Page 9 of 19 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 186

Thread: so what's the verdict on the picture thing?

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    SE OZ
    Posts
    3,957

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PStechPaul View Post

    I really think this PB deal is a last ditch desperate attempt of a failing company to make a few quick bucks before folding. I doubt very many users will pay ten times the cost of a full featured web server, just to store pictures and do simple editing that can be done better with free or very cheap software. Probably once the supply of suckers dries up, and their upper management puts user fees in their off-shore accounts, they will shut down their servers and people will be scrambling to recover, especially if they used PB as their only repository for images they offloaded from their phones.
    I beg to differ.

    It is possible that PB is getting rid of all "non-profitable" (and "free-loaders") "users" who have effectively "pirated" PB at no cost and all the benefits of PB to themselves.

    In the mean-time, given the rate that PB is knocking off the "non -payers" and the like, it seems that those pics that still perform on PB may be "knocked off" as well that the number of PB pics shown may reduce drastically in the not too distant future.

    You really think that this is the end of and for PB? - perhaps not.

    This current position must/might almost be regarded as theft after all as PB does not seem to have known about it until if happened and certainly does not seem to have approved it..

    If PB were purge itself of all pirated and non-performing (aka non-profitable) and actually "dead losses" for PB to have on its books then it may very well come out of it all in very good shape indeed.

    Perhaps if PB could get rid of some or all of these "parasites" and could keep the "good" performers (that pay there annual subs every year) then PB might well have a pretty valuable product to take to market and come out of it all very well and in the process become a very good performer.

    Some might have to find a replacement for PB or just go without PB and learn to get used to it or leave here if that is the only or best option for them.

    I wonder who swallowed all the "free lunches".
    Last edited by oldtiffie; 09-14-2017 at 03:04 AM.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Victoria BC, Canada
    Posts
    846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Alciatore View Post
    Dave,

    Are you saying that the later versions of the vBulletin software are not compatible with the older ones? That does not make sense. At least, it does not make sense to anybody other than an IT person.

    They should at least have a way to easily port over the old database.

    But then I have a South Bend 9.
    Yes, I am making several assumptions:

    * That this site is relatively low value to HSM, but valuable enough to keep running. After all, it is still running, just, and has been so for a long time.

    * That upgrading to newer BB software is difficult enough to not be worth it. It's not been upgraded for a reason, likely $$.

    * That nearly all of the value in this site is it's history.

    * That the owners of HSM realise that images are an important part of the forum history, that they own and are monetising, and that they are in a bind because they don't have any control over those images.

    Honestly, it's not my problem and I don't really care. The only reason I posted with PB images is that several long-time members complained because I was using Google and they didn't want to be tracked. Whatever people want is fine by me. But, I've not got some deep sense of ownership that's driving me to go back and edit all my old posts just to move the images. They go when PB goes, not my problem. I doubt anyone here really cares about them... not exactly top-tier content.

    But, like many people here, I can't help but offer free advice to solve problems when they come up in discussion. The solution I offered is cheap and meets all the above assumptions. Oh, and while upgrading to a new version of the BB software would let new image content be hosted locally, it won't repatriate the images already hosted on 3rd party sites.

    David...

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    SE OZ
    Posts
    3,957

    Default

    It seems that some here have really painted themselves into quite a corner with little chance of being released from that "bind" that they are in and which to a large degree being largely their own fault.

    Mea Culpa

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mea_culpa

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Victoria BC, Canada
    Posts
    846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oldtiffie View Post
    It seems that some here have really painted themselves into quite a corner with little chance of being released from that "bind" that they are in and which to a large degree being largely their own fault.

    Mea Culpa

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mea_culpa
    The only people in a bind are the owners of HSM. Way back when, they decided to push people to 3rd party image hosting, because who can afford hosting images themselves, but it turns out images are important now. Hard to sell advertising on a site full of advertising for some other site they don't own. Likely, history will repeat when video becomes the primary communication system and everyone will be kicking themselves for letting youtube do the hosting for them. Then, some guy will probably be saying "you know, if you just write a script to download... strip out the advertising and host them yourself..."

    edit... you know, I just realised it won't work. If they pull off all the images from PB (et.all), they're fine if the forum poster only linked to images said forum poster owns. Pretty hard for PB to push copyright infringement when the original uploader is still being credited. But, just ONE image otherwise, linked to by someone other than the original uploader, and HSM is now liable for being sued. Lawyers... if the lawyers held sway like they do now back when computers were first starting, we'd still be using dumb terminals. Copyright law needs a serious gutting or the likes of China will be the only place innovation can happen. Okay, yeah, that's way off topic.

    David...
    Last edited by fixerdave; 09-14-2017 at 04:20 AM.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    893

    Default

    [QUOTE=oldtiffie;1135004]It seems that some here have really painted themselves into quite a corner with little chance of being released from that "bind" that they are in and which to a large degree being largely their own fault.

    QUOTE]

    The only bind is that you don't get to see my images anymore. It's your loss, not mine. My images are safely resting on my hard drives and the photos on Photo(b)ucket were only to show in forums. The really nice thing about it is I don't have to look at all those awful ads when I want to share a photo with someone

    Keep trying, you may be able to convince someone that spending $400 a year to look at ads for 20 minutes before you can see a picture is a good deal.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,081

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fixerdave View Post
    But, just ONE image otherwise, linked to by someone other than the original uploader, and HSM is now liable for being sued.
    I don't think it's that simple. They just need to have a way to report and remove infringing content.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,796

    Default

    Elf said: The only bind is that you don't get to see my images anymore. It's your loss, not mine. My images are safely resting on my hard drives and the photos on Photo(b)ucket were only to show in forums. The really nice thing about it is I don't have to look at all those awful ads when I want to share a photo with someone

    Keep trying, you may be able to convince someone that spending $400 a year to look at ads for 20 minutes before you can see a picture is a good deal.
    Great post!!!

    When I signed up with PB something like ten years or so ago, I was following their rules and posting some of my 15,000 or more technical images that I had by then accumulated. I had no idea that I was a "free loader" or a "pirate" as mentioned by Old Tiffie.

    Like you, I remain unconvinced that spending $400 a year to see PB's ads before posting a few photos is a good deal. LOL.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Traverse City, MI
    Posts
    1,379

    Default

    Lots of misconceptions in this thread and Iím not going to attempt to answer all of them, but did want to mention a few things.

    First, the convoluted method of hosting photos on our site is simply a product of how the BBS software is set up. That may change with different versions of the software and is what it is. Our IT department has always been against using server space for the BBS, for a number of reasons, and I had to fight long and hard to get where we are.

    When it comes to pulling photos off of PB and placing them on our server, we canít do that. We donít own the photos on the internet, even those on our site and, while other sites take a different view of copyright laws, we do everything we can to abide by the letter of the law.

    We do update our software, though the first version was in place for years. This version has been up for several years and is ready to be replaced, which will happen, probably, sometime next week.

    With the previous version we worked hard at hammering the software into looking and acting like the version it was replacing. For this change and any future changes, we are simply going to go with the stock VBulletin offering. I know that many here donít like change, but by using the stock software we will be able to update more frequently, which should make for a better user experience and a more secure site. As to what that will do for the photo album interface, I canít say, but I would imagine that there might be changes from version to version.
    George

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    SE OZ
    Posts
    3,957

    Default

    I have no issue with how any one deals with his software licencing money - at all -as its his matter and his alone.

    Same applies to me with the money I use to subscribe to PB.

    All my images are safe on my hard drive/s - so no real issue/s there either.

    But after all, I do think that PB may be using all this to its advantage by better managing its products - and so they may well come out of this quite well after all and flourish instead of failing after all.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    SE OZ
    Posts
    3,957

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by George Bulliss View Post

    ....................... I know that many here don’t like change, but by using the stock software we will be able to update more frequently, which should make for a better user experience and a more secure site. As to what that will do for the photo album interface, I can’t say, but I would imagine that there might be changes from version to version.

    ..........................
    Thank George.I guess that we just have to wait to see what turns up and either "go with the flow" or simply "bail out" and perhaps leave this BBS.
    Last edited by oldtiffie; 09-14-2017 at 07:43 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •