Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Image Hosting on Reddit

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 163 posts

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#141

Post by simonswords82 »

danneu wrote: post #90
School-Cotton wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because Wikipedia citation links have rel="nofollow".

It would be irresponsible for a machine learning black box like Google's indexer to give much importance to rel="nofollow". Think about it. Imagine you're building the perfect internet indexer. In an effort to generalize your model, you anticipate a scenario where a nofollow link shows up consistently on various Wikipedia pages where it persists for a long time. What are you going to do? Ignore the link because, sorr…

> It would be irresponsible for a machine learning black box like Google's indexer to give much importance to rel="nofollow".

My anecdata concludes exactly the same.

A link is a link. Sure Google acknowledges that a link is nofollow but it's not going to ignore references from a giant of the web like Wikipedia just because it adds nofollow.

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#142

Post by corobo »

chadscira wrote: post #66
dmerrick wrote: post #10

It's really unfortunate that Imgur took such a turn for the worse. Originally it seemed like Imgur was a benevolent gift to Reddit users... a clean, simple, easy to use image hosting service that everyone could use for free. I guess it was too good to be true, because now it's tricky to link to a direct image (though not impossible), and the standard landing page is filled with unnecessary clutter. As an aside: if yo…

This was the reason why I created http://img42.com . They bombard you with ads, and other "features". I wanted something where I could just click, drag and drop, or pate and it would be uploaded.

"easy temporary image hosting" - How long do images last before being removed?

It was actually that drawback that lead me to making/using my own image host! With my own host, files that were uploaded back in 2012 when it first started working are still there - with the same URL (despite URL scheme changing since then)

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#143

Post by corobo »

nopzor wrote: post #118
pyvpx wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

imgur worked because a CDN named voxel could readily use the bandwidth bump provided by hosting images to decrease their overall network costs.

Voxel founder here. That doesn't really make sense, as others have pointed out. Imgur was indeed a valued customer, and we grew together and had a great relationship with them. Customers like them helped us achieve the necessary scale to build out our network. But pushing more bits costs more, not less ;)

Oh wow you guys re-branded. You could do with a landing page knocking about somewhere mentioning your old name! I was trying to dig through the web fairly recently trying to find you (Knowing you'd survived hosting imgur for at least a time!)

Ended up with KeyCDN for now

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#144

Post by viewer5 »

jamiequint wrote: post #40
lostlogin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. The mobile site has a banner that takes up a lot of the screen advertising their app. I don't want their app, and I can't dismiss the advert. Still, it's saved me wasting time browsing.

Why don't you want the app?

It's a website, I already have an app for that, it's my web browser. No desire to spend my limited phone storage space on something I can just use my web browser for.

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#146

Post by marcosdumay »

School-Cotton wrote: post #102
danneu wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be irresponsible for a machine learning black box like Google's indexer to give much importance to rel="nofollow". Think about it. Imagine you're building the perfect internet indexer. In an effort to generalize your model, you anticipate a scenario where a nofollow link shows up consistently on various Wikipedia pages where it persists for a long time. What are you going to do? Ignore the link because, sorr…

Interesting. I and everyone else I've talked to in the industry have always assumed Google just takes it on faith. Granted, I never worked in SEO directly. I'm still not sure what the truth is. You raise a good point.

Google certainly does take nofollow into account. Probably up to the point that spamming sites that add it to links is pointless.

That said, Google probably has some heuristic for considering them. It probably errs on the side of ignoring, but it would be stupid for Google to ignore all nofollow links. Even more so because spammers don't like them.

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#147

Post by galistoca »

rms_returns wrote: post #104
galistoca wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's a monopoly. Come back when Imgur becomes the only (or one of very few) place on the web to share funny images and Gifs. Farewell.

Are you trying to imply that Youtube is a monopoly? Aren't there others like vimeo, etc.? Besides, there is nothing from technology perspective to make it a monopoly. All you need is a server rack and a bunch of web developers who can build such a site, right?

Youtube is a monopoly in a way Google is a monopoly. Just like how there's Bing and DuckDuckGo but most people use Google, most people use Youtube although some do use sites like vimeo. If you think it's so easy to build a site that competes with Google or Youtube you should go ahead and build one and overtake them. After all, nowadays everything is open sourced, you can even build your own search engine from scratch overnight.

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#148

Post by CM30 »

Klathmon wrote: post #71
tzs wrote: post #45

No reference counting? This seems like it will cause problems: [–]iBeReese 1246 points 3 hours ago Is there a planned retention policy? Or is it an "as long as reddit has the money to maintain the servers the images will stay forever" kind of deal? [–]Amg137[S,A] 1421 points 3 hours ago We will keep the images as long as they are associated to a post. However if you delete a post we will also delete the image [–]spee…

IMO that's how it should act. Just because someone else links to a picture doesn't mean that they get to say whether it's taken down or not... If you want to be the "uploader" then upload it, don't just link.

In the hypothetical case, the uploader is the person linking to it. They just want to post it on multiple subreddits without having to keep reuploading it.

Heck, I can see a similar situation where post 1 is on a subreddit with awkwardly enforced rules, post 2 is on a more relaxed one, and then because the mods remove the post and image on subreddit 1, the second version breaks with it.

Should people have to keep reuploading the same image every time they want to use it?

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#149

Post by dzdt »

aaronbasssett wrote: post #121
niftich wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating communities is hard, but Google wants a unified 'Google' community, not multiple disparate ones -- just look at how they handled YouTube. Even if you throw in some machine learning to figure out if the user's looking at memes or gifs or porn, I can't imagine the marginal value of that data being of use to Google. It's essentially unmonetizable, which is why most image hosts disappear after a few years. Imgur…

Especially as Imgur is already giving Google that information for free (from the Imgur source): Imgur.Util.getGoogleTracker(); __ga('send', 'pageview');

What makes you think this is free?

Re: Image Hosting on Reddit

#150

Post by walrus01 »

discardorama wrote: post #108
walrus01 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does anyone remember pbase.com for free photo gallery hosting, in around 2002? apparently it still exists with its same basic but functional UI.

From their FAQ: Is PBase free? No.

it used to be, a long time ago
Post reply on HN