|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 13, 2015 15:07:08 GMT -5
Gang, newey and I are in a quandry, and we'd like your help. Neither of us can see the logo image at the top of the page. This has been going on for about a month, give or take a few days. Oddly enough though, newey can see it while he's at work, on a different machine, with a different OS and browser. I don't have that luxury, so as far as I'm concerned, the logo has disappeared, period. Now, the funny part - if I copy the logo's URL and then drop it into the browser's address bar, the image comes in and displays just fine. Say what? !!! So I dug under the hood, so to speak, and I can see that ProBoards is forming the correct request to ImageShack for that image. But the innerwebs reports back that dreaded '404' error, "can't be found". Poppycock, it just displayed a moment ago, right in my own browser.... what the hey?  Even when I can see the image file in my cache, the browser refuses to display it when called upon to do so ((from within The NutzHouse). Now we're getting somewhere... just where, I dunno, but it's another data point, amiright? So, what are we asking for here? Simple - do you see the logo above? We'd appreciate Yes or No answers, and if you feel like it, what you're using for a browser and OS, and whether you might have any filtering software of any sort (Adblock, NoScript, etc.). Keep it simple, or write a book, it's all good... we just want some feedback before we go any further in attempting to restore the logo in any particular fashion. That is all, and thanks! sumgai (and by extension, newey) |
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Nov 13, 2015 15:55:12 GMT -5
That's a b..gger!
I can confirm no logo visible on pc nor phone (in mobile nor desktop view)
maybe newey's machine has it cached locally?
|
|
|
|
Post by b4nj0 on Nov 13, 2015 18:14:36 GMT -5
Not visible on Opera, Opera Classic, HTC browser nor Chrome on my HTC One M8s on Android Lollipop.
Haven't tried the Nexus 7 tablets.
Visible right now on Chromium running under XP SP3(but only after repeatedly inspecting the element and trying to load it on a different tab. I got the 404 at first.
I have a screen shot of this page if required, couldn't be bothered to go through uploading to Photobucket.
There's an issue with Flash in this XP configuration. Flash has banned certain (java etc)plugins from September 1st on security issues.
Roll on HTML5... Don't get me started with the Flash fiasco!
Hope this is of some help?
Edit:
Refresh a page and logo is history. Copy image URL and drop in the address bar like Sumgai and back it comes, visible on all pages unless page is refreshed.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Nov 13, 2015 20:03:59 GMT -5
On Windows 7 Internet Explorer at work it was not there. Opened the url in another tab and it worked, and it's showing on this page I'm typing in now.
Not seeing it on Safari on my iPhone.
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 13, 2015 22:04:26 GMT -5
Not seeing it here either on anything. I probably have the original around here somewhere. Let me know if you need it and I'll go look.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 13, 2015 22:19:18 GMT -5
So I dug under the hood, so to speak, and I can see that ProBoards is forming the correct request to ImageShack for that image. But the innerwebs reports back that dreaded '404' error, "can't be found". Using an older Dell desktop running Windoze XP and Firefox with AdBlockPlus. Image was not displayed. Just a block-letter Guitarnuts 2. I right-clicked on the area where the logo should have been and selected "View Image". I too got the 404 error. Interesting twist to the story ... I cut the address that now was residing in my address bar: img86.imageshack.us/img86/443/gn2logoom1.jpg then right-clicked on the address bar and selected "Paste & Go". Voila! Image was now displayed. Note: This was just the image called for by address, not the GN2 page. But now when I view any GN2 page, I do see the logo in the appropriate location. I wonder if Imageshack isn't currently handling third-party requests for that image. Perhaps because the person who owns the Imageshack account where that file resides has not logged on to their account for a long time? Maybe the "fix" is to simply log onto that imageshack account and upload a file so the account is flagged as being active? Idk. Just guessing here. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 14, 2015 0:49:35 GMT -5
It might well be my account. My avatar appears to have wandered off, too. I sent an e-mail to their support, since my account is linked to a dead e-mail account...and I have no idea what I set the password to...
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 14, 2015 1:02:34 GMT -5
reTrEaD echos my first sentiment - is ImageShack somehow not playing nice with ProBoards? If the account had gone dormant for inactivity (the owner's last login was more than a year ago), then none of us would be able to see it in our various browsers simply by inserting the URL into the address bar.
The common theme here is ProBoards, not much doubt about that. But newey and I didn't want to whine run to ProBoards Support without more info from a segment of our user-base. It's entirely possible that other images from ImageShack are not forthcoming, as in cynical1's example of his avatar. Still, I'd like to have more than two samples, that's a pretty small data-set, if you know what I mean.
The obvious fix is to simply move the logo image to another provider. But if ImageShack is going to be a pill, vis-a-vis ProBoards, then we're gonna lose a lot of photos/drawings posted here over the years... that's something I'd rather avoid, if I can get to the root of the problem.
Stay tuned.......
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 14, 2015 10:49:56 GMT -5
If the account had gone dormant for inactivity (the owner's last login was more than a year ago), then none of us would be able to see it in our various browsers simply by inserting the URL into the address bar. There is logic to that thought but I'm not entirely certain it works exactly that way. Maybe ... The images are still there and available by a direct call from our web browsers BUT when an account has been inactive for an extended period of time, Image Shack stops responding to HTML calls from webpages? Again, I'm just guessing. Didn't Newey or John H recover images that were previously lost by someone with an inactive Image Shack or Photobucket account? Iirc, the images weren't showing up but were still available by direct link? Not sure if this will confirm anything or just add another layer of confusion, but I'll include the logo as an inserted image in this post. First with a src call, then with simple IMG tags, finally as a clickable link.  Simple IMG tags: img86.imageshack.us/img86/443/gn2logoom1.jpg |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 14, 2015 11:22:20 GMT -5
SG &\or Newey -
Check your PMs. I found the original and shot you the new URL where it lives now.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 15, 2015 3:07:34 GMT -5
'TrEaD,
You may be correct, but that would mean some serious testing. In my book, the server can indeed see where a request is coming from, and respond as programmed to do so. But that would mean that ImageShack is seriously breaking the Internet, if it decides that links from web sites are somehow verboten, yet they'll send that same file directly to a user's browser.
In the meantime, newey and I are discussing storing the logo somewhere else, as suggested by c1. We're just worried that other member's contributions to The NutzHouse in the past might also come under this embargo, and that would sorely test my patience, lemme assure you.
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 15, 2015 11:53:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 15, 2015 13:09:45 GMT -5
When they hold me hostage for my images they wish in one hand and crap in the other to see which one gets filled up first.
SG and newey: You better use the link I sent you for the logo, as I'm not coughing up $3.99 a month to these bastards.
I guess I'll be updating a lot of posts along the way, and some may just fall by the wayside, as everything I linked an image to was on Imageschlock...
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Nov 15, 2015 14:00:26 GMT -5
I'm glad the logo is fixed. But I' wondering if this is the start of a worrying trend? will other 'free' image hosting services do the same. From Imageshacks description, not only are they stopping internet linkage from free accounts, but will actually be deleting them all:
"If you chose not to upgrade, your account access will be discontinued by the end of January 31st, 2016, and your ImageShack account will be considered abandoned"
My stuff is all on Photobucket - for a while....
EDIT: I can see how, if people want to stay in business, there has to be some income, and the model for how this works will change over time. If the freebie service paid by ads is not sufficient, then I cant argue with that. But what they can not morally do is to suddenly break the service that they offered before, and that many have come to rely on, and hence unilaterally trash large sections of the internet. The least that they should do is to maintain all free accounts that they host, but given warning, stop new uploads to them. That would direct their users either to start to pay them, or go elsewhere but without damage to other sites.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 15, 2015 16:48:44 GMT -5
Guys,
Thanks, especially to reTrEaD, for that info and advice. I will now be consulting with newey on a way to go back and grab all images currently hosted on IS, and either move them away, or just post them as attachments here on PB. However, as pointed out, this may be the harbinger of a forthcoming trend, in which case there'll be no safety in preserving history, unless we each decide to pony up a few shekels and "buy" some happiness. By that, I mean a permanent home that all the members can share, where it be here on PB, or elsewhere.
Stay tuned.....
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 17, 2015 22:57:14 GMT -5
Well, it get's even more ridiculous. They re-linked my account with my current e-mail. However, it seems Imageshack arbitrarily deleted my account. All the images up there are no longer accessible when I logon.
And it's not even January yet...
I've seen last ditch greed take over a company in the the past, but this is one of the more blatant unvarnished examples. My money is on this becoming an unrecoverable FUBAR on their part.
If I were a betting man, I'd start a pool where everyone could buy a square on when Imageshack tanks and is no more.
The Internet. Proving, once again, that information does not always cut the trail to intelligence.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 19, 2015 11:52:05 GMT -5
Boys and Girls,
Please observe the top of this page - do you see the logo, restored to all its former glory?
Trust me, ProBoards did not make it easy to find the place where we can change things like this, that's why I need confirmation that what I did worked.
Thanks.
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 19, 2015 13:06:24 GMT -5
Yes, looks good. I must have been on at just the right time to see an earlier attempt with lots of white space, below and to the right of the image. Those are gone now and all is well.
|
|
|
|
Post by b4nj0 on Nov 19, 2015 13:27:05 GMT -5
Looking good here using a "smart" 'phone.
e&oe...
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 19, 2015 14:45:03 GMT -5
Yeah, the image now appears there for me too.
Frankly, though, I am more concerned about all the images which will be lost in the New Year. That's a problem!
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 19, 2015 14:47:58 GMT -5
And, thinking about it, given your experience with the Gnuts logo and C1's loss of all his images, I expect that images are probably already disappearing left, right and centre from the forum.
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 19, 2015 16:54:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 19, 2015 21:47:24 GMT -5
Yes, looks good. I must have been on at just the right time to see an earlier attempt with lots of white space, below and to the right of the image. Those are gone now and all is well. That was an attempt to get everything sized correctly. The only way "to be sure" was to test it live, and you got caught in the line of fire. Sorry 'bout that!  |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 19, 2015 21:53:47 GMT -5
And, thinking about it, given your experience with the Gnuts logo and C1's loss of all his images, I expect that images are probably already disappearing left, right and centre from the forum. Yes, we're starting to lose things, though probably not yet to the point of "left and right". But I'm not holding my breath in hopes of an easy solution. See my follow on thread about the coming debacle for more info. I believe reTrEaD broke the news (to us/me, at least) last Friday. But it is nice to have more than once source confirming ImageShack's pending doom. A pox upon them, and may their Christmas stockings be filled with large lumps of coal.  EDIT: It seems that this has been going on for longer than we knew. From the links quoted just now, I see that ImageShack started, back in August, to replace images with advertisements. That's right, instead of sending out the user's image to a Forum or blog, they instead delivered an ad. My Gawd, how much cheek can one company display! Now we know: ads weren't getting the job done (bring in more moolah), so they went to the no-free-accounts position. That kind of describes the perfect 1-2 punch, if you ask me. [/edit] sumgai |
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 20, 2015 0:43:48 GMT -5
Hi sumgai, All the Imageshack images I checked which turned up in my search were duds: www.google.com/search?q=site:guitarnuts2.proboards.com+imageshack.com&biw=1920&bih=969&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjj04-oop7JAhXM7yYKHejyD1MQ_AUIBygBRight-click any of the broken images, select 'view image info', and invariably the image is one from Imageshack. I have little idea of how much Imageshack is used by posters to this forum. Maybe the situation is not as bad as I fear. What really disappoints me is that - although I can accept that the previous model might have been unsustainable for Imageshack - they could have handled this very differently. I suspect, though, they saw an opportunity to make a killing - even if the new model proves a total failure and causes them to close down / sell the business, the number of clickable ads they can place in the short-term by this change must be enormous. It would be interesting to read their old T&Cs. No one using their service will expect their images to be replaced like this, changing the content/intent/meaning of their posts. Suppose, for example, that the replacement image was for gun sales in a thread where someone had posted an image of someone lost to gun violence - I am assuming here that Imageshack will attempt to use key words from the target ad-page to increase click-through rates. I imagine that there could be some very unfortunate substitutions. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 20, 2015 1:48:39 GMT -5
Tell me about it...
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 20, 2015 4:53:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Nov 20, 2015 10:52:00 GMT -5
The problem I have now is that they've "accidentally" deleted my account. I can login now, but there are no images to view. My images are MIA and all I got was a vague mention of restoring them.
I've been here about 6 weeks short of 8 years, so that's a lot of stuff try and figure out exactly what I put where.
I'll try the link you posted. Hope springs eternal.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 20, 2015 12:01:43 GMT -5
col,
Your link to Google is a nice start, but... you should substitute ImageShack.us, not dot com. Or try them both.
However, what I see from that search is page after page that contains textual links, i.e. links that the poster spelled out, instead of using the [img] tags. In many cases, there are also images posted correctly, but not always.
sumgai
|
|
col
format tables
Posts: 474
Likes: 25
|
Post by col on Nov 20, 2015 14:38:58 GMT -5
Hi sumgai,
Some pages just have textual links, others have placeholders for missing images - usually missing Imageshack pictures. Right-click the placeholders for the missing images and select 'view image info'.
|
|
