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

The opposite of no restrictoins, or a right, is that there exist some restrictions, thus it beocmes a privilage controlled by sony like PSN.

As I already said before, denynig people the right to modify their property as they see fit is a laughable stance.

you cannot modify something as you see fit and still interact with other people and their possessions ( in certain conditions ) thats what this is about not stopping modifications but determining which modifications cause harm to others and restricting them

just like the car for example yes i can strap a sword to my car but it must remain within my personal space i can't expect to go out and drive on the road therefore a restriction is imposed

A restriction is imposed on PSN, not on the hacking of the PS3. I can put any amount of swords I want in my car and not give a damn about anything. You have it all sorts of wrong.

i think we are going around in circles here :

"I can put any amount of swords I want in my car and not give a damn about anything"

didn't you say before that you would only be able to do that in a situation where you keep it locked down on your property? you're beginning to contradict yourself now

I am not contradicting myself one bit, and will have to paste this in here:

"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."

you said :

"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"

then said :

"I can put any amount of swords I want in my car and not give a damn about anything"

you see no contradiction? on one hand you say i can modify as i see fit but i can't interact with other people and their property if my mods will cause harm while on the other you're saying i can do whatever i want regardless of the consequences for other people and their property

edit : "A restriction is imposed on PSN, not on the hacking of the PS3"

...wrong, a restriction is placed on the use of the modded ps3 not on psn  just like if i put swords on my car i can't USE it in situations that would cause harm to others and their property

"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

For someone who was bitching about reading comprehension I can't believe you are interpreting "I can put any amount of swords I want in my car and not give a damn about anything" as meaning that I can take the car on the public roads.

So you are telling me ALL this time you were fine with absolutely all modificatoins to the PS3, as long as some of them were bannable from the PSN, adn that Sony are idiots for trying to restrict modding of PS3s?

why don't you tell me then what it mean't? especially this part : "not give a damn about anything"