Would you perhaps prefer anarchy?

"The problem is your definition of "fix". If it's a temporary solution to cover a deeper problem, I don't call that a fix."

well the thing with words is that they do tend to vary in meaning from context to context, when we focus on the context of technology and computing we generally accept that most devices and systems can be hacked into given enough time...

and from that then i guess i figured that when i spoke of a "fix" that it would be obvious that i was reffering to something that could be eventually be broken through, if you didn't undertand that before then i'm sorry

"I'm pretty confident in my own logic"

i know you are but it doesn't change the fact that beyond that theres not much backing up your argument

"So if you haven't heard of it, that must mean it's absolutely factual"

no its just taking the information presented to me, just like i i did when i heard that the keys had been leaked...

"You think sony is some kind of god, who never asked for this in the first place, and can never do anything wrong"

i actually don't and i was never even close to implying that i believe that they had mastered technology to such a degree that they could "rewrite decades of digital encryption methods in their first attempt" ( if i'm wrong quote me where i did )

beyond that i could as easily say that you seem to view sony as some demonic force that deserved some kind of retribution and maybe they did i wouldn't know they've never done anything to me personally maybe they have to you if so well all i can say is that i'm sorry

True, nothing is totally secure. However, I was referring to similar means. If the PS3 is cracked again, it WILL be because of it's obligation to maintain backward compatibility with games published under the original key. A fix would imply that hackers would need to look into other means to breach security, rather than adding efforts to the already damaged wall.

Once again, if you really wish to know why I'm confident, do a little research on the implications of digital security breaches. I'm sick of giving you the logical path to my reasoning, only to have it ignored.

You don't know me very well, do you? I give a critical eye to ALL corporate entities, especially the ones who start to test the bounds of civil rights (including the right to personal property), as well as snake oil techniques, such as taking back things that a buyer has purchased (there is a derogatory term for that, but I refuse to use it). Stand by for a rant on Apple and their forced MagSafe power adapter monopoly...

Anarchy isn't the world we live in either. 

Black and white much, eh? ha ha

In any case:

SYSTEM SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT (Version 1.4) FOR THE PlayStation®3 SYSTEM

December 10, 2009  (that's before April 2010, obviously, the month in which the firmware update removed the Other OS fonctionality ^_-)

3. SERVICES AND UPDATES

From time to time, SCE may provide updates, upgrades or services to your PS3™ system to ensure it is functioning properly in accordance with SCE guidelines or provide you with new offerings. Some services may be provided automatically without notice when you are online, and others may be available to you through SCE's online network or authorized channels. Without limitation, services may include the provision of the latest update or download of new release that may include security patches, new technology or revised settings and features which may prevent access to unauthorized or pirated content, or use of unauthorized hardware or software in connection with the PS3™ system. Additionally, you may not be able to view your own content if it includes or displays content that is protected by authentication technology. Some services may change your current settings, cause a loss of data or content, or cause some loss of functionality.

"it WILL be because of it's obligation to maintain backward compatibility with games published under the original key"

maybe, we'll just have to wait and see... this is about 9 months and counting now, for a seemingly simple hack it appears to be taking some time

"I give a critical eye to ALL corporate entities, especially the ones who start to test the bounds of civil rights (including the right to personal property), as well as snake oil techniques, such as taking back things that a buyer has purchased (there is a derogatory term for that, but I refuse to use it)"

it confuses me how people can say things like this then turn a blind eye to what the hackers are doing... then again we're two different people and as a result we can't be expected to see eye to eye on this issue

"such as taking back things that a buyer has purchased"

implying that people were coerced into purchasing their ps3s for linux? even though it wasn't advertised on the box it came in, in any of the tv ads or promos etc?

Once again, assuming that it already hasn't been hacked. If it already has, it's most likely remaining underground in fear of a Sony backlash.

Okay now tell me, what did the hackers do wrong in this situation? You need to relay your hate from the hackers and put it towards piracy in this issue. They have every right to modify their property just as they have as much right to inform others how to with theirs.

I want you to prove to me that there was not one person who listened to either Phil Harrison, or read the article on the Sony website informing of OtherOS capability, and then decided that it would make a perfect, cheap Linux box, for say Samba, Apache or NFS. Heck, even I was almost persuaded, myself! If you can do that, then I would concede that Sony took nothing from anybody.

Here we go....are you the kind of person who believes that companies put disclaimers on things for common courtesy? Here's a hint. It's to protect their ass from going to court and paying an exhorbirant amount of fees to defend oneself. Play by the rules (and by which, I don't mean corporate created rules. Most of those have no legal leg to stand on). And please let's not bring race into this....

Oh, and the agreement that you posted would hardly be enforced by a court. Just because they put it in there doesn't mean that they're valid to do so. For instance, if Sony slipped in a clause "we reserve the right to reclaim any hardware purchased by the user", and then they try to enact that, how do you think the court would rule?

Ha ha ha!  Still in utopian world.  Those contracts that you agree on are written by their lawyers.  They're in fact valid, and just like you said, made to protect their own asses.  Which brings us to this here argument... For which all your silly points have been made moot. There was no case.   Now that all is said and done, you can complain all you want and find delusional reasons to think that the judge wasn't quialifed for that case and whatnot (like you know any better, ha ha).  In the end, as the judge concluded, and which was really easy to guess for most who followed the story a wee bit, Sony did win by default.

It doesn't go any simpler than that.

So what exactly did Sony "win"? For those who ACTUALLY followed the story, the case was dismissed on base of lack of evidence, not for the fact that the judge took a look at this tripe of a license agreement.

The fact of the matter is, if evidence is found that keeping OtherOS on hinders the console's main ability to play newer games, then there will most likely be a retrial n this matter (see the ruling by the judge, that the conclusion was that Sony have every right to keep others off PSN, which I agree with. However, limiting purchased consoles from their main purpose of playing ANY games offline was something he didn't take into consideration).

Lawyers can write any old crap on paper and call it legal. Keep in mind that these are the same people who try to persuade judge/jury in their direction EVEN IF they know they're in the wrong. So using this ethos argument is pointless.

I fail to see the logic how you're cheering on how a big multinational conglomerate screws some of their legitimate buyers. Are you really THAT far behind such a company? What's your opinion on Lik Sang? What about the rootkit incident? Then again, I shouldn't be suprised. After all, I'm talking to someone who believes a good first contact involves spamming insulting messages on one's wall....

What a befitting scene for this thread, considering the amount of support Sony is getting here: