Fucking chrome

Modern browsers can go suck a dick.

Why are there so few instances of others complaining about this idiotic behaviour? The image is literally right there on the screen, but chrome can't save it. So does chrome ping the server every time you save a file, even if that file is right the fuck there?

To deal with this bullshit I am going to have to make an extension that downloads images on relevant pages, converts them to base64 text encoding, and stuffs them right into the html. Wew. Good job chrome. Normie browser / 10

Why did you use Chrome in the first place?

because all browsers suck so much that it doesn't seem to matter which you end up using

what do you use?

IceCat, Firefox, Palemoon

I would use Links2 or Emacs if they worked on most sites though, terminal browsers are the most secure - but don't use i2p or tor with it.

...

And it still won't work if the image is used not directly in a html tag but via some convoluted obfuscated data-binding-style jewscript which assumes some things about the tag which will break when doing this replacement even if your script finds out where should the base64 payload go.

I think your better bet is to extract data from browser cache. Not sure if cucked chromium supports that, however.

Or just use fucking Firefox, it's slow at times but afaik it doesn't suffer from that stupidity yet. I mean, it doesn't download shit again when you press fucking Save if it's cached in memory or disk.

Another option is to use local caching proxy, if you trust its code enough that TLS will terminate on it. It should handle all issues of TLS by itself then, that's not easy but if you do that, it should solve the problem once and for all.
Unless the image is loaded in some scrambled form and only finally constructed in jewscript.

All browsers are equally suck bro, but chrome are more equal than others.

hahahahahhahha

...

...