My Thumbnail Topic Image Link Collection
-
@Dashrender said:
This seems unlawful by nature to me, regardless of it's actual lawfulness status.
If you believe so, then I assume that since all components of your reasoning match all forms of linking that you agree with my statement that while you may find hotlinking wrong, you must also find all linking wrong by logical extension. One cannot be separated from the other, they are the exact same thing technically - a reference in a text file optionally followed by the end user.
Only convention over time has changed the text file portion from being the part automatically followed most of the time to the image one. And will that change in the future? Will your perception change based on convention again? If perception of right and wrong change every ten years based on how you perceive common usage, does that make that perception inherently flawed?
-
Just for reference, here is how any site running Apache (which is a lot) can trivially block hotlinking. This is all that it takes for a webmaster to inform us that they do not want resources of these types to be called without being called from their own site:
RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^$ RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http(s)?://(www\.)?yourdomain.com [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http(s)?://(www\.)?yourdomain2.com [NC] RewriteRule \.(jpg|jpeg|png|gif)$ http://hpmouse.googlepages.com/hotlink.gif [NC,R,L]That goes in .htaccess, for those not familiar. So you can do this on your own server or on a host like A Small Orange, for example. Of course, the last line sends them to Google. It's both hysterical and hypocritical that the person who made the example decided that instead of blocking hotlinking, they would hotlink Google themselves. Clearly whoever wrote it agrees that there is nothing wrong with hotlinking, because it is always at the discretion of the server being hotlinked to.
-
So stealing is acceptable if I don't stop you from doing it?
So if I leave my bike on the sidewalk, while I go into buy a drink, it's OK for you to steal it, because I didn't lock it?
-
@anonymous said:
So stealing is acceptable if I don't stop you from doing it?
It's a reference to something you offer freely. If you offer something freely when someone requests it, do you normally refer to someone who told that person that you were doing so as stealing? You define stealing in a very odd way.
-
@anonymous said:
So if I leave my bike on the sidewalk, while I go into buy a drink, it's OK for you to steal it, because I didn't lock it?
That's stealing, nothing like the situation at hand. Hotlinking requires going to the person offering the service, requesting the file and getting it - and the hotlinking itself is just a reference to the person being willing to give it out.
If you hand out your bike to anyone who asks, do you feel you are being stolen from?
-
No one is discussing if stealing is okay. It is not. We are discussing differing definitions of stealing. To you, telling someone that someone else hands things out willingly is stealing, but actually asking for those resources is not.
To me, stealing cannot involve telling someone about a freely available, public resource.
By your definition, all use of the Internet is stealing as you are not paying for any website that you access and it is offered in a free way and you get there by some reference. So everything has to be stealing.
-
Remember what a web server is, it is a server that hands out files that are requested. In order to do so, whoever runs the server has to have made the decision that they want to hand out those files. That is its purpose.
When someone requests the file from the web server, the server has the option to accept or decline the request.
There are two ways to stop hotlinking here - to not publish things that people do not wish published or to decide to only publish in certain ways. Someone has to make the server allow the files to be given out before hotlinking is an option, it cannot happen otherwise.
-
So you don't want to pay to store and transmit the images however your OK with someone else having to pay to store and transmit the images?
-
@anonymous said:
So you don't want to pay to store and transmit the images here....
Incorrect, happy to pay for them here when it makes sense. Not always an option, of course, as you know.
That's why we have image hosting accounts for this sort of thing. Perhaps we got the ToS incorrect, but we did acquire an account with a service for this purpose.
I feel that your statement is leading.
-
@anonymous said:
...however your OK with someone else having to pay to store and transmit the images?
Absolutely, as they are okay with it. You are actually saying this in a way that is suggestive that somehow we are making other people store their own images or making them publish them. Clearly neither is the case. So we know that they are okay with it and have taken effort to provide them. So if they are okay with it, why would I not be? And certainly, why would you not be?
-
People upload images to there website with the intention of displaying them on there website.
I never never once uploaded a image to my website, hoping that someone else would use it.
-
@anonymous said:
People upload images to there website with the intention of displaying them on there website.
That's your personal opinion, provably false and nothing but an assumption based on who knows what. Some sites don't even have their own website. There is no discussing when you just make things up. This is obviously untrue and you are completely reaching to find even the slightest logic why there is anything amiss.
Obviously there is no logical, legal or technical grounds on which you can even suggest this is stealing. If you are going to make up other peoples' intent, there is no need to continue the argument and I consider that you are no longer taking it seriously.
You can keep repeating fallacies, but you are attempting to rationalize a clearly illogical opinion. Step back and ask yourself... why do you feel this way? What is driving you to make these claims based on assumptions of intent when they go directly against the suggestions of the actions of the person doing it?
-
@anonymous said:
I never never once uploaded a image to my website, hoping that someone else would use it.
Anecdotal fallacy. You did something, therefore everyone does the same thing.
I certainly have. So clearly we have conflicting anecdotal evidence. The difference is you are attempting to claim that because you personally have don't something that no one else could possibly.
I am simply stating that that is untrue and have proof. See the difference? You are claiming that you determine my motives. I do not claim to determine yours.
-
Hey guys.... Why is anyone looking for me on a Weekend? I am never around on the weekends... I have a life outside of ML and IT
-
-
@Minion-Queen said:
Hey guys.... Why is anyone looking for me on a Weekend? I am never around on the weekends... I have a life outside of ML and IT
What? say it isn't so!
-
@Dashrender said:
@Minion-Queen said:
Hey guys.... Why is anyone looking for me on a Weekend? I am never around on the weekends... I have a life outside of ML and IT
What? say it isn't so!
This weekend was a double Gig one so not around and not enough sleep either
-
@Minion-Queen said:
@Dashrender said:
@Minion-Queen said:
Hey guys.... Why is anyone looking for me on a Weekend? I am never around on the weekends... I have a life outside of ML and IT
What? say it isn't so!
This weekend was a double Gig one so not around and not enough sleep either
It's all good, as most here probably know - unless I'm working, I'm probably not on ML on the weekends either.
