@sir delivered via an external domain too usually
why? who knows actually.
@Vann there was once a legitimate reason for this, namely that web browsers limited the number of concurrent connections to a single origin. But now we have HTTP/2 and your page shouldn't need that many resources anyway.
@sir The 6.0 tells how many GiB of RAM you need to load up the page
@sir If using Imgur is required for some reason, I generally link to the direct image, and ask others to do so as well, exactly for this reason. There's no reason to waste more bandwidth on the JS than you spend on the image itself.
@tyil no, this is an old problem https://dillpickle.github.io/imgur-please-dont-be-the-next-tinypic-or-imageshack.html
@kaushalmodi public image hosts are doomed to fail and litter the internet with millions of dead links, I wrote about this ages ago:
It was an interesting read. Thanks!
I can only hope that imgtc.com doesn't go through the same cycle.
@kaushalmodi oh, it will.
In that case, I'll be looking for another "imgtc.com" when that happens.
I basically need something to quickly share an image (usually a screenshot or something during a debug). So I'd be fine if that image is thrown away in 30 days or something.
For permanent image hosting for my blog, I just self host them.
Thanks! I'll check that out.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!