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

Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 391 posts

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#161

Post by pgeorgi »

ATsch wrote: post #97
jakubp wrote: post #92

Quotes from @searchliaison: "Today we're launching some changes on Google Images to help connect users and useful websites." "Ultimately, Google Images is a way for people to discover information in cases where browsing images is a better experience than text." Do you believe any of these statements? I am still surprised how easily corporations will hide their true motives, resolve any cognitive dissonance internally…

I feel somewhat angry at this tweet. Not because the feature is gone but because they are daft enough to assume that they can sell this as an improvement to their users and anyone will believe it.

If the alternative would have been to disable the feature altogether, then this is an improvement.

But to make this clear, they'd probably have to disable the feature for 2 days "because of the Getty case", then come up with this as a compromise.

(Disclosure: I work for Google, but have nothing to do with that stuff nor any special insights)

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#162

Post by salvar »

ax0ar wrote: post #17
lovelearning wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Google likes it either. "These changes came about in part due to our settlement with Getty Images this week."

Couldn't they just introduce a change that would only affect certain websites such as getty? That would be more logical than completely destroying how image search is meant to be.

I'm sure they just didn't think of that option.

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#164

Post by prepend »

kalleboo wrote: post #49
prepend wrote: post #33

So it’s ok for google to scrape and save images and display them without compensating photographers (which I’m cool with), but not users? This is bizarre, anti user functionality. By default if the image is available on the web, it is meant to be seen. This is going to make high school PowerPoint users spend more time, and result in zero extra revenue and zero drop in copyright infringement. The more interesting ques…

> The more interesting question is why google is doing this. They got sued. "These changes came about in part due to our settlement with Getty Images this week."

I don’t believe that this is the sole motivator. As others have said, they could remove this for Getty images only (based on domain, based on reverse image search, lots of ways). But also, this seems like an absurd judgement, that if true they would want to highlight how the judgement had a very specific design fix as part of the settlement.

Since Google isn’t highlighting any such absurd ruling’s specific language then there must be some other reason.

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#165

Post by snag »

nicolas_t wrote: post #82
psyc wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long ago, when I still thought of Google as a good company that made good decisions for its users, I never had the impression that I'd done an exhaustive web search until I searched on Google. Now, searching Google always gives me the impression that I'm searching a heavily filtered, AI-curated subset of the web. I switched to DDG recently, and so far the results give me that impression that I'm searching 'the whole…

I love DDG but the problem is that google is still the best whenever I want to search something that's not in English or that's localized. So I still use google for that.

also recent news. google still way above ddg on minutes old news.

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#166

Post by lotsofpulp »

YouAreGreat wrote: post #150
glup wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason a lot of people choose not to work there.

Google still manages to get far too many non-sociopathic employees, by feeding them a supernormal[1] morality surrogate ("googley values") industrially designed to draw moral attention away from Google. Many employees actually start to perceive whatever they do at Google as "good" because Google has these supernormally good "googley values" of Google's own manufacture. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_st…

I think it's more the $200k salaries and badge of having Google on your resume.

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#167

Post by gvx »

akvadrako wrote: post #148
Zak wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm seeing on the current site is that the large preview seen on clicking a thumbnail is the original image, loaded from the original server and scaled in CSS. Nothing's really changed in terms of capability; the UI is just a bit more awkward.

That can't be true - or it would be very taxing to browse a page of 20MP+ images.

Only images you click on (so that the larger preview pops up, with the Visit button and which used to have the View image button) load the original images, rescaled with CSS. The grid of smaller images consists of thumbnails.

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#169

Post by oldcynic »

akkat wrote: post #93
vortico wrote: post #34

DuckDuckGo still has this feature in their Images search, using the "View File" button. It also doesn't wrap the URL of search results in a Google redirect URL, so you can Right Click > Copy to get the actual URL of the webpage or image.

There are some Firefox and chrome add-ons that fix that issue. but I have yet to find something that fixes Facebook's link redirection. Anyone know of one?

FB Purity[0] includes cleaning link redirects and a lot else to try and make FB tolerable.

[0] https://www.fbpurity.com/

Re: Google removes ‘view image’ button from search results

#170

Post by codeulike »

sundvor wrote: post #134
veidr wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the first time I've ever heard somebody use "bing" as a verb, outside of a Microsoft ad. (Assuming that your post isn't a new form of Microsoft ad, that is.)

https://duckduckgo.com/ also had this link as its #1 result. I much prefer DDG - have converted across all my devices now in the past month and I'm really, really liking it. (Sorry off topic, but it's contextual.) What's that then, I ducked it? :-)

quacked it?
Post reply on HN