Subject:
|
Re: Cracking down on unauthorized image links
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Jun 1999 15:16:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
948 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.admin.general, dkrenz@mc.net (dkrenz) writes:
> > > I need to have something clarified: Is it ok to tell people to go to
> > > www.lugnet.com and do a search for a set (not a direct link)? [...]
> >
> > Absolutely, yes, 100% OK.
> >
> > But better yet, give them a link to the page showing the set, for example:
> >
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=6990-1
> > or
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=7128-1
> >
> > Just please don't link directly to the underlying JPEG image files, i.e.:
> >
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/pix/space/lego6990.jpg
> > or
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/pix/new/upload/7128-1-912938621.jpg
> >
> > --Todd
>
> Wow... head spinning here, thinking about this. Isn't this just about
> the same bandwidth load? Only lightening is that some people won't click
> on the link, so the image won't be served up. Any thoughts on what %
> "some" is in the above sentence?
It may be that there is little bandwidth change in the long run (I have _no_
idea about the numbers here), but the point is that people can't link directly
to the file. This way, someone looking at Joe Blow's Lego Auction does not
automatically cause a bandwidth drain on LUGnet - they have to follow a link,
(which they may or may not do) which puts them onto LUGnet, and means that
LUGnet's bandwidth is only being used for LUGnet.
At least, that's how I understand it.(1)
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
1:so, would this be a 'principle' or a 'utility' argument, Larry? ;)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Cracking down on unauthorized image links
|
| (...) Yup -- that's the idea. There is also another reason: Linking to the HTML page currently just happens to plop up whatever size JPEG image happens to reside in the DB. But it doesn't have to be that way -- many of the images are 100+ KB, which (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jun-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Cracking down on unauthorized image links
|
| (...) Wow... head spinning here, thinking about this. Isn't this just about the same bandwidth load? Only lightening is that some people won't click on the link, so the image won't be served up. Any thoughts on what % "some" is in the above (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jun-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
41 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
