| Dodece said: This thread is bursting with bad logic, but one sentiment really struck a nerve with me. The sentiment that two wrongs do not make a right is absolutely false. Sure it sounds good, but society most often practices the opposite, and views the end result as being right. I feel a example is called for. I think we all agree locking people into small rooms is wrong. I think we all agree that killing another human being is wrong. However that doesn't stop us from locking murderers in small rooms. Then considering the act to be right. We fundamentally view punishment of a offender as a righteous act. The negative response is proportional to the crime. I see a lot of people advocating that Sony not be bound by consequences for its acts. I am sorry where others see overkill in the hackers attacks I see letting Sony just slide right by as being equally reprehensible. People talk about this being fought out in court. I think everyone knows that isn't exactly fair. People feeling victimized being forced to spend a great deal of money they do not have to fight a corporation with what amounts to bottomless wealth. You are not advocating for these people having a stand up fight. Your advocating that Sony has the right to bend someone over the table and rape them. Perhaps I am more fairness minded then most. Seeing as neither side would readily fight a war in the middle ground that cannot be determined by wealth or technical skill. All I can say is this all things are fair in war. Soldiers fight in the way that gives them the greatest advantage. Computer hackers will hack, because that is what they are good at. Sony wants to litigate, because they have ungodly wealth to pay a army of lawyers. Technically speaking they are both very unsporting, Since both sides fight dirty I wouldn't get mired down in one being worse then the others. What bothers me about this is the Sony break it mentality. Instead of finding a way to make something work. They just like to break things, because is saves time and money. I am sure there was a technical solution to their problem that would have allowed the console to retain a property it was sold on, and to address potential security concerns. There is a bad logic at play that says it is okay to break something that belongs to someone else to make life easier for you. A lot of people in this thread are buying into this shitty logic. That it has to be all or nothing. I am sorry there is always a reasonable compromise that can be made, and if Sony had just tried to do that. Even had they failed Geohotz probably wouldn't have felt a need to jailbreak the PS3 in the first place, and none of this would have happened. More to the point it would have probably helped the public image of Sony. When companies treat people fairly it usually results in good things. Valve has been hacked a number of times. That said however the hackers are usually caught. The reason is simple people really live Valve, and Valve really treats its customers with respect. So when Valve asks for help in finding hackers. Usually someone rats them out. Hacking into a Valve server is a pretty good way to find yourself in leg irons. Sony should learn from this, and work towards getting more respect. Making people happy is just good business. Going out of your way to piss people off isn't going to bring good things. Going after Geohotz was just plain dumb. There was nothing that could be done at that point to put the genie back in the bottle. They wanted to make an example out of somebody, and that is just plain mean sprited. |
*like*
