Why do people put xxx after a jpg link?

[James Tainton]

I see people doing this on other websites- when they link to a photo or something- they put the ridiculous xxx's after the jpg address. I'm sorry but I don't get it? Seems highly anal to me and a waste of my time.:p

[Tordenskiold]

Seems highly anal to me and a waste of my time.


Much like this post really - no offense :D

[James Tainton]

Much like this post really - no offense
Why do you say that? While no offence is taken I wonder-if it was such a waste of time why waste more time replying? Can you explain why they do it. I think it has to do with saving bandwidth but if you remove the xxx's you still end up going there. It's just a little too pC for me. I hate PC.
Another thing that bugs me is when people talk about something or refer to some product or thread etc. and don't include a link to the item.

[tamigawa]

I hate PC.

I like Macs too.... :D

You're probably right, it is to save bandwidth and so slower connections can load faster.

[Sadness]

Hi there,

I think it has something to do with copyright. Some pics may not be linked directly on forums, so people do it that way. Anyway thats what I have read.

Greetz
Tom

[mossieramm]

Hi Faust,
At my previous work all files sent by mail with jpg, exe, etc were deleted by the server. To get around that I renamed my jpg with a harmless extension, like bob or pop. That way I was able to send anything I wanted anyware I wanted.
David.

[sharkmouth]

Hi,

Some web sites do not allow direct linking. Without the added extension, the forum would see an alternate image (like PMMS used to do) with some text to the effect:
Direct linking not allowed, please visit www.!#$$^.com

Another reason is to avoid the image loading in the forum if it is a large file. I prefer people to note the large file size in the post heading and, if I am not on broadband, I can decide to open it and wait, or skip it until I have broadband access. Some forums, like Network54, have a view thread link which negates my ability to avoid opening a post with a large image file linked within. Having broadband available at all times, it is not an issue for me but someone else may not be pleased.

In emailing, David mentioned the best reason to do so which usually includes something in the text informing the recipient to rename the file into a particular extension.

I hope this answers the question to your satisfaction. It was a pleasure to serve you.

The Nerd Herd

[James Tainton]

Hi,

Some web sites do not allow direct linking. Without the added extension, the forum would see an alternate image (like PMMS used to do) with some text to the effect:
Direct linking not allowed, please visit www.!#$$^.com

Another reason is to avoid the image loading in the forum if it large as a file. I prefer people to note the large file size in the post heading and, if I am not on broadband, I can decide to open it and wait, or skip it until I have broadband access. Some forums, like Network54, have a view thread link which negates my ability to avoid opening a post with a large image file linked within. Having broadband available at all times, it is not an issue for me but someone else may not be pleased.

In emailing, David mentioned the best reason to do so which usually includes something in the text informing the recipient to rename the file into a particular extension.

I hope this answers the question to your satisfaction. It was a pleasure to serve you.

The Nerd Herd

Yep know about the big file issue-(who still uses dial- they must be in the minority?) but I often find that the link provided goes to some measly little 100 k image anyway.

As for the e-mail thing that's not really what I was asking about. I've never had a problem sending a .jpg in the mail though.

Regarding the Network 54 deal with showing the pic once the URL is included...that maybe an issue, but again usually the file is not a big one. I find it much more conducive to discussion to have the image in the thread in any case. (That's one of the reasons I love planetArmor's format better than any other website.)

I'll post an example next time I encounter this phenomena.

[sharkmouth]

Found an example:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/thread/1192851234/Photo+of+casting+numbers+needed

Regards,

[Panzergrenadier]

It is just to waste one's time and to provide some mouse exercise.:D

[James Tainton]

Found an example:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208/thread/1192851234/Photo+of+casting+numbers+needed

Regards,

Okay here is an example of a small image link- and I can see that there could be an issue if the owner of the linked image felt the piggy backing and hyper linking to his image that is situated on his server may cost him some bandwidth. But it does seem rather minuscule.
(79.73 KB in this case)
I do also think the Network 54 issue of making visible any http address that is included in ones post may cause one to add the x's. (But just one would do it)

Here at pA - if you used the http address without the xxx you would only get a highlighted text that you can click on.
http://www.toadmanstankpictures.com/m43_13.jpg

I guess the question from me stems from my embedded dislike of rules and regulations. :D

But I do see that it can be seen as a courtesy to the originating site's boundaries. Point taken.

to just link the image is known as hot linking
Some feel this is akin to plugging your electric appliance into a nieghbors electrical outlet.

Hotlinking (hot linking):

Also see:
Definition of "Direct Linking"
and
Free Hotlinking Checker - Test Your Hot Linking Protection

"Hotlinking" (also called "hot linking", "leeching", and "bandwidth theft") is a term referring to when a web page of one website owner is direct linking to the images or other multimedia files on the web host of another website owner (usually without permission, thus stealing bandwidth). This not only causes the other person to pay for the bandwidth of the hotlinked file, but often is intellectual property theft. The term is also used loosely (a misnomer) by free image hosts which allow you to store images on their server and allow you to direct link the hosted image files on forums or other websites (sometimes altering the image to have a watermark). One of the most common occurrences of "hot linking" is when people are forum posting and they hotlink pictures from another website to use as avatars or signature images on the messageboards (forums). Some disadvantages of hot linking worth considering are that the webpage generally loads slower when you link to images stored on a different web hosting server than the webpage is hosted on, and the owner of the image has full control to disable hotlinking, or delete, rename, or worse yet, do a "switcheroo" (i.e., switching the file name to be another image which is sure to cause the hotlinker embarrassment) of the hot-linked image. Common methods of preventing hotlinking are by using an .htaccess file, using the "Hotlink Protection" offered in control panels such as Cpanel, or simply renaming image files periodically.


History of the hyperlink

The term "hyperlink" was coined in 1965 (or possibly 1964) by Ted Nelson at the start of Project Xanadu. Nelson had been inspired by "As We May Think," a popular essay by Vannevar Bush. In the essay, Bush described a microfilm-based machine (the Memex) in which one could link any two pages of information into a "trail" of related information, and then scroll back and forth among pages in a trail as if they were on a single microfilm reel. The closest contemporary analogy would be to build a list of bookmarks to topically related Web pages and then allow the user to scroll forward and backward through the list.

In a series of books and articles published from 1964 through 1980, Nelson transposed Bush's concept of automated cross-referencing into the computer context, made it applicable to specific text strings rather than whole pages, generalized it from a local desk-sized machine to a theoretical worldwide computer network, and advocated the creation of such a network. Meanwhile, working independently, a team led by Douglas Engelbart (with Jeff Rulifson as chief programmer) was the first to implement the hyperlink concept for scrolling within a single document (1966), and soon after for connecting between paragraphs within separate documents (1968). See NLS.

[edit] Legal issues

See also: Deep linking

While hyperlinking among pages of Internet content has long been considered an intrinsic feature of the Internet, some websites have claimed that linking to them is not allowed without permission.

In certain jurisdictions it is or has been held that hyperlinks are not merely references or citations, but are devices for copying web pages. In the Netherlands, for example, Karin Spaink was initially convicted of copyright infringement for linking, although this ruling was overturned in 2003. The courts that advocate it see the mere publication of a hyperlink that connects to illegal material to be an illegal act in itself, regardless of whether referencing illegal material is illegal.

In 2000, British Telecom sued Prodigy claiming that Prodigy infringed its patent (U.S. Patent 4,873,662 ) on web hyperlinks. After litigation, a court found for Prodigy, ruling that British Telecom's patent did not cover web hyperlinks. [1]

When linking to illegal or infringing copyrighted content the law of linking liability is currently considered a grey area. There are examples where sites have been proven liable such as Plaintiff Intellectual Reserve vs Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, and Comcast vs. Hightech Electronics Inc [2], and there are examples where sites have not been proven liable for linking, for example Perfect 10 v. Google Inc. The cases of websites are proved liable outweigh those where websites were not liable.[citation needed]