Ha! Anonymous didnt do it. It was Phantom.

[o_O.Q]

Alby_da_Wolf said:

o_O.Q said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:

flyingforce said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:

iasta said:

@ o_0.Q

What happened to Sony was predictable, they sue lots of guys that discuss about the PS3 hacking (not the one for the back up player / usb loader, but the ones that do it for homebrew, not piracy) sure they should have prepare for shitstorm because you have the right to do what you want for the hardware your purchase, so it gives some incentive to hackers to mess with Sony and got some justification for it.

If sony only goes against the pirate, not the hackers they would have much less trouble.

Agree. Suing just the pirates is the only acceptable strategy, attacking honest users can only backfire, even if they don't piss hackers off, as they are pissing good customers off anyway, breaking one of the fundamental rules of commerce.

lol at calling geohotz honest

Isn't he? He was sued only in a civil lawsuit and never condemned. He always spoke against piracy. He just wants users to keep the freedom to modify what they buy for legit purposes.

yes true he always spoke out publicly against piracy... yet his actions allowed for it and compromised online gaming... its not your intentions thats important its the results of your actions...

Sony keeps the right to kick modded consoles out of its network, I don't deny its right, neither does GeoHot, AFAIK. BTW on PC gaming networks, you can access them with whatever PC you like and you can have any SW you like on your PC (as long as you use a supported OS, if the network isn't platform independent, or a supported browser if the net is based on them), your only obligations are to use unmodded games (or authorized mods of legit, not pirated copies of the games) and unmodded proprietary client for the network, if one is needed. Modding doesn't necessarily mean crime, piracy, malicious hacking or cheating and in the cases users use their freedom for not legit purposes, networks owners have every right to deny them access. Not to mention that it's like with weapons: forbidding honest people from owning them doesn't stop criminals.

"Sony keeps the right to kick modded consoles out of its network"

They should also have the right to attack any threats to their software or to the games that hard working people toil to create

"Modding doesn't necessarily mean crime, piracy, malicious hacking or cheating"

agreed but the bottomline is that it happened in this case... and sony attacked the source first by removing linux then geohot... to say that they should attack the pirates only is pointless if the source is still there to provide the exploits so that more pirates are formed

"forbidding honest people from owning them doesn't stop criminals"

i disagree if theres a situation where the weapons can be successfully prevented from being obtained by either ( stop the source ) then both will do without... which was sony's plan i would have to assume