First, we are using Amazon S3, underneath Imgur.
What do we get? A clean/easy API yes, but they handle virus scanning, image re-sizing (profile images, etc.), backups (we also back our Imgur-hosted images up nightly), and they're large enough to be at a better price overall due to the deals they get with their host, CDN, etc.
It works - and it works well,...
The maximum length of a post, question or answer, on Stack Overflow is 30,000 characters. This includes markdown and any other formatting. The limit on the question title is 150 characters.
I don't believe there are any upper limits on the number of links and images. I challenge you to make a post so heavy on links and images that we're tempted to add some. ...
Yes, just add an s, m or l (lowercase) at the end of the imgur link before the ".png".
For example, the image http://i.stack.imgur.com/9tE32.png can be made:
If you are using the native Stack Overflow imgur service (eg. clicking the little icon for adding an image in the toolbar), you can just append an s or m or l (for small/medium/large) at the end of the URL, before the file extension.
You could link ...
Since I think I count as the "powers-that-be":
Imgur's "normal" terms of service do not apply to pictures you upload through Stack Exchange.
That means that the images you upload are covered under our "attribution required" ...
The alt (alternative) attribute is used when the image fails to load, or for user agents that can't display images (screen readers, very old mobile browsers, etc.)
According to the HTML5 specifications,
The most general rule to consider when writing alternative text is the following: the intent is that replacing every image with the text of its alt ...
Nice work on finally bringing HTTPS support in!
I want to note something on point 4 (emphasis mine):
Rebake remaining posts with HTTP images, so that images linking to HTTP addresses will become links - most of those are dead anyway.
If most of those links are dead anyway, why not go through the hassle once and check if they are actually dead or not. If ...
To give an idea of the extent of this problem: according to this stackexchange.com search, over 8000 posts are affected. Some of them may contain images which are already lost (e.g. the last image in the Meta.SE post you found).
There are some options:
Edit the post and upload the images via the Stack Exchange image uploader, which stores them on imgur.com....
I completely support banning ImageShack images in new posts. The fact that it's an unreliable image host would be reason enough in itself, but the replacement of images by ads just adds insult to injury.
If implemented in the same way as most content bans on SE, this would presumably mean that trying to post a question or an answer containing an image ...
While Jeff makes a compelling argument that this isn't a particularly urgent usability bug, I question the rationale of declining it altogether. It shouldn't be that hard to write an if statement and a couple of unit tests to fix the problem during some developer down-time...
The reason I think this is a significant problem is because it actively interferes ...
While you can’t directly upload an SVG image, if you can host it somewhere else, you can still display it in your post using HTML like <img src="https://example.com/url/to/your/image.svg"/> (note - you need to use https:// for this to work).
For example, take this US map here from Wikimedia Commons
See this post for other examples of what you can do.
1. Is this behavior expected?
Expected as in "You should do this" – obviously not. Expected as in "we know it's possible" – yes.
2. Does it not matter to Stack Exchange and Imgur?
It's pretty much impossible to prevent this 100%, at least up front.
However, hijacking our Imgur account poses a risk for the uploader: If they use ...
We examined this issue and decided that on most sites, the restriction is doing more harm than good. The restriction has therefore simply been removed on all sites except Stack Overflow, Server Fault, Ask Ubuntu and Super User. We may revisit this list if we notice, or the moderators inform us of, unexpected issues.
The default for newly created sites is ...
Another problem with this kind of post is that it is entirely unsearchable.
As you say, it appears to be a crop from an image/screen grab, and as such not been attributed to the source either.
I say delete with extreme prejudice.
When I upload an image via the little button on the Stack Exchange form, there's no indication that I'm doing anything but uploading my image to Stack Exchange. Therefore I expect that it is included in the normal content agreement here — namely, that it becomes Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike (CC BY SA).
It doesn't matter if SE has some backend ...
I'd support this if Imgur added support for SVG images and removed the size limit from PNG images (or at least raised it to something more reasonable than 1 MB). Until that happens, though, there are sometimes valid reasons not to use Imgur.
(I guess I could be OK with this if Wikimedia Commons was also whitelisted as an allowed image source. They do ...
A few days ago (February 2011), a new image upload is being tested on Meta, adding support for paste and drag-and-drop:
However, this does not support direct paste or drag-and-drop into the edit page; one first needs to click the "Image" button (Ctrl+G) to show the upload dialog.
In June 2015, this new dialog was implemented:
You can also add a query string like ?s=xyz (with xyz = 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 or 512) after the name of the image to change it from gSpBi.png to (eg) gSpBi.png?s=128. I.e I just added the query string ?s=128 right after .png. Attention: sometimes part of the top and bottom are not shown (I think it depends a bit on the actual image you're using).
Something that will be awesome for me is pressing CTRL+V inside the editor while there is an image in the clipboard, and that would automagically open the uploader and paste the image in there.
This will save me so many clicks... :)
I'd agree that from a privacy standpoint, banning users hosting images on servers they control would be beneficial.
In the DMZ it's been a long standing acknowledgement that people's locations can be uncovered in this way (well apart obviously from users using things like Tor) unless the user default blocks image loads.
So restricting image links (or ...
Is the image above inclusive of ethnicities?
I'd say yes, it is. I'm not going to say it covers all, since that'd be nearly impossible for a group of 9 people and a robot arm, but yeah, there's differences that can be seen in the skin color outlines, so at least an attempt was made and succeeded, as far as I'm concerned. I see already three that have ...
So, it's art, it's open to interpretation. I looked at this before we used it and I saw diversity in gender, accessibility and color:
I saw a brown person there, even though the people were done mostly abstract. I was also happy to see that someone with a disability (and depicted as much older) was also included in the group. I'm 42 and disabled, so .. ...
We haven't implemented an overlay (the community was more divided on this), but from now on, the image uploader automatically wraps images in a link to themselves, which looks like this and should make your life easier:
[![enter image description here]]
Balpha is to thank for this change.
There are several reasons, as far as I am concerned:
Images of code can be very hard to read. Especially if a person takes a picture with a phone of a screen. It can be very difficult to cipher one's way through it.
Images of code frequently chop out bits of material. Not all terminals have a good wrap function, and even the ones that do can often make ...