else

        Okay, provide me with an open standard that is widely-used that provides similar functionality.

        It isn’t there. There are parties who would like to move email users into their own little proprietary walled gardens, but not a replacement for email.

        The guy is literally saying that encrypting email is unacceptable because it hasn’t been built from the ground up to support encryption.

        I mean, the PGP guys added PGP to an existing system because otherwise nobody would use their nifty new system. Hell, it’s hard enough to get people to use PGP as it is. Saying “well, if everyone in the world just adopted a similar-but-new system that is more-amenable to encryption, that would be helpful”, sure, but people aren’t going to do that.