Google View Image Extension Patched?

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?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (986x706, 341.21K)

Other urls found in this thread:

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:
ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003863513
ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003889214-Is-Ecosia-a-privacy-search-engine-
chiru.no/a/search/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

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

Attached: 10928847_1542113199407234_74315882650777205_n.jpg (346x250, 11.2K)

Jews jewing themselves due to a lack of white people to paratisize as they have all been replaced by Indians and/or invalid trannies.

Attached: eyes of hate.jpeg (2145x3056, 3.38M)

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.

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:

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

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (800x563, 508.13K)

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.

You'd better be fucking joking.

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.

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

Attached: duckduck.jpg (400x300 11.56 KB, 75.67K)

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

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.

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

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.

Attached: out.webm (960x1072, 475.63K)

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.

Attached: 2018-05-15-171220_1920x1080_scrot.png (570x182, 17.42K)

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.

Attached: ecosia_logo.jpg (1024x752, 35.04K)

Literally powered by Bing.

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

Go ahead, search for porn and compare the results.

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

Everyone ITT needs to kill themselves.

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)

keep this in mind though ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003863513
ecosia.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003889214-Is-Ecosia-a-privacy-search-engine-

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").

hello, cuckchan!
If you want to use the botnet, at least have some decency and stick to original, otherwise use unpopular proxies/searx instances
chiru.no/a/search/

Literally goyim placebo tier.

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

literally kill yourself

Don't be jewish
Well searx image search still works and gets results from the G so...