Edit

It doesn’t make sense which is why people believe Google has ulterior motives. I haven’t seen any real reason not to use jxl as the new format; but I also haven’t looked that far into it. ¯\(ツ)/¯

You might have grabbed the wrong iso. There are two ISOs for Ubuntu, one is desktop which comes with a desktop and the other is server which only comes with a text console.

You can install a desktop onto a server image if necessary, however I would recommend just using a desktop iso and don’t bother with adding on and setting up all the desktop software.

If you want to be able to select text, copy and paste, I just SSH from Windows Terminal or Mac iTerm2

Alternatively if it is a desktop iso then you might have accidentally installed a package that broke things or have gone a tty interface. There’s so many different possibilities it’s going to be hard to help more.

Just an fyi bmp280 is not real temperature but an estimation based on air pressure.

Hmm, I haven’t delved into image training in a couple years so I’m assuming they still downscale images anyway, so I’m not sure how much the format helps? Do you know if better compression helps at lower resolution? I could see it helping but I could also seeing it be marginal gains and depending on processing time it might not be worth it to convert whole image sets to jpeg xl. And for performance does jpeg xl require less power/time to decode than other formats? Maybe for new image sets going forward it will be the standard.

It is when you’re a cloud hosting platform and you have 1000’s of photos uploaded daily. That 44k saving scales massively when talking about cloud hosting platforms. The jpeg xl format license is more open than webp which is controlled by google.

The new format also enables more features than just file size, a quick google shows it supports animation, 360 photos, and image bursts (as well as more technical specifics that allow for better share ability without needing to have an accompanying json file or dropping to RAW).

This is more important because it means websites can embed photos and the web engine whether it be chromium, Firefox, or safari can handle it natively without needing JavaScript or some other intermediary.

What about png? It’s just another competing standard. At the end of the day it doesn’t really matter, but by not having competing standards we end up having one company controlling it. So since at the very least it gives a decent file size saving it’s good enough for me.