cichlidfan

Just remember to do that every three days.

I see no value in removing them.

Considering that an F-18 for another sim has been around for years and nobody made a full HOTAS for it, I wouldn't get my hopes up.

So assuming that nothing has been changed in either the hardware or DCS software, then no internet connection is required to maintain the activation. Thanks Viper but I would still like to hear what Coff has to say on the subject just for the purposes of having this confirmed by a knowledgeable ED employee.

Simple question. Once I have activated a module that is currently using Starforce, under what circumstances would I be required to reconnect to the internet to maintain the validity of that activation?

Actually, as long as Starforce is the current DRM for every module that I own, it does matter.

Agreed. I have no desire to switch my existing modules to the new DRM. Also, if Starforce phones home periodically, I would like to see official confirmation of that fact including under what circumstances/time frame that it occurs.

That option will be available in a future update. :D

I have asked this as well, with no response.

Sage advice. Also, make the first VR flight in a helo.

I am making a list And checking it twice You've got twenty four days To be naughty or nice :santa:

Actually, the terms of the EULA already give them that.

Because ED would then have to continue to pay for Starforce, even though they don't need it. Then there is also the headache of maintaining two DRM systems.

You aren't alone on that score.

Oh hell. Ice Hockey. That is a mysterious sport where nobody knows the rules and the best players try not to die while scoring a goal. :) Collegiate hockey is much better, btw. Of course, I went to Michigan Tech in the late 70's when they were a major force in their division. Unfortunately, that did not last and they are now just a footnote.

You probably will be able to do so with no issues. I do it myself but I also know that unwelcome surprises may occur. Worst case is that you do it and find that it was not a great idea, then you do it from scratch. It shouldn't be all that terrible even it the worst of cases.

I agree in principle but you can only take this so far. There will always be exteme cases but (I hate myself for saying this) ED probably does needs to consider the statistical likelihood of certain extreme cases. I wonder if my insurance company would consider access to ED servers to be a vital service. ;)

Well, though I don't agree with the methodology it is done and I hope for a positive outcome for everyone.

Agreed. Some things must be taken on faith. Plus, I have always respected EB so I won't dispute something that he had reason to believe would be the case.

Indeed.

Good intentions only go so far. I really wonder how such an event would play out in the real world. === Here is your two week notice that we are shutting the doors. We need you to code a non-DRM version of the product. Hmmm, I am gone in two weeks, do I care what my boss wants? === Yes, the answer is a matter of intergrity. Personally, I would be one of those who would spend my two weeks coding the desired product during the day and spending my off time on my CV and seeking a new employer. An interesting side note is that in this type of environment people who are let go are generally, and immediately, isolated from any possibility of doing harm to corporate software/hardware. Twenty years, or so, ago, I was laid off from an IT position. My access to the computers was removed before I left the HR office and I was escorted while I cleared my belongings from my office. My potential ability to cause harm, had I the desire to do so, was a far greater concern than my ability to contribute prior to my scheduled departure from the payroll. Granted, the company was a DOD contractor which may have played a role in the level of paranoia involved.

I would not argue the point. Two weeks might be acceptable to many people. However, this discussion could have better served everyone had it happened before the new system was released into the wild.

I'll take two.

Quite reasonable, IMHO. If my router goes south that gives me a reasonable amount of time to determine that the router is the source of the problem and procure a new one.

Wow, so internal tester's input is not given much credence. To elaborate... ED tested this with the internal group of testers and they indicated that there was an issue. ED released it to the public to see if they could get different results. Generally, you test something in a small environment. If a problem arises you address it instead putting it in front of a larger environment and hoping for a different result. Example: Is this drug safe? Well many of our small test group died so let us test it on a bigger group and see if a lower percentage of them die. It isn't just the DRM that is flawed but the method that was used to come to the conclusion that it was a good plan.