[JCharante]

It'd work if people just simply posted the direct image, so you don't have to load their massively bloated website. Then again a direct link wouldn't support them through their monitization methods (ads), but if I'm already running an ad blocker..

[codetrotter]

While I argued for Imgur over using the hosting site the parent to mine used with regards to intrusiveness of ads I should note something important about Imgur with regards to the bloat you mentioned.

The image subdomain servers of Imgur, i.imgur.com, look at the referer of your request and will conditionally redirect you to the web app.

Basically, direct links to images will only give you the image directly if the page you came from is on their whitelist.

Reddit is on said whitelist but I don’t think HN is.

And to further complicate the matter keep in mind that browser caching might make it look to you as though a direct link you posted somewhere is really direct, but to those who haven’t visited the image already they will be redirected the first time they visit that direct link.

For example, here is a direct link to an image hosted on Imgur: https://i.imgur.com/6O265V5.jpg

For me it will look this direct link serves the image only, even when I click my own link in this comment after I’ve posted the comment and am visiting it with HN as referer.

But if HN is not on their whitelist then you and everyone else clicking the link in my comment will be redirected to their web app, provided you didn’t happen to have the image in your cache already.

Edit: Yup, visited the link in this comment from another computer and am indeed redirected as I expected.

Edit 2: Am also redirected even on the device I posted from when following the link in my comment. So even browser caching didn’t stop that in this case.

[userbinator]

The image subdomain servers of Imgur, i.imgur.com, look at the referer of your request and will conditionally redirect you to the web app.

Fortunately, if you send no referer it seems you get the image directly. This is easy to do with a browser setting.

[codetrotter]

> This is easy to do with a browser setting.

On your desktop browser yes. On mobile devices not as easy.

And even on desktop you might not want to globally disable sending referer because other sites might break.

And even if you use a browser add-on to only block referers for i.imgur.com, most other people haven’t so everyone else is still being redirected.

[TeMPOraL]

> On your desktop browser yes. On mobile devices not as easy.

What's even worse, on mobile, imgur heavily downscales and compresses images. Which is fine for kitten photos, but completely destroys any of its utility for screenshots, as you can't read normal-sized text on the phone.

[codetrotter]

Which makes me think that it would be nice if someone set up an image hosting site that allows hotlinking for HN but not for others (in order for bandwidth requirements to be reasonable and for your server to not be overloaded).

But running an image hosting service that anyone may post to is a lot of work.

Firstly you have your run-of-the-mill DMCA takedown notices, both the legitimate and the bogus ones. So you need to deal with those. And if you are unfortunate with your choice of hosting provider or registrar then those might not forwarding DMCA takedown notices to you as they should but instead just terminate service.

And DMCA takedown notices aren’t even the worst part. Sooner or later someone might post illegal photos to your server depicting sexual abuse and other atrocities, and you absolutely need to figure out the proper procedures for dealing with that.

On top of that you have trolls abusing what ever form of report functionality you create.

This leads to a kind of Catch-22. You need for reports to be legitimate in order to provide service to the honest part of your user base, but at the same time you neither can nor want to look at the worst kind of images that someone could post.

So you need systems that can automatically identify those sorts of images without human interaction. And certainly it will be very difficult to get such a system correct so that it has no false negatives and limited amount of false positives (the latter meaning that the system removes images that shouldn’t be removed), because once again you neither can nor want to look at the images that it should be able to identify and remove.

Obviously, it’s not impossible — otherwise there wouldn’t be any image hosting sites in existence — but like I said, it’s a lot of work.

Additionally, even if you do get all of that right, the utility of a HN specific image hosting site is very limited. For example, if the HN community was to adopt it then suddenly the referer check that was there to make the service feasible in terms of bandwidth cost and server load will result in seemingly broken links for anyone on HN that wants to share any of the images outside of HN.

[JCharante]

Ah, thank you for the informative reply! I admit that's clever of them, even though it's not to my benefit.

[themodelplumber]

What's weird is, I'm pretty sure I originally posted the "direct" image link that PostImage provided, among the options given post-upload. When I tested the link from HN, I just saw the image on Safari's black background. But minutes later I tested the same link here at HN and saw the image buried in a page of ads.

I wonder if they have some kind of "hey, non-members get a limited number of directs" policy.