FLAI has been decommissioned

[knich 113]

5 hours ago, duckbilled said:

No idea why. I was just wondering if you used it in P3D or FSX. If you did, you would be comfortable with the direction things are going. It is a great product in those sims, and I'm sure it will be great in MSFS.

 

Yeah...No I don't have P3D.  It would be nice though if a moderator would explain why this thread was moved from its original forum?

[kiek 1,213]

6 hours ago, pmb said:

And BTW, FLAi was the default base for PSXSeecontraffic, so this will have to be modified as well.

It was a very convenient way to let new users of PSXseeconTraffic start while installing FLAi was easy and they did not have to install and run the AILGenerator tool.

This advantage has gone, and I already have modified the quick start guide.

But on the positive side, don't forget that PSXseeconTraffic can work with any AI aircraft set or individual livery, so the loss of FLAi is not a big drama.

Nico

 

Edited January 10, 2021 by kiek

[pmb 5,137]

7 minutes ago, kiek said:

It was a very convenient way to let new users of PSXseeconTraffic start while installing FLAi was easy and they did not have to install and run the AILGenerator tool.

This advantage has gone, and I already have modified the quick start guide.

But on the positive side, don't forget that PSXseeconTraffic can work with any AI aircraft set or individual livery, so the loss of FLAi is not a big drama.

Yes, I know, and I setup AIG once myself (for P3D). I wouldn't call it "One-click" though, and while it can be done, I found the setup a bit nasty, even more compared to FLAi. 

Frankly, I feel quite uneasy about that development, even more as less choice rarely is better for the user. I'll at least try to put a bit more pressure on Asobo/MS to provide their own AI/Live traffic liveries with MSFS.

Kind regards, Michael

[honanhal 1,420]

So AIG for MSFS is coming along, but could be months or even years before it's actually released. And in the meantime AIG and others are making sure that no one can use their data to release something that works in MSFS, albeit less than ideally, now. Do I have that right?

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm extraordinarily grateful for everything that AIG has done for this community. Genuinely. But surely AIG has to understand that's a tough pill to swallow. To use the vegetables analogy, it's as though we're asking the guy with the stand to shut down, while no one else will be able to provide any vegetables, at all, for some significant amount of time.

My totally unsolicited advice: AIG will provide a solution that will be unbeatable, when it's ready. I have every confidence it will be comprehensive, totally uncompromising on quality, and seamless to install. So there is no cause, at all, to be worried about these other outfits cutting into your market share (if that's the right word for freeware) at that point. There will be no reason for anyone to choose them over you guys. Why not let them release their interim, imperfect solutions using your data in the meantime? What's the harm?

James

[rondon9898 84]

What a massive pain FLAi was the perfect solution - online traffic is a nightmare to setup usually. Why couldn’t they have just been a bit more careful and given the appropriate credit and got the necessary permissions?

[Urmel81 189]

9 hours ago, honanhal said:

So AIG for MSFS is coming along, but could be months or even years before it's actually released. And in the meantime AIG and others are making sure that no one can use their data to release something that works in MSFS, albeit less than ideally, now. Do I have that right?

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm extraordinarily grateful for everything that AIG has done for this community. Genuinely. But surely AIG has to understand that's a tough pill to swallow. To use the vegetables analogy, it's as though we're asking the guy with the stand to shut down, while no one else will be able to provide any vegetables, at all, for some significant amount of time.

My totally unsolicited advice: AIG will provide a solution that will be unbeatable, when it's ready. I have every confidence it will be comprehensive, totally uncompromising on quality, and seamless to install. So there is no cause, at all, to be worried about these other outfits cutting into your market share (if that's the right word for freeware) at that point. There will be no reason for anyone to choose them over you guys. Why not let them release their interim, imperfect solutions using your data in the meantime? What's the harm?

James

I don't think you are completely right.

1. AIG doesn't create own paints (or does have the rights on it) (as far as I know)

2. the AIG Forum hosts most of the painters (so many people thinks that this are AIG Paints) (I THINK THIS IS THE CAUSE OF THE MISUNDERSTANDING)

3. the same with the aircraft models, most of them are not created by AIG. The only thing is, AIG converted a lot of Models (with the permission of the original dev) to P3D. Not sure if FLAI has converted them by itself or how does it handle this.

4. I think in this case it's the same for AIG and FLAI, when an Painter doesn't want that his paints are used, even FLAI or AIG can't us them. In this case FLAI has lost the painters (not sure why, I don't care, because I don't use FLAI)

5. there are a lot more misunderstandings I think!

 

[simbol 5,818]

I really don't understand what is all the fuss about this / VATSIM. Are you guys aware VPILOT does model matching automatically regardless of what AI models you use? this means you can connect to VATSIM and use any AI Model package you have and VPILOT will represent that AI model inside your simulator.

You can do that with UTL, UTL2, Traffict Global of AIGM already..

You only need to open the model matching settings and configure it to look at your current AI models.. done.. it is pretty simple and quick.

S.

[fluffyflops 1,847]

what I find funny is a bunch of people uploaded their ai models to avsim and flightsim.com  to be downloaded 1000s or times,  then people made repaints for these very models, and then uploaded them also to avsim and flightsim.com to be downloaded by 1000s of people again.

then someone zipped them up, uploaded it to the flai cloud and then 1000s of people then downloaded them to use on vatsim.  was any money made ?   no. is anyone out of pocket, ?  no   and did anymore put a gun to the heads of repainters or model makers and force them to make the models or paints and then upload them to somewhere where they knew they are going no get downloaded ?  no.   why the hell upload them if you dont want them to be downloaded ?

maybe im missing something,  but i cant see the problem.   if you dont want people to use your stuff that you uploaded, then guess what.  dont upload it.  

I do find IT bods the strangest of people sometimes.

Edited January 11, 2021 by fluffyflops

[fluffyflops 1,847]

4 hours ago, simbol said:

You can do that with UTL, UTL2, Traffict Global of AIGM already..

 

or heres a thought. you can download from numerous places, the same places where the authors uploaded them too.    that would be the same places that FLAI made the pack from and make your own pack like I did.

bloody ridicoulus all of this.

[Christopher Low 5,338]

This may be an unpopular opinion in the AI flightsim world, but I agree with fluffyflops. This business about "permission" having to be granted if a model or repaint needs to be updated (or included in a separate package) is a fair point, but there are times when it feels like the community is collectively shooting itself in the foot. A good case in point would be the AI model conversions to P3Dv4. If the original model maker could not be contacted, then no P3Dv4 model could be released (even though it had actually been converted and used by any number of people for private use).

Whilst I agree that permission should always be the first port of call, I do think that if sufficient effort has been made to contact the original developer of the freeware model, then conversion should be allowed to go ahead provided that the original author is credited in the documentation.

In short, anyone involved in the freeware flight simulation community should take a step back when something like this happens, and reflect on why they originally joined the community in the first place. I would prefer to see us all smashing down barriers rather than erecting them.

You may now open fire

[simbol 5,818]

The issue all started because a group of people pretended to use all these repaints + AIGM + FLAI + AIG flight plans, etc. without even asking permission in the first place to be used. This was for a project for MSFS and of course, they were taking all the credit for it.. as a result AIGM banned the usage of anything related to them.

In my view it is a bit over the line to pretend to use AIG models for their project and take credit after. I am glad AIG banned it.. after all AIG is the one that has put all the hard work for over a decade to have all these repaints, schedules, etc. and if someone deserves the credit is them and nobody else.

FLAI then also banned those freeware developers from using their models, however this triggered lots of freeware modelers being upset that their work was taken for granted or modified withouth their consent, specially because it was used to create new software without even consulting them..

FLAI at the end had it reasons to close down, up to then to explain..

Now regarding freeware, just because something is FREE it doesn't mean you can take it and use it for your own purpose.. this is a concept that people really need to understand, intelectual rights apply to any software being freeware or not.. If you were to create some piece of art, music, etc. and you donate it to a museum for free, it doesn't grant such institution the right to change it, modify it, giving it for auction or even for free to anybody else without fully consent of the original artist. And if the artist dies.. such right passes to any survival family member.. who if they wish to, can release any intelectual rights or get holds of them.

Software is not different.. being PAID or FREE.

So is it selfish that a modeler doesn't want someone else to take their artist work, modify it and use it for another platform? up to each individual to decide, but at the end of the day, it is his / her work, he / she can do with it wherever it wants..

S.

Edited January 11, 2021 by simbol

[duckbilled 310]

There is a distinction here that I don't think is being fully captured. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but AIGAIM doesn't contain any textures or models. The user is doing the downloading, and the tool assists with the installation. To me, this is what makes their product so innovative, and nothing is stopping FLAI or anyone else from creating a similar tool. They don't need any permission if their tool does the downloading, conversion, and installation locally.

For those who are not familiar with the project, maybe you should read through this thread on the AIG site. You can see the development process over the course of two years. Note that the tool was in public beta for quite a while, and even it its 2018 state, it provided a lot of value. Also, some have mentioned that the installation isn't one click - that's correct, sort of. Installation does take a bit of time, because the tool needs to go to a number of sites to download the files. You'll need to have your sign in info, you need to make decisions on which models you prefer, and you'll need set your preferences and file locations. The longer you have it installed, the less you will have to do when you update it. I think a lot of people just run the tool on a weekly basis to capture anything thing new, and if you run it regularly, you won't have to do that much - especially if you are not using any payware AI aircraft. If you run it infrequently, you will have to click a bit more to get it updated, and since the FSP payware aircraft are updated regularly, using them may make the update process sightly longer. Either way, it is very easy, and no manual installation is required.

As a reference, I don't think I've updated for 6 weeks before today. When I ran the AIGAIM exe, I had to update the FSP aircraft. I also had 70 new flightplans and 22 updated flightplans to install if I wanted to.

[Luke 782]

57 minutes ago, simbol said:

If you were to create some piece of art, music, etc. and you donate it to a museum for free, it doesn't grant such institution the right to change it, modify it, giving it for auction or even for free to anybody else without fully consent of the original artist. And if the artist dies.. such right passes to any survival family member.. who if they wish to, can release any intelectual rights or get holds of them.

Two issues - one, the right expires after a certain period of time, and second it doesn't apply to physical goods. If I create a painting and sell it, I immediately lose all rights over that physical object.

Cheers!

[simbol 5,818]

10 minutes ago, Luke said:

Two issues - one, the right expires after a certain period of time, and second it doesn't apply to physical goods. If I create a painting and sell it, I immediately lose all rights over that physical object.

Cheers!

1) Yes because you sold it.. however does it mean they can change it? and when you sell your software do you allow people to modify it?

2) if you do a paint and give it for free to an institution, does it give the right to change it? and say it was made by then?

Intelectual rights resides always with you..

S.

[Luke 782]

Fair point - I should clarify; as the creator of the work even if you no longer have the rights to it you have the right to be credited as the creator.

Honestly, I don't know what the rights are over modifications of the physical work. Keep in mind that most IP law relates to duplication and not the physical goods. I expect that if you purchase a painting you can do whatever you want with it in a physical sense.

Cheers