The 'lambda' he's talking about isn't a lambda function or anything fancy. It's just the name he's using for the speed/space tradeoff knob that compressors commonly give you. So for JPEG, for example, your 'quality' slider is adjusting lambda, but if you're cranking it way up to 99% then you're getting outside of JPEG's 'natural lambda' range and you should probably use PNG instead.
It means that compression algorithms (like cmix) have different tradeoffs (the lagrange lambdas), and you can optimize the cost "J" in order to compare and switch algorithms automatically, without external agents or users needing themselves to know about those tradeoffs. This sounds like sort of bleeding edge codec stuff, but maybe it's just a formalization of what they're already doing at his company, and which the tweak-by-intuition codec developers need to learn. The author relies on domain knowledge and context of other rants, or maybe familiarity with his company's work, which lends his post some ambiguity, but the comments on other posts show that his audience groks it.
Curiously - one of those links is highlighted in a different color, which means I've recently been there. (The Langrange multiplier link.)
Your answer mostly gives it some more meaning. By itself, it was really hard to figure out what the fuck he was on about. I figured I'd better make it clear that this was a link I knew nothing about.
It's written in a weirdly high-level way, which makes it easy to follow if you can figure out wtf he's working on. The author must be brilliant to pull that off, which explains the fancy programming. If he packaged up his rants with a couple of charts or paragraphs of explanation, he'd have a really wide audience. It's a rare thing to find. I'm going to have to follow this blog now.
Excellent. I'm glad you will get good use from the link. Math, I've got covered. However, I am an odd duck in that I actually kind of hate programming. I've done it - lots of it. I just don't like it.
Still, it's great that it's a source that you'll get enjoyment from. I absolutely wish I could vote your reply up more than once.
7 comments
1 u/Scruffy_Nerfherder 20 Jan 2018 21:47
Ummm, ummm, me neither. I don't get monoids either. Maybe I'm just dumb.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 20 Jan 2018 22:40
Shit, I understand Lambda Calculus and I don't understand this. I'm kind of hoping someone comes along and explains it like i'm five.
0 u/tame 22 Jan 2018 00:32
The 'lambda' he's talking about isn't a lambda function or anything fancy. It's just the name he's using for the speed/space tradeoff knob that compressors commonly give you. So for JPEG, for example, your 'quality' slider is adjusting lambda, but if you're cranking it way up to 99% then you're getting outside of JPEG's 'natural lambda' range and you should probably use PNG instead.
0 u/lemon11 20 Jan 2018 22:49
It means that compression algorithms (like cmix) have different tradeoffs (the lagrange lambdas), and you can optimize the cost "J" in order to compare and switch algorithms automatically, without external agents or users needing themselves to know about those tradeoffs. This sounds like sort of bleeding edge codec stuff, but maybe it's just a formalization of what they're already doing at his company, and which the tweak-by-intuition codec developers need to learn. The author relies on domain knowledge and context of other rants, or maybe familiarity with his company's work, which lends his post some ambiguity, but the comments on other posts show that his audience groks it.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 20 Jan 2018 22:54
Sweet! Thanks!
Curiously - one of those links is highlighted in a different color, which means I've recently been there. (The Langrange multiplier link.)
Your answer mostly gives it some more meaning. By itself, it was really hard to figure out what the fuck he was on about. I figured I'd better make it clear that this was a link I knew nothing about.
1 u/lemon11 20 Jan 2018 22:57
It's written in a weirdly high-level way, which makes it easy to follow if you can figure out wtf he's working on. The author must be brilliant to pull that off, which explains the fancy programming. If he packaged up his rants with a couple of charts or paragraphs of explanation, he'd have a really wide audience. It's a rare thing to find. I'm going to have to follow this blog now.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 20 Jan 2018 23:00
Excellent. I'm glad you will get good use from the link. Math, I've got covered. However, I am an odd duck in that I actually kind of hate programming. I've done it - lots of it. I just don't like it.
Still, it's great that it's a source that you'll get enjoyment from. I absolutely wish I could vote your reply up more than once.