5 ms·
About ten years ago I made a converter application that converted a image (jpg/png/gif) to an HTML table. The result at the time was great. Unfortunately the ge
by pan69 14y ago
About ten years ago I made a converter application that converted a image (jpg/png/gif) to an HTML table. The result at the time was great. Unfortunately the generated HTML was quite verbose so it took a lot of bandwidth to download. I guess a similar conversion program has been used here and it seems that CSS these days can take off quite a bit of fat of that generated code.
PS: Forgot to mention. The reason I wrote the converter at the time was as an experiment to avoid people from right-click and saving images.
- cup 14y agoWhile some websites stop people from right clicking and saving (such as flickr) you can get around that by just screen printing. So why would you invest time in trying to stop one route of copying when there is a second unstoppable?
- Scottopherson 14y agoClients.
- cup 14y agoWould it not be easier to explain to them that what they're asking for is impossible to deliver?
- petsos 14y agoProbably not.
- gsteinb88 14y agoSometimes, yes. Frequently it's very difficult to explain to a client that the way you[1] interpret the words they[2] are using is rather different than what may be in their head. That is, from the technical perspective it may be 'impossible' to achieve perfect DRM. But from another perspective, if the added cost of circumventing that DRM is large enough that most[3] people won't bother, it /may/ be a success. See: Steam. In short, the language/terminology barrier between people in different fields results in a lot of client/developer miscommunication, frustration, and, frankly, poor results. A rather complete discussion on this (w/r/t a client wanting 100% uptime): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3056414 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3056414 [1] The technical party in the relationship [2] The party paying someone you to handle the technical side [3] Again, we run into a problem with precise definitions using 'most' - do we mean 99.9%? Do we mean enough that the cost of implementing the DRM is larger than the $ saved. Though the lost sales due to /having/ DRM is an entirely different discussion.
- jere 14y ago>So why would you invest time in trying to stop one route of copying when there is a second unstoppable? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management Good question. I'd like to know also. On another note, let's be honest. A lot of people today don't know print screen. I'd say the majority. But 10 years ago? That image to table conversion must have been a bank vault.
- bennny 14y agoIt is possible, but this creates a higher barrier. I know of users who will give up after the first attempt.
- yozmsn 14y agoSee the thing is that often at least for me when I want to save a picture it's because I like it and want to use it as a background, the trouble with printscreen is that it only captures the picture at your screen resolution not the photo's resolution so you end up with a grainy unusable image... if someone goes through the trouble of making a picture uncopyable I give up immediately, it's just not worth the hassle.
- xutopia 14y agoScreenshot?
- borplk 14y agoYeah good old times. I did exactly the same thing although not that long ago. It turned amazingly well (although yes no matter what you do the size will be higher than the original image) but the quality was identical. You can use a very small font with the ASCII square character which basically gives you pixel perfect images.
- cousin_it 14y agoIf you want to stop people from right-clicking and saving, why not just cut the image into 16 smaller images? That would also make right-clicking and saving more difficult than screen-printing, so there's no point doing anything more advanced. For even more entertainment value, you could make the pieces irregular shaped, with transparency :-)