The codec is basic, uses decades-old tech, and was trivially REed.

Lemmy instance choice does not check out ;)

and for testing you get a wackload of SBCs and Bluetooth chips and test that

I asked because I wasn’t aware of any consumer buds supporting Opus. I wasn’t aware of PineBuds, thank you for mentioning them.

keep in mind that it’s hard to get real numbers on LDAC because decoding is proprietary

I used to think the same. But as it turns out, a decoder exists. Maybe some people don’t want anyone to know about it to keep the myths alive ;)

EDIT: Also, as a golden rule, whenever anyone sees the words High-Res in an audio context, they should immediately realize that they are being bullshitted.

After testing LC3Plus, Opus, and AAC personally for bluetooth, LDAC claims are BS

How did you test Opus for bluetooth?

latency is significantly better then AAC (tested against libfdk) and marginally better then opus

In case you didn’t know, you can use 10ms (or even 5ms) frames with Opus instead of the default (20ms). 10ms should roughly match LC3plus’s default latency while still retaining high quality.

LDAC claims are completely bullshit.

LC3plus is worse than AAC quality wise (to be expected). Lower latency is the only thing going for it. And that’s just because AAC is a very high-latency codec. Opus (as a format) would win on both fronts, although there could be issues with creating a high-quality encoder for it that is not too complex, and power-efficient.

I do think it is the future of filesharing

In internet years, Torrenting is old. I2P is old. Even torrenting in I2P is old. Nothing about this is “the future”.

Ideally, the future of file sharing would involve a fully/natively integrated anonymous network with content-addressable distributed filesystem.

But this will probably not happen, as that architecture didn’t see large scale success before, except in Japan where at least some elements of this architecture are used in their popular P2P networks.

The I2P crowd themselves tried with Tahoe-LAFS, but that was never really a network, even aMule over I2P had more traction, and by traction I mean tens or hundreds of users, not thousands or beyond.

Ironically, the one content-addressable distributed filesystem that gained some attraction (outside Japan) is IPFS, which doesn’t offer anonymity, or replication, or anything special really. Yet for some reason, some hype-susceptible techies liked it, together with the NFT crowd, a great fit.

The future of file sharing will depend on where most content will land where it will be easily accessible and quickly grabbable. How those networks will look like? Nobody knows.