Because of course the corporations are evil and must be destroyed at all costs for having the gall to try and make money.ArBeater said:
So how are Geohot and the Sony hackers heros?
- Thread starter bdcjacko
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ok you can't compare switching car models to software laws and I'm going to point out why. First I'm going to bold what stuck out for meAgayek said:
There have been a few cases about hardware in gaming in courts one that sticks out most is this
.
That wasn't over software used to run the games it was the hardware that was reproduced. There is 3 in 1 systems knock offs made to play older game carts you can buy easy (My local mom and pop store sells a lot of them). There are countless hardware mods for current and old systems that are popular and posted on game sites and NONE OF THEM WERE SUED. You have got to stop using a car as a point, you need to use something software based because hardware mods happen for all kinds of things and those are legal because that laptop 360 thing that was made a few years back didn't give anyone access that microsoft didn't want anyone to have. You are whining about two different things in the same argument but the problem is one is legal the other isn't. And a lot of people do this, yes you can legally blow up a system, but you can't give yourself access your not allowed to have.
Lets try this as an example, we both have access to use the escapist's forums to post, but we are not allowed access to features on the site (lets say we don't have access to upload videos to the site or access a certain forum here). If were were to hack the site to allow access the escapist would have the right to kick us out would they not? The issue is getting access we are not supposed to have.
ummm yeah thats not totaly true, hitler wasnt the brightest when it come to battle tactics, if he was a genius he wouldnt have made the HUGE tactical blunders of:samsonguy920 said:
A) stopping the tank advance on british forces at dunkirk even with all his generals saying to continue the advance (which im very thankfull for because my grandfather was there)
B) Opening up a third front against Russia even though russia would have kept neutral for longer and doing so against the advice of every single general under his authority. and this is subsiquently what lost germany the war, its pretty certain they would have won otherwise because without russia to worry about they would have taken britain easy (probably the only real threat they had for total control of europe and africa)
the fact was he took the credit for most things his generals come up with such as the blitzkrieg idea from Heinz Guderian who was inspired by the british.
hitler however was an excellent front man for the nazi agenda, he was incredably charasmatic and likable (despite what 66 years of anti-hitler properganda would make you believe).
oh and i agree somewhat with the mac point you made, though the fact was steve jobs was no better then bill gates, and in many ways he did the same things as gates (such as stealing the GUI idea from a university) then proclaiming he had invented it (something jobs took gates to court for like 5 years over)
Yes you did you said it hereEradiusLore said:
seems like your talking about buying stuff from a uncaring company to me and ranting about it.
It's kinda backwards to use a service and complain about it when the service did nothing wrong in the fist place. If you don't like a company for how they are don't use it, that's what geohot is claiming to do now. It's like if you buy lemonade complain about side company treating the lemons with acid but you still drink the lemonade anyway. Your just a anti corp loser who whines about companies but will still use their products. I personally said I don't like activision multiple times and I never buy a game from them new (it's used even if I want it on launch day I would buy it used so they won't get my money). I didn't support the price hike for XBL Gold and the features it gave so I stopped paying for it. And here is a good example, my laptop has a video card chip set from Nividia in it and it is burned out twice for me, and I refuse to buy anymore products from them because it is a common thing with my chipset other people delt with, so my solution is to stop supporting them.
Bottoms line if you don't like the company STOP BUYING THERE STUFF AND GIVING THEM YOUR MONEY.
Yeah, god forbid we enjoy our hobby of playing video games and own a PS3, right? God forbid we might just want Sony to be able to get PSN and the store up and running so we can fully enjoy said hobby, right?ArBeater said:
No no, we should piss you off for defending the people that hold the ability to let us play online games in their hands.
Do people defending the model airplane store that got burned down by an arson piss you off too? If not, then you're a hypocrite.
Your example isn't terribly valid, because neither of us own the escapist. Now, if I were to purchase a server from someone and use it to upload videos and photos onto the internet. Then, suddenly, the guy I bought it from comes swooping in and says "Ok, you can only upload photos from now on". That's the kind of thing Sony has done. They took something you purchased and said "Ok, we've decided you can't use that feature anymore".Arehexes said:
The car analogy is fairly accurate. You bought a car (or a console), the seller came by later and took away your convertible roof (or Other OS) that you paid for. It's a perfectly valid comparison.
I don't give a flying fuck if Sony, or anyone else, sues people for modifying their consoles (though I would definitely be against them winning it). My problem is that Sony is legally allowed to alter your property after you paid for it. I can't make it any clearer than that. You buy something, then at any point in the future, Sony can say "Welp, it can't do that anymore", at will.
I don't see how this doesn't cause at least some level of concern. It's a gross violation of basic consumer rights, specifically the right to what you paid for. The only reason software companies keep getting away with it is that our laws are too horrendously archaic for the digital age.
Sony never gave a valid reason for removing OtherOS. They vaguely hinted at security, which I don't think any specific were given on, so it sounds like complete bullshit. Piracy was never the issue.
Many people have concluded that it was because IBM was seeing the PS3 cut into its server market share, so they forced Sony to remove the feature to keep the Cell deal going. You could cluster a few together and still pay less than a single server for $2-3k.
The PS3 also was causing Sony to lose money because all the hardware the worth more than the price. Since many people looking to utilize OtherOS wouldn't even bother with PS3 games, Sony would be losing out when they don't end up with that sweet licensing cash coming in afterward.
Either way, Sony was doing bad business, and targeting customers for modding a product they own is just a dick move.
Many people have concluded that it was because IBM was seeing the PS3 cut into its server market share, so they forced Sony to remove the feature to keep the Cell deal going. You could cluster a few together and still pay less than a single server for $2-3k.
The PS3 also was causing Sony to lose money because all the hardware the worth more than the price. Since many people looking to utilize OtherOS wouldn't even bother with PS3 games, Sony would be losing out when they don't end up with that sweet licensing cash coming in afterward.
Either way, Sony was doing bad business, and targeting customers for modding a product they own is just a dick move.
Ah but Geohot doesn't own the software for the ps3 he owned the hardware. If companies couldn't change anything then sony, microsoft, or nintendo couldn't force us to update if we want to play the newest games or use online. And sony didn't alter your property (that would be the console itself) they altered their software on your system. You don't own the software and you never did, if that was the case sony would give out the source code and release it under a GCC like license (I can't remember the right one atm).Agayek said:
And my question is this "idea" isn't a new thing from any game company this generation. Nintendo won't let you play any new game or access the wii shop store unless you updated (hey you paid to play for the game system to play games). Microsoft blocks you from using online play if you don't update your game (even though you payed for XBL), and sony blocks you from playing new games/use psn market unless you update.
And for the car the idea would better be if they updated a chip in your car to lower how fast it can go, or if it reported you if you were speeding to the police. And if you didn't you would loss the right to drive your car by it not starting because you didn't put the newest chip in it. You may own the car itself but software it runs you don't own and can't mod. Again that is why you don't see console modders sued by companies (even the fake knock off consoles).
For me Sony's business model is damaging, what they and other big companies are during will as far as I can see sooner or later make the hold gaming industry crash again. Therefore I find it better if one of the worst offended crash alone and give the others a wakeup call.Jumplion said:
Well they modded software they didn't own, you can mod the hardware but software is different. Why do you think you can by a premade desktop from bestbuy and upgrade it later? Heck if you go to a mom and pop store you can find crappy multi cart systems and they aren't sued by companies for it. And there are famous console modders(and I mean hardware) who are posted all over games sites not sued. But none of that was software, the key difference is software that the company owns. Heck from some places I've read you don't even own a Mac (hardware or software), so sony isn't the first or only to pull this crappokepuke said:
Eh. The People that hacked PSN and stole a lot of data are just irredeemable criminal douchebags.
Geohotz I have no idea about what he was after...
Other hackers, I have a bit more respect for, because they tend to have some sense of ethics, and hack things in part because they don't agree with the legal/mainstream/corporate idea of what you are allowed to do with your own devices.
But you'll notice pretty much all of them are open about the fact that a side effect of their hacks tend to be things like piracy.
They also often give suggestions about how corporations can please them without making it trivial for people to run pirated stuff on their consoles...
But does anyone ever listen?
Funnily enough, Sony did, and look what happened.
Nobody bothered to hack PS3's...
Right up until they got scared and pulled the 'Other OS' feature.
Not too long afterward...
The PS3 got hacked.
Moral of the story:
If you want to reduce the risk that your device will get hacked by the hackers that have the most skill (and thus the best chance of screwing up your security entirely), give them a legal way to do what they want.
They're usually not interested in piracy, so if they have a way of doing what they want with your device, they won't bother trying to hack it.
That doesn't mean you can skimp on security, because others whose only interest is piracy might still try, but if the PS3 is anything to go by, without the help of the (for want of a better term, 'ethical' hackers), the pirates will have a much harder time of it, since by the looks of it, those whose primary interest is piracy, don't have quite that high a level of skill...
You'd do well to realise there are more than 2 sides in this... And the hackers have their own goals, but frequently the pirates and criminals benefit indirectly from their work.
Thing is, a smart company could exploit the goals of the hackers (which are different to those of the pirates & criminals), and thus stop the criminal element getting a free ride off the back of the hacker's efforts.
But, I doubt corporations are likely to listen... So on we go with this stupid 'war'. Hackers keep on hacking. Corporations keep on trying to stop them, and the only group that wins out are the pirates and the criminals.
Geohotz I have no idea about what he was after...
Other hackers, I have a bit more respect for, because they tend to have some sense of ethics, and hack things in part because they don't agree with the legal/mainstream/corporate idea of what you are allowed to do with your own devices.
But you'll notice pretty much all of them are open about the fact that a side effect of their hacks tend to be things like piracy.
They also often give suggestions about how corporations can please them without making it trivial for people to run pirated stuff on their consoles...
But does anyone ever listen?
Funnily enough, Sony did, and look what happened.
Nobody bothered to hack PS3's...
Right up until they got scared and pulled the 'Other OS' feature.
Not too long afterward...
The PS3 got hacked.
Moral of the story:
If you want to reduce the risk that your device will get hacked by the hackers that have the most skill (and thus the best chance of screwing up your security entirely), give them a legal way to do what they want.
They're usually not interested in piracy, so if they have a way of doing what they want with your device, they won't bother trying to hack it.
That doesn't mean you can skimp on security, because others whose only interest is piracy might still try, but if the PS3 is anything to go by, without the help of the (for want of a better term, 'ethical' hackers), the pirates will have a much harder time of it, since by the looks of it, those whose primary interest is piracy, don't have quite that high a level of skill...
You'd do well to realise there are more than 2 sides in this... And the hackers have their own goals, but frequently the pirates and criminals benefit indirectly from their work.
Thing is, a smart company could exploit the goals of the hackers (which are different to those of the pirates & criminals), and thus stop the criminal element getting a free ride off the back of the hacker's efforts.
But, I doubt corporations are likely to listen... So on we go with this stupid 'war'. Hackers keep on hacking. Corporations keep on trying to stop them, and the only group that wins out are the pirates and the criminals.
I highly doubt any other company would get a "wakeup call" from anyone crashing, and in fact would only serve to cause more collapses. Whatever business models you disagree with, them crashing would not only bring down the bad, but it'd bring down the good as well. As I said, thousands would be out of a job (not only developers, but engineers, PR reps, etc...), along with some sort of impact on the global economy, with some developers without a publisher (or no developer in general) with potential difficulty in relocating certain studios, and generally just a collapse of some part of gaming. I would not be surprised if one collapse would cause everyone else to follow suit in the tremor.linwolf said:
It's not nearly as simple as I think you think it may be.
Now, I can understand getting knocked down a peg or two. Every company needs to have some sense slapped into them once in a while. But an entire collapse? That's just cruel to those who need the jobs.
The problem with this logic is that the hardware is useless on it's own, and Sony's terms mean you can't replace the software. (They specifically designed it so the software can't be replaced with anything other than what Sony made.)Arehexes said:
In fact, if you look at the information of what the hackers tried to do, (and more or less what Geohotz succeeded in doing), it's getting access to Sony's Hardware at the earliest point in the PS3's boot process.
In other words, the whole point of the hack was to get at the hardware directly at the first point possible. (because trying to get to it any earlier is impossible; The 'software' is hard-coded into the console)
That means, essentially, replacing every single bit of Sony's code possible with something completely different of the hacker's choosing.
That's what the hackers want.
They want to REMOVE all of Sony's (or Microsoft's, or Nintendo's, or whatever's) code, and substitute their own.
It's the hardware they want, not the software.
Problem is, the design of these consoles makes that quite difficult to do. So... What the hackers try to do is break the software to see what the earliest possible point is that they can replace as much of it as possible without rendering the hardware completely useless.
Modifying the software isn't the goal of the hacker. It's simply the only route available most of the time because of how the hardware and software are designed to fit together.
They're not. They're dickheads with inflated egos. Sony may have been wrong for persecuting Geohotz, but the hacking of the PSN and other Sony networks is even more wrong, not to mention the theft of Sony customer's personal data. Now they're hurting people that had nothing to do with the whole Geohotz thing.
Get a life you losers. Maybe you can find one on eBay.
Edit *by "you" I mean the hackers.
Get a life you losers. Maybe you can find one on eBay.
Edit *by "you" I mean the hackers.
Ok fair enough but there are open source consoles available (most were handhelds but there was one open source console I believe but it bombed badly). Hell the open pandora (which I wish I could get, I followed that sucker since it was first talked about like 2 years ago) is pretty powerful open source device that already gives us the access they want. So is it that they want access or is it they want the challenge? I'm for messing with hardware I've done it multiple times (sadly it never seems worth it cause of how unstable it always is, if my palm T|X could run linux I would be happy). Sadly it seems even TI is taking this route with their calcs in programming -_- (that was a tangent but I'm bumbed the new CX might not be as powerful as 68K basic on a 89)CrystalShadow said:
They arent good guys imo. They didnt do anything to Sony, just ruined the online for 3 weeks, and put out the people they said they were trying to protect.
Thanks dirtbags, keep giving governments MORE excuses for regulating the internet. Bravo *slow clap*
*Sarcasm mode disabled* Unless something monumental happens to stifle the technology industry, this is the beginning of our growing pains as we transition into a computer dependent civilization(s). Welcome to the new Wild West, ladies and gentlemen. Stay tuned for more info and sweeping pronouncements of grandeur.
*Sarcasm mode disabled* Unless something monumental happens to stifle the technology industry, this is the beginning of our growing pains as we transition into a computer dependent civilization(s). Welcome to the new Wild West, ladies and gentlemen. Stay tuned for more info and sweeping pronouncements of grandeur.
I know it's not that simple but I don't want to type out an entire essay on the subject. So let me put it simple I have only brought one AAA new game, thank god of GOG and indie, this year because I find that I can't support most developer and publisher. And the way I see it before it can get better there has to happen something really damaging for the industry.Jumplion said:
And you can't just bring people into it, there are people employed everywhere if something is wrong you can't just keep it because people will loose work. By that logic nothing should ever be made better as there are always some that will loose job in the transition.
Well, I think there's more than one reason.Arehexes said:
Part of it probably is the challenge. Both of figuring out what a device does, how it's security works and so on. (That's what hackers are all about, after all.), but part of it is also that these devices are cheap, and, in theory, useful.
That's where open source consoles & stuff like pandora kind of fail.
OpenPandora is a great device, but it's a niche product, that only exists because the people that made it put a lot of effort into releasing it. Even then, availability is pretty patchy, and it costs a lot more than a comparable device from a big company.
Faced with a choice between an expensive open device, or hacking a much cheaper closed one, guess what'll tend to win out?
Unfortunately, open source hardware is a bit of a pipe dream when you look at the costs and specialist equipment needed to make things like that.
(by comparison, open source software can be created by anyone with a PC and a compiler.)
As cool as a device like OpenPandora is, it's something of a miracle it exists at all.
Still, I'm sure even if such open, unrestricted devices were as cheap and readily available as mainstream consoles, somehow I doubt that would stop hackers entirely.
Mainly because part of the reasoning seems to be:
Why do I want to hack this thing? Because I can!