2Abendsegler

@zookeepertx It is always good to put the feet up and wait a bit. The problems will be solved over time and the pages will work as before. I mean, you don't have to understand everything of the thousand things you mentioned. Many of us, including myself also, don't understand everything. Wait a bit, the time will come again, that it's just about caching.

Auf den Webseiten wird schwer gearbeitet um Datenschutz Verordnungen umzusetzen. Es funktionieren einige Dinge (manchmal) nicht oder stehen nur verzögert zur Verfügung. Die Buttons zum Editieren oder Löschen von Logs benötigen vielleicht etwas Zeit bis man drauf klicken kann und etwas passiert. Ich meine, man kann immer drauf klicken, aber es passiert zuerst mal nichts. Bei mir dauert es im Durchschnitt vielleicht so 3 Sekunden. In dieser Zeit kann ich einige Male drauf klicken ohne dass etwas passiert. Wenn es das nicht ist, dann kann es auch damit zusammenhängen, dass du die Cookies auf dem neuen blauen Banner nicht alle akzeptiert hast. Kannst du dich an dieses blaue Banner unten am Bildschirmrand erinnern? Ansonsten fällt mir auch nichts ein. Es wären vielleicht noch Angaben hilfreich wo du genau bist, welcher Browser oder so.

Well, my dear, as so often you are ignoring the constant changes on the webpages. I know this is difficult to understand, so I'm telling you. Nice day. Oh no, it still doesn't work. Maybe you should turn off your blockers, my dear. For example with blocking of cookiebot.com does it run, but without not.

Well, my dear, as so often you are ignoring the constant changes on the webpages. I know this is difficult to understand, so I'm telling you. Nice day.

Little Bug: Both buttons "Edit log" and "Delete log" have no function, nothing happens with a click. After about 3 seconds both buttons work with a click. If there is no function, the button should not be selectable, that is the least. Nobody knows that you still have to wait. And maybe 3 seconds are certainly too long these days? PS: Maybe you can apply for an exemption not to have to implement the GDPR yet? I mean, it should have been implemented long ago anyway. Why not wait until you can provide a system that is not a disaster? [Edit] Firefox 71.0 (64-Bit) Win 10

Die neue kleine Version 0.10.2 zum GC little helper II steht hier zur Verfügung. Sie kommt auch per automatischem Update. Details zu den Anpassungen gibt es im Changelog. Das Blockieren von cookiebot.com ist für den Betrieb des GClh zur Zeit nicht mehr erforderlich. Liebe Grüße Frank

Schau mal hier, vielleicht reicht das schon. Ist aber auf Englisch.

That is against the TOU.

That is not complete. I can save for example a cache listing with all the logs data are showing me of the website for personal use. This data are allowed of the user, that's why I can see them. If I look to the website or save the website to my hard drive for later looking, is up to me. This is the main functionality, yes. But sometimes an other webpage is loaded in the background. Example: In order to be able to display further information about a selected cache on the older map during the pop-up, the cache listing of the selected cache must be load.

I said: "I can download all cache listings completely with all the logs. And it's allowed for my personal purpose." That is the law in Europe in GDPR. And that was starting point for the california thing. Of course, I can not put something of this data into the internet or on other public positions. But I can use it on my private laptop. I am an advocate of my privacy data, but the discussion here would limit my freedom, if it would come true. But it won't come. Yes, I know. I have to live with that. If you defend your opinion, it is often the case.

... and c:geo, of course.

I agree, only the developers of the scripts are not liable, of course, because the responsibility rests with the user. I know it of GClh. And the others would do well to do the same. And now we're back to the user and not by apps or companies, which use private data. I, as a user, can download data. I can download all cache listings completely with all the logs. And it's allowed for my personal purpose. And i don't have to delete the data if someone decides not to make it public anymore. And that's the whole point with scripts.

Sorry, but that what you want is not part of the GDPR. Try it, to request this by GS. Maybe you found someone which implement it.

You do not understand the core. You cannot determine, where your data can be used, but only whether. If you allow it, you allow it to all browser activity. And c:geo does not keep your data, but a user. And he was allowed to do that too. And he can even do it after you said that the data should be deleted. Because it is simply the user's decision whether to delete your data or not. Like your data on my hard drive.

This is not right. At the time c:geo take the data, it was allowed by the user. It is, as if I save the website locally on my hard drive. If I do that, according to your definition, I would also violate privacy.

No. ? If you block your profile statistic, a script can not see it. If you don't block it, the script can see it. It is easy. c:geo does the same.

? This is no secret and can be explained by the chronological sequence of the development, the API and the ToU. It is like all or almost all scripts do it, you know. But think a minute about it, instead wailing. ? The scripts can only see the data like a browser do it. That is the core you don't want to admit. If you block your profile statistic, a script can not see it. If you don't block it, the script can see it. It is easy.

Hm ... there is not really a big difference for me. GClh works like c:geo and operate like a browser. After receiving data, GClh build the data into the webpage.

You don't have to be interested in the script or the scripts. It was just an example from my practice to explain you the situation. And I had and have no intention of saying, that c:geo is not scraping data, in violation with the ToU. If you had read my articles carefully, you would not have missed that either.

Certainly not, because c:geo and GClh only processes data that the logged in user can also view via his browser. That is nothing forbidden. Maybe, the blocked official partner apps processes with more data? Yes, but in 2010 and the following years there are no API. And as I started with GClh development in 2016, I actually had no desire to throw everything away.

@HHL That's true. But if GS hasn't provided a usable API for years, that's not surprising. What should c:geo or the GC little helper II also do, throw away the entire development and do everything new, because there is finally a usable API. I think that's too much to ask.

Do you want c:geo to be blocked by GS? Why that? c:geo only processes data that the logged in user can also view via his browser. There are no GDPR violations.

Yes, maybe the cookiebot stuff is implemented incorrectly. Other possibilities are, the cookiebot stuff is paid junk, or the cookiebot stuff is also supposed to hinder or prevent the execution of scripts, or ...

Eine mögliche Lösung, der seit dem 31.12.2019 bestehenden Probleme mit Scripten, ist wohl die Blockierung der Adresse "cookiebot.com". Arnos hat hier beschrieben wie man dazu vorgehen kann. Frohe Neues Jahr. Frank

Eine mögliche Lösung der Probleme mit den Scripten ist wohl die Blockierung der Adresse "cookiebot.com". Arnos hat hier beschrieben wie man dazu vorgehen kann.