PS3 Hacker Raised All the Legal Funds Needed to Beat Sony in a Weekend

gundamrx101

New member
Nov 19, 2010
169
0
0
Okay, this is insane. You do realize that all you players out there that if you went to sony about customizing your ps3 to be able to download mods, change font ect then Sony would probably be behind you (granted you might have pay say, 5 bucks) as long as you don't pirate games. But no, people support him cause he's 'rebelling' if you aren't going to work with sony to help the company make better products then why buy the system at all? Look at the feedback Microsoft and Valve, the appreicate input. If enough people got behind the company they might chance. If not, tough, you bought the system for a specific reason. Just get a PC then. As for this guy claiming he did nothing wrong, he just gave way to a bunch of other people to hack and cheat, he may not have had those intentions but others do and it's his fault, so of course sony is going to make an example by suing the very man who opened the doors to everyone including hackers.
 

JonnWood

New member
Jul 16, 2008
528
0
0
Illyasviel said:
Another thing that blemishes Sony's record is having an insecure system
>held out against piracy for 4 years
>most modern game systems are cracked by the end of year one

Uh huh.

Alpha Centauri said:
No, listen to your friendly neighbourhood faceless corperation, they love you.
:D
The fact that you're using the term "faceless corporation" without irony somewhat undermines your argument.

montopolis said:
I might be wrong here, but I don't think the issue is whether you are allowed to do what you want to your own console on your own, its that he told the whole fucking planet how to hack it. I am pretty sure that's the really issue here, and these articles are purposely misinterpreting the issue.
I don't think it's the articles. I think it's the people reading them who can't see past their own Robin Hood mentality. They ignore the part about the piracy, and the people on PSN who are having their gaming disrupted by cheaters, it's just Hacker David vs. Sony Goliath to them.

ionveau said:
RyanKaufman said:
If a hacker wins in court I've lost all faith in humanity.
Humanity should be ruled by the top 1% that have the right to do ANYHING they want to you and your family, If this man can stand and defend himself against these Gods among man then the whole system is doomed.

I bet they bribed the judge so im sleeping happy dont worry we pests will never be able to go against these Gods among man dont be silly.
That is one heck of a Straw Man.
 

Speakercone

New member
May 21, 2010
480
0
0
I've used this comparison before, but if I buy a Volkswagen, VW is not allowed to tell me what I can and cannot do to my vehicle. They are also not allowed to alter my vehicle in any way without my consent after sale, because it belongs to me.

Figuratively speaking, Sony is contending that they should be allowed to come to my house, take out the engine, and replace it with a less powerful engine. They also contend that unless I agree to this change, they will make sure I can't use my vehicle at all.

This is a ludicrous argument.
 

Decagonapus

New member
Jun 30, 2010
23
0
0
Darkauthor81 said:
But then again, no one can blame gun makers for gun violence or McDonalds for obesity. He gave them a tool. If they choose to abuse it. That's on them not him.
Exactly
 

airrazor7

New member
Nov 8, 2010
364
0
0
this crap has gone on long enough. Sony just needs to let this go.

Besides, the majority of people interested in any kind of tech always wants to tinker with it and mod it. Everytime I heard someone talking about an xbox, they were rarely talking about the games; they yet were talking about all the things they could do to it. Even still, look at the popularity of the kinect. It isn't so popular because of the wii ripoff/inspired titles for it, it's popular because of all the cool things that people have done with it that the developers did not think of.

Modders have increased the tracking abilities of the kinect, created the ability to interact with virtual items, are trying to create better games for it and to top it off people have turned it into a frakken flying robot that can work with a hiveminded team!

Sony, if you just let your customers and fans do what they want with the systems they PAYED for, as long as they do not try to harm anyone or disrupt anything, it may garner interest in the PS3 and increase sales.

Sony acts like they want to work with everyone yet they try to control the actions of anyone who does anything with them. That's probably why they had hard time getting 3rd party developers on board with the system.
 

fanklok

Legendary Table User
Jul 17, 2009
2,355
0
0
They aren't taking him to court over piracy they're taking him to court over him modding his PS3 to do things it could when he first bought it. For everyone that has been making these idiotic analogies mayhap I can fix them so they make sense.

You bought a gun and used it for hunting/stress relief on the range/anything else it could legally be used for, then the company that manufactured the gun decide that they don't want their guns to be able to shoot bullets any more so they come to your house and make changes to it and it no longer does what it could at your original purchase. If you took it apart and figured out how to make it work like it did upon your purchase of it then went to the firing range you frequent and post instructions on the bulletin board so other people there can return their guns to their original purchase state is it your fault if some deranged individual uses public info to do something illegal?

Same argument can be made for a car replacing bullets with acceleration/turn signals/headlights/steering, or a bike and the ability to move the pedals.

This entire lawsuit is about consumers getting fucked out of a feature their purchased item could do but no longer can, someone decided to return their item to it's original functioning state and a company taking them to court over it.

For the purpose of my analogies I'm ignoring existing laws, I don't care if cars are legally required to have headlights or turn signals.
 

gphjr14

New member
Aug 20, 2010
868
0
0
fanklok said:
They aren't taking him to court over piracy they're taking him to court over him modding his PS3 to do things it could when he first bought it. For everyone that has been making these idiotic analogies mayhap I can fix them so they make sense.

You bought a gun and used it for hunting/stress relief on the range/anything else it could legally be used for, then the company that manufactured the gun decide that they don't want their guns to be able to shoot bullets any more so they come to your house and make changes to it and it no longer does what it could at your original purchase. If you took it apart and figured out how to make it work like it did upon your purchase of it then went to the firing range you frequent and post instructions on the bulletin board so other people there can return their guns to their original purchase state is it your fault if some deranged individual uses public info to do something illegal?

Same argument can be made for a car replacing bullets with acceleration/turn signals/headlights/steering, or a bike and the ability to move the pedals.

This entire lawsuit is about consumers getting fucked out of a feature their purchased item could do but no longer can, someone decided to return their item to it's original functioning state and a company taking them to court over it.

For the purpose of my analogies I'm ignoring existing laws, I don't care if cars are legally required to have headlights or turn signals.
That analogy isn't any better since the purpose of a gun is to shoot and rthe PS3 still plays games and blurays and goes online just on Sony's OS.
 

fanklok

Legendary Table User
Jul 17, 2009
2,355
0
0
gphjr14 said:
fanklok said:
They aren't taking him to court over piracy they're taking him to court over him modding his PS3 to do things it could when he first bought it. For everyone that has been making these idiotic analogies mayhap I can fix them so they make sense.

You bought a gun and used it for hunting/stress relief on the range/anything else it could legally be used for, then the company that manufactured the gun decide that they don't want their guns to be able to shoot bullets any more so they come to your house and make changes to it and it no longer does what it could at your original purchase. If you took it apart and figured out how to make it work like it did upon your purchase of it then went to the firing range you frequent and post instructions on the bulletin board so other people there can return their guns to their original purchase state is it your fault if some deranged individual uses public info to do something illegal?

Same argument can be made for a car replacing bullets with acceleration/turn signals/headlights/steering, or a bike and the ability to move the pedals.

This entire lawsuit is about consumers getting fucked out of a feature their purchased item could do but no longer can, someone decided to return their item to it's original functioning state and a company taking them to court over it.

For the purpose of my analogies I'm ignoring existing laws, I don't care if cars are legally required to have headlights or turn signals.
That analogy isn't any better since the purpose of a gun is to shoot and rthe PS3 still plays games and blurays and goes online just on Sony's OS.
Functionality of what ever device used in the analogy is irrelevant, a feature originally included was removed. Yes a guns primary function is shooting, but everything else is the same it could be loaded the safety still works and the trigger can be pulled hell even the hammery thing could still move but the bullet doesn't go any where.

I get that the guns primary functionality is removed in that and the PS3's is still there, that wasn't my point, my point was that Sony included a feature in their console then removed it and someone wasn't happy with that so they found a way to put it back. As far as I know first gen PS3's still have functioning backwards compatibility (please correct me if I'm wrong about that) Sony didn't remove that from every PS3 they just stopped making PS3's with it. If Sony wants to remove the other OS fine, what they shouldn't do is remove it from PS3's that originally came with it.
 

Illyasviel

New member
Nov 14, 2010
115
0
0
Retosa said:
Yeah, and like Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft haven't sued their customers for ridiculous things. Fan games and fan projects, Pokemon being discussed on a forum with screenshots of the japanese game before it's released in NA. Fan movies, etc. Instead of getting sued all the time, we get bullshit DRM that rootkits our computers, among other things. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are all abusing the laws and rules that were created by the RIAA/MPAA's pressure. And honestly, the gaming industry has prevented usable backups from being created since even the Playstation. Hell, even as far back as the Nintendo or before then. It's not like cartridge backup modules were easy to come by at any point in time. They are doing just as much to harm consumers as anyone else. Price fixing, DRM, abusing 'IP' laws to say that consumers don't own their gaming consoles.

I will agree with you that Geohot could have handled the situation better. But I have to say, Sony can't be reasoned with. They removed Other OS very quickly, and were never planning to bring it back. They also removed backwards compatibility. All in the name of 'protecting their IP' and 'combating piracy'. If they don't like what you do with their system, they gut it. And they've proven it time and time again.

The industry may not be as evil as it could be, but that's just a blanket statement. You could say "that guy just murdered those people... But at least he didn't rape them before he did it. He's not as evil as he could be." or "That guy just robbed the convenience store... But at least he didn't shoot the clerk. He's not as evil as he could be." In the end, it becomes a statement about how BAD the other industries are, not how GOOD the gaming industry is. What is being done is wrong, and the fact that so many people are convinced Sony is just "protecting itself" is proof of how badly brainwashed we've become.
I don't think the number of cases the gaming industry files per year even comes close to ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND. Think about that. Every single day, about 275 people or organizations received an order to appear in court. Can you even think of 27 times you've heard of the gaming industry suing somebody? Not a typo. I am asking for you to recall a number of cases filed, off the top of your head, one tenth of what the rest of the industry does in a day in. I can think of when Nintendo sued an Australian based R4 ( the DS crack ), Sony sued the guys distributing the USB crack and the Nintendo thing about Pokemon you mentioned. Three total and two of those are pretty damn legit.

Everybody restricts information about their products before release. Sure the suing is a bit much, but that's not something you can single out the gaming industry for. Ever wonder what happens when you distribute a movie that has a marquee on the bottom that says "Pre-release: not for distribution?" Most forms of copy protection do not involve installing a rootkit, and this only effects PC gamers, which means all you console only gamers don't get to use that rationale. But speaking of rootkits, do you remember StarForce? A Russian form of copy protection that installed a rootkit and was temporarily used by UbiSoft? Well, gamers complained about StarForce and UbiSoft dropped StarForce completely, and in fact, did not resort back to DRM for years. They brought DRM back when it turned out some of their games were being ridiculously pirated. I don't think I can remember any incidents of any other entertainment players doing anything like this for consumers.

That other OS argument is hardly worth much either. I doubt more than 5% of people even tried it once, and even though they took ONE feature out, they added a bunch more. Oh hai Netflix, PSHome, Qriocity, 3D support, when did you get on my PS3? Btw, if you really want Linux that bad, do what I did and buy like a USD400 notebook or dual boot or emulate ( I forget the exact term, but I believe you can do it with Cygwin ).

Backwards compatibility is not a big deal. I have it, and used it once. I came to the realization that while using backwards compatibility, the game is constantly streaming right off the disk, as opposed to intelligently using PS3 caching or installation. This shortens the life of my bluray drive and generates extra heat that can damage my PS3. If I really want to play PS2 games, I'll buy a PS2.

I'm not sure when this happened, but the more I talk to people the more I get the impression that a significant portion of people believe that businesses should be and are run by saints, that businesses do not constitute people making decisions, but some type of amorphous, nonhuman, innately evil substance making decisions, and finally, that they are the only people who matter in the universe. Sure businesses might not be your friend, but neither is GeoHot, and unlike GeoHot, businesses allow people to put bread on their table. Let me say it again. GeoHot is not your friend. Don't ever mistake him to be. What the gaming industry should do is release videos with developers asking people not to support GeoHot to take away his stupid David vs. Goliath, I'm a man going against the machine, facade.

So, for once, throw the gaming industry a bone. They deserve it. As it is, sure DLC kinda sucks, but unlike the other industries, they really are making forward strides to bring consumers value through aggressive integration of technology. What about the music industry? Well, soon after the RIAA formed, the Big 5 ( I think? ) reduced CD prices by 30% to about USD12.50 / disc average, but those prices have gone back up to USD16. In comparison, games have only increased in price once in the last decade plus, hardly in line with increases in development and marketing costs and inflation. Music, very plainly, gives me shit for value.

Consider the alternative. Headlines filled with gamers being sued for thirty grand per game pirated. Think that number is absurd? Its not. Never separate what happens now from what happens in the future.

I think I saw somebody making some kind of analogy to Sony removing Other OS to be like removing the engine from your car? That's the most ridiculous analogy I've heard in my life. You don't need Other OS to use your PS3. Its more like... removing cruise control. Sure its a nice feature, I guess, but I've never used it, and I wouldn't be surprised if most people haven't used it either.
 

Retosa

New member
Jul 10, 2010
107
0
0
Illyasviel said:
Retosa said:
Yeah, and like Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft haven't sued their customers for ridiculous things. Fan games and fan projects, Pokemon being discussed on a forum with screenshots of the japanese game before it's released in NA. Fan movies, etc. Instead of getting sued all the time, we get bullshit DRM that rootkits our computers, among other things. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are all abusing the laws and rules that were created by the RIAA/MPAA's pressure. And honestly, the gaming industry has prevented usable backups from being created since even the Playstation. Hell, even as far back as the Nintendo or before then. It's not like cartridge backup modules were easy to come by at any point in time. They are doing just as much to harm consumers as anyone else. Price fixing, DRM, abusing 'IP' laws to say that consumers don't own their gaming consoles.

I will agree with you that Geohot could have handled the situation better. But I have to say, Sony can't be reasoned with. They removed Other OS very quickly, and were never planning to bring it back. They also removed backwards compatibility. All in the name of 'protecting their IP' and 'combating piracy'. If they don't like what you do with their system, they gut it. And they've proven it time and time again.

The industry may not be as evil as it could be, but that's just a blanket statement. You could say "that guy just murdered those people... But at least he didn't rape them before he did it. He's not as evil as he could be." or "That guy just robbed the convenience store... But at least he didn't shoot the clerk. He's not as evil as he could be." In the end, it becomes a statement about how BAD the other industries are, not how GOOD the gaming industry is. What is being done is wrong, and the fact that so many people are convinced Sony is just "protecting itself" is proof of how badly brainwashed we've become.
I don't think the number of cases the gaming industry files per year even comes close to ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND. Think about that. Every single day, about 275 people or organizations received an order to appear in court. Can you even think of 27 times you've heard of the gaming industry suing somebody? Not a typo. I am asking for you to recall a number of cases filed, off the top of your head, one tenth of what the rest of the industry does in a day in. I can think of when Nintendo sued an Australian based R4 ( the DS crack ), Sony sued the guys distributing the USB crack and the Nintendo thing about Pokemon you mentioned. Three total and two of those are pretty damn legit.

Everybody restricts information about their products before release. Sure the suing is a bit much, but that's not something you can single out the gaming industry for. Ever wonder what happens when you distribute a movie that has a marquee on the bottom that says "Pre-release: not for distribution?" Most forms of copy protection do not involve installing a rootkit, and this only effects PC gamers, which means all you console only gamers don't get to use that rationale. But speaking of rootkits, do you remember StarForce? A Russian form of copy protection that installed a rootkit and was temporarily used by UbiSoft? Well, gamers complained about StarForce and UbiSoft dropped StarForce completely, and in fact, did not resort back to DRM for years. They brought DRM back when it turned out some of their games were being ridiculously pirated. I don't think I can remember any incidents of any other entertainment players doing anything like this for consumers.

That other OS argument is hardly worth much either. I doubt more than 5% of people even tried it once, and even though they took ONE feature out, they added a bunch more. Oh hai Netflix, PSHome, Qriocity, 3D support, when did you get on my PS3? Btw, if you really want Linux that bad, do what I did and buy like a USD400 notebook or dual boot or emulate ( I forget the exact term, but I believe you can do it with Cygwin ).

Backwards compatibility is not a big deal. I have it, and used it once. I came to the realization that while using backwards compatibility, the game is constantly streaming right off the disk, as opposed to intelligently using PS3 caching or installation. This shortens the life of my bluray drive and generates extra heat that can damage my PS3. If I really want to play PS2 games, I'll buy a PS2.

I'm not sure when this happened, but the more I talk to people the more I get the impression that a significant portion of people believe that businesses should be and are run by saints, that businesses do not constitute people making decisions, but some type of amorphous, nonhuman, innately evil substance making decisions, and finally, that they are the only people who matter in the universe. Sure businesses might not be your friend, but neither is GeoHot, and unlike GeoHot, businesses allow people to put bread on their table. Let me say it again. GeoHot is not your friend. Don't ever mistake him to be.

So, for once, throw the gaming industry a bone. They deserve it. As it is, sure DLC kinda sucks, but unlike the other industries, they really are making forward strides to bring consumers value through aggressive integration of technology. What about the music industry? Well, soon after the RIAA formed, the Big 5 ( I think? ) reduced CD prices by 30% to about USD12.50 / disc average, but those prices have gone back up to USD16. When was the last time you got a voucher from, say EMI Music? Hey, thanks for buying one of our CD's. As our thank you, here's a coupon to get 50% off your next purchase. In comparison, I have gotten two from EA games, eight beta invitations, one from GameStop and I think one from Sony. In comparison, games have only increased in price once in the last decade plus, hardly in line with increases in development and marketing costs and inflation.

Consider the alternative. Headlines filled with gamers being sued for thirty grand per game pirated. Think that number is absurd? Its not.

I think I saw somebody making some kind of analogy to Sony removing Other OS to be like removing the engine from your car? That's the most ridiculous analogy I've heard in my life. You don't need Other OS to use your PS3. Its more like... removing cruise control. Sure its a nice feature, I guess, but I've never used it, and I wouldn't be surprised if most people haven't used it either.
Just because the gaming industry doesn't sue quite as frequently as the music industry doesn't make a lot of the lawsuits right. Plus, you have to consider that there are a LOT more people pirating music than there are pirating games. Music files are 3-5mb/piece (on average). Games... Well, these days you're looking at a minimum of 1GB, often somewhere around 5-10GB, with some being much larger than that. Takes a lot longer to download, and is a more niche hobby, rather than a close to universal hobby. Compound that with the number of people with the technical knowledge to pirate games being a bit more limited (using Daemon Tools is easy as hell, but I've talked to some people who wanted to try 'getting the free games off the internets', who got the iso, couldn't figure out wtf to do, and just said screw it and bought the game.) Also, considering that expanded technical knowhow tends to include the ability to hide themselves better via proxies and anonymous bittorrent settings/programs and etc. This all makes it harder for game companies to go after gamers pirating their goods.

Not to mention the fact that the music industry tends to be a lot further behind in their business models than the gaming industry. They've done the same thing for a lot longer, and are entrenched deeper in their ways than the gaming industry is. RIAA feels like it has a lot more to lose from internet music distribution than the gaming industry has to lose from online gaming distribution (in fact, both industries have a lot to gain... However, music publishing has a LOT it could lose, due to an increased ease in self publishing over the internet, with the proper technical knowhow. The music industry knows this.) Also, I have to laugh at the fact that most of the music pirates area also their biggest consumers, as recent studies have found out. Actually, a lot of pirates I know are like that. No, doesn't make it right, but I just thought of it and it made me laugh.

It sure was nice of Ubisoft to temporarily remove DRM from their games, but they brought back some of the most ridiculous DRM out there. Also, I'm willing to bet that someone high up in Ubisoft decided that since 'game pirating' was at an 'all time high', 'a lot of our games are being pirated' so they needed to 'protect ourselves with DRM! GET PEOPLE WORKING ON IT RATHER THAN THE GAME!'

I never got a chance to use backwards compatibility on my PS3, but if they designed it properly (AKA caching the information properly and making use of the PS3's superior memory, while emulating the processing power and etc), then the PS3 would've been better at playing PS2 games than the PS2. Kinda like the PS2 was better at PSOne games than the PSOne was. It all came down to them not wanting to spend the extra money on properly designing it. Though, I can kinda feel for them a bit, considering they sold every system at a loss for a long time, and weren't doing so hot for so long, so I can understand removing it from the PS3 Fat. BUT, they could've fixed all that stuff with the PS3 Slim, instead of removing it completely. Your reason for not liking the PS2 backwards compatibility is them not designing it correctly, which is an argument for how much they failed at it, not it being a bad idea.

Other OS is something that maybe not a lot of people used, but it was a nice feature that allowed customization and the ability to play around and enjoy the system to its fullest for some people. It allowed homebrew apps and all sorts of fun stuff to be done on the PS3. Just because it wasn't a feature you wanted or used, doesn't mean others didn't like it. Sony removing it pissed off a lot of people who liked screwing around with that kind of stuff, and those are the people that went out and cracked the system open.

No one thinks that corporations are run by saints. But if we disagree with what they're trying to do, and what laws and rules they try to force down our throats, why shouldn't we fight back? Why should we roll over and just accept that we pay for a leased console that we aren't allowed to decide what we can do with? Why the hell should we just let them tell us what we can do with things we pay hard cash for, with none of the legal benefits of a lease? Tell ya what, if we start getting the legal benefits of leasing the consoles, I'll be alright with the fact that it's a lease. But either we lease the damn thing, and get the protections, or we own it, and we can do whatever the hell we want with the damn thing as long as what we do doesn't have an effect on the Playstation Network servers. I don't agree with the script kiddies screwing with the PSN games and all that bullshit.

No one wants pirating (except the pirates, of course), but a lot of us want to know that when we buy a console, we BUY it. And a lot of us want to be able to do more with our PS3's than we're currently allowed to do. As for Geohot being our friend? I don't give a shit whether he's a friend of mine or not. He's fighting a court case that, if he wins, will do exactly what I want. Tell me I OWN my Playstation 3. I'm not leasing it, I own the fucking thing. And THAT, is what I approve of. Complain all you like about the fact that he 'abused Sony's IP', IP needs to be completely redefined and the protections of it need to be reinvented. The DMCA needs to be completely abolished, and copyright law rewritten from the ground up.

I was reading an article a couple months ago on /. about how some scientist had created some new technology that sounded interesting. I don't remember exactly what it was, but he was presenting it. Afterwards, he went up to a company exec to ask if they'd be willing to help fund his research for applications if it could do what he was expecting it to do when he completed his preliminary research. The executive laughed, and informed him that if it worked the way it was supposed to, he would have his company hire a shitton of copyright lawyers, and write patents for every single application for the technology that they could think of. Thus, the scientist decided he wasn't going to patent his own research, due to the fact that even if he did, it wouldn't matter at all. This shit happens ALL the time, and it slows innovation and is absolute bullshit of the highest degree. This is why I hate copyright law, IP, and the DMCA.

As for the analogy, that was mine (unless someone else made an analogy similar to the one I made, or I might have quoted that one and got my analogy from it, I can't remember). Anyways, my analogy was that it was like modifying your engine. Other OS is another OS, runs differently from PS3's OS. Which makes it VERY MUCH like modifying your engine. If you fuck up, you can either screw up and have to start over, or you could brick your system (which can happen when modifying a car's engine as well). If you don't know what you're doing, you can brick your car/PS3. If you brick it, it's your fault, and Sony's (or the car manufacturer's) warranty has been voided (as they don't support Other OS anymore). You want another one, you buy a new PS3/car.

Edit:

montopolis said:
fanklok said:
gphjr14 said:
That analogy isn't any better since the purpose of a gun is to shoot and rthe PS3 still plays games and blurays and goes online just on Sony's OS.
Functionality of what ever device used in the analogy is irrelevant, a feature originally included was removed. Yes a guns primary function is shooting, but everything else is the same it could be loaded the safety still works and the trigger can be pulled hell even the hammery thing could still move but the bullet doesn't go any where.

I get that the guns primary functionality is removed in that and the PS3's is still there, that wasn't my point, my point was that Sony included a feature in their console then removed it and someone wasn't happy with that so they found a way to put it back. As far as I know first gen PS3's still have functioning backwards compatibility (please correct me if I'm wrong about that) Sony didn't remove that from every PS3 they just stopped making PS3's with it. If Sony wants to remove the other OS fine, what they shouldn't do is remove it from PS3's that originally came with it.
Sony did NOT remove it from all the older systems!

YOU had the option to NOT UPDATE your system with the new firmware if you wanted to keep Linux on your PS3, and still be able to play all the older PS3 titles. It was completely up to the PS3 owners!

They gave EVERYONE an option;
1- Keep Linux on YOUR ps3, and play THEIR older games OFF THEIR network, or..
2- update YOUR system IF you want to play THEIR latest games on THEIR network.

Stop acting like fucking victims, as if they broke into peoples homes and took their Linux capabilities away.

Its like this, if someone bought a gun, and a car, but then H&K and Ford went and broke into their house and made a played out, stupid car and gun analogy that is completely irrelevant to the real issue, that is, that he posted THEIR goddamned root key on the internet for everyone to abuse, and .....
Yes, because I should be forced to make a choice between keeping a feature I enjoy, and being able to play new games on a system I paid for, just because Sony decided to REMOVE the feature from the system. So they removed an ADVERTISED feature from a system I paid for with the knowledge that I could USE that ADVERTISED feature, OR tell me I can't play any new GAMES that come out for my GAMING console, because the NEW games require an update that REMOVES my ADVERTISED feature.

Yes, that's fair. Either I have an extremely limited library of games, with no access to online games, or lose an advertised feature for the console I purchased thinking I'd continue to receive support of my advertised feature. It's bullshit and you know it. That's like buying a car with an iPod Dock, only to have the vehicle recalled because they decided to remove the iPod Dock from the vehicle due to some legal matter. Yeah, that's fair.
 

Illyasviel

New member
Nov 14, 2010
115
0
0
Retosa said:
I was reading an article a couple months ago on /. about how some scientist had created some new technology that sounded interesting. I don't remember exactly what it was, but he was presenting it. Afterwards, he went up to a company exec to ask if they'd be willing to help fund his research for applications if it could do what he was expecting it to do when he completed his preliminary research. The executive laughed, and informed him that if it worked the way it was supposed to, he would have his company hire a shitton of copyright lawyers, and write patents for every single application for the technology that they could think of. Thus, the scientist decided he wasn't going to patent his own research, due to the fact that even if he did, it wouldn't matter at all. This shit happens ALL the time, and it slows innovation and is absolute bullshit of the highest degree. This is why I hate copyright law, IP, and the DMCA.
This argument drives me nuts. Innovation? Ridiculous. Progress will not stop. Progress will never stop. Regardless of what some person, organization or law tells you, progress has but one direction, and that is forward. In fact, if anything, we need companies with huge funding to innovate now more than ever. You think when they say "America was the first country to send a man to a moon" they literally meant one man was all it took to get to the moon? Four guys in a basement cobbled together that Intel processor in your computer? A guy called Jimbo designed and assembled the variable valve timing, direct injection, turbocharged, all aluminum engine in your car? What about the tools those guys used? All it took was two, maybe three guys to program AutoCAD? The vast majority of time, innovation requires funding. Who can put up those big bucks? Business. Why do they put in big bucks? For profit. Are they going to try to protect their profit? On, you betcha. Which is why everybody has to innovate or go out of business.

You want your innovation utopia? First separate profit from progress. I don't know how far you'll get, but at least "everybody" can innovate.

Its easy to say everything sucks and is anti-consumer or whatever. But wait until those are the laws that are protecting you. Moderation and equality in all things. Consumers should not be handed the golden keys to everything and neither should businesses. The problem is that golden key is exactly what consumers want. That is neither moderation nor equality.
Retosa said:
Other OS is something that maybe not a lot of people used, but it was a nice feature that allowed customization and the ability to play around and enjoy the system to its fullest for some people. It allowed homebrew apps and all sorts of fun stuff to be done on the PS3. Just because it wasn't a feature you wanted or used, doesn't mean others didn't like it. Sony removing it pissed off a lot of people who liked screwing around with that kind of stuff, and those are the people that went out and cracked the system open.
To all people whining about the removal of Other OS ( not you in particular ), sure I can assume that you are "righteously" defending the loss of a feature while ignoring the implementation of other features, but let's talk honestly.

If you really, really felt the loss of Other OS, than clearly you intended to run Linux on your PS3. Which means you know Linux because nobody would want to try to install Linux on their PS3 as their first experience into the world of Linux.

So I know very little about Linux, I admit. I've only used it for research, but my limited knowledge makes this an even better indicator of how much you love Other OS. Let's have some quick Q&A.

If you really, really cared about the loss of Other OS, without consulting Google answer these questions:

List six distros. Here are my six: K***u, U***u, R***t, S***e, D***n, F***a. Should be easy as pie.

What is one of the biggest topics Linux users like to debate? Hint: Related to text. Again, super easy.

Sudo. What does it do? What are the requirements? Probably the first thing you learn.

Using command line, how do I search for an address I don't know the address number to, but know the street name to in file "addresses.txt?" We'll call the street "1st. Ave."

If you can't answer those questions, well, you know less than me ( because those are SUPER easy questions ) and guess what? Other OS did not and probably never will matter to you at all.
 

Retosa

New member
Jul 10, 2010
107
0
0
Illyasviel said:
Retosa said:
I was reading an article a couple months ago on /. about how some scientist had created some new technology that sounded interesting. I don't remember exactly what it was, but he was presenting it. Afterwards, he went up to a company exec to ask if they'd be willing to help fund his research for applications if it could do what he was expecting it to do when he completed his preliminary research. The executive laughed, and informed him that if it worked the way it was supposed to, he would have his company hire a shitton of copyright lawyers, and write patents for every single application for the technology that they could think of. Thus, the scientist decided he wasn't going to patent his own research, due to the fact that even if he did, it wouldn't matter at all. This shit happens ALL the time, and it slows innovation and is absolute bullshit of the highest degree. This is why I hate copyright law, IP, and the DMCA.
This argument drives me nuts. Innovation? Ridiculous. Progress will not stop. Progress will never stop. Regardless of what some person, organization or law tells you, progress has but one direction, and that is forward. In fact, if anything, we need companies with huge funding to innovate now more than ever. You think when they say "America was the first country to send a man to a moon" they literally meant one man was all it took to get to the moon? Four guys in a basement cobbled together that Intel processor in your computer? A guy called Jimbo designed and assembled the variable valve timing, direct injection, turbocharged, all aluminum engine in your car? What about the tools those guys used? All it took was two, maybe three guys to program AutoCAD? The vast majority of time, innovation requires funding. Who can put up those big bucks? Business. Why do they put in big bucks? For profit. Are they going to try to protect their profit? On, you betcha. Which is why everybody has to innovate or go out of business.

You want your innovation utopia? First separate profit from progress. I don't know how far you'll get, but at least "everybody" can innovate.
Retosa said:
Other OS is something that maybe not a lot of people used, but it was a nice feature that allowed customization and the ability to play around and enjoy the system to its fullest for some people. It allowed homebrew apps and all sorts of fun stuff to be done on the PS3. Just because it wasn't a feature you wanted or used, doesn't mean others didn't like it. Sony removing it pissed off a lot of people who liked screwing around with that kind of stuff, and those are the people that went out and cracked the system open.
To all people whining about the removal of Other OS ( not you in particular ), sure I can assume that you are "righteously" defending the loss of a feature while ignoring the implementation of other features, but let's talk honestly.

If you really, really felt the loss of Other OS, than clearly you intended to run Linux on your PS3. Which means you know Linux because nobody would want to try to install Linux on their PS3 as their first experience into the world of Linux.

So I know very little about Linux, I admit. I've only used it for research, but my limited knowledge makes this an even better indicator of how much you love Other OS. Let's have some quick Q&A.

If you really, really cared about the loss of Other OS, without consulting Google answer these questions:

List six distros. Here are my six: K***u, U***u, R***t, S***e, D***n, F***a. Should be easy as pie.

What is one of the biggest topics Linux users like to debate? Hint: Related to text. Again, super easy.

Sudo. What does it do? What are the requirements? Probably the first thing you learn.

Using command line, how do I search for an address I don't know the address number to, but know the street name to in file "addresses.txt?" We'll call the street "Longden Ave."

If you can't answer those questions, well, you know less than me ( because those are SUPER easy questions ) and guess what? Other OS did not and probably never will matter to you at all.
Personally, I prefer Gentoo Linux, as that's where my first REAL experience happened. I spent a month learning the basics of Linux and installing it. Red Hat was my first experience, and it failed due to Disc 3 of 4 being corrupt, and I lost interest after a while. Redhat is now Fedora, and I don't care about them. Or is Fedora their PC version while it's Red Hat Enterprise Linux now? That might've been what they did.

Ubuntu I've heard is good, but never tried it, same with Debian. Mandrake I've always heard sucked, last I checked they changed to Mandragora or something? Tried it once, it had a bunch of problems with the ethernet drivers that I never experienced with Gentoo, went back to Gentoo. Can't remember, it fell off my radar ages ago.

I know nothing about SuSe except the name. Don't know what K***u is, if it wasn't for the u I'd be thinking Knoppix.

Last I heard, the favoured HOME Linux distros were Gentoo, Debian, and Ubuntu. I think I've satisfied more than 6 Linux distros.

Linux users debate EVERYTHING. Hell, there are still massive debates about which of the two favoured bootloaders is better, even though one's been discontinued for YEARS. Though, considering text, I'm gonna figure you're talking about gedit vs KDE's text editor(forget the name) vs vim vs Emacs vs etc and onward to infinity.

Sudo, run as superuser.
$ sudo vim /etc/****.conf
Allows you to run a program with the privileges of root, without actually logging in as root and opening yourself up.

The last question would be answered with the strings command. Can't remember exact usage, but I'd just man strings, figure the usage, and go to it. Though, to hazard a guess I'd say:

$ strings -p '*Longden Ave.*' addresses.txt

Have I sufficiently satisfied your questions? I really never used the strings command. Probably would've made my life a lot easier in some cases if I had. But I remember trying to use it in one case, and it wasn't working properly (due to something about the file formatting, I later found out from my instructor), but I was always jaded about it after that.

Anyways, onto the innovation statement. I agree that company funded innovation is good. But just as often, companies figure they can make MORE money by stifling innovation. Or by taking advantage of OTHERS' work by copyrighting all applications of said person's work and innovation. Thus making it so that individuals innovating are always going to get fucked over. We're entering a society where individuals will not be able to do anything without the go-ahead from large corporations funding them, while saying they get to reap the rewards of whatever comes. This means the individuals who do all the work and create amazing new technologies and ideas, will never get the credit, nor the money they deserve. Especially in the case of they create the technology, try to bring it to a company to get the funds to market it for say, 40-60 or 50-50 split, and end up getting told no, only to find that what they made is patented by said company and now being sold by the company they tried to market with. THAT is the reason I hate copyright and IP. It's too easy to abuse, and is consistently being abused by patent trolls already.

Edit: Forgot to mention the Redhat/Fedora stuff.
 

Illyasviel

New member
Nov 14, 2010
115
0
0
Those questions weren't really meant to be answered, only to demonstrate that the majority of people who complain about the loss of Other OS are not even people who get any use or intend to get any use out of OpenOS. Good job though. You probably know more about Linux than I do. Iirc, you can just use grep to string match and as for the pattern matching part, the syntax is similar to various scripting languages ( doesn't use * for wildcard though, I think more along the lines of ^, etc. ).

I was thinking Knoppix ( great for livebooting ), but ended up with k-Ubuntu.

Business is taking over innovation because its too goddamn expensive to do innovation on your own. There will always be exceptions, but the fact of the matter is innovation isn't fueled by happy thoughts and unicorn farts. The number of people who get screwed now pales in comparison to the number of people who get screwed if it really were a big free for all melee.

But oh wait... looks like you can innovate at home after all [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=25955]. So the gaming industry is already giving you their tools... for free, or the price of a game, and we still need to hack the PS3 "for the homebrew?"

Look, I have no problem with you. The people I have problems with are generally pirates who will come up with any kind of bullshit reason as long as it, however vaguely, justifies their right to piracy.
 

tahrey

New member
Sep 18, 2009
1,124
0
0
thefreeman0001 said:
well piracy was pretty rampant on the ps2 as well one of the most successful consoles released.
What of the PSX? I'd be surprised if the ratio of legal : copied games played on that exceeded 1 : 10.

Didn't seem to hurt them THAT much... the hardware still got sold after all. Difference is in this case, much like with cellphones, it's not so much the hardware they're selling, but a gateway into a digital service domain which is where the real moolah is generated. The console would probably cost 2x as much without that propping it up.

Still, that's their problem. I'd have maybe contributed a dollar or five to his fund if I'd known about it before it shut down. I like Sony's gear (and a lot of their artists), but their policies have caused me SO MANY HEADACHES in the past. Hell, I'd like to sue them for harming my education because of how poor a lecture-recording solution their MDLP portables turned out to be, for someone who's not very good at taking or revising paper notes. (Had it been built with less unnecessary restrictions and legal we'll-sue-your-ass BS? Far better).
 

klaynexas3

My shoes hurt
Dec 30, 2009
1,525
0
0
i think both sides are at fault. the hacker has unleashed the pirate community unto the ps3, and now will be losing game sales because it "was just for homebrewing". sony is at fault in that it needs an engine that is more mod friendly, like how valve uses source. look how well valve does because of that, homebrew is allowed, but the pirating is still kept at bay. it's a good system, that should be done for the ps3. i don't know how most of this stuff works, i've never done it and i haven't looked into the hardware of my ps3, but from the sounds of it, i guess all that i can see happening is psn turning into 4chan on a console. homebrew, good. piracy, bad. let's make sure we can see this.
 

Chewster

It's yer man Chewy here!
Apr 24, 2008
1,050
0
0
Shit like this always amuses me for two main reasons: number one, it brings out the scores of fanboy apologists who defend Sony like they own stock or something. PROTIP gents: Sony, like all corporations, is incapable of giving a fuck about you, your well-being, your rights or anything that is good for you. If killing you off would make them a boatload of money, they'd find a way. In this instance, they are still going to be raking in the scratch either way. They'll just hold slightly less power over what they make, and having less power, however slight, scares the Christ out of most corporations. Cry me a river, is my response.

Number two, it just goes to show how far from our roots this industry has shifted. At one point in the history of computers and gaming, experimentation was encouraged and lauded as it lead to all manner of innovation. In fact, gaming, the thing we've all come to love, was born of this experimentation. Now that major players are involved, people who try to get creative get punished. So much for innovation kiddies. Enjoy Generic War Shooter #1,349.

Shame on Sony, if you ask me and more power to the people, rather then to the corporations.