Bumping this thread in case anyone who used a pirate server hasn't yet seen it.

All right, I don't see any more comments and can't think of more that needs to be said so I'll close the thread.

Thank you, I've fixed that for the next update.

As I'm aiming for an incompatible version very soon, I've made a note to look at this, probably tomorrow. I can't comment more until I understand how it works in the code.

I'm trying to release 0.7F in a short time with all the updates and it should be incompatible to make sure everyone gets on the new version.

Your request really would set "number of stops" that player has done. I don't see a difficulty adding a packet to set this, in an incompatible version.

I can't see any other thing that is similar, that I should code at the same time. We can set number of laps and a penalty, so I guess the number of pit stops done is the one missing thing.

Hi all,

I will disconnect from this thread now to focus on work.

I'd like to thank Chris again for his well written post which I said I would read again later.

I hope it's OK to say a few parting words. I know TC provides a lot of entertainment within LFS, which is a good part of why I've always done a few things here and there to support cruise servers. I don't believe TC or I can eliminate license sharing but we can be aware of it and reduce it. At least some of us learned a few things in this thread that we were not aware of before.

No doubt I have expressed some things too strongly and interpreted other people's words wrongly as it got too heated in this thread. I hoped after Chris's post that we were moving on, and I still hope that.

Quote from tmehlinger :

You're acting like a child, and you're treating your biggest fans and partners like garbage.

That's not true, you are simply not reading my posts as they were intended.

Quote from tmehlinger :

It's painful for us to read, and it is embarrassing for you.

I'm not embarrassed. As I've explained many times, asked a few questions, made a single unpopular suggestion and I stated a few facts. There's nothing wrong with that.

Better go back and read the thread again so you can see how it evolved.

Sorry for my previous failed reply when I thought your post was another from Chris.

Quote from mbutcher :

I'm sorry, but how else are we meant to interpret

I'm disappointed by the lack of understanding going on now.

Chris wrote a well formed post which I appreciated and thanked him for while explaining a bit more from my side, and I ended with a repeated thank to make sure it wasn't missed.

Then I got back a silly post from Boypower, and one from Chris advising me how to use my own brain. This is ridiculous and antagonistic.

I thought things were getting better after Chris's post where he acknowledged certain issues we have all learned more about on this thread. Learning more is a good thing, I think. So I don't know why argument and jibes continue at this point.

Odd, the last two posts I could say back at you two, exactly the same.

I was trying to discuss things, you were taking it as attack and accusations.

I certainly was falsely accused several times on this thread.

I don't really need a lecture now from you guys, thanks.

Pity you couldn't see what I was saying in my last post but I can't really be bothered to explain now, I'm actually too busy.

Degats: thank you for explanations, understanding and efforts to prevent or reduce license sharing and certain types of trading.

I see you have felt under attack from me, but I'd like to mention that I have felt under attack all year so far, not from TC but generally, as most of the time I have been having to deal with people working out ever more ways to try to circumvent every rule or limit we have, to the point of causing problems with the online experience. I've had some success with that but every time I get near the end, another issue seems to come along.

On this thread I gradually learned more about an account rental problem that we have received information and evidence about, and as I gradually realised how it was unintentionally made possible by the TC system, I asked questions, made an unpopular suggestion about removing the free donation of in-game money, and asked for explanations why that was necessary. At that point I was accused of things like trying to destroy TC and so on, which is silly as I've always supported it. I'm sure I should be allowed to ask questions as anyone else can. I'm not some all-knowing sage, I'm just a person who works hard to understand what is going on, and I'm not afraid to ask questions to increase my knowledge.

Making a suggestion and asking questions is not the same as laying down the law and it would be helpful if it's not interpreted that way, so we can have a discussion and it could lead to fixing or reducing problems.

I don't really have more to say at this point but I'll read your post again later to let it sink in a bit more. Thanks again for looking into the problems and making steps to reduce them.

Quote from Yisc[NL :

;2081566"]That's a unique number that cannot be changed in any way.

I'm pretty sure that mac address spoofing is normal.

Anyway, to those who talk about device identification, I'm not really about to give up development again to work out ways of analysing which device we are on in great detail. I'm actually trying to get back to development of what the people actually want, but I have been constantly distracted by hackers the whole year.

Quote from Bradracer :

As Chuck mentioned a few pages ago, do we know the scale of the issue or are we just playing a game of virtue-signalling, hypothesising, and finger-pointing?

The instant you say "virtue-signalling" you have lost all credibility and I read no further.

It's funny how may people around here are attributing me with all sorts of stuff I haven't said, and aren't reading what I have actually said.

I realise it's 2024, but there must still be a place for replying to what people actually said, instead of making up stuff you pretend they said, and arguing against that? Or is that too old-fashioned now?

Quote from Degats :

TC has *never* sold in-game currency (or items) for real money. Various other cruise servers have in the past (maybe still do?), but TC hasn't.

I never said they had.

Try to keep up and please stop suggesting I've said things that I haven't.

I've pointed out that the ability to freely donate money between players enables a real world trade in your currency. In turn that enables ringmasters to rent LFS licenses in contravention to our license agreement, in order to gain TC credits which they sell for real world money, obtained from richer people that don't want to play your game in the spirit that we assume it was meant.

If you can't understand this, the only explanation is that you don't want to understand. If you do understand but think this is fine, then we have a different point of view that cannot be reconciled.

Quote from Degats :

We've always been against it on principle, but there's not really a lot we can do about it - any trading of real money for TC money is happening off-server, between individuals.

Boypower states on TC's behalf that officially you are neutral:

Quote :

QUOTE: we allow people to advertise these services on our platforms, including our forum

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2081198#post2081198

Quote from Degats :

I'm not sure where you got the idea that TC is doing it ourselves.

I haven't thought that or suggested it any any point.

Well what you have, by allowing people to buy game credits, is several things.

Off the top of my head:

1) The ability for people to get 'rich' in game without actually doing the work which I believe you intended as the 'game' of TC. Basically they get the reward without actually playing. I guess that wasn't the original plan, but correct me if I'm wrong.

2) Richer people can buy credits so now they can dish them out and look very generous, compared with the poorer people who actually have to work for it. Here you recreate real-world inequality, oddly as a direct mirror to the real world.

3) This system is supporting and unintentionally encouraging the rental server system where rental ringmasters buy licenses which poorer people use to generate money for the ringmaster. It reminds me of some pretty bad things in the real world. Also it is against our license agreement, but you are basically OK with that.

So after all the support I've given to cruise servers and TC, now the result is you are recreating many ugly aspects of capitalism in a game world and supporting a license rental trade in direct contravention of our license agreement.

I read that this real world money purchase of game credits is a problem for many game developers, and it's a problem that is going to grow for you and us. We receive emails about the problems and contravention of the license agreement from people who have bought their license legitimately, so it is now a distraction for us and hinders development.

So yeah, it's not good. It creates bad feeling as you have allowed a fun game to shift towards real world earning instead of staying on the fun side.

It's an ugly thing you have created.

Imagine a game of monopoly, with one change. People can use their real-world currency to buy monopoly money from the other players.

Now who wins?

Quote from tankslacno :

Problem when connecting to a servers on 0.7E7

On 0.7E6, I didn't have any problems with this, but on 0.7E7, I cannot join on several hosts, including my both own hosts (Sport Racing Team Finland and Sport Racing Team Demo). This problem doesn't happen on every host though.

I can try to reproduce this by looking list of hosts and see any host which don't have any drivers on track, but have 1 connected user. When trying to connect to a host, which have that kind of situation, LFS just permanently states I'm in "Queue position 1".

This is not related to E6 or E7, all hosts simply get to that state after 49.7 days.

I have a fix but it's not released.

Editor Patch E6:

Much faster "reduce detail" function
Command /rtex can be used to reload textures
Editor unlock no longer affects LFS unlocks
(S3 number of unlocks now matches S1/S2)

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106792

Test Patch E7:

Tightened main model and wheel limits for mod reports
Unlock screen requires "unlock" to keep any changes
(if already unlocked the unlock count is unaffected)
More translation updates. Thank you translators!

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106967

Quote from DarkShadow32 :

Just another thing that may be worth mentioning:

Don't use the same username and same password that you use for your LFS account on any website that requires you to register when it comes to website from LFS (Not talking about TC OR LFS ITSELF

You should not use your LFS password on the TC server or website either.

Thread: LOGIN DETAILS - use on LFS websites only!

Quote from LFS Terms & Conditions

Quote :

3.4 You must not give your username, WEB or GAME password to other LFS users.

There aren't exceptions, including pirates LFSPro and Pereulok or legitimate systems like TC.

Thread: Possible password leak from Pereulok

Quote from Vilix :

I apologize, I assumed it was understood why it was such an important part of the economy but I'll explain it then.

Thanks for taking the time to give examples to paint a fuller picture.

I suppose most of the things you mention (jobs/repairs/trade of items) could be done using fixed prices and that would provide the fun without the unbridled capitalism that appears to be currently corrupting the server and replicating real world inequality.

I like (or should that be 'liked' in the past tense) that in LFS, after buying a license, everyone is equal. There are reasons why we don't have prices on items you can add. I mean, reasons other than us developers being idiots for not squeezing the community for every penny they are worth, like many other game companies do. I actually like creating an environment where people can race or play free from consideration of real life finances.

So I'm sad to see that money and corruption is creeping into LFS servers and creating incentives to abuse our license system.

Quote from turbofan :

As long as people think that money is an elementary particle of the cosmos and things can't exist without it, we are screwed.

Agreed!

Quote from hsvdin0 :

If you still don't get this

Just a quick note, it's you who doesn't get what's going on, but I won't explain again.

Unfortunately, I started this one thread about two separate subjects which are probably not related.

For the password subject, I have now started a new thread: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/107278

Dear LFS Racers,

As many of you know, there was once a pirate master server and community based in Russia called "Pereulok".

Despite warnings on our forum and in our license agreement, many LFS racers actually handed over their LFS user name and game password to the owners of Pereulok.

We have recently seen approximately 40 accounts that have been taken over by one or more individuals and in some of those cases, not only the game password was confirmed and used online but also the web password was obtained (maybe it was similar to the game password).

At least two of the owners of the affected accounts that have replied to us, have used Pereulok at some point in the past, so it's a possible source of the leak. It appears that the leaked data is old because the hacker makes several attempts before finding one that works.

If you ever logged in at Pereulok and have not changed your passwords since, please change your passwords immediately. If your password used at Pereulok, or any other pirate site, is in any way similar to any passwords you use on other websites, you should change them all.

It is not our duty to explain to you that you should not use the same password on multiple sites, and particularly not on the websites of pirates or hackers. But this causes some disruption when, after a leak, a user can access multiple accounts. So that's why I have written this alert.

Previously discussed on the Hackers alert thread but that thread covers a different subject as well.

Quote from Vilix :

Stopping money transfers between players would simply crash the TC economy

So simple, you can't even explain it?

Just like PVL you can only say "of course" or "simply" but you don't give a single example of why it's necessary.

Quote from Vilix :

In all honesty, it seems a little unfair to suggest to potentially destroy the entire server economy

Who suggested that? If you are referring to me, you are mistaken. I have repeatedly asked why it is necessary to allow money transfer between players, but have not received an answer yet.

Quote from hsvdin0 :

It has nothing to do with rented accounts - in fact

Before commenting, maybe you should read back a few pages, and you will start to understand there is a link to rental accounts.

Repeat: It appears that the rental accounts are a tool for illegal account pirates (called 'owners') who rent out their accounts to gain TC money which they then sell for real money. This is a criminal activity enabled by TC money transfers. That is a fact, not an opinion. Even if you don't like it, it's still a fact. Don't fall into the modern human thing of denying things just because you don't like that they are true.

Last edited by Scawen, Fri, 23 Feb 2024 08:40.

Quote from 0033549 :

I was playing in Pereul*k project, so that could be reason

Thanks for the information.

I don't need more info from you now, but would like to know if any of the other affected people have similar information.

Last edited by Scawen, Thu, 22 Feb 2024 20:46.

Quote from P V L :

The problem is that more than one person uses the same account, not the TC economy.

I think you are not seeing my point (that took me a long time to understand) that the reason someone allows multiple people to use the same account, is to gain TC money. And this only happens, because there is a real world value applied to TC money.

Quote from P V L :

And yes, of course it would be a great issue for TC if we could not send any cash between accounts.

Why "of course" ? I really don't know why you have to be able to donate money, but I am interested, which is why I asked.

Sometimes if a feature does more harm than good, things get better when it is removed.