By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fps_d0minat0r on 13 March 2011
Edit Thread
Xen said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
Xen said:
Munkeh111 said:
greenmedic88 said:

I'll be sure to send donations when he designs, engineers and produces his own successful console that has the full support of third party developers in addition to AAA first party studio games, and finds the security of his closed gaming platform compromised by consumer rights advocates who make deliberate efforts to crack any security measures implemented and threaten his legitimate business and viability as a secured gaming platform.

Simply put, his efforts do nothing for me as a legitimate consumer of games and there's no reason why I would want to nor should assist in footing the bill for the legal expenses he knowingly brought upon himself with his work.

Precisely. Sony are just trying to protect the ecosystem that they have created, and what they did was perfectly legal, there have terms of use, and what rights they have as platform owner, and they utilised them

I can understand there are some issues with consumer rights, but this is primarily a games machine, and if linux could threaten its profitability as one, then Sony had every right to stop it. As for current issues, they are seperate, and Sony seem to be making progress in dealing with them

Why are the hackers always seen as the good guys?

Security researchers, use proper language... and the answer you're looking for is obviously because the corporations are out there to screw us, even when it doesn't look that way ;)

If they dont work for sony then theres no reason for them to do "security research"

if a stranger was looking around your house at all the alarms and locks and entrance/exits surely you wouldnt think their up to something and report them to the police.

and it doesnt matter if hackers condone piracy or not.....it doesnt change the FACT that their the cause of it. without hackers, there would be no piracy.

and if they loved linux so much then why did they CHOOSE to REMOVE it?

A minus 1 to you for replying seriously to sarcasm ;)

oops