TD-Linux

It is not an individual I-D, but has been adopted by a working group, and has a chance of actually being published as a RFC.

There is no "IPv8". Any crackpot can submit an internet-draft to the IETF, and this person happened to call theirs IPv8. If the submitter actually read the draft rather than feeding it to the slop cannon, they would have realized it is also a LLM hallucination that someone uploaded to IETF.

>I'm sure the effort is good, but the article is not. It reads like breathless corporate crap.

That is because it is AI-written.

It's not JPEG like at all, unlike JPEG it is using the DCT only for the loss function, so it can have frequency weights, having the same approximate effect as JPEG's quantization matrices (at least, according to the slopped-out description). Whether that actually improves things for this type of content is unclear.

Every Intel laptop with integrated graphics has been unified memory, all the way back to ye olde 915 in 2004 at least.

Yes. The default ffmpeg build enables everything, and most distros follow suit. Security conscious web services generally disable a lot of them, but there is no official list on which are considered more secure than others, so every site tends to have its own unique mix.

Hardware support does not matter for TS, as containers are handled in software.

Fast start is irrelevant because MoQ normally uses fragmented MP4, not progressive.

HLS also supports fMP4 now and no one is making new services that use TS (there are some old ones still around with too much friction to switch)

If you want OpenWRT you don't want this, you want one of the Mediatek based routers (GL-MT*).

Specifically, it needs an age rating set or it can't be viewed in Europe without an account.

Which is completely wrong by the way, JPEG-XL quantizes its coefficients after the DCT transform like every other lossy codec. Most codecs have at least some amount of range expansion in their DCT as well, so the values quantized might be greater bit depth than the input data.

I do not understand the connection between the patent concerns in the article and open-source 3D printing. In particular, the patent issues seem to be the case for all non-Chinese 3D printer companies, whether open source or not. I am not sure how sharing your designs makes this worse (I suppose with the original drawings it's a bit easier to write a patent in bad faith - but certainly not necessary). Something like a defensive patent grant might make a lot of sense (see Opus, AV1 etc) but that's also independent of whether the implementation is open source or not.