picture in Reply #1 (Thanks Cassandra!)

[WT Fuheck]

this wont' work

Sorry. I don't know how to link a picture.

[Cassandra2010]

1. I googled for the picture. Is this it?

[Jamastiene]

2. +1

[WT Fuheck]

4. that's the one.

[HughMoran]

6. interesting Ghost

:think:

[HughMoran]

13. almost Orwellian

;)

[WT Fuheck]

21. more Dickensian

or maybe Tolstoyan

or even Kafkaesque

[Jamastiene]

3. K&R

If it is the picture in post #1

[TicketyBoo]

5. If you watched Bill Moyers' Journal

the night he played the recordings of phone calls of LBJ, then you understand just how accurate this is.

Moyers followed up the revelatory phone calls with the commentary:

We will never know what would have happened if Lyndon Johnson had said no to more war. We know what happened because he said yes.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/11202009/transcript1.html

President Obama knows history; I hope he is too smart a man to doom us to repeat it, anyway.

[patrice]

7. Right click on the picture you want, copy & paste the url from its Properties into

your post.

[tbyg52]

10. Uh, that's called "hotlinking" and is generally considered unethical.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. And we do it all the time here

and on other sites.

[tbyg52]

15. Doesn't make it right.

http://altlab.com/hotlinking.html

Still, I must admit that I've been all over that site trying to locate the page the cartoon is on (so I could post a link to *that*), with no success. Their navigation leaves a bit to be desired.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. Alert is your friend

[tbyg52]

19. I don't think it would matter - as other posters point out, it *is* all over the place here.

I block images, usually don't click on them, and when I do I usually don't notice the URL, but since it's been mentioned I've been looking around.

[patrice]

14. I have never seen false attribution and anyone who cares to know whose picture it is

can right click and find out and even go to the source if they wish, thus increasing their traffic.

I see nothing unethical in any of that.

The alternative would be to copy & paste the image into one's own media, upload that to a server, and the link to that, much more unethical than the hotlink if you ask me.

[tbyg52]

16. It's the link straight to the image that is the issue.

Linking to the page the image is on is generally considered the better method. I doubt the site would get much if any traffic through link to the image alone, as to visit the actual website you have to take the image link and cut off everything but the basic URL. The problem with linking directly to images is that it gets the site few, if any, more readers, while using their bandwidth for the image.

[patrice]

18. Very reductionist thinking there. No one develops enough skill to edit the link?

Or the number of those who do learn to edit the link aren't worth the bandwidth?

A rising tide does not lift all ships or at minimum the ships of those who are interested in whatever image is at issue?

This is very exclusive, shall we say "Conservative", thinking, very anti- the spirit of what created the internet.

[tbyg52]

20. It's not *my* thinking - it's generally accepted web practice.

The difference between hotlinking & linking to a web site:
When people link directly to a media file (gif, jpg, png, mov etc.), the webmaster of the original site has to pay the fees. When someone links to a page on that same website, the webmaster still pays fees but the content is shown in the form the designer (and copyright holder) wished, and they may be able to cover costs by displaying advertising on the page.
Super simply put... Hot Linking to media files = bad... Linking to pages = good ;-)

http://www.webweaver.nu/html-tips/hotlinking.shtml

But, whatever....

[patrice]

8. Like this . . .

[Goldstein1984]

9. I'm reading "The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam" by

Robert S. McNamara. And I just finished watching the Bill Moyers LBJ program. I grew up under the specter of Vietnam.

President Obama must certainly have information that the public does not, but it certainly feels like we've been this way before.

[tbyg52]

12. That's exactly what I've been thinking. nt