==Google View Image Extension Patched?==Everyone should know by now that Google removed the View Image feature from their image search. However, a browser extension called View Image by a guy named Joshua B soon appeared and has worked great... up unt

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Flag
Oekaki	Show oekaki applet (replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf Max filesize is 16 MB. Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000. You may upload 3 per post.

File (hide): 8c82ae3ea41deba⋯.png (341.21 KB, 986x706, 493:353, ClipboardImage.png) (h) (u)

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:05:23 No.914784>>914799 >>914800 >>914953 >>915694 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]

Google View Image Extension Patched?

Everyone should know by now that Google removed the View Image feature from their image search. However, a browser extension called View Image by a guy named Joshua B soon appeared and has worked great... up until now. Looks like Google are doubling down on their stance on the removal of the original feature and have patched their code to prevent the extension from working.

What the fuck is wrong with Google?

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:24:02 No.914796>>914805

File (hide): f65880f6083f204⋯.jpg (11.2 KB, 346x250, 173:125, 10928847_1542113199407234_….jpg) (h) (u)

Right click on image and press "Open Image in New Tab" on the context menu. It will give you the original image without having to visit the website

Google NEVER removed the "View Image" button. They just obfuscated it in a sense

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:26:31 No.914799

File (hide): f09b45ddb9df30b⋯.jpeg (3.38 MB, 2145x3056, 2145:3056, eyes of hate.jpeg) (h) (u)

>>914784 (OP)

>what the fuck is wrong with Google?

Jews jewing themselves due to a lack of white people to paratisize as they have all been replaced by Indians and/or invalid trannies.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:28:40 No.914800>>914806 >>914807

>>914784 (OP)

yeah I actually switched to bing when google did this

but I needed to google something so I typed google into bing, and then it had some weird message about I didn't need to go there because bing is better. So I am back to google now.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:41:35 No.914805>>914824 >>914825

File (hide): 7de713f513e9134⋯.png (508.13 KB, 800x563, 800:563, ClipboardImage.png) (h) (u)

>>914796

>Right click on image and press "Open Image in New Tab" on the context menu

This behavior is not consistent as the image is usually a preview image, not the original, so opening in a new tab just opens the lower-res preview.

Check out this search:

https://www.google.com/search?biw=975&bih=867&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=J2H7WtG9LqzejwT27aDwDg&q=1080+wallpaper&oq=1080+wallpaper&gs_l=img.3..0i10k1j0l2j0i10k1l7.21910.24054.0.24190.14.14.0.0.0.0.120.1388.8j6.14.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.14.1387...0i67k1.0.tAuMJF60C7A#imgrc=_GN-jUXuUzuVOM:

If you open pic related in a new window, you get the 300x168 version while the original from the site itself is 1920x1080

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:43:07 No.914806>>914807

>>914800

>yeah I actually switched to bing when google did this

I did, too. However, as soon as I realized how much Bing sucks in comparison to Google, I searched for a means to bring the View Image button back to Google which is what led me to the extension.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:45:45 No.914807>>914810

>>914800

>>914806

You'd better be fucking joking.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 22:55:50 No.914810>>915325

>>914807

Not me. While Google is 200% pozzed, you can't deny that their engine is far superior to anything else. I've tried Bing, DuckDuckGo, etc, but they don't provide results that match my queryies anywhere near as well as Google. I go with the service that gives me what I need as a consumer.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 23:16:46 No.914821>>914827

File (hide): 5b7f1b736504618⋯.png (75.67 KB, 400x300, 4:3, start.png) (h) (u)

File (hide): 91845857abba9a9⋯.jpg (11.56 KB, 474x474, 1:1, searx.jpg) (h) (u)

File (hide): c13bbf1cd9f5daf⋯.jpg (110.6 KB, 1280x1024, 5:4, duckduck.jpg) (h) (u)

Use another search engine. It's literally in the sticky.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 23:29:39 No.914824

>>914805

>If you open pic related in a new window, you get the 300x168 version while the original from the site itself is 1920x1080

That is 100 percent WRONG. I get the full-res shit by using the right-click menu. Maybe it only works for Chrome

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 23:33:19 No.914825

>>914805

You have to wait for the image to be fully loaded, otherwise it just shows you Google's thumbnail. At least that's how it's been for me.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 23:42:00 No.914827>>914834 >>914838

>>914821

Searx is great. Anyone can host their own instance, and it works without CSS/javascript - so I can still use it with Lynx/w3m.

▶Anonymous 05/15/18 (Tue) 23:59:01 No.914834>>914838

File (hide): 7ae70a684ea2d14⋯.webm (475.63 KB, 960x1072, 60:67, out.webm) (h) (u) [play once] [loop]

>>914827

This is also true of DuckDuckGo Lite, although I use Surfraw and helm-firefox, so I just use the search engine I need most for the occasion, although I prefer DuckDuckGo. Not to flex in a pathetically nerdy way.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 00:15:31 No.914838

File (hide): 5cfafdabd98056e⋯.png (17.42 KB, 570x182, 285:91, 2018-05-15-171220_1920x108….png) (h) (u)

>>914827

>>914834

For the record, you can use Surfraw with basically any browser, including w3m. It works very nicely with runner like dmenu or, of course, EXWM's runner in GNU Emacs.

You can use w3m in Emacs, so you could also theoretically leverage helm-surfraw to interact with w3m.el. But I prefer eww.el over w3m--less dependencies, not to mention smaller; more minimal than w3m in that sense.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 00:19:25 No.914840>>914846 >>914856 >>914949 >>914951

File (hide): 3f3e288b34bfb38⋯.jpg (35.04 KB, 1024x752, 64:47, ecosia_logo.jpg) (h) (u)

I have switched to Ecosia because they use their profits to fund reforestation efforts around the world.

Also, after you turn off safe search, their image search gets far raunchier results than anyone else.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 00:36:32 No.914846>>914850

>>914840

Literally powered by Bing.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 01:02:53 No.914850

>>914846

Tweaked by their algorith. Their image search results are definitely different.

Go ahead, search for porn and compare the results.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 01:16:31 No.914856

>>914840

Are you twelve? Do your parents block porn sites? Is that why you rely on a search engine's image search to find porn?

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 05:15:45 No.914948

>using google

Everyone ITT needs to kill themselves.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 05:17:08 No.914949

>>914840

thanks for reminding, it seems to actually be cool and the image search works great, and it doesn't even need JS for that

(but I am not sure how exactly will they make profits from my somewhat hardened browser)

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 05:20:56 No.914951>>915221

>>914840

keep this in mind though https://ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003863513

https://ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003889214-Is-Ecosia-a-privacy-search-engine-

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 05:27:10 No.914953

>>914784 (OP)

>images may be subject to copyright

There's your answer. Because some images may be copyrighted, they decided to inhibit free downloading of images (at least without having to visit the originating website, which fact in turn effectively obliges the user to be bound by that site's "terms and conditions").

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 19:09:17 No.915221

>recommending google/yahoo/bing commercially-run proxies as privacy-enhancing alternatives

hello, cuckchan!

>>>/tech/ddg

If you want to use the botnet, at least have some decency and stick to original, otherwise use unpopular proxies/searx instances

https://chiru.no/a/search/

>>914951

>If your browser has “Do Not Track” enabled, we disable the “Client ID” automatically.

>“Do Not Track”

Literally goyim placebo tier.

▶Anonymous 05/16/18 (Wed) 22:42:25 No.915325

>>914810

Jesus fucking christ you're a dumb nigger. Use searx you stupid faggot.

>like dude my user experience maan

>jewgle knows what I want before I even type it from all the spying they do bro my experience with them has been amazing!

Kill yourself

▶Anonymous 05/17/18 (Thu) 00:37:35 No.915358

>2018

>using google

literally kill yourself

▶Anonymous 05/17/18 (Thu) 18:21:32 No.915694

>>914784 (OP)

Don't be jewish

Well searx image search still works and gets results from the G so...

/tech/ - Technology★

General

WebM

Theme

User JS

Do not paste code here unless you absolutely trust the source or have read it yourself!

Favorites

Customize Formatting

Filters