in case you missed it : just try this tool >https://www.lfs.net/forum/thre ... -%C2%A9-KingOfIce-app-%29

Is this the death of lazy?

Quote from Roofus :

Is this the death of lazy?

Not if devs see what we all are seeing and build all Lazy tools directly inside the sim (to behave as they did). We all would love it. Also newcomers who are not so technically aware would benefit this, while they might not have knowledge to use any insim whatsoever.

Please, build all Lazy features into LFS.

Quote from pantiainen :

Not if devs see what we all are seeing and build all Lazy tools directly inside the sim (to behave as they did). We all would love it. Also newcomers who are not so technically aware would benefit this, while they might not have knowledge to use any insim whatsoever.

Please, build all Lazy features into LFS.

Please !

Quote from Roofus :

Is this the death of lazy?

Doesn't it still work on 0.7A?

Yes but LFS 0.7A is no longer online compatible with later versions (it was at the beginning).

Quote from loopingz :

Yes but LFS 0.7A is no longer online compatible with later versions (it was at the beginning).

i use Lazy with 7A lfs

i have separate 7D folder that i use Monitor by KingOffice and have my layout
and widgets (only ones compared to lazy) the same like lazy so i can have same experience

also in 7D folder i removed /run start_LFSLazy line to remove popup startup
File autoexec.lfs (edit with notepad) in C:\LFS\data\script

Cheers

Quote from loopingz :

Yes but LFS 0.7A is no longer online compatible with later versions (it was at the beginning).

But if all relevant racing servers stay 0.7A, then there is no need to upgrade LFS from 0.7A higher.

Quote from Roofus :

Is this the death of lazy?

yes

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

Don't waste your work. Don't forget the 8 years and all the effort you've put into this. Upload the source to GitHub and make it open source so someone can continue your legacy.

Hey guys! Plugin is great, but can it somehow show time difference right after crossing the line and not only after first sector?

when Lazy @DANIEL-CRO ??

It would be really nice to have an update for this version since the LFS updates for mods seem to have stabilized. No new patches on the horizon.

Pleaseeee update it.

A couple of features from LFSLazy are available in Test Patch D10 and you should check out the PACT Driving Assistant if you haven't already.

I don't know about the overlap of features between LFSLazy and PACT Driving Assistant but I do know that PACT has a lot of features.

Moved some posts about a hex edited LFS Lazy to the bin.

1) I don't think there has been a submission to any moderators proving that Daniel gave permission to modify his exe in this way. So it looks like a copyright infringement.

2) From another point of view, unverified, hacked exes were posted here which we can't allow for obvious safety reasons.

Quote from Scawen :

Moved some posts about a hex edited LFS Lazy to the bin.

1) I don't think there has been a submission to any moderators proving that Daniel gave permission to modify his exe in this way. So it looks like a copyright infringement.

Disagree, LFSLazy isn't copyrighted and doesn't seem to have any licensing agreements whatsoever so it's nonexistent copyright can't be infringed upon and is legally able to be modified from my understanding.

Quote from Scawen :

2) From another point of view, unverified, hacked exes were posted here which we can't allow for obvious safety reasons.

Disagree again, for multiple reasons.

The executables posted here are as reputable as original Lazy or any other unofficial addon posted here, what makes a modified version of Lazy any less safe than other random LFS insim application made be various developers and users?

Binaries can also be scanned and checked to see if they're safe or not and the modified copy posted here had the same VirusTotal results as the original Lazy.

Even if you disagree with the above points, there was no reason to remove the instructions guiding users on how to modify Lazy themselves on their own computer - there's nothing dangerous or ill intent about that. Removing it just hides valuable information from the community and only harms the community rather than 'protecting' it.

It's obvious that many LFS players love LFSLazy and want it to be updated, having that taken away has no positive benefit.

How copyright works: if none is stated then it is protected by copyright.

So unless we hear otherwise from Daniel, it is copyrighted.

I stand corrected on copyright, my other points are still valid nonetheless. At the very minimum the instructions on how to update Lazy manually should be reinstated.

The LFS developers should host instructions on how to reverse engineer someone's software without their permission?

Honestly, I'm not even sure programs should be allowed to work the way LFS Lazy does, hacking into LFS. But it was allowed in this case, so that is beside the point.

I've added a couple of the most requested features from LFS Lazy into a recent test patch.

I know there are many other features of Lazy that are still wanted, though I assume you would prefer me to to continue working on the new tyre physics, instead of trying to implement the features of LFS Lazy?

It's possible to recreate many of the features of LFS Lazy without resorting to hacking obsolete software which is itself a hack, even if a very good one. I mentioned above, the PACT Driving Assistant which is currently in development has many features that may be of interest (although I don't know which features of LFS Lazy can or cannot be done by PACT).

PACT is not really an alternative to Lazy (nor is it trying to be tbf)

OK, well stop being "Lazy" and code up the functions you need in a new program. Daniel does not appear to be supporting LFS Lazy so it's time to move on. That's my view.

I'm not disagreeing with that

Will leave the coding part to someone else though. Kingofice's Detect&Monitor is working pretty alright as a substitute so far (but again reads game memory for some of its functionality)

I've probably missed something at some points and this should probably be on its own thread, but this memory hacking is problematic and questionable because it steers too close to cheating. I won't get into that discussion now, note I didn't say "it is cheating" but "it steers too close to cheating" and might open the doors to cheating possibilities.

I've provided an interface called "InSim" that should provide all the info needed by external programs and I wonder if memory reads should be banned. I don't think that is the normal thing that is allowed, so why is it allowed in LFS? It certainly makes me feel very uneasy and wonder why I bother with cheat protection and properly designed interfaces, then we apparently allow people to hack the game at will.

Sorry to find myself in this debate...
I have indeed used this memory reading technique due to the high demand for certain information present in Lazy AND with the agreement of the developers!
As said recently on the Detect&Monitor thread here : https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2039663#post2039663 I intend to stop this practice which costs too much time with each new .exe and which does not seem necessary to me any more following the recent evolutions brought by Scawen.
Detect&Monitor will continue with some less informations, now available natively in LFS.
Hopefully this will be my only post here to leave Scawen alone to other more important things...