By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony’s War on Makers, Hackers, and Innovators

Kasz216 on 26 February 2011
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.  Firmware updates also came on the games.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.  I guess that's ok though, because there are clear rules.  GM, Sony and everyone else are free to do whatever they want with the product you paid money for and if you decide you want to use your product differently or even keep all the functionality they take away your screwed.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



Around the Network
JamaicameCRAZY on 26 February 2011
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



tell me can you go throw 5,000 cans in the ocean because you just love the sound it make hitting the water? How about discharge a firearm in the air outside of your nearest courthouse at 2 AM? How about empty a barrel of oil all over your backyard because you think a black lawn is so much spiffyer than a green one?

This idea of 100% product ownership and use is a joke.



EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

            

       Coffee is for closers!

Kasz216 on 26 February 2011
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



tell me can you go throw 5,000 cans in the ocean because you just love the sound it make hitting the water? How about discharge a firearm in the air outside of your nearest courthouse at 2 AM? How about empty a barrel of oil all over your backyard because you think a black lawn is so much spiffyer than a green one?

I don't see your point?  You are talking about things that actually damage the enviroment and/or other people there with no benefit.

Versus something that mostly helps people and who's main purpose is to unlock hardware so that users can get the most legal use possible out of their hardware.

People are defending Sony, who are literally currently argueing in court right now, that as soon as your 1 year warranty is up, they have every right in the world to completely frag your system.

Or as Sony put it directly "So, Your Honor, if the purchaser can have no expectation of the PlayStation 3 functioning at all after the expiration of that one-year warranty, how can it somehow have a greater expectation about the availability of one feature?"

Which is exactly why hackers like this dude is needed.



JamaicameCRAZY on 26 February 2011
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



tell me can you go throw 5,000 cans in the ocean because you just love the sound it make hitting the water? How about discharge a firearm in the air outside of your nearest courthouse at 2 AM? How about empty a barrel of oil all over your backyard because you think a black lawn is so much spiffyer than a green one?

I don't see your point?  You are talking about things that actually damage the enviroment and/or other people there with no benefit.

Versus something that mostly helps people and who's main purpose is to unlock hardware so that users can get the most legal use possible out of their hardware.

People are defending Sony, who are literally currently argueing in court right now, that as soon as your 1 year warranty is up, they have every right in the world to completely frag your system.

Which is exactly why hackers like this dude is needed.

NOTHING WILL CHANGE IF SONY WINS shit will go right back to where it was before dipstick came along!!!!!!! I am more afraid of what will happen if geo wins im mean jeeze what cant be hacked there goes every multiplayer out there because geo says its fine its 100% yours then sony and all the boys have to make it harder for people to and i have to deal with all the crap they come up with DRMS who knows what else they cook up.

You cant only say legal use too.

My whole point is you cant do those things you can do plenty of things in this world with the things you buy deal with it.



EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

            

       Coffee is for closers!

Kasz216 on 26 February 2011
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



tell me can you go throw 5,000 cans in the ocean because you just love the sound it make hitting the water? How about discharge a firearm in the air outside of your nearest courthouse at 2 AM? How about empty a barrel of oil all over your backyard because you think a black lawn is so much spiffyer than a green one?

I don't see your point?  You are talking about things that actually damage the enviroment and/or other people there with no benefit.

Versus something that mostly helps people and who's main purpose is to unlock hardware so that users can get the most legal use possible out of their hardware.

People are defending Sony, who are literally currently argueing in court right now, that as soon as your 1 year warranty is up, they have every right in the world to completely frag your system.

Which is exactly why hackers like this dude is needed.

NOTHING WILL CHANGE IF SONY WINS shit will go right back to where it was before dipstick came along!!!!!!! I am more afraid of what will happen if geo wins im mean jeeze what cant be hacked there goes every multiplayer out there because geo says its fine its 100% yours then sony and all the boys have to make it harder for people to and i have to deal with all the crap they come up with DRMS who knows what else they cook up.

You cant only say legal use too.

My whole point is you cant do those things you can do plenty of things in this world with the things you buy deal with it.

You can't do things with stuff you buy... that will harm other people or the enviroment.  That's about it.

As for your parnoid "what can't be hacked" comment.   See PC gaming?  The answer is basically, not much can be hacked or rather, shit can be hacked but it has almost no negatives lots of positives, and it doesn't really cause a problem.  Every PC game in existence has had it's multiplayer hacked... in MUCH easier ways then the Sony hack.

The impact?  Zero.

Aside from that you may have missed this Sony arguement.

"So, Your Honor, if the purchaser can have no expectation of the PlayStation 3 functioning at all after the expiration of that one-year warranty, how can it somehow have a greater expectation about the availability of one feature?"

In otherwords, after a year.  Sony feels they can remove anything/everything.  If this line of reasoning holds true, it means companies can basically break anything you "own" after a year, because they feel like it and want you to buy a new one.  They are expected to with with that above line of arguement.  Combined with being banned from changing your firmware = by by actually owning anything anymore, because the companies can shut it off whenever they want, then sue you for trying to fix the object you bought.



Around the Network
Ail on 26 February 2011
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
funkateer said:

Regarding the geohot thing, what the article fails to acknowledge is that Sony is the 'Maker' here, not geohot.

Whether or not there is any legal ground for Sony is imho a bit irrelevant (who thinks the law is always fair anyway?). Even if Sony's agressive stance is smart or not is besides the point.

I feel they have the right to protect their investment, which geohot and the likes are jeopardizing. Sony has been selling their platform under cost price so that customers can afford the thing, meaning to recoup the investment by software. This investment created jobs for god knows how many people developing the platform & the content. That is why the PS3 is a closed platform. Personally I think that's a pretty compelling reason.

If geohot seriously thinks his 'efforts to avoid piracy' are enough than he's really one arrogant (or perhaps just thick and ignorant) kid. Who says his 'efforts' can not be worked around? Did he avoid a PS emulator to be ported? (Sony still sells PS1 games, mind you, so he has actually still opened the door to piracy in a way)

He distributed tools to break security, and that directly jeopardizes the bread and butter of a lot of people. So geohot, is your little hobby worth that? The industry is under enough pressure as it is, so I'd rather see him excercise his skills in a more meaningful way.

My 2cts


Wouldn't that have been solved by... Sony not selling the PS3 for a loss.  You are basically saying, Sony should be protected for making poor buisness decisions, and because tangentially something he did was used in a wrong way.

 

That's like saying gunmakers should be forced to store owners money because the guns they make may of been used to rob stores that don't have robbery insurance.

Laws shouldn't be crafted around poor buisness decisions.


What would really solve it is.. Geo not trying to break security which would allow him and others access to information conected to peoples wallets/ pirate games/ steal shit. Which is illegal.


He... didn't do that?  He broke the secuirty that prevented a lot of other stuff... and then people went from their and broke into that stuff.

Well except the Credit Card shit... that's been around forever... because Sony doesn't encrypt the information it sends out... because... I have no idea why.

Regardless, it's been consistantly ruled that when a company ties the "legal" protections with the "illegal ones" they lose any right to litigation because they, not the hackers made it so that one had to be breached, to breach the other.

Unless there is a surprise ruling... they should lose on that count.

which is Negligence/Carelessness.


No, I think Sony did it on purpose personally.  I wouldn't say they were being negligent or careless so much as they didn't care because they thought they had an unbeatable sysetm.

Though the not encrypting peoples credit card numbers was negligent and careless.  They could get sued for that.

Edit: Oh, you probably meant Geohot?  That's... not negligence or carelessness at all.  It was probably more a case of not caring.  

"They made it so that getting the full legal use out of their system is going to hurt them.  It's a shame, but what can you do, I have my legal rights."

 

If companies tried to stop locking out the legitamite uses of hardware, maybe they wouldn't have so many problems witht he few illegitamite uses... though of course, they aren't really fighting the illegitamite uses... it's the legitamite uses they want to fight like being able to backup your own games and run third party free legal software vs having to buy stuff.


ROFL. Did you actually read the information about the credit card information ?

The credit card information is encrypted through SSL, what more you want ? That's what happen each time you make a frigging online purchase on your PC.( so when are you suing your bank, amazon, and all those others web site for using SSL ???)

The reason the guy was able to tell you what information Sony sends is that he used a CFW to see what his PS3 is sending through SSL...

So much disinformation.

Suddenly sending data through SSL become the same as not encrypting it at all...

 

If you don't install any CFW on your PS3 there is no way someone can break through that SSL connection and get your credit card information....................NO WAY



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

JamaicameCRAZY on 26 February 2011
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am going to go contrarian here because defending Geohotz is too easy. Using symbolism, which most college age, foam at the mouth progressives mistake for reality, Geohotz = poor, innocent individual and Sony = Big, greedy, bad multinational corporation.

Having paid due respect to symbolism and it's almost idiotic simplicity, let me tear a new one into Geohotz and all his sheep...excuse me, supporters.

Everything Sony creates is it's intellectual property. This is equivalent to you owning a house and going through all the necessary hoops to do whatever and build whatever you want on your own private property. Geohotz and his ilk are outsiders.

One night you go to sleep and wake up in the morning. You look out your sliding glass door and see 2 tents pitched in the middle of your backyard. Some trustafarian dude comes walking up to you as you step outside. He says he goes by the name of Geohotz, explains he found a hole in your fence, called a good friend, both climbed through, and are now residing on your property.

You give them the usual reply. Well, I hold the deed to this land, I pay the taxes on this land, etc. Please remove yourself from my premises.

Geohotz replies with a flat out no.

What do you do? Call the police to remove the squatters and fix the hole in your fence? Call the police to remove the squatters, fix the hole in your fence, and file a lawsuit against Geohotz and his friends to prevent them from doing it again?

Sony is attempting to do the latter. Their property is their domain where they are absolute king and emperor. In their mind if you participate on PSN, the PS3 you paid over $300 for is now under their domain so long as it connects to PSN, and they can release whatever firmware they want to change the internals of your PS3.

Folks like Geohotz have no respect for a concept called private property or intellectual property. They do because they can. The strong beat the weak. The only rule is to not be a sucker.

Now whose moral paradigm would you like to live under? Sony's where there are clear rules that are written out? Geohotz's and hackers where the strongest (smartest) do what they want, when they want, and to hell with the consequences?


A) Geohotz doesn't have a PSN account... apparently never has.

B) The one where people who own their property can do with their property what they wishde.  If Geohotz wanted the strongest to do what they want, when they want... he wouldn't of released it for everybody to use.

C) Intellectual Property shouldn't cover things like basic firmware.  Your car has firmware.  To say Sony should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, is like saying GM should be able to do whatever they want with their firmware, like say... shut off your care a year after you pay for it.

Once a product is sold... that's it.  It's sold, as long as people aren't using the product for profit, they should be free to use it however they wish... with illegal uses of it like piracy being dealt with on the individual level.



tell me can you go throw 5,000 cans in the ocean because you just love the sound it make hitting the water? How about discharge a firearm in the air outside of your nearest courthouse at 2 AM? How about empty a barrel of oil all over your backyard because you think a black lawn is so much spiffyer than a green one?

I don't see your point?  You are talking about things that actually damage the enviroment and/or other people there with no benefit.

Versus something that mostly helps people and who's main purpose is to unlock hardware so that users can get the most legal use possible out of their hardware.

People are defending Sony, who are literally currently argueing in court right now, that as soon as your 1 year warranty is up, they have every right in the world to completely frag your system.

Which is exactly why hackers like this dude is needed.

NOTHING WILL CHANGE IF SONY WINS shit will go right back to where it was before dipstick came along!!!!!!! I am more afraid of what will happen if geo wins im mean jeeze what cant be hacked there goes every multiplayer out there because geo says its fine its 100% yours then sony and all the boys have to make it harder for people to and i have to deal with all the crap they come up with DRMS who knows what else they cook up.

You cant only say legal use too.

My whole point is you cant do those things you can do plenty of things in this world with the things you buy deal with it.

You can't do things with stuff you buy... that will harm other people or the enviroment.  That's about it.

As for your parnoid "what can't be hacked" comment.   See PC gaming?  The answer is basically, not much can be hacked or rather, shit can be hacked but it has almost no negatives lots of positives, and it doesn't really cause a problem.

You may have missed this Sony arguement.

"So, Your Honor, if the purchaser can have no expectation of the PlayStation 3 functioning at all after the expiration of that one-year warranty, how can it somehow have a greater expectation about the availability of one feature?"

In otherwords, after a year.  Sony feels they can remove anything/everything.  If this line of reasoning holds true, it means companies can basically break anything you "own" after a year, because they feel like it and want you to buy a new one.

Kinda like RROD, Kinda like the disk tray problems on ps2s, kinda like how orginal xboxs needed to be sent back to HQ every 6 months or so...Im mean seriously this is the 2011 people are so connected its rediculous if sony started effing people over everyone would hear about it and stop buying their shit. If Geo wouldnt have done this we wouldnt be having this discussion. It would be extremely detrimental for a company to remove all features and it would be very detrimintal if not suicide.  So let sony try something like this, any company for that matter and watch people speak with their wallets, which they will.

And calling me paranoid when your the one going on about sony removing everything in a year of ownership...yea thats not paranoid at all..they are talking about a limited warrenty on the hardware everything has this. Crappy car companies that pump out Crappy cars only warrenty their cars for 30k miles, i dont see you complaining about them, how would you like to spend 30 k to have your car start falling apart on you. Thing like this happen everywhere why cherrypick and complain about this one?





EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

            

       Coffee is for closers!

Kasz216 on 26 February 2011
Ail said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
funkateer said:

Regarding the geohot thing, what the article fails to acknowledge is that Sony is the 'Maker' here, not geohot.

Whether or not there is any legal ground for Sony is imho a bit irrelevant (who thinks the law is always fair anyway?). Even if Sony's agressive stance is smart or not is besides the point.

I feel they have the right to protect their investment, which geohot and the likes are jeopardizing. Sony has been selling their platform under cost price so that customers can afford the thing, meaning to recoup the investment by software. This investment created jobs for god knows how many people developing the platform & the content. That is why the PS3 is a closed platform. Personally I think that's a pretty compelling reason.

If geohot seriously thinks his 'efforts to avoid piracy' are enough than he's really one arrogant (or perhaps just thick and ignorant) kid. Who says his 'efforts' can not be worked around? Did he avoid a PS emulator to be ported? (Sony still sells PS1 games, mind you, so he has actually still opened the door to piracy in a way)

He distributed tools to break security, and that directly jeopardizes the bread and butter of a lot of people. So geohot, is your little hobby worth that? The industry is under enough pressure as it is, so I'd rather see him excercise his skills in a more meaningful way.

My 2cts


Wouldn't that have been solved by... Sony not selling the PS3 for a loss.  You are basically saying, Sony should be protected for making poor buisness decisions, and because tangentially something he did was used in a wrong way.

 

That's like saying gunmakers should be forced to store owners money because the guns they make may of been used to rob stores that don't have robbery insurance.

Laws shouldn't be crafted around poor buisness decisions.


What would really solve it is.. Geo not trying to break security which would allow him and others access to information conected to peoples wallets/ pirate games/ steal shit. Which is illegal.


He... didn't do that?  He broke the secuirty that prevented a lot of other stuff... and then people went from their and broke into that stuff.

Well except the Credit Card shit... that's been around forever... because Sony doesn't encrypt the information it sends out... because... I have no idea why.

Regardless, it's been consistantly ruled that when a company ties the "legal" protections with the "illegal ones" they lose any right to litigation because they, not the hackers made it so that one had to be breached, to breach the other.

Unless there is a surprise ruling... they should lose on that count.

which is Negligence/Carelessness.


No, I think Sony did it on purpose personally.  I wouldn't say they were being negligent or careless so much as they didn't care because they thought they had an unbeatable sysetm.

Though the not encrypting peoples credit card numbers was negligent and careless.  They could get sued for that.

Edit: Oh, you probably meant Geohot?  That's... not negligence or carelessness at all.  It was probably more a case of not caring.  

"They made it so that getting the full legal use out of their system is going to hurt them.  It's a shame, but what can you do, I have my legal rights."

 

If companies tried to stop locking out the legitamite uses of hardware, maybe they wouldn't have so many problems witht he few illegitamite uses... though of course, they aren't really fighting the illegitamite uses... it's the legitamite uses they want to fight like being able to backup your own games and run third party free legal software vs having to buy stuff.


ROFL. Did you actually read the information about the credit card information ?

The credit card information is encrypted through SSL, what more you want ? That's what happen each time you make a frigging online purchase on your PC.

The reason the guy was able to tell you what information Sony sends is that he used a CFW to see what his PS3 is sending through SSL...

So much disinformation.

Suddenly sending data through SSL become the same as not encrypting it at all...

 

If you don't install any CFW on your PS3 there is no way someone can break through that SSL connection and get your credit card information....................NO WAY

Hey, if that's what the story states now.  Ars Technica previously said it was completely unencrypted.

So, Sony can't be sued for neglect either... I don't see your point though... if they weren't encrypting it, even if you installed CFW, sony could be cpmsidered at fault.



JamaicameCRAZY on 26 February 2011
Ail said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
funkateer said:

Regarding the geohot thing, what the article fails to acknowledge is that Sony is the 'Maker' here, not geohot.

Whether or not there is any legal ground for Sony is imho a bit irrelevant (who thinks the law is always fair anyway?). Even if Sony's agressive stance is smart or not is besides the point.

I feel they have the right to protect their investment, which geohot and the likes are jeopardizing. Sony has been selling their platform under cost price so that customers can afford the thing, meaning to recoup the investment by software. This investment created jobs for god knows how many people developing the platform & the content. That is why the PS3 is a closed platform. Personally I think that's a pretty compelling reason.

If geohot seriously thinks his 'efforts to avoid piracy' are enough than he's really one arrogant (or perhaps just thick and ignorant) kid. Who says his 'efforts' can not be worked around? Did he avoid a PS emulator to be ported? (Sony still sells PS1 games, mind you, so he has actually still opened the door to piracy in a way)

He distributed tools to break security, and that directly jeopardizes the bread and butter of a lot of people. So geohot, is your little hobby worth that? The industry is under enough pressure as it is, so I'd rather see him excercise his skills in a more meaningful way.

My 2cts


Wouldn't that have been solved by... Sony not selling the PS3 for a loss.  You are basically saying, Sony should be protected for making poor buisness decisions, and because tangentially something he did was used in a wrong way.

 

That's like saying gunmakers should be forced to store owners money because the guns they make may of been used to rob stores that don't have robbery insurance.

Laws shouldn't be crafted around poor buisness decisions.


What would really solve it is.. Geo not trying to break security which would allow him and others access to information conected to peoples wallets/ pirate games/ steal shit. Which is illegal.


He... didn't do that?  He broke the secuirty that prevented a lot of other stuff... and then people went from their and broke into that stuff.

Well except the Credit Card shit... that's been around forever... because Sony doesn't encrypt the information it sends out... because... I have no idea why.

Regardless, it's been consistantly ruled that when a company ties the "legal" protections with the "illegal ones" they lose any right to litigation because they, not the hackers made it so that one had to be breached, to breach the other.

Unless there is a surprise ruling... they should lose on that count.

which is Negligence/Carelessness.


No, I think Sony did it on purpose personally.  I wouldn't say they were being negligent or careless so much as they didn't care because they thought they had an unbeatable sysetm.

Though the not encrypting peoples credit card numbers was negligent and careless.  They could get sued for that.

Edit: Oh, you probably meant Geohot?  That's... not negligence or carelessness at all.  It was probably more a case of not caring.  

"They made it so that getting the full legal use out of their system is going to hurt them.  It's a shame, but what can you do, I have my legal rights."

 

If companies tried to stop locking out the legitamite uses of hardware, maybe they wouldn't have so many problems witht he few illegitamite uses... though of course, they aren't really fighting the illegitamite uses... it's the legitamite uses they want to fight like being able to backup your own games and run third party free legal software vs having to buy stuff.


ROFL. Did you actually read the information about the credit card information ?

The credit card information is encrypted through SSL, what more you want ? That's what happen each time you make a frigging online purchase on your PC.

The reason the guy was able to tell you what information Sony sends is that he used a CFW to see what his PS3 is sending through SSL...

So much disinformation.

Suddenly sending data through SSL become the same as not encrypting it at all...

 

If you don't install any CFW on your PS3 there is no way someone can break through that SSL connection and get your credit card information....................NO WAY

this kid is sadly misinformed..



EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

            

       Coffee is for closers!

thismeintiel on 26 February 2011
JamaicameCRAZY said:

Kinda like RROD, Kinda like the disk tray problems on ps2s, kinda like how orginal xboxs needed to be sent back to HQ every 6 months or so...Im mean seriously this is the 2011 people are so connected its rediculous if sony started effing people over everyone would hear about it and stop buying their shit. If Geo wouldnt have done this we wouldnt be having this discussion. It would be extremely detrimental for a company to remove all features and it would be very detrimintal if not suicide.  So let sony try something like this, any company for that matter and watch people speak with their wallets, which they will.

And calling me paranoid when your the one going on about sony removing everything in a year of ownership...yea thats not paranoid at all..they are talking about a limited warrenty on the hardware everything has this. Crappy car companies that pump out Crappy cars only warrenty their cars for 30k miles, i dont see you complaining about them, how would you like to spend 30 k to have your car start falling apart on you. Thing like this happen everywhere why cherrypick and complain about this one?

Simple answer.  Cause its Sony.  And of course, like many who support this BS, he will ignore the fact that the PS3 WAS one of the most open systems to date.  More open than the 360 and Wii at launch.  We had Linux and homebrew (the same thing people are claiming they want back), we had/have region-free Blu-ray movies and games.  But no, its never enough for some people.  The fact is, the Phat owners would have NEVER lost Other OS if Geohot hadn't tried hacking the PS3 to begin with.  And I would still be enjoying emulators/apps on my HD TV.  Of course, if you are more interested in Linux than playing recent games and using the PSN (2 things not needed by those who think Linux is SO important), then you had the CHOICE to not upgarde.  Simple as that.