Anon : PSN Users "Butthurt" and "Selfish" For Wanting to Use PSN During the Outage

[scottie]

OK, I'll give it a go

So, the hackers involved in this see it as a person's right to do what they want with things they purchased. Lets not complicate this by going into some of the things that Geohotz enabled people to do (piracy for example). Lets keep it to 'Sony disabled OtherOS, and then Geohotz reenabled it' This is infact the order it happened in, your claim that " [linux was removed] because geohot tried to undermine the security of the console through linux which of course sony didn't want to allow and as a result it was removed" is simply not true, as far as I can tell. Look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS#History for details.

There was then a class action lawsuit against Sony, saying that removing OtherOS was "unfair and deceptive" and a "breach of good faith".

So obviously some people in this world (myself included) believe that removing OtherOS, without even attempting to compensate the users was immoral. Imagine if Nintendo made a mandatory update for the 3DS that turned off the 3D effect permanently, you are taking away a feature that was advertised when people purchased the console.

Of course, on the other hand, one can argue that by removing OtherOS, Sony made it harder to hack the PS3 (although they also made people want to hack it more) and thus they protected their users from people being able to cheat in games, and from the loss of 3rd party support that can accompany the system being pirated.

I hope you can thus recognise that for some people, the first of those is more significant than the 2nd, even if you don't agree?

Then, we have the hackers counter measures. The theory behind them is that if they can financially hurt Sony with their hacking, then the next time Sony (or any other company) is in a similar situation, they will choose to leave the feature in, instead of removing it and consequently being hacked.

Again, can you recognise that this is a legitimate belief to have? Even if you do not personally hold that belief.

The hackers then decided that taking down the PSN was a good way to financially damage Sony, through the effort they would have to go to to secure the network, the cost of providing credit card monitoring for their customers, the cost of the apology gift they would give their users and the cost of lost sales of online heavy games.

Then it is just a matter of working out if the cost to Sony's customers is greater than or less than the benefit that this action will give to consumers in the long term. You (and me) have both decided that the cost of the hacking (inconvenience for users) was greater than the benefit of the hacking (convinces companies to act in a different way in the future), but that is not to say that no-one can honestly believe that the benefit is better than the cost.

The hackers were trying to do good. They do this at great personal risk or imprisonment or fines, they do this despite the hate sent their way, they do this with no personal glory, because if they ever tell anyone that it was them they get thrown in jail. They do this to try to help me, and they do it to try to help you.

Call their feelings misplaced, call them a bull, trying to help someone find a particular piece of china in a china shop.

But do NOT call them selfish.