>>106484103
????

If you can't wrap your head around the concept of lossy archival quality then I can't help you desu.

What we can all agree on is that when that a GPU encoded 4:2:0 JPG with dogshit quality gets converted to a webp you end up with a webp that is BIGGER in file size compared to the source JPG especially at high quality which is why Jpeg XL applying lossless transformations to the huffman tables or whatever resulting in smaller file sizes is pretty fucking cool and whatnot.

That's why I say webp is cursed because even IF you come across a correct 4:2:0 JPEG image you don't know if the file size is needlessly huge or not for webp to achieve that 20-30% filesize reduction with no noticeable quality loss. Websites DON'T FUCKING CARE if the net positive means less bandwidth used.

>>106484116
For mom and pop websites, sure. Not the globo-homo one serving millions of user uploads per day. Do you think they would be able to make any money if they had a backlog of images to CPU encode because they decided to focus on better compression efficiency? You think they're your friend?

>>106484195
50% lower filesize compared to both 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 JPGs encoded by a GPU is nice though it still assumes that the file size of the JPEG is huge. So call it what you will but by volume AVIF would still save us a lot of bandwidth but knowing globo-homo they'll just use GPU AVIF encoders because profit line must go up lol. But yeah, hopefully only CPU encoder for JXL exist like webp and the fucking imbeciles don't touch the default settings.