Starman4308

The thread author clearly does not share that opinion, and in this case, I feel you've derailed it long enough with paranoid suspicions that if the thread author wants the rails put back on, he has that right.

That bit of the EULA is likely going to get torn to shreds unless Take Two demonstrates that they put a good faith effort into securing the data. It's also no different from Papa John's pizza storing my credit card info for easy checkout.

It would still be a PR problem. Best guess is everything's locked down in an encrypted server to which few people have access, specifically to minimize any risk of a data breach. If they are sloppy about data protection, there's a good chance they'd be on the hook for damages.

You can literally be sued by stockholders if they feel you are deliberately not making as much money as possible. Regardless, as to whether the EULA would permit them to sweep for your personal info instead of merely storing what is voluntarily sent for things like microtransactions... my suspicion is that would not hold up in court. It would also be an utter PR disaster for them. If you want to be really sure, either reject the license terms, send Take Two notification thereof, and cease to use the licensed software, or hire a lawyer. And not a lawyer with a degree from Google University.

There's a good chance one or two of them is a perigee kick. The Fregat stage has a burn time of 22.5 minutes, long enough for serious Oberth losses if trying to go straight from LEO to GTO.

One other issue is that the CoL indicator is a bit misleading. Sure, your lift producing parts are in the back, but there's a lot of drag produced forwards of that that the CoL indicator misses. I suspect the easiest solution is to put a reaction wheel or two towards the front, both as ballast and for control authority. EDIT: What really needs to be looked at is Center of Pressure, which is the sum of both lift and drag, but KSP doesn't show that.

A few things over the past few days: My first approach to Saturn. Yes, I know the rings are missing. Turns out I needed to manually upgrade to a version of Kopernicus not on CKAN for compatibility with RSSVE. It's since been sorted out. Voyager III will be coming around for its next close pass in... about a couple years. The lesson learned there (never brake to the absolute minimum for capture around a gas giant: your period will be absurd!) was applied to Voyager V, which is now orbiting Jupiter with a planned Io encounter soonish (still in several months). I closed down Vandenburg for the most part: the commsats were getting tedious, and I was all too often getting low-inclination contracts that Vandenburg can't handle due to having no eastward azimuth. To both replace Vandenburg, and to add to my eastwards-launch capability, I opened up Tanegashima for business, with an inaugural launch of communication relays to Mars. Only the main transfer bus has the Pioneer-class antenna capable of remaining in contact with Earth indefinitely, so in the event that the main transfer bus and the Arean lunar surveyor are both out of contact with Earth, the network may experience a shortish blackout. I also launched an unmanned lander towards Mars out of KSC. While I can probably kOS the landing, it may not be able to return scientific data until the relays are in place. I really like using the STAR 37FM SRM for this sort of work, though unfortunately it's mostly been used on the dark side of Earth (which will hopefully change once used to launch towards Venus or Mercury!) I then spent most of this night designing both a Saturn V copy, and what I'm calling the Saturn IIIB. The IIIB is almost 1900 tons, using a trio of F-1A engines, then a trio of Russian NK-43 closed-cycle kerolox engines, then the good old S-IVB. While the NK-43s don't have the specific impulse of J-2 engines, it's hardly terrible (something like 340 sec IIRC), they're much cheaper, and provide more thrust for a pretty comparable mass. The Saturn IIIA would just have the S-IVB upper stage deleted, with RCS thrusters added to the second stage. While it won't be enough for a single-rocket launch of a lunar landing mission, I'm fairly confident I can get it in two launches, and in previous careers, that's generally what I've done: prepositioned a lander near the destination, then rendezvous. I'll probably have to add solar panels to the lunar lander, though. I also just yesterday realized that for months and months I've been getting the units of specific impulse wrong: I thought they were sec-1, not sec, and I have no idea when I started making that mistake. I think it was a mental mistake of dividing m*sec by m*s^2, instead of m/sec by m/sec^2.

Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? There's also the strong probability that the Take Two legal team has told Squad not to say anything on the matter, and that if it's anything urgent, to refer it to them instead of saying anything themselves.

Nowhere does it state that they do collect such information, merely that they may. This is, as per usual, bog-standard boilerplate designed to handle every conceivable issue that might arise. It is not an admission that they are doing it. That... still wasn't an answer to your question, since there is no confirmation that they are actually exercising that part of the license.

Presumably each set of observed images is timestamped. One T works for an entire batch of X,Y,I observations (X,Y in the plane, plus an intensity).

A lot of your concerns have been previously addressed. Again, mods are largely untouchable, since that content is not created by Squad/Take Two software. Take Two might or might not have a license to final products produced by PartTools, but some have suggested that's merely a format change, in which case that would be unenforceable. Content created by the software is: screenshots, videos, etc. Not stuff you made in Visual Studio/Blender/what-have-you. "Human-readable" answers would constitute legal advice, which could get Take Two into a heap of legal trouble due to conflicts of interest. They never needed the license agreement to DMCA you into oblivion for gameplay videos. A gameplay video is clearly a work incorporating substantial elements of Take Two's IP, a plain and simple copyright violation. The only reason people haven't been sued is that, well, Take Two kinda likes having gameplay videos on YouTube; that helps get them more customers. If there was a clause in the EULA/TOS explicitly permitting gameplay videos, only then would you be free from any possibility of getting sued... not that a game company is ever likely to include such a clause. They'd kinda like to keep the hammer of DMCA in their inventory just in case it's needed. EDIT: Overall, I think a lot of people are panicking about what the license says, and forgetting to look into wee little things like "copyright law" that would establish that the video game owner could do that anyways. As I've posted before, I think they're just making sure it's iron-clad in the document specifically because they're turning a blind eye to a lot of these things, and they really don't want a judge saying "you've tolerated it all these times before; you've granted your users an implicit right to this".

Wikipedia suggests it sends back some of the raw data. The total output is on the order of Gbit/sec, whereas its max downlink rate is 5 Mbit/sec. However, since most of its focal plane is just empty space, it apparently just sends a few pixels around each object, presumably plus some information on where that was in the focal plane.

Technically speaking this works; not nearly as well as pointing it in the other direction. I think part of it is that once the sail stops the air blown by the fan, that air then has to get out the way of more incoming air, and that imparts a small net force. Still, that doesn't salvage the OP's concept. I get that he tested it, and that's great, but there's a reason that scientists put a lot of time into careful experiment design to exclude alternate possibilities like "maybe it has something to do with surface friction from the table it's set on".

Not at my computer to make a full reply, but the fear that they own mods is fallacious. Take Two does not arbitrarily assign to itself a license to copyrighted content made in Visual Studio, Blender, Mono, etc. It's only stuff made inside KSP itself (primarily Mission Builder missions) to which it grants Take Two a license... and a license is not ownership.

First error: the watt is a unit of power, not energy. Power is a rate of energy over time; a flow of one watt is one joule per second. Second: Mach 10 sounds impressive until you compare it to rocket propellants. Assuming a standard value of Mach 1 = 343 m/sec, Mach 10 is 3430 m/sec, which is in the realm of a high-performance kerolox/methalox engine, but still much slower than hydrolox engines. You're basically requiring huge power and cooling sources for something you could do with a good old-fashioned rocket... once you delete the catcher that would give you a thrust of zero. Third: As has been mentioned, violations of laws of physics, amateur experiments on Earth do not necessarily correspond to space, etc. Fourth: I've seen no reliable evidence to suggest the EM drive works, and given its violation of the laws of physics, I'm very much inclined to believe it doesn't work.

You realize the original issue was that that mod permitted breaking DRM, and Take Two had every legal and ethical right to send the C&D? I see that less as a triumph of the gaming community, and more a company forced to back down because of a manufactured PR storm of ill-informed and poorly justified rage. Regardless, one key thing: they still haven't done a single thing. The EULA sounds scary, but it's always been scary.

I can address this, at least, in a fact-based manner instead of as an opinion. You accepted the new license agreement by continuing to play 1.3.1. If Take Two decides they don't want you playing KSP... you can wave farewell to 1.3.1. The terms have always been "you exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it", it's just the "you will end because we demand it" part of the TOS/EULA changed slightly this time around and scared people. Not that they're actually likely to end it. Bad PR tends to result in fewer sales, and they currently have no reason to demand your end.

I don't think it'll really change a thing. Please note I'm not a lawyer. If I was a lawyer, I'd have to ask for money, because formal legal advice from a lawyer requires a formal lawyer-client relationship, and lawyers don't work for free. My understanding of things is that your fanfiction continues to violate Take Two's copyright, and Take Two will continue to ignore this because it's good PR for them. However, explicitly adding it to the TOS means that if, for some reason, Take Two does take exception, there is explicit language in the contract. Without explicit language in the contract, a judge might reasonably say "you've let it slide for all these other people, and thus you've granted users an implicit right to fanfiction." With explicit language, however, there is no ambiguity to possibly exploit, so Take Two can still take it down if, for some reason, they take exception. They probably won't, though: fanfiction is usually good PR, and attacking fanfiction writers (nevermind established fanfiction writers) could easily cause a community revolt. EDIT: Also, as discussed in the other thread (to which this will probably be merged), Take Two and Squad have to be very circumspect in what they say right now, because it could be constituted as "legal advice" and open them up to liability. Safer for them to stay mum. https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/171236-updated-terms-notice-privacy-policy-discussion/

My guess is that it's part of the MKS colonization suite. If you can figure it out, though, and it's not bundled with all the other MKS stuff*, I'd probably add that myself. *KSP would probably cry trying to run both the MKS suite and Realism Overhaul.

My first point here is gong to be: those are all massive companies who can afford lawyers to scrutinize the "plain speech" versions to death until they're rid of any possible liabilities from it. My second point would be that what they're doing is fairly simple, straightforward, and follows their license and all relevant IP law. The issue for Take Two right now? They're allowing a lot of illegal, license-breaking, copyright-breaking stuff because it's good for them. This, ironically, means stricter terms, and I'll get to that point later. Fanfiction? A derivative work, a right reserved exclusively to the copyright owner (Take Two). It is, as point of fact, illegal copyright infringement, and if Take Two wanted to, they have every legal ground to have it taken down. They don't, however, because fanfiction is good PR. And possibly because a few of the more satirical ones probably fall under fair use doctrines. Fan art? See above. Screenshots (of which I've likely posted hundreds)? See above. I'd have to ditch probably 90% of the stuff I've uploaded to Imgur if Take Two sent a C&D. Mods? Mods are... not copyright infringement, except for maybe the parts linking to KSP code and maybe final end-products transformed by PartTools. All the rest of the code, and any art assets prior to putting them through PartTools are yours, and continue to be yours. They're not a derivative work based on the KSP IP (eliminating copyright concerns), they're not generated using Squad/Take Two software (which eliminates we-automatically-have-a-license shenanigans)... they're yours. All of this puts them in a paradoxical spot. Let's say somebody wrote a fanfiction of which Take Two disapproved, for whatever reason. If Take Two doesn't have these draconian terms written into their contract, they have no hammer with which to have it taken down. Any judge will take one look, say "well, you've tolerated it many times before, I'm not going to let you selectively punish one person based on something never written into the contract." if Take Two does have clauses stating "no, you may not do this", Take Two has the freedom of selectively enforcing this. They can sue you, and the judge will say "you accepted this contract, this was written into the terms, Take Two can do this". The rest of the time? They can... not sue. They can take a blind eye to it, to the point of literally hosting fanfiction, fanart, etc, on their forum. Also, when you mentioned "dozens of eBay addons to Firefox"? Those... modify Firefox, not eBay.

Yes. The paranoia of a few whipped up by fears of legalese is totally a show of power on Take Two's part. You're also describing things that haven't happened with KSP, such as any sort of DRM. This is a panic based on changing a few lines of the EULA to make the Mission Builder legally possible, without any evidence that Take Two will be actually changing its practices with respect to KSP.

There are many situations where corporations can, as point of fact, be in a weaker position. When it comes to checking individual compliance with terms, for example, they basically... can't, not unless it's implemented in the software. There's no way they can afford to investigate each and every one of their customers: $40/customer does not stretch very far for the legal budget. For public opinion, people almost always side with the little guy even when the little guy is clearly in the wrong, because "evil corporations". It's not ideal, but software companies selling to the general public are not dealing with a few customers they can trust, or at the very least fight an expensive legal battle with: they're dealing with millions of customers on a one-shot basis. Their customers have the protections of relative anonymity, being too small to practically sue, and being the innocent little lambs that have never done anything wrong in the public eye. You also seem to be concerned they will "steal" your mods. This was discussed in one of the threads that got merged into this one. To the best of my knowledge, none of the new terms transfer ownership of your copyrighted mods to Take Two, and any EULA that tried would be illegal. If licensed under MIT/BSD, they could be incorporated into KSP... but only insofar as they obeyed the license terms, including a copy of the original license notice, and they could not prevent you from continuing to distribute the original mod. The contract was agreed to when you registered for the forum. Continuing to use the forum indicates you continue to agree with the contract, as modified by the owners.

Simulated artificial gravity via a centrifuge that is a hollowed out asteroid. Or a hollowed out dwarf planet. It'd get much weaker towards the poles, now that I think about it. If you're thinking the concept is absurd: it is.

A rubble pile asteroid would indeed fly apart. Even more sturdy bodies would likely suffer a huge loss of mass if spun up so far above surface gravity, unless you artificially reinforced them. However, by the time your civilization can spin Ceres up to that speed, it's clearly extremely high tech. 10^20 kg of asteroid does not change its rate of rotation without a gigantic input of energy/rotational momentum. EDIT: Argh out of likes. Still, an insightful question.

Lots of extreme reactions here, ones motivated by fear of what might happen. Calm down. Step back a bit, let it sit for a day without getting wound up by the worst case scenarios. Then look at the pros and cons of what you might do, and take a look at what's happened in the past. As has been pointed out in the past, companies have gone to draconian terms not because they want to, but because any time they leave a loophole or grey area, it gets exploited. Unfortunately, then, what must be looked at is not the text of the agreement, but rather what the company has tolerated in the past. It's not an ideal situation, but in the absence of a bilateral agreement with well known customers, they have to be very strict in their terms. Instead of dealing with a few entities with business reputations to protect, they're dealing with millions of people, 99.9% of whom would live up to the spirit of a more generous contract, and 0.1% of whom the EULA is actually designed to handle. If you're getting wound up, take a step back and reconsider things when you're less emotional about it.