puravida1976

No good news, sadly. As long as things continue to deteriorate in the world, I don’t expect anything to get done. Nobody wants to work, which means I’d have to do it myself, and I don’t have the time right now –BECAUSE OF everything going on in the world.

Only the CIA-funded corps have people to work, but they are substandard developers anyway. So, either good people start to work again or I get to it when I can.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by puravida1976.

@jamesbanzini I would have to take a look but do not have time, at the moment. When I do have time, I will get a copy of their software and take a look at their integration.

My initial guess would be that they are using the free account level using the “embedded” method, which limits per domain rather than per account. That way, virtually unlimited domains could enjoy a reasonable number of free captures each month.

But, I would need to confirm that theory.

Hello,

It is very likely that there is a conflict with more recent versions of PHP and/or WordPress. At some point, we may pick up support on this software again.

It has been impossible to find anyone who is willing to work and produces good quality over the past year. I hope things improve soon.

-B

@ku3hn Must have replied to another ticket. I looked up this specific one and replied just now.

Continued in the support portal.

Thank you for understanding and the encouragement. I would love to get back to focusing on STW. My developers have dwindled this year, due to all the 2020 ridiculousness, and those left are 110% focused on my other venture currently. However, we’re catching up, and I hope that soon they will be freed up enough to start back work on STW tasks.

I will DEFINITELY keep you in mind for testing. I appreciate the offer! ??

Best regards,

Brandon

Hello.

Yes, but we were about TWO YEARS behind, going into 2020. We were nearly caught up, but now with the lockdowns and the communist agendas playing out; who knows?? Only the large Elite-owned corporations have the liberty to focus on making progress. The rest of us must focusing on survival and freedom.

Anyway, we are once again getting caught up on other ventures (plus fighting the war). So, maybe we’ll have time to work on this before end of 2020. Time will tell.

-Brandon
p.s. I wish the Satanic Elite weren’t enslaving humanity and murdering children, but it is what it is. We can no longer ignore them without a fight. ??

@ukcw My 2cents here: With the “Embedded” type of integration used by this plugin, all providers will behave in a similar fashion. They will usually send a temporary placeholder for anything not already stored in THEIR cache (i.e. requested by someone else recently). When automatically saving “whatever” image is returned, this means the placeholder will be saved.

In the case of ShrinkTheWeb, we provide a few ways around this:

1. On queued or errors with a URL (invalid, broken, timed out, etc), our server will serve the placeholder image with an HTTP status code of 404. If Yannick adds a small check for this status code and DOES NOT cache that image, the correct image would be cached on the next attempt after successful capture. This is the simplest workaround, and this method “may” work for other providers as well (many have copied our API behavior over the past decade).

2. Using our sample code for the “Advanced” method would allow for inline status checking and more control over caching (already handled automatically in our sample code and fully tested).

3. We also provide a third way, using the “Notification Callback” feature (available with “Embedded” or “Advanced” methods) that will PUSH the captured image to the end-user storage/cache as soon as it’s captured, behind-the-scenes. This way will overwrite any prior cached image with the valid one being PUSHED.

For options 2 and 3, there is the additional requirement of putting a callback script on end-user servers, so that would add a bit of work to Yannick’s part.

I hope that insight helps. ??

Cheers!

@jackdewey Awesome! That will likely fix the issue for @docmario. If not, then I am happy to investigate further. ??

Hi @docmario… It looks like you correctly added your domains for “Embedded” use, which is great. This means that Yannick used the “Simple Method” to integrate, which is OK but requires a little more setup for the users and doesn’t provide quite as much security. However, it is an acceptable way to integrate. I’m just mentioning the difference.

In your case, I suspect that the issue is related to SSL/HTTPS, as that seems to be a growing reason that screenshot services stop working for many. That said, ShrinkTheWeb DOES support SSL/HTTPS requests. The key is to ensure that the link uses HTTPS requests on HTTPS secured end user sites.

@jackdewey Firstly, I greatly appreciate your consideration to integrate STW as an option for your users. I think they will also appreciate your efforts. When you integrated, did you account for end-user sites that use SSL? In those cases, our sample code will detect that and prefix “Simple Method” requests with HTTPS instead of HTTP. This generally overcomes any issues of that type.

From prior discussions between us, I believe that your plugin always uses the embedded style of using request links, and that is OK. However, I wanted to point out the added benefit of using our sample code for a more robust integration that caches images locally (reduces usage that avoids having users hitting limits). There is also an easy way to have those cached images PUSHED to the end-users server, securely, the instant that captures are completed.

I am available to answer any questions about this HTTPS issue or on making a tighter integration. I am happy to assist.

@docmario For now, I’m thinking that @jackdewey may need to make a slight modification to the integration to get it working on your site. IF I am wrong about that, we can dig deeper and figure it out with you! Cheers ??

@docmario Most issues stem from not adding the proper domain or IP to the “Allowed Referrers” (account security area). However, we have been working diligently on a massive roll-out of our new website, so there’s a small chance that we also broke something.

So, I’ll take a look at your account settings and involve my team to dig further, if that’s not the quick fix. I’ll get back to you shortly. ??

@ukcw Hello. In this case, it is PagePeeker that needs to fix the issue; not Link Library.

The error indicates that their SSL certificate does not support their free domain. They will need to take action to support HTTPS for their free service.

Cheers!

@fitoma It’s no skin off my back if the author chooses not to integrate our service, sending a bunch of free users (most of which will never need to upgrade). However, YES, I am not above calling people out when they avoid supporting the real deal, like ShrinkTheWeb. I pushed Amazon Web Services out of the screenshot market back in 2008/2009 and spent a fortune to provide the best service over the past decade. I’ve learned that it is sometimes necessary to point out better alternatives, when the masses may not be aware that they struggle for no reason.

The web design is irrelevant. I updated the design back in 2015 but never got around to deploying it. Regardless, no other screenshot provider compared/compares.

I remember now that your reasoning was that you did not want to send users to a service that required registering. Then, a few months later, Thumbshots went under. Then, the next provider you chose went under. Now, another one ceased and several have approached me to buy them out.

Over the next week, I am deploying the updated design that I made back in 2015 and many will probably complain that it looks outdated (since designed almost 5 years ago), but that’s not what is important. Everyone has an opinion on good design and most people do not really know a good design when they see one.

—–
Yes, registration is still required (as theft of service is a major issue, which also justifies such a harsh policy). I prefer to have a harsh policy rather than go out of business giving away $25,000 USD worth of screenshots every month.

The default size is 120×90. It is required to send size parameters to get other sizes. There are six(6) default sizes available for free accounts. The pricing model will be updated with this 2015 update and will include more of the features in the free account, with lower pricing across the board for premium accounts.

The more relevant question is why did Yannick torture users of this plugin by constantly integrating fly-by-night screenshot providers. I reached out to Yannick over 5 years ago to offer to personally assist him integrating ShrinkTheWeb, the leader in this niche. I followed up on several occasions, but Yannick always said he had no time.

That is not the real reason, though, because integrating STW is quick and easy. Plus, Yannick always took the time (that he didn’t have supposedly) to integrate all of the inferior services.

Ask yourself WHY he would do that. It is NOT in your best interests, as the users of this plugin would have gained far more with a ShrinkTheWeb integration. https://shrinktheweb.com

It didn’t hurt STW at all, but it’s the users of this plugin who lose.