"You don't even understand that the laughable part is that you equate hacking your PS3 with PSN access."

i just asked you "go find me the quote of what i said that led to that hilarious assumption"

you haven't answered my question and what you are going on to write further shows that you appear to beleve that im saying that, which is quite frankly nonsense i never said such a thing

You clearly state that hacking a PS3 should be prevented because it may adversely affect PSN users, effectively saying that the privilage of accessing the PSN should be the same as your right to hack your hardware. You don't realize that hacking your PS3 is a right, and accessing PSN is just a privilage. Just like the right to modify your car as you see fit, and the privilage of using a public road. The laughable part is that you don't realize this.

"You don't even understand that the laughable part is that you equate hacking your PS3 with PSN access."

i just asked you "go find me the quote of what i said that led to that hilarious assumption"

you still haven't shown me the quote where i equate the two

"You don't realize that hacking your PS3 is a right, and accessing PSN is just a privilage"

modifying a console and completely unlocking it to the point where it can be used for malicious acts are different things aren't they?

so now i have to ask you where i said that ALL forms of modification shouldn't be allowed? as far as i remeber i was talking about the keys and the exploits that allowed the console to be completely altered for malicious acts

I'm a PC gamer, but cheaters and other dickheads exist on every platform. This doesn't give either me or you the right to avenge ourselves on innocents.

PS3 hack hit Sony so hard because it made the wrong assumption that it could reach ultimate security. As I already wrote, it was just an illusion, and when Sony understood it, millions of vulnerable consoles had been already sold and were available to both benevolent and malicious hackers to study. Unless Sony bought them all back, they were available to study and hack, and the hackers had all the time they needed, nothing could stop them anymore. At that point, with or without GeoHot the situation was compromised, and the right solution for new consoles wasn't to remove OtherOS, but to patch or rewrite the hypervisor and redesign the virtual machine structure used, and to watch more accurately PSN to kick away cheaters. Blaming GeoHot and hoping that stopping him all could get back like before is totally utopian. It's like a Pandora's box, but in this case it was neither GeoHot nor other hackers that opened it, they just discovered that Sony left it open instead. At that point, like I already wrote too, the only effective strategy Sony can choose for PSN is the same of other networks and the same used by casinos too: watching carefully and ceaselessly. And for PS3, checking and patching the firmware promptly and accepting only units with authorized firmware in its network to play. These things would have been effective also to protect CoD multiplayer. Scapegoats didn't actually take evils away 3000 years ago and they never started working since then, either.

I can quote the entire second half of your post, which is what you are saying.You still fail to realize that ANY modification is allowed and your right, PSN is just a privilage and you are equating the two to try and push off hacking your PS3 as a privilage, and not a right, that can be taken away. If I want to I can stick two lawnmowers on the hood of my car that would allow for maximum carnage to pedestrians. Obviously, I can't take it to the street (PSN)  Your entire stance is just laughable on many points because you try to push off a right as a privilage.

Oh by the way let me tell you that modifying your car for illegal purposes (another example is tinting windows past 30% or so in some states) could mean death, meanwhile the hackers at best mean you have a bad game that last like 20 mins, and STILL modifying your car is legal. WHich makes your stance all the more hilarious.

the only way it can be said that i equated the two is to quote me where i said that all modifications are not allowed ( i never did and never will ) to say so otherwise is just plain stupid

"ANY modification is allowed and your right"

lol any modification is allowed? lmfao lets take your car example if i strap a sword on the side of my car to extend into oncoming traffic thats allowed? or for the ps3 if i mod my ps3 to explode after a given time interval and chuck it at a group of people thats allowed?

Just by saying SOME modifications, which you have plainly stated, you are saying that modifying your PS3 is a privilage which can be taken away under given circumstances.

Your example is flawed. You aren't allowed on the road, but you ARE allowed to put as many swords as you want on the car. Just don't be n the public road. You can use it in a private track if you want. You don't seem able to differentiate between what it means to modify something privately and using it in a public setting. I guess I can see how you can get confused in that case and make laughable claims.

"what it means to modify something privately and using it in a public setting"

lmfao you honestly try too hard tell me what have i been talking about up till now? wasn't i talking about the effects on the network? if you're able to at least comprehend that how the hell does anything you just said fit into that? furthermore if you took the time you would see that i reiterated several times that once the modding is secluded to the persons ps3 then its fine but when they affect the network it becomes an issue

you have now tried about 3 times now to put words in my mouth :

i never said that all modifications aren't allowed

i never equated psn access with modding ( because i never said that all modifications aren't allowed )

i never said that theres a problem if the modding occurs within the confines of the person's personal space

as i said earlier either read through and uinderstand what im actually saying or brush up on your comprehension skills but don't make up nonsense and then say that i said it

I never said you said all modifications are not allowed, I just said you are treating modification of the PS3 as a privilage, like PSN access, that can be restricted.

You try to justify forbidding modifications of your own privately owned property because of the fact that it may adversely affect a public service. If that is not the point you are making, then why the hell are you bringing up that people's modding may inconvenience people on the PS?

some modifications have to be restricted yes in the context of allowing the user of the modified console to interact with the network but i never said all