I guess the JPEG images costs more disk space to store them on Java Ranch's server. Java Ranch server stores a long history of the posts. Eventually, the server will be running out of memory. I suggest to post JPEG images to elaborate related ideas like garbage collections issues. If there is any funny picture to share, it can be posted on a personal web site.
Well, I don't know if there is an official policy on annoying pictures -- IMO, there shouldn't be one because this is one of those things that should be self regulatory. Common sense says to not distract from the topic. It is hard enough getting your fellow ranch hands to focus on your topic, and hence, help you -- annoying them is never a good idea. This is, of course, my opinion.
And since I branch off this discussion -- feel free the debate it, to as much detail as possible, here.
Ted North wrote:Terabyte disc drives are not that hard to come by these days anyway.
Then you should buy one to host/store your images, rather than suggest that Paul, the owner of this site, spend his money to let you do it here.
Seriously, you think the correct response to someone saying "maybe you shouldn't do this" is to reply with "well, if someone else spends their money it's not a problem!!!"? Regardless of whether its $5 or $500, why do you think you have the right to tell anyone else that they need to spend their money for your benefit?
Note: This is my PERSONAL opinion, not that of the Ranch
There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
1) whenever you use an image from another site, it is important to make a link to the site to show the source. Unless, of course, everything in the image was created by you. So i you mashed up some images into one image, it seems like you need to have a page that thoroughly thanks all of the sources. And then when you embed the image here, you need to have a link to the source giving proper credit. On the other hand, if you take a picture of something, post it on your blog and embed it here, you don't have to give credit because you have 100% of the copyright and can do what you want.
2) uploading images here does add load to our servers and, more importantly, to the amount of bandwidth we use. And bandwidth ain't free. I think there are a lot of things where this is legit. And even funny things where this would be legit. But if the images in this thread were hosted on this server, I would not be okay with it (the bandwidth is large and the funny is small - so the bandwidth to humor ratio is too high).
3) It would be nice to have the funny images be a little smaller - a little easier to scroll past for those that don't find it as funny. Maybe a lot smaller.
4) Humor is always a double edged sword. We all want the funny. At the same time, funny is always relative and subjective. One person's funny is another person's icky. So there are two possible conclusions here: A) if you are gonna have any funny in your life, some is gonna be lame; B) if you choose to have zero funny in your life, you shouldn't make everybody else be without funny too.
Andrew Monkhouse wrote:I believe the images were all hosted on a different site, not on CodeRanch.
Personally I would skip posts that have irrelevant pictures, but I can see how some would like them.
The browser loads threads a page at a time. The only way to skip them is to not view the thread in the first place.
I think Andrew meant that he would skip reading them -- meaning the content of the post. An analogy would be going to a blog, seeing lots of junk (such as popup ads, ads all over the page with animation and sound, etc.), and not bother staying to read it to get the nuggets of information that may be there.
To reiterate an eariler post....
Henry Wong wrote:
Common sense says to not distract from the topic. It is hard enough getting your fellow ranch hands to focus on your topic, and hence, help you -- annoying them is never a good idea.