[ravnostic]

It’s not in Godaddy’s TOS (they’re probably big enough that they just don’t care.)

I can’t say if they really care, but: “You shall at all times use the Services as a conventional and/or traditional website. […] Specifically by way of example and not as a limitation, you shall not use the Services as: (i) a repository or instrument for placing or storing archived files; and/or (ii) placing or storing material that can be downloaded through other websites. “

http://www.godaddy.com/agreements/showdoc.aspx?pageid=HOSTING_SA

In context with the rest of the paragraph (below), Godaddy is saying it’s not designed as a back up service, and it assumes no liability as such. So long as I don’t impair them, they don’t care–they told me I wasn’t supposed to use them for that service; and if I’ve been hacked or abused or otherwise wronged, it’s not their fault. Typical lawyerese for ‘look, if you have a problem, it’s not our fault, and we’ll use this TOS agreement to show in court that we’re not responsible.’

The bit about ‘placing or storing material that can be downloaded through other websites’? If it’s on the interweb, and has an extension that starts with ‘http’, it’s downloadable via other websites, less a whole bunch of security measures, of which isn’t provided through flickr or picasa or any number of other such type sites (witness Trudy’s “Barbie” shot, for example) that most everybody never even thinks about, lest consider.

It’s protection for them against liability–after some 7 years of my use, through the popularity of “Myspace” and well along thereafter, I think if they had a problem, I’d know by now. They don’t want to mess with small-fish players–they want to protect against big-fish culprits, or the truly corrupted abusers that might exist (pedo’s, etc).

I, for one, am not overly worried about it.

Same with the whole ‘i-google’ thing; it’s not in their best interest to steal, copy, or use commercially the images anyone posts there. But they’ve got a nice portion of their TOS describing all sorts of situations where 1)they aren’t liable and 2)if you use them, and get abused in any way/sort/fashion–it’s not their bad–it’s yours. There’s another thread regarding that here, and elsewhere on the web as well.

CYA–welcome to corporate America. It’s the damned lawyers, I tell ya, that make all this legalese necessary.

Go Daddy?s shared hosting servers are not an archive and Go Daddy shall have no liability to you or any other person for loss, damage or destruction of any of your content. The Services are not intended to provide a PCI (Payment Card Industry) compliant environment and therefore should not be considered as one. Go Daddy shall have no liability to you or any other person for your use of the Services in violation of these terms. You shall at all times use the Services as a conventional and/or traditional website. You shall not use the Service in any way, in Go Daddy?s sole discretion, that shall impair the functioning or operation of Go Daddy?s services or equipment. Specifically by way of example and not as a limitation, you shall not use the Services as: (i) a repository or instrument for placing or storing archived files; and/or (ii) placing or storing material that can be downloaded through other websites. You acknowledge and agree that Go Daddy has the right to carry out a forensic examination in the event of a compromise to your server or account

My translation: “We’re a website provider, not an archival repository. We’re not set up for legal archival data, so use at your own risk. If you lose your stuff, it’s not our fault. If your stuff gets seen, it’s not our fault. If your stuff gets hacked, it’s not our fault.

Usage shall be considered as a website only. If you screw us or our web operations, we’ll nix you, and back up our doing so with hard data. Especially if you’ve put up stuff that someone saw somewhere else, that was [potentially] illegal and of which we could be considered complicit in providing–in which case, we’ll use technology to show we’re only the repository, and hold no blame in the matter, so don’t blame us if you screw up and have a problem.”

//much ado about nothing IYAM and/or IMHO and YMMV. I still recommend it as another way to back up data. Been working for me for many years now.

NO offense intended, sleeping (or anyone else, FTM), these are just my thoughts on the matter.

[ravnostic]

I don’t know how much most providers care, but using a web hosting account as file storage for backup purposes (unconnected to a web site) is, at least in many cases, a violation of their TOS, so I would be extremely wary of relying on it.

It’s not in Godaddy’s TOS (they’re probably big enough that they just don’t care.)

Thanks, Yugoboy for the Kodak tip! The more backups, the better.

[ravnostic]

I guess my comment got eatted; but I echo Kes; personal stats: good. Real life: more important. When there’s time for enhancements, it will be. Waiting is.

[ravnostic]

Redundancy -having more than one backup location- is the only way to really protect your files entirely.

Ayep. The more, the merrier.

When my parents had the house fire, and lost pretty much everything in the garage (read that, the family letters dating to the late 1700’s, the pictures to the 1800’s, the keepsakes, etc), the “I’ll get to doing that someday” attitude got dropped rather quickly. The few letters I salvaged are now on CD-ROMs among multiple family members, as well as on my lappytop, backup drive, and godaddy acct.

//I totally feel ya, kes on the 10 gig limit. I haven’t exceeded it (I back up only my VERY favorite raw images plus personal things), but I’m SO glad I have the additional storage with the extra space when I need it (150Gb with deluxe).

I know if I didn’t treat the space as a valued property and just uploaded to my heart’s content, I’d be out of space already (there’s 272 Gigs on my TB backup). I keep saying I’ll get around to cleaning up the blurries, duplicates (or nearly so’s), etc; but then–that’s what my mom said about copying the family documents before the fire. It’s an easy attitude to re-adopt, unfortunately. 🙄 {–guilty as charged–}ravnostic

[ravnostic]

Depending on your file size requirements, buy a domain from godaddy for twelve bucks a year (or one of the cheaper ones–.us is $5) Comes with free hosting, but you don’t have to use to build a website–use it as a backup. Filezilla makes it easy to use. Godaddy gives you 10 Gigs of storage for nothing more than the domain charge. Though due to my multi-domain needs I pay for deluxe hosting, I post all my pictures in farktography from there–I’m up to 5.6 gigs of data after 6 or 7 years now (there’s other stuff, of course as well, family pictures, documents, etc.). If you want to pony up for deluxe, sign on for a year, then wait for an e-mail for 30 to 40 percent off, and extend it out when you get it.

If you build a webpage with ‘free hosting’, however, it will have google-ads on it–gotta pay to get rid of those. But as a place to store your ‘stuff’–it’s the bomb. Has unlimited bandwidth, too.

//just make sure a family member knows the password to access it, or include it in your will (God forbid, of course, but should you pass on, someone needs to know how to get in–godaddy is a pain in the ass to get into in survivorship situations (I know–I worked there for a time)–it’s easier if someone just knows what they need.)

Works from any computer; backed up in Chandler Az and Dallas, Tx–short of a nu-keu-lar war, your data is saved. Good for wills, marriage certs, etc. as well.

//ironically, my most viewed data are pictures not from farktography, but from the photoshop contests (8 of 10). Go figure. 🙁

[ravnostic]

I personally thought the spirit of the theme was to just stop wherever you are when the minutes run out, and try to get the best shots you can come up with, given the hand you’ve been dealt. That being said, there’s no way that anyone would be able to check and see if you followed the rules, but when I go out for this I’m expecting to get some real random images…

It’s kind of what I envisioned the theme was about, as well, but by truck I’m 15 minutes from downtown Scottsdale; from Rio Salado Park where I got the picture I recently pm’d to Kes and one of this week’s entries; from downtown Tempe if I wait for rush hour (25 in a 35 zone); from a number of interesting places where I often go on spur-of-the-moment picture taking sessions.

//Not-so-much interesting places if I walk, but I don’t do much of that 1) in July in Az and 2) in my neighborhood at times when it isn’t 105+ degrees with a nice DSLR.

One more question–should the pictures be from one outing (I’m guessing ‘yes’, but to clarify….)

[ravnostic]

Plama, is this intended to be something of a ‘random imagery’ of ‘wherever you go, there you are!’ type theme, or can I do 25 in a 35 zone to stretch the minutes to an area I know I can get some sort of decent photographs of interesting things I know will be there?

//edit–also re-read the original suggestion thread, and wish to confirm the o.k. on the use of panoramics

[ravnostic]

Thanks Farktographer and CISS

CISS; I had already decided it I was going to do this, to start out with the basics of what I wanted and implement them early–so I didn’t have to play catchup later. I did use w3schools; I’ve used them for HTML for years. I have a book on CSS that I referenced, but it’s basic, and 5 years old, so I found myself searching the CSS portion of W3 while building.

I’m going to do a few changes (mostly related to file sizes, but linkages, etc, as well) before going much further, but I’ll want to link my blog in at some point (which has been live for years, but rarely used–another thing I want to get back into), pick up on Javascript (just found out my company offers classes on that!–for FREE!!), etc., etc., etc. Also noticed that here at work their older IE browsers aren’t formating the CSS properly. I’m going to continue focusing on the latest brower protocols; there’s some stuff I haven’t done yet that I’ll need to do to get the site ‘certified’ as ‘proper’. Work, work, work! But now that OT is gone–I’ll have time. If I can keep from getting behind my lenses too often. 🙂

I’ll need a more abundant supply of round tuits. 😉

[ravnostic]

Not there, plama. I cleared my cache of download history first, to make sure my browser (Chrome) didn’t ‘find’ them because I’d looked earlier.

[ravnostic]

Actually, IIRC, anyone can apply for time with it–and if the science is deemed worthy, you might just get it. Which begs the question, pulled from an earlier debate regarding taking pictures versus making pictures (when someone else pulls the trigger after all the hard work–settings, composition, et al was done by another–who really made the picture), and takes it to a whole new level. 🙂

//oh yeah–I’d want credit for it. It’s the friggen H.u.b.b.l.e.!!!

[ravnostic]

Well. I’ll. Be. Damned.

So I’m going through the contest folders in my archives, as some people at work have been asking about the photos I take and wanting to see them, and I’m going to build a (very simple and nothing fancy) web page with some of my favorites (whether they did well in the contests, or not.)

And I get to the file for “Travel photography II (or was it III–it was recently)” and there are the pictures from my Colorado trip.

Damn, all that stress–for nothing. I just put them into a ‘Travel’ folder for fark, instead of my general travels.

Shiat.

Oh, well. Carry on. Still appreciate the helpfulness of all of you’ts–this community rocks.

[ravnostic]

Foliage is a pain in the arse to get down to fark-sizes.

713 files (double, since I shoot raw and jpg), to be exact. There’s a third folder that didn’t get recovered, but they were the p+s images after my DSLR died–and I really didn’t care for them much, anyway. I’ve become a DSLR snob–the lack of control in p/s drove me nuts.

[ravnostic]

I gotta add CISS is right, U-Man; you do fantastic portraiture work.

Speaking of b’s:

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/jul/13/shore02sml.jpg

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/jul/13/shore03sml.jpg

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/jul/13/shore05sml.jpg

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/jul/13/shore06sml.jpg

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2011/jul/13/shore08sml.jpg

Contest is off to a nice start–lovely first entries, all!

[ravnostic]

Thanks YB; no hard feelings about your links? Pandora was the first I clicked to, and I’ve downloaded from the dowload.cnet before, so I tried there first. Since it worked, I didn’t need look further. Your assistance, however is appreciated, as was everyone who had suggestions.

Bonus: my DPP program ‘remembered’ the images so I don’t have to re-post-process anything. Which is a nice bonus. And the recovery allowed me to use the raw image to condense further one of the pics I’m using this week to a smaller, more fark-friendly size (I’d not noticed that the ‘small’ file was a whopping 189k–too close to the limit for comfort.

What’s up with trees making files so dayumed large, anyway? Anything with trees I just can’t get down to decent sizes–at the lowest jpeg conversion quality (which is still plenty good enough), it’s STILL 150k. Only tree pictures seem to behave this way…

[ravnostic]

no worries, O. I’m thrifty, but if another option didn’t come along, I’da paid.

At the end of the recovery, a window came up to ask for a donation (and which gets you a program that will allow you to make sure when you’ve deleted something, it WONT be retreivable, as in if you sold your laptop or something. Or at least an email link to said program.)

I’m cheap, but I gave ’em $10, which I could afford at this time. The pics are worth more, but I’m glad I could contribute something, as the program did what I needed it to do.

[Author]

Posts