micha

*I* can't. Society does. Always has, and, for the foreseeable future, will continue to. At least modern society places quite a high value on life. And how about if you value your life so much YOU take some responsibility for your own actions too and don't just rely on society/engineering to wrap you in a safe little cocoon? Someone crossing a road in the middle of the night in the middle of nowhere in front of an oncoming car is asking for trouble. (Deserted roads are the #1 spot for drivers losing concentration). So tell me how people will get from A to B in Australia across thousands of miles of nearly *nothing*? In the still-slightly-civilised areas you'll get a petrol station and pub every couple hundred miles. In the Outback, you get what you bring. Reduce the lengths of roads? How about shrinking the planet then, Mr Wiseguy? Or stopping people from going places? We don't all live on a small island with a high population density (UK, Java?). Even in the UK there's plenty of areas which aren't built up enough for comprehensive public transport. In London itself it makes very little sense to own your own a vehicle and use it (people still do and I'm generally against it). In Australia in most areas it makes little sense for public transport because the population density is just too low to support it - even around cities the suburbs are too spread out and too thinly populated to cover so people have to use personal transport at least in order to GET to public transport. I'm outta this conversation, yes, I'm all for public transport and alternatives to roads and personal vehicles, but there's also practicalities involved and you're being militant about your views without considering when and where they can be applied.

I'm not "you guys" (never lived in America), and all I'm saying is that it may be possible to fix a couple of thousand miles of such things, not a couple of million miles (yes, the US has over 4 million miles of road infrastructure - I just looked it up) of such things. Areas which have a high number of incidents DEFINITELY get looked at and fixed. Areas which have had ONE FATALITY also get investigated. Areas which may be "unsafe" but have had no incidents funnily enough don't get looked at. (At least, this is true for Australia). You really expect the population to pay for hundreds of thousands of miles of road safety equipment (which will require periodic inspection and maintenance) for the 1 (* number pulled out of my cheeks) bicycles and 100 (* number also pulled out of my cheeks) cars which use those isolated stretches annually, just to avoid the potential of that one careless biker and driver coming together? As I said, it's a question of distance and population density. You can't use the same rules everywhere.

That video is rather misleading - visible light cameras are notoriously bad for distinguishing light from dark; a human drivers' eyes would perform significantly better in that situation. That being said; _IS_ that car being navigated by those cameras (in which case there's a huge case to be made to the manufacturers for using insufficient sensors). For night-time driving, it -SHOULD- have IR or LIDAR or similar. The potential for driverless cars to have significantly better sensory input than a human is immense. 360deg vision not obstructed by the cabin with multiple different viewpoints. From a software perspective, a driverless car should use significantly different algorithms depending on whether it's driving in heavy traffic (ie, following other vehicles) or whether it's on a near-empty road by itself. The latter has significantly higher potential for non-traffic incidents and such the car should monitor a much wider arc and distance ahead for anything which moves. @YNM: I can understand some of your viewpoints about reducing the dangers of mixing vehicular traffic with pedestrian traffic, but what may seem doable in a high-density low-distance environment is infeasible in a low-density high-distance one. You can almost always engineer something to be better or safer, but until we live in a post-scarcity world, cost is (unfortunately) always going to be the major factor (funnily enough, only when us mortals are involved; never seems to be an issue when our ruling classes or their immediate sycophants are involved) in any improvement works. As to @LordFerret's original posting (ie, Mathematics becoming sentient) - I think it would make more sense to compare it to DNA. That is, it'll be at the core of AI and ultimately driving its shape and behaviours, but it won't be sentient in and of itself.

Hi @Wolf Baginski, I've never seen this error before (and I just double-checked using the latest MM (3.0.6), KSP (1.4.1), and Corvus (1.3.2). Thanks for the report, but without version numbers, platforms, and/or full logs I'm not even sure how to start looking into this. Sorry.

Marked as compatible with KSP1.4x. Is there any interest in having this mod localised?

Feature improvement suggestions: - move the GameData/Squad folder somewhere, and mklink/j it into every new GameData - saves nearly another 500MB per GameData. - use the same trick for the CKAN/downloads folder - only keep one set of downloaded mods (another potentially large disk-space hog) Really neat idea, but personally I'm a bit wary to use it in my "production" install given some of the reported issues and the author's perceived lack of recognition of the severity of some of these ("coded this while sleepy", "it's only a tiny bug", "didn't bother checking which button the user pressed" etc). Considering this tool is altering the filesystem on my PC, that's a bit scary sounding... (yes, I know I can audit the code, but I won't do that for -every- version I download). So @Icecovery: it would help if you could take bug reports a little bit more seriously - I'm sure you do when you actually code fixes for them, I meant your language here.

Thanks @Apollo13. Sure, the DLC adds a "Gemini", but for all the people who haven't (yet) got the DLC, I just released v1.3.2,. It has some minor tweaks from v1.3.1, but most importantly I've updated the metadata to mark it as compatible with KSP 1.4.x. Please see the release thread for details.

DARNIT! I did initially see that thread, read it, then went looking for yours as that one looked dodgy as heck. Looks like my copy-paste to update my post still had the old clipboard info in it. Will update ASAP. Thanks!

Done; I've added a link to an album in the second post. I just made this (looks a touch messy once the launcher stack is decoupled, but worked well):

I've just added support for AnimatedDecouplers to Corvus_CF to fix a long-standing runtime warning (can't remember how I found out about this, it was through Google). This DOUBLES your supported mods list Might be good to link your GitHub on the first post, @Starwaster. People who can click on "Hide Contents" before starting to type are winners... However, conversely (and I just checked!) it would be good to put a link to this forum post into your README on GitHub.. Thanks for making and maintaining this

Well, it is at least another couple of hours before 1.4.1 drops... :-D :-D :-D

Offtopic nitpick: Not true. I know for a fact (because I've had to work on a couple) that automated crash logs and telemetry DOES get looked at. We take stability fairly seriously... YMMV. Regardless, IMHO, it should always be OPT-IN, no matter how "useful" the developer/publisher of a piece of software may think a particular set of data collection is (either for themselves or their customers), and there should always be a way for customers to disable any such functionality. Standard Disclaimer: These opinions are my own and in no way reflect the opinions of any employers, past, present, or future, that I may be employed by.

"reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, display, perform, prepare derivative works based on, or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part;" Many mods do exactly these things. Furthermore, a lot of mods use APIs (or have figured out -how- to use such APIs) by reverse engineering the game files rather than only relying on "the official API [and documentation] the game is offering for modding purposes". Also, the "meaning" of a legal statement can only be determined in a court of law. I very much doubt it would ever come to that, but as I said, for some people, the uncertainty is enough. And -that- is the reason for a lot of the uproar here. Personally I couldn't care less (and I maintain a few mods), but hopefully this clarifies to the OP what the main issue is that some people have with the new EULA.

I think for most people the bigger issue with the new EULA is that it effectively gives Take Two ownership of all player-generated content, AND that it makes modding the game technically illegal despite Squad and Take Two having stated that they want to continue to support modders. Other games published by Take Two continue to have a modding community, under the same EULA, but that's contravening the EULA whether or not it's currently being tolerated. Legally it's shaky grounds (and yes, I realize that it's hugely unlikely for Take Two to go after an individual modder, I'm just saying..) and without explicit amendments to the EULA to allow modding, that's where we stand. These clauses are fairly standard for modern game companies, but is a change and a very big deal for some mod authors. Ultimately it might (or already has) dissuade people from modding this game, which is something that has had a huge impact on the games' popularity. The making personal backups/copies issue is unenforceable/minor at best. While the removal of the "Send data" checkbox and additional sending of data is also a concern to many, this is easily solvable with a properly configured firewall.

I'll probably wait and see; overall the mission builder sounds like it could be fun, especially playing other people's missions, but on the whole I prefer charting my own course and doing my own thing. The actual parts I'm not that interested in; don't see the point in just having historical parts instead of additional Kerbal-unique parts. There's plenty of high quality mods recreating historical parts already so why compete with them? Some of the new parts are also too integrated for my liking - rolling more and more functionality into a single part removes the building block aspects of KSP.

Hmm, looks like it's time to block KSP from any and all network accesses. Shame, as I really don't mind providing basic usage information to the developers in order for them to improve their products or see their own usage patterns, but I draw the line at this data being used by random undisclosed third parties with dubious data protection procedures. The GDPR is about to kick in in the EU, so Squad had better consider re-enabling the data communications checkbox and clarify what data is collected, by whom, and what it's going to be used for, irrespective of the new EULA's, or they could open themselves up to a whole world of (financial) hurt.

Hi @Ablelives, thanks for your kind comments. I'm currently in the process of getting settled in Japan, so it'll still be a little while before I can resume development. I've never experienced these issues before, nor heard of anyone else having them, but then I've never tried the "release" feature on the KEES experiments myself, I just 'G'rab them directly from the PEC. Could you please detail what version of the mod you're using (as in, not the DLL, but the actual mod - for example, did you download from CKAN?) I'll take a look as soon as I get some time. Thanks!

Hi canisin, Glad you like it and thanks for the feedback. I'm currently in the process of moving to Japan but once there hope to pick up development again. Thanks, - Micha.

Hi Andrea, Thanks for the bug report; I haven't had time to look into it yet, and probably wont' for a little while yet, but I've noted it down on the GitHub tracker.. Cheers, - Micha.

Hi Galimba, Thanks for the kind words. The general idea is at least 3 launches (although of course you could try to do it in an all-in-one launch using MOAR BOOSTERS): 1) Launch the lab and dock it to your station. 2) Launch a station mission carrying the lab equipment using the Lab Equipment Container. The desired lab equipment must be loaded in the VAB. Dock this to your station and you can now install the Lab Equipment into the Lab using the right-click menu (I can't check right now but it's either by right-clicking on the lab itself, or on the Lab Equipment Container). 3) Launch a station resupply mission with an "ESC" container. Load the desired experiment(s) into the ESC in the VAB. Dock this to your station and you can now install the experiment using the right-click menu (again, not sure whether it's the menu of the lab or the ESC). Please note that Lab Equipment can only be installed into the correct Lab, and an Experiment can only be installed into the correct Equipment, so if you take the wrong Equipment or Experiment to your station it may not be able to be installed. You might want to try a dummy test on the launchpad before doing actual launches. If you still have issues could you attach some screenshots showing the exact problem? Thanks, - Micha.

KDEX Continued Kerbal Dust Experiment v1.11 for KSP1.3.1 A one-part science mod with individualised science results for lots of places. Originally by masTerTorch.

The NEOS mods also take time and are aimed at long-running orbital experiments.

If anybody wants to test it and provide feedback, I've pushed a new DLL which supports KAC integration. Whenever an experiment is started, a KAC alarm will be generated which will trigger 30s before the experiment or experiment step is completed. Simply download the DLL and replace the current one in NehemiahInc/NE_Science_Common/Plugins with the new one.

Send me the files or even better create a git pull request and I'll add them for the next version.

And now available via CKAN Please note that this is not an automatic update. The mod is now called "Nehemiah Engineering Orbital Science" and conflicts with the older ones. Also, CKAN now only offers the full install, if you want only part of the mod, either download it directly from GitHub, or delete the relevant sub-folders from the install. The old ones will be removed from CKAN at some point in the not too distant future.