Quantcast
Anon takes down Sony website!

Forums - Sony Discussion - Anon takes down Sony website!

Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
 


My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal. Heres what I said "I know its not just related to this issue but we need to globally enforce the internet, fast. Its becoming more and more disconnect to what we accept and defend in our society."

Luckily, its part of our freedom to be able to go against the freedom of speech of someone else in our judicial system.

You mean protests aren't what you accept and defend in society? Things that disrupt corporate workings so they actually pay attention? Wow, where do you live, again?

Surely, by accept I mean legal, and by defend I mean societal values and jurisprudence. Im all for protestation, as long as the protestant doesnt do anything illegal. As far as I know, manifestation and protestation are permitted in most developed countries, personally im in Canada.

Distributed Denial of Service is the equivalent of blocking the shop entrance of a store, and that's if the website they're DDOSing is a shop or not.

Once again:

"I know its not just related to this issue...".

"My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal."

Even then, I'd be inclined to be persuaded based on the circumstances. Why? Because I believe that corporations should be made to be transparent along with government. For instance, if a hacker made their way into BP's network, and found information relating to deliberate negligence towards maintenance in the gulf that led to the large spill, and distributed it all over the internet, how would you rule on that?



Around the Network
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
 


My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal. Heres what I said "I know its not just related to this issue but we need to globally enforce the internet, fast. Its becoming more and more disconnect to what we accept and defend in our society."

Luckily, its part of our freedom to be able to go against the freedom of speech of someone else in our judicial system.

You mean protests aren't what you accept and defend in society? Things that disrupt corporate workings so they actually pay attention? Wow, where do you live, again?

Surely, by accept I mean legal, and by defend I mean societal values and jurisprudence. Im all for protestation, as long as the protestant doesnt do anything illegal. As far as I know, manifestation and protestation are permitted in most developed countries, personally im in Canada.

Distributed Denial of Service is the equivalent of blocking the shop entrance of a store, and that's if the website they're DDOSing is a shop or not.

Once again:

"I know its not just related to this issue...".

"My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal."

Even then, I'd be inclined to be persuaded based on the circumstances. Why? Because I believe that corporations should be made to be transparent along with government. For instance, if a hacker made their way into BP's network, and found information relating to deliberate negligence towards maintenance in the gulf that led to the large spill, and distributed it all over the internet, how would you rule on that?

I think that giving the right to anyone and/or the police to look into what we define as private on the basis we might find something illegal is hard to defend. What is private isnt legally accessible without a subpoena and it should remain that way. Now, if you ask me if companies and governments should have less privacy, my answer is yes. I think we should work toward that way. For examples, laws like the "Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act" we have in Canada and getting rid of the switzerland bank privacy policy are both good things that was done toward this way.



Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
fordy said:
Icyedge said:
 


My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal. Heres what I said "I know its not just related to this issue but we need to globally enforce the internet, fast. Its becoming more and more disconnect to what we accept and defend in our society."

Luckily, its part of our freedom to be able to go against the freedom of speech of someone else in our judicial system.

You mean protests aren't what you accept and defend in society? Things that disrupt corporate workings so they actually pay attention? Wow, where do you live, again?

Surely, by accept I mean legal, and by defend I mean societal values and jurisprudence. Im all for protestation, as long as the protestant doesnt do anything illegal. As far as I know, manifestation and protestation are permitted in most developed countries, personally im in Canada.

Distributed Denial of Service is the equivalent of blocking the shop entrance of a store, and that's if the website they're DDOSing is a shop or not.

Once again:

"I know its not just related to this issue...".

"My reason wasnt to solely control hackers who invade others property. If it were just that, it wouldnt be that much of a deal."

Even then, I'd be inclined to be persuaded based on the circumstances. Why? Because I believe that corporations should be made to be transparent along with government. For instance, if a hacker made their way into BP's network, and found information relating to deliberate negligence towards maintenance in the gulf that led to the large spill, and distributed it all over the internet, how would you rule on that?

Giving the right to anyone and/or the police to look into what we define as private on the basis we might find something illegal is hard to defend. What is private isnt legally accessible without a subpoena and it should remain that way. Now, if you ask me if companies and governments should have less privacy, my answer is yes. I think we should work toward that way. For examples, laws like the "Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act" we have in Canada and getting rid of the switzerland bank privacy policy are both good things that was done toward this way.

The main issue is that a lot of cases that require subpoena need some kind of warrant, and a warrant cannot be obtained unless there is sufficient evidence that illegal activity might be happening. In the cases of major corporatism (Big oil, Big banking etc.) there is a hidden wealth distribution to ensure that they are always on the law's good side. How else could big banks almost destroy the world economy and get away with no arrests, while police are kicking down doors and seizing computer equipment of people who copy a few songs, in the interest of organisations such as the RIAA? Which is the bigger crime here, exactly?

I can see the dangers of rummaging through private areas in a corporate network, especially if the hackers are only in it for personal gain. It's the usual issue of security vs transparency. I don't know the ultimate answer to corporate transparency, but I still like to see the occasional corporate leak, where the public gets to hand down the verdict. Gives them the feeling that they may have to atone for their actions if it ever got leaked.

I'd love to see leaks on the workings of the American banks. Let the people decide which banks will fail, too big to or not.



fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:

We fight for consumer rights!

*Takes down PSN and hurts the service that millions of people use*

We only for fight for some consumer rights that appeal to a minority, every other consumer can go fuck themselves!

Anon and their fans are hypocrits.


sometimes the majority must suffer in-order for change to occur. and if they do what Im thinking they will, it will benefit consumers for a little bit. free content!


Your a fool and I don't think I'm going to talk to someone who is willing to exploit the innocent just so they can get some free games and some internet cred.


Its not about free games or internet cred. its about whats right. I have the right to modify my console, and help others be able to do so. Its like cell phones, they can be legally modified and jackbreak software is regularly available. What is the difference between a console and cell phone in terms of electronics? nothing, they both are specialized computers. So if i can modify my cell phone, I can modify my console. If the instructions to modify more cell phone is online, so should the instructions to modify my console.

This isn't a Civil War, this isn't even a national crisis, this is a bunch of hackers getting pissed off because they can't get what they want. Consumers are happy with what they've got and now the 'freedom fighters' have come along to ruin the services we already have and like. 

You do not get to choose what the rights of millions of people are.

You do not have the right to fight for my rights.

You do not have the right to fight for your rights and act as if your special, knowing that it'll hurt the rights of millions to feel safe and use a good service that they agreed to.

You do have the right to hack your console, but you don't have the right to go on Sonys PSN services or buy any of Sonys games.

You do not have the right to pick and choose between what is right and wrong. Hackers do not make laws, they are meant to follow them.

You do not have the right to take advantage of the innocent bystanders of this situation, which includes developers, other publishers and consumers.

You do not represent me, you do not represent the majority, you do not represent freedom.

 

We are Consumers.

We were happy.

We do not forget

We do not put up with needless bullshit.

Piss off.


I'd like to see some kind of opinion poll where you get your facts from, because it isn't safe to say whether the majority support or oppose this. In fact, I'd be safe to say that the majority are in the "no opinion" category.

So what gives you the right to speak for those people, or lobby that you want corporate crackdown on consumer bought hardware? These people are consumers, too. They bought their PS3, so do not treat them as anyone lower than yourself.

Anyone can say they represent the majority, but unless you can back those words up, it's nothing but hot air.

I'm pretty sure that the majority of PS3 owners who use PSN are going to be pissed off that their service was taken offline, just because a few hackers wanted things their way. If they also felt that Sony was being the big bad world in this situation, then they would have reacted. Sony has done nothing to them, so they have no need to freak out about something this silly, on the other hand though, hackers have taken down their service. Sony does nothing bad, hackers attack the consumers right to go on PSN, I wonder which side they'd choose.

I'm pretty sure the majority of PS3 owners weren't online all at the same time to notice it. Once again, no facts, no persuasion.

They HAVE reacted. These are the consumers you are telling to quote "piss off".

Yeah, Sony are the big, innocent corporation here crying out buttrape. How about this? Instead of banning homebrew PS3s from PSN with extreme predjudice, why not enforce regulation of those consoles who DO cause damage to others? Why not? Because Sony do not wish to spend the money on doing procedures the right way, and are sending their brainwashed followers in to do their lobbying.

There is more than one way around this. Sony chose the 'cheaper, but hurt more of their base' path. And you're complaining when those consumers make a stand against this? That is pathetic.


And why don't hackers ban other hackers that do things go bad??



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:

We fight for consumer rights!

*Takes down PSN and hurts the service that millions of people use*

We only for fight for some consumer rights that appeal to a minority, every other consumer can go fuck themselves!

Anon and their fans are hypocrits.


sometimes the majority must suffer in-order for change to occur. and if they do what Im thinking they will, it will benefit consumers for a little bit. free content!


Your a fool and I don't think I'm going to talk to someone who is willing to exploit the innocent just so they can get some free games and some internet cred.


Its not about free games or internet cred. its about whats right. I have the right to modify my console, and help others be able to do so. Its like cell phones, they can be legally modified and jackbreak software is regularly available. What is the difference between a console and cell phone in terms of electronics? nothing, they both are specialized computers. So if i can modify my cell phone, I can modify my console. If the instructions to modify more cell phone is online, so should the instructions to modify my console.

This isn't a Civil War, this isn't even a national crisis, this is a bunch of hackers getting pissed off because they can't get what they want. Consumers are happy with what they've got and now the 'freedom fighters' have come along to ruin the services we already have and like. 

You do not get to choose what the rights of millions of people are.

You do not have the right to fight for my rights.

You do not have the right to fight for your rights and act as if your special, knowing that it'll hurt the rights of millions to feel safe and use a good service that they agreed to.

You do have the right to hack your console, but you don't have the right to go on Sonys PSN services or buy any of Sonys games.

You do not have the right to pick and choose between what is right and wrong. Hackers do not make laws, they are meant to follow them.

You do not have the right to take advantage of the innocent bystanders of this situation, which includes developers, other publishers and consumers.

You do not represent me, you do not represent the majority, you do not represent freedom.

 

We are Consumers.

We were happy.

We do not forget

We do not put up with needless bullshit.

Piss off.


I'd like to see some kind of opinion poll where you get your facts from, because it isn't safe to say whether the majority support or oppose this. In fact, I'd be safe to say that the majority are in the "no opinion" category.

So what gives you the right to speak for those people, or lobby that you want corporate crackdown on consumer bought hardware? These people are consumers, too. They bought their PS3, so do not treat them as anyone lower than yourself.

Anyone can say they represent the majority, but unless you can back those words up, it's nothing but hot air.

I'm pretty sure that the majority of PS3 owners who use PSN are going to be pissed off that their service was taken offline, just because a few hackers wanted things their way. If they also felt that Sony was being the big bad world in this situation, then they would have reacted. Sony has done nothing to them, so they have no need to freak out about something this silly, on the other hand though, hackers have taken down their service. Sony does nothing bad, hackers attack the consumers right to go on PSN, I wonder which side they'd choose.

I'm pretty sure the majority of PS3 owners weren't online all at the same time to notice it. Once again, no facts, no persuasion.

They HAVE reacted. These are the consumers you are telling to quote "piss off".

Yeah, Sony are the big, innocent corporation here crying out buttrape. How about this? Instead of banning homebrew PS3s from PSN with extreme predjudice, why not enforce regulation of those consoles who DO cause damage to others? Why not? Because Sony do not wish to spend the money on doing procedures the right way, and are sending their brainwashed followers in to do their lobbying.

There is more than one way around this. Sony chose the 'cheaper, but hurt more of their base' path. And you're complaining when those consumers make a stand against this? That is pathetic.


And why don't hackers ban other hackers that do things go bad??

Can you rephrase that? I've tried to interpret that question in several ways.



Around the Network
vlad321 said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Conegamer said:
M.U.G.E.N said:

bu bu bu they are the great the peoplez! they want whats good for consumerz...!!!

what a load of BS

anywho nothing biggie, idiots being annoying for a while

It's the little things though. Could do real PR damage


nah I mean this is one of those things the average consumers won't know. Heck if Sony can do some good PR magic here, they can use this idiotic acts to their advantage. Imagine saying hey sorry for the PSN troubles, hackers are doing it (in a better politically correct way), I will bet even those who supported such morons will get annoyed with them. and again Sony is a big company, few hackers are just not capable of doing the level of damage they speak of. If not we will be seeing a better 'attack' than this

Whe has sony ever shown the ability to do PR magic? If anything if they attempt their special brand of PR magic sony is screwed even more.


Kevin Butler? Jack Tretton at the past two E3's? Kaz Hirai with the PS3 Slim announcement? I think the Sony we have now is much better at handling PR.

I wish we could erase those 2 years (2006-2008) where Sony was just in shambles.



fordy said:

Even then, I'd be inclined to be persuaded based on the circumstances. Why? Because I believe that corporations should be made to be transparent along with government. For instance, if a hacker made their way into BP's network, and found information relating to deliberate negligence towards maintenance in the gulf that led to the large spill, and distributed it all over the internet, how would you rule on that?


You probably haven't hear the execs of Transoceans are giving themselves millions of bonus for an exceptional safety year 2010. Corps are totally going to play by the rules. Yeah.



fordy said:
DonFerrari said:
fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
fordy said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:
ssj12 said:
Doobie_wop said:

We fight for consumer rights!

*Takes down PSN and hurts the service that millions of people use*

We only for fight for some consumer rights that appeal to a minority, every other consumer can go fuck themselves!

Anon and their fans are hypocrits.


sometimes the majority must suffer in-order for change to occur. and if they do what Im thinking they will, it will benefit consumers for a little bit. free content!


Your a fool and I don't think I'm going to talk to someone who is willing to exploit the innocent just so they can get some free games and some internet cred.


Its not about free games or internet cred. its about whats right. I have the right to modify my console, and help others be able to do so. Its like cell phones, they can be legally modified and jackbreak software is regularly available. What is the difference between a console and cell phone in terms of electronics? nothing, they both are specialized computers. So if i can modify my cell phone, I can modify my console. If the instructions to modify more cell phone is online, so should the instructions to modify my console.

This isn't a Civil War, this isn't even a national crisis, this is a bunch of hackers getting pissed off because they can't get what they want. Consumers are happy with what they've got and now the 'freedom fighters' have come along to ruin the services we already have and like. 

You do not get to choose what the rights of millions of people are.

You do not have the right to fight for my rights.

You do not have the right to fight for your rights and act as if your special, knowing that it'll hurt the rights of millions to feel safe and use a good service that they agreed to.

You do have the right to hack your console, but you don't have the right to go on Sonys PSN services or buy any of Sonys games.

You do not have the right to pick and choose between what is right and wrong. Hackers do not make laws, they are meant to follow them.

You do not have the right to take advantage of the innocent bystanders of this situation, which includes developers, other publishers and consumers.

You do not represent me, you do not represent the majority, you do not represent freedom.

 

We are Consumers.

We were happy.

We do not forget

We do not put up with needless bullshit.

Piss off.


I'd like to see some kind of opinion poll where you get your facts from, because it isn't safe to say whether the majority support or oppose this. In fact, I'd be safe to say that the majority are in the "no opinion" category.

So what gives you the right to speak for those people, or lobby that you want corporate crackdown on consumer bought hardware? These people are consumers, too. They bought their PS3, so do not treat them as anyone lower than yourself.

Anyone can say they represent the majority, but unless you can back those words up, it's nothing but hot air.

I'm pretty sure that the majority of PS3 owners who use PSN are going to be pissed off that their service was taken offline, just because a few hackers wanted things their way. If they also felt that Sony was being the big bad world in this situation, then they would have reacted. Sony has done nothing to them, so they have no need to freak out about something this silly, on the other hand though, hackers have taken down their service. Sony does nothing bad, hackers attack the consumers right to go on PSN, I wonder which side they'd choose.

I'm pretty sure the majority of PS3 owners weren't online all at the same time to notice it. Once again, no facts, no persuasion.

They HAVE reacted. These are the consumers you are telling to quote "piss off".

Yeah, Sony are the big, innocent corporation here crying out buttrape. How about this? Instead of banning homebrew PS3s from PSN with extreme predjudice, why not enforce regulation of those consoles who DO cause damage to others? Why not? Because Sony do not wish to spend the money on doing procedures the right way, and are sending their brainwashed followers in to do their lobbying.

There is more than one way around this. Sony chose the 'cheaper, but hurt more of their base' path. And you're complaining when those consumers make a stand against this? That is pathetic.


And why don't hackers ban other hackers that do things go bad??

Can you rephrase that? I've tried to interpret that question in several ways.

You said that Sony took off Other/OS and homebrew along (didn't bothered by the fact that this was done after GeoHotz release of information about being able to hack through other/os) and that they should go after people that are harming then (they are doing this by seing GH did it);

And you said that they took the cheapest route when they should take another measures that involved expending more money (why should anyone be guilty because he doesn't want to expend more money to protect from something that shouldn't be done in the first place)... and I said, if it was a hacker that started the problem and are hackers that are doing things that harms some services and make sony overreact, why other hackers don't fight those??

Never saw any hacker working on a hacking to reestabilish anti-piracy measure on a exploit... didn't saw hackers banning pirates from PSN...

You want sony to solve everything and do it the way you want?? Maybe people could start doing it by themselves, go there and ban the CoD cheaters.

@people doing car analogies: It isn't like Sony is prohibiting you from going to the Highways, they are prohibiting people with modded cars to enter their private roads protected by them. They aren't prohibiting to play games (if you kept your Linux), they are "recusing" to sell you new ones... People twist it like if Sony could go to their homes and pick their PS3 Backs, sony is denning service not stealing your owned product (like pirates are doing even when they say they didn't steal because they never took the item from store, but they forgot that the item will still be there unsold and costed money to do - or do you think if a game isn't sold it doesn't cost anything?)



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Kasz216 said:

Dreamcast's attach rate was high COMPAIRED TO OTHER SYSTEMS AT THE SAME TIME.


Seriously, you can look up the numbers right here on this website.

The gun analogies point, was the point by the way, it basically disproved the arguement that your trying to make here... and yet you keep trying to argue it.  Making the next point, kinda pointless but oh well.

 

As for the research studies.  You do realize they don't actually ask pirates right, they track all this data scientificially?

Torrent sites don't make the research.. they report on them.  These are all government and university studies... and they all say "Piracy has no effect, mild positive effect"  except for one which says "Can't tell".

Any articles you read from torrent sites likely were completely valid.


This is a completely pointless post, however I just wanted to mention that the word scientificially should totally become a proper word.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

vlad321 said:
Kasz216 said:

Dreamcast's attach rate was high COMPAIRED TO OTHER SYSTEMS AT THE SAME TIME.


Seriously, you can look up the numbers right here on this website.

The gun analogies point, was the point by the way, it basically disproved the arguement that your trying to make here... and yet you keep trying to argue it.  Making the next point, kinda pointless but oh well.

 

As for the research studies.  You do realize they don't actually ask pirates right, they track all this data scientificially?

Torrent sites don't make the research.. they report on them.  These are all government and university studies... and they all say "Piracy has no effect, mild positive effect"  except for one which says "Can't tell".

Any articles you read from torrent sites likely were completely valid.


This is a completely pointless post, however I just wanted to mention that the word scientificially should totally become a proper word.

And just to note, Kaz someday provided me some so called studies from unknow universities with a little number of subjects... And most were unconclusive or used researchs from hackers information, and none were from government - as he says there are a lot of government and respectable univeristy that corroborate his points, but never saw the docs.

It would be mingbloging why large companies would expend a lot on anti-piracy rotines if it really doesn't harm them (and when used the CD comparition he back tracked saying there was a bubble and today you see that no harm is done, even though total revenue is 10% of what it was before piracy becaming rampant) is it millions expended just to have someone to blame when you don't meet your projections?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994