Thought this was a good read exploring some how the "how and why" including several apparent sock puppet accounts that convinced the original dev (Lasse Collin) to hand over the baton.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Supermariofan67@programming.dev 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The first 3 seem incredibly far-fetched.

What exactly does Facebook gain from more people using zstd, other than more contributions and improvement to zstd and the ecosystem (i.e. the reason corporations are willing to open source stuff).
Why do you consider zlma to be loved among pirates and hackers and zstd not to be, when zstd is incredibly popular and well-loved in the FOSS community and compresses about as well as lzma?
Every person in the world uses both lzma and zstd extensively, even if indirectly without them realizing it.

I think it's likey that, of all the mainstream compression formats, lzma was the least audited (after all, it was being maintained by one overworked person). Zstd has lots of eyes on it from Google and Facebook, all of the most talented experts in the world on data compression contributing to it, and lots of contributors. Zlib has lots of forks and overall probably more attention than lzma. Bz2 is rarely used anymore. So that leaves lzma

[+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] Supermariofan67@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Facebook may be evil but I don't think they're anywhere near "inject malware into global supply chains to push adoption of a public engineering side project that they don't directly profit from and most executives don't care about" level of evil. Is it possible? Sure anything is possible, but that is wildly beyond many many more plausible explanations and there's zero evidence leading us down this path. And why would they go through the trouble of backdooring zstd, which has a highly observed codebase, when they just successfully backdoored lzma because it didn't have a lot of maintainers?

While it's true that zstd is commonly favored for having "good" compression at blazingly fast speeds, which is useful on the web and on servers, Zstd 's max compression setting (zstd --long -19) is actually within about 5% of LZMA's but faster, so it replaces most use cases of LZMA except when that extra 5% (and that's not even constant; some inputs are even better on zstd) really does matter at all speed cost