FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM

LOG IN Forgot Login? Register General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board Search Terms:  Search Within:  topics posts since 2019 2018 posts 2017 posts 2016 posts 2015 posts 2014 posts 2013 posts 2012 posts 2011 posts 2010 posts 2009 posts 2008 posts 2007 posts 2006 posts 2005 posts 2004 posts 2003 posts 2002 posts 2001 posts 2000 posts users  search tips  You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1      Non-Film Score Discussion: Photobucket R.I.P. (?)   Last Post   Posted:   Jul 1, 2017 - 7:24 AM     By:   Ian J.   (Member) As Photobucket have decided not to let anyone use their service for 3rd party hosting (i.e., images on forums, etc.) unless the user stumps up $399, I think we here might need to find a new host for images. I'm particularly thinking of dragon53 and the movie news posts which now seem to have lost all images. Also, I reckon with this policy, PB will basically cease as a service, although it may take a little while. Unless of course they decide to reverse the decision. Also note, I gather that PB aren't going to let users download their images from their accounts (although I was able to completely delete everything I had on my account with them as all my images I keep locally and don't trust any cloud provider to protect them).    Posted:   Jul 1, 2017 - 8:04 AM     By:   WILLIAMDMCCRUM   (Member) Does this technologically mean that all previous images posted on forums will disappear? P.S. Oh, you've answered it already!    Posted:   Jul 1, 2017 - 8:14 AM     By:   Last Child   (Member) Also note, I gather that PB aren't going to let users download their images from their accounts. I dont see how they prevent downloading to your own devices. Maybe you mean coping to other host sites because their 3rd party blockage prevents it thru the image URLs. Otherwise they'd be blackmailing their customers outright.    Posted:   Jul 1, 2017 - 9:05 AM     By:   Justin Boggan   (Member) I used to use imageshack.us, then they switched to having paid accounts. Which I would have been okay with had I had the money to do so, however, I learned a year or two later -- without being warned in advance -- that they deleted all images hosted and started out fresh! That means you lost everything and had no chance to save it. So I said fuck them and moved on. I used Photobucket as an alternative for bigger images and GIF's, but never really used in much over the years. Now I used PostImage.org. It's still free and it gives you the option to delete images when you are done with them so they don't shoulder the cost of keeping them forever (or until they pull an imageshack...). For avatar contests in forums, for example, after voting has occurred and the image is no longer useful, I delete it.    Posted:   Jul 1, 2017 - 12:30 PM     By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member) I followed Justin Boggan's trajectory exactly--first Imageshack, then Photobucket, and now PostImage. Since I never used any of the sites to store images (just post them), no need to worry about lost images.    Posted:   Jul 4, 2017 - 5:47 PM     By:   WILLIAMDMCCRUM   (Member) Amazon and other such sales sites are badly wrecked by this: Amazon photos broken by 'ransom demand' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-40492668 No appropriate notice was given. Internet life is a kind of hell. There is continuous enslavement to the need to upgrade, update, seek competitive rates, etc.,etc.. You could fill 24/7 of your precious life being sucked into this, with no let-up. Not good. And then the endless spam, hacking threats, inane social media. If anyone has as little as five programs or two computers, or two social media accounts, it's endless provocation. And all those 'Take a moment to re new our new policies ...' every other bloody day. Where once one simply paid one's phone bill, now there's the continual checking to see if cheaper providers are available. They call this freedom of choice, but it's bondage. The real cost is in life hours wasted. No rest, no stay, lumberjacks walking on logs. There must be a better way.    Posted:   Jul 4, 2017 - 7:00 PM     By:   Essankay   (Member) Where once one simply paid one's phone bill, now there's the continual checking to see if cheaper providers are available. They call this freedom of choice, but it's bondage. The real cost is in life hours wasted. My brother lives in Texas where they've deregulated electricity and this is just what he describes. Multi-year contracts are required and trying to compare plans is, according to him, a nightmare. It's also brought with it all kinds of game-playing and scams by providers. One of his co-workers had their electricity contract hijacked by a different company (without their consent, of course) and when they finally wrested back control the original provider demanded a huge penalty for having broken their contract. They protested since it was all done without their knowledge so the provider just cut off the juice! It took months to straighten it out.    Posted:   Jul 4, 2017 - 9:04 PM     By:   Solium   (Member) Internet life is a kind of hell. There is continuous enslavement to the need to upgrade, update, seek competitive rates, etc.,etc.. You could fill 24/7 of your precious life being sucked into this, with no let-up. Not good. And then the endless spam, hacking threats, inane social media. If anyone has as little as five programs or two computers, or two social media accounts, it's endless provocation. And all those 'Take a moment to re new our new policies ...' every other bloody day. Then again unlimited free porn!    Posted:   Jul 4, 2017 - 9:09 PM     By:   Solium   (Member) I suspect within weeks PB will go back to it's old policy. These recent changes seem like suicide to me.    Posted:   Jul 5, 2017 - 4:46 PM     By:   Justin Boggan   (Member) They're IMDb-ing themselves.    Posted:   Jul 6, 2017 - 9:26 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) They're IMDb-ing themselves. I wonder how much they're traffic has dropped since they removed the forums?    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 1:04 AM     By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member) Photobucket's business model apparently hasn't fared too well since they started charging $399/year for third party image hosting (i.e., allowing you to post images that can be re-posted on sites like this one). As of three days ago, they are under "a new management team that wants to do the right thing." So, they have dropped their price to $1.99/month or $20/year, a 95% reduction. As an inducement to sign up, they have temporarily turned back on all of the previously posted images that were turned off last year. If you check out older threads, you can see the restorations. Photobucket also claims to have cut back on the ads on its website.    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 10:01 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Photobucket's business model apparently hasn't fared too well since they started charging $399/year for third party image hosting (i.e., allowing you to post images that can be re-posted on sites like this one). As of three days ago, they are under "a new management team that wants to do the right thing." So, they have dropped their price to $1.99/month or $20/year, a 95% reduction. As an inducement to sign up, they have temporarily turned back on all of the previously posted images that were turned off last year. If you check out older threads, you can see the restorations. Photobucket also claims to have cut back on the ads on its website. Surprised it took this long but it's a huge step in the right direction, though I still won't pay for image hosting.    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 10:05 AM     By:   Sean Nethery   (Member) Surprised it took this long but it's a huge step in the right direction, though I still won't pay for image hosting. Solium, dude, just pay for the image hosting. They're the only good thing in your posts!    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 10:10 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Surprised it took this long but it's a huge step in the right direction, though I still won't pay for image hosting. Solium, dude, just pay for the image hosting. They're the only good thing in your posts! Hahahaha! Thanks mate. I think.    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 10:16 AM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) Photobucket also claims to have cut back on the ads on its website. But isn't that also cutting off the largest potential revenue stream?    Posted:   May 19, 2018 - 1:05 PM     By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member) Photobucket also claims to have cut back on the ads on its website. ---------------------------------------------------------- But isn't that also cutting off the largest potential revenue stream? They didn't say they eliminated ads, just reduced them. Everything is a trade-off. Fewer ads probably means more page views, which should increase the amount that Photobucket can charge each advertiser. But fewer ads also means fewer advertisers. There is a sweet spot that will maximize ad revenue, and Photobucket is trying to find it. Same thing with reducing the price by 95%. Won't that reduce revenue by 95%? Not if it increases the number of site users by 20-fold.     Non-Film Score Discussion: Photobucket R.I.P. (?)    < 1  >   Go to page:  1   First Post    General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1

© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved. Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.