If only there was a way to roll back the firmware and put new firmware in that would allow support of linux..oh wait there is. Again even the lack of linux is not a good reason to hack them because you can still put linux on it.

Wasn't this my point?  Anonymous hacked Sony...or do you completely refute that as well?  Sony was accusing Anonymous of stealing money from people.  In your article, Anonymous is refuting that they stole money from the consumers since they are only "trying to fight criminal activities by corporations and governments, not steal credit cards."

Anonymous hacked Sony in the beginning and then another hacker came in and stole credit card information.  Do I serously need to spell out the article that YOU even posted?  Seriously...SERIOUSLY!?!

You are completely missing the big picture.  How would you like to buy a PS3 just because it was a cheaper blu-ray player for Sony to turn around and remove that functionality?  I could care less about using Linux on my PS3.  My point is that they removed a feature from a product that was already in my hands.  I was not compensated for this removal.  I was then forced to remove this feature because if I didn't, I would no longer be able to play new PS3 games, play online, play new bluray movies...etc.

So now it goes from "No money was stolen" to "someone else did it" Did you even read the article? They did not hack Sony period. They have denied it to this day. It was not them period. Consider this the last time I acknowledge you because you just pull crap out of thin air and I'm pretty sure you may need professional assistance. Have a nice night.

Wasn't it removed because hackers found a vaunerable way into sonys security through Linux? So it's their fault in the first place it was removed, sony removed a feature that 0.1 percent of the playstation community used...doesn't bother me 

So its the consumers fault that the PS3 was vulnerable?  I believe you have it completely backwards.  It is Sony's fault that their product was vulnerable.  

You completely missed my point.  Answer my questions in the above post on a general basis and not in reference to just the PS3.

And for your information I knew the reason, and it was bogus than as it is now. Reason being Ever wonder why Sony asked you to update instead of forcing the update outright?, this was very freaking simple there was a security flaw in LINUX OS it self! In other words at the kernel level see for your self!

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/05/random_number_b.html

This was found out in 2008, but it turned out it was there since ,2006! Remember fail over flows statement of no random keygen? They knew quite well why, Sony asking Hackers to fix an exploit..notice I said Asking, what do you think the hackers response to that would be? Hey update the linux kernel there so as to patch that exploit? Be a good sport will you, and what would hackers say? Yeah lets just do that for a corporation that just wants our money and are greedy...do you and others not get that?

There was no outright force fix, you had to patch it and asking hackers to do that patch is freaking futile. Hackers know that full well.

Sony than with the slim decided no linux for a freaking d@mn good reason, to void or try to void another vector of attack. The hackers went on to media to blast Sony when they know full d@mn well it was the only choice that or let the exploit stay which is the reason why they hate Sony they patched the exploit in the slim and said if you want to keep Linux you can but do not expect a exploited system to run unasigned code to not go un challenged on our network or to go for piracy.

You could still run Linux but that was no other choice other than to the system toremain a linux only system or update.

The claim oh' we were fighting for consumer rights was really about fighting for a right to "keep a back door" into playststion's network and system.

I know I will get plwnty of people that say thats wrong, but think about it for a min let it sink in, sony did not force the update they had to ask the consumer to do so. It was all or none, the heads would not allow knowing hacked systems with out trying to prevent those exploited systems to be "ok let them all on knowing full well they have or could have an exploited system" sony did they only thing they could have done, remove the threat at the base point no ps3 slim shipped with the native ability to load other os, and than gave the consumer the option to keep the Linux but not running on the network. They could say yeah patch the kernel, but would hackers do so? 

Law of prudence, what would a prudent man do?

You are right....Sony did not require you to upgrade to the latest firmware.  However, Sony had a number of DRM restrictions that would essentially force you to upgrade.

1.) It will be impossible to play PS3 games online.

2.) It will be impossible to play new PS3 games

3.) It will be impossible to watch new Blu-ray movies

4.) New Blu-ray discs could even disable the Blu-ray drive entirely if they contain an AACS Host Revocation LIst that affects the old firmware version.

5.) Videos on DTCP-IP media servers will be disabled.

For the 13 persons in the world that actually used it, that's really unfortunate that this feature had to be removed. But Sony had to remove it to make the platform more secure. A barely used feature got axed for the greater good.

Of course, You with your blatant agenda will keep beating that dead horse six feat under, but what can we do... -__-

because games give the biggest reaction with the least amount of destructive force or effort. Face it, gamers will go all up in arms on the internet over the slightest thing about their game/system.