Why do people support Geohot?

[Erana]

The thing is, even when you purchase it, its still Sony's console, and they can do what the hell they want with it, and you as the consumer has to abide by the the rules given by Sony.

Sony has it's rules so things such as hacking will be kept to a minimum, and so you can have a great online experience, and people like Geohot stop this from happening.

Personally? Fuck a "great online experience" if it means I do not legally have any say over what I do with my purchases.

"Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power"
Except we're not talking about exchanging our rights for wealth or power, we're talking about allowing companies to set up a precedence that would allow them to control everything technological so that we can shoot people in games with a marginally smaller chance of someone hacking.

I would honestly rather have to deal with a hacker on every other game I played than not being able to own my own electronics for this reason. What we'd give up is just not worth annoyances in a form of entertainment.

 

[DanDeFool]

The thing is, even when you purchase it, its still Sony's console, and they can do what the hell they want with it, and you as the consumer has to abide by the the rules given by Sony.

This.

People are behind Geohot because FUCK. THAT. SHIT.

It's not Sony's console. It's MY Goddamn console, and if I bought it to run Linux or do homebrew software, or create a supercomputing cluster, it SHOULD be able to do those things (especially if that functionality was part of the deal when i bought it). If the company decides to limit the functionality of the system, functionality the end user PAID FOR, the user should have the right to restore that functionality.

Consider the iPhone. There's absolutely no physical reason why the hardware wasn't capable of tethering, running on other networks, and multitasking. The people who made the device just decided they didn't want to add that functionality. Hackers who decided they wanted more out of their devices decided to add the functionality themselves.

And yes, right now it's against the EULA. That's why this is so important. If Geohot wins this case, it will set a precedent that hardware belongs to the consumer, and the consumer has the right to do whatever they want with it.

If he loses, you might wind up having to pay a $20 fee to be able to use a third-party mouse and keyboard on your Dell Laptop. Hey, don't whine! It's in the EULA; you don't like it, don't buy our products! And if you don't want to pay the fee, you can always buy this Dell branded keyboard and mouse for your system for an extra $80--no, wait--$120!

 

[HellsingerAngel]

I'm not sure I know enough about this particular case to make any sort of hard judgement, but things that seem to have been avoided in conversation are as follows:

#1. Does the system still run all Sony software? (Games, PSN, etc etc)

#2. Does the system have potential for breaking copywrite laws? (emulators, burned disks, etc etc)

#3. Does the new OS enable any sort of new capabilities -- that are not considered to be illegal -- that the old OS did not support? (using an Xbox controller instead of a PS controller, for example)

#4. Did Sony promote the multi-OS capability of the platform after the release date in North America/Europe, or was it a promise made beforehand?

I don't look into Sony that much, but these questions are very important ones. If it can still run the PSN, that's a breach of EULA and Sony has every right to protect their "Sony only" stuff. If the new OS can put in hacked software, use burned disks and support emulators than Sony has the right to protect their product and image by encouraging people not to rip them off. If the new OS doesn't support any new features aside from illegal ones (such as the ones mentioned in question #2) then Sony can safely assume that's the only reason for having such an OS on their platform. Finally, if Sony never said anything about multi-OS capability after launch, then it's not false advertisment and this entire arugmenet is based upon sour grapes over having to cut that portion out. It's not your right to have something like the OS mentioned above with all those capabilities to put Sony under just because they couldn't keep a promise.

 

[Talespinner]

"Your television will now only be able to show channels that advocate the views of the political party that just donated a large amount of cash to our company."

That will be legal if Sony is allowed to set precedence.

 

[coldfrog]

It's weird - I'm half and half with him. Sony is in the wrong, but he's in the wrong too. If he actually cared about the protection of the games and the system, he'd give Sony the key, and possibly some tips as well. By releasing it like this, he's basically handing it over to pirates and saying "Go Nuts". Stating your position is not the same as going through with it. Piracy is the same reason Napster and other "file sharing" programs got taken down, and the only way for Sony to have a case at all is to take the stance that his actions cause an increase in piracy.

On the other hand, however, Sony is even more in the wrong if their intentions are to make the EULA legally binding. Hacking the PS3 or any other piece of hardware in this way is not illegal. Once you have bought the hardware, Sony can't say anything about what you do with it. Or rather, they shouldn't be able to. By trying to, they're trying to essentially claim that you don't actually own the console you bought. And if that's the case, what DO you own? The games you play on it? The saved data on the hard drive?

The problem is it's a very grey line here. I find Sony's position more morally problematic so I tend to fall on the side of George here, but I think that they could work together to help secure the system so a system with Linux installed on it could be more secure and help prevent privacy, rather than spatting over it like this.

 

[similar.squirrel]

You are not borrowing the console from Sony. You have bought it. From that moment, you should be able to do anything you like to it. That is common sense.

 

[SilverUchiha]

It's because the product came ready to support such an option but the devs took it away for no clearly good reason. Saying that it is a means to pirate games is like saying customizing your Smash Bros Brawl game with the Minus, Plus, or M mods is a means of piracy. It's a way to enhance the device and/or gaming experience.

On top of that, with the purchase of a console, we own it and can make whatever modifications we want to it. They have no right to say otherwise unless it directly affects their company in a negative way.

 

[Mumonk]

The thing is, even when you purchase it, its still Sony's console, and they can do what the hell they want with it, and you as the consumer has to abide by the the rules given by Sony.

Umm, no. If I purchase a fine piece of art, I don't have to hang it up in my house the way the artists wants, its my fucking painting, and if I wanna hang it up or use it to wipe my ass, it doesn't matter, its mine.

If Sony wants to ban modded PS3's on the PSN, fine, its their network that they are running, and is a service they give to their customers. But the machine is mine to do w/e the fuck I want to with it on my own.

Besides, the courts, at least in the US, already determined that jailbreaking a iPhone is the right of the consumer. So Sony doesn't have the right to do any of that shit but keep updating firmware in an attempt to fight it. Which is pointless, cause if a human being made it, another human being can unmake it.

 

[TheGuiggleMonster]

People are supporting him because all he did was make it so that PS3 owners can hack their own consoles and Sony can't bully them out of something they have the right to do because they spent their own money on it.

 

[lord.jeff]

Geohot has effectively jailbroken the PS3, a step that should by all precedent be determined legal, given prior devices and legal rulings. Even if he is "contributing to piracy," He is doing so in a legit way, and I'd hate to see our consumer rights limited because pirates might capitalise. That's like curtailing free speech because al Qaeda might use it.

As far as his actions on the PS3, it's likely he did absolutely nothing wrong.

Sony, however, removed an advertised feature (more than one, actually) from a product they sold with it as a selling point. They have since protected their "property" by suing people on dubious grounds, bullying people who cannot afford to stand up for themselves legally.

Yeah, who did something wrong here?

First off this is nothing like your Al Qaeda example because money is involved. And as for who did something wrong, the answer is everyone involved, the Linux OS was used to pirate, Sony did make a stupid move in removing it without trying other options first but not doing anything would have been an ever dumber move.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

I support him because when I buy an appliance it's supposed to be my property.

After I paid in full on my end, as I consumer I should be allowed to use my property however I see fit.

If someone wanted to take their car to the shop, and soup up their engine, add spoilers, mudflaps, and spinners, that's their right even if it is gawdy.

If you wanted to convert your toaster into a spring device, nothing should stop you even though you're modifying it for an unintended purpose.

If I want to remove the heating function of my microwave, take a drill and bore a hole into it, shape the hole into an ellipse, lube it up, then fuck it rigorously day and night, nothing should stop me from making love to my microwave.

People do things to machines that are legal but ridiculous. Why should modifying your Playstation to perform a reasonable task a dubious matter?

 

[mjc0961]

Because he is right, once YOU pay for an item, it is YOURS to use how you want. Remember, the supreme court told Apple "tough shit" when they didn't want people to jailbreak the iPhone, and as far as what GeoHot himself did, it's the same thing (note: he did NOT make any piracy firmware himself; yes his work will sadly allow people to do it, but so does iPhone jailbreaking and that's still allowed). Now if he actually had gone online with his PS3 and started ruining other people's online gaming like some dicks are doing, I would be more inclined to say he's a dick. But he didn't.

Plus, supporting Sony means siding with a bunch of dicks who think their EULA is written law, even to people who never agreed (and that's the key word, the A in EULA stands for "agreement") to it, when in reality it's not written law for anyone. At best, violating it would be grounds for a ban from Playstation Network, not getting sued into oblivion. It also means supporting people who think they still own a device and should still decide how I use it even though I am the one who legally purchased and now own it just because their logo is on it. What's next Sony, making your music playing devices only play music from artists signed to your record labels via a firmware update, and suing anyone who manages to fix the device so it plays all music again? That's basically the kind of shit they're saying they should be able to do by suing GeoHot.

Also, supporting Sony means, at least to me, that I would have to support them removing Install Other OS in the first place, and I don't. I think they had no right to remove an advertised feature that while it may not have brought in the bulk of their sales, it was still a feature that made some people decide to buy the console for. Then they took it away and said "Okay costumers, you have two choices: you can update and have a gimped console that doesn't do Install Other OS. Or you can not update and have a gimped console that doesn't play the latest games, can't get patches for older games, can't access the Playstation Store, and can't play online over Playstation Network. Thanks for your money, and remember to tell your friends to buy a Playstation 3 because it only does everything." And they hid this outrage under the guise of "it will increase the security of our platform" which obviously was complete bullshit. So I am glad failoverflow and GeoHot ruined Sony's shit on this one: Sony put out a firmware update that made their customers make a choice that they shouldn't have had to make while spewing a piss-poor excuse, and for all their added security, their console is now super easy to hack. Tastes like karma to me.

So yeah, between GeoHot just standing up for his rights as a consumer, and all the nasty shit Sony has done and clearly would do if they manage to win this case or force GeoHot to settle, I'm glad to hear that GeoHot managed to raise some money to take them on, and I hope he can keep doing so to take the fight all the way to the end and hopefully beat Sony. Somebody needs to tell them "No asshats, you cannot decide what people do with a device they bought in their own homes. It's none of your business if they aren't taking it onto your online services."

the Linux OS was used to pirate

Actually no, it wasn't. The first thing that allowed piracy on the PS3 (that PS Jailbreak USB dongle thing) came out after Sony removed Install Other OS support.

 

[Wolfram23]

Yeah, I don't get why everyone's supporting him.
He's basically contributing hugely to piracy on the PS3, and he knows it.
His actions have resulted in a huge problem for Sony, yet for some reason everyone is supporting him, not Sony.
I am really against him.

The potential to be used for piracy doesn't mean it is. My car has the potential to run people over, my hand has the potential to choke the life out of you/people. But I'd never do those things!

Having Other OS support has a multitude of uses. From the US Navy using PS3s linked together as a supercomputer to having Linux simply for it's support of many, many more movie Codecs for movie playback.

And no his actions haven't resulted in a huge problem. Hacking the PS3 is a very minor occurance. And those who do hack it, may or may not use it illegally (as in to play pirated games or to "stat hack" in their favorite online game - if that's even possible).

A EULA isn't necessarily legal. Some aspects of it surely are, but we as comsumers are protected by many different pieces of legislation. Basically, you buy something and it's yours. A car company could say "if you buy our car you're not allowed aftermarket upgrades." That does not mean I can't throw a turbo on my car, and if I did, they can't sue me for it. The ONLY thing they could do is void my warranty.

I would therefore say if you want to hack your PS3, that's your own business. The ONLY thing Sony should be allowed to do about it is block that PS3 from getting onto the PSN. That's all. Nothing more. It's his/our hardware and we can do whatever the hell we want with it.

 

[IamQ]

I have nothing against Geohot, except for the fact that he made himself look quite childish, in my opinion, in a video he released recently about sony sueing him.
Actually, I'm pretty sure you have the right to do whatever you want with a product after you bought it as long as you don't hurt/offend other people.
So what if some people want to install linux on their PS3 or tinker around with it, let them.
I believe Sony was in the wrong for removing the "other OS" option which they advertised for the PS3.
He had every right to make it available again.
Is it his fault that people start using homebrew on the PS3?
Well, was is Einstein's fault that they used one of his discoveries to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

At least Einstein admitted that he regrets what he's done. Geohot think's that he is in the right here. He made it possible for people to hack around with the PS3, and while he says that he only made it for use of other OS features, he knows that he would bring upon other people aswell. He's just too cowardly to admit it.

 

[mjc0961]

Having Other OS support has a multitude of uses. From the US Navy using PS3s linked together as a supercomputer to having Linux simply for it's support of many, many more movie Codecs for movie playback.

Sorry to be picky, but it's the Air Force, not Navy. Or Army, or any other branch of the military people seem to say it was except for the correct answer of Air Force.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...inishes-PS3-Supercomputer-of-Epic-Proportions

 

[SIXVI06-M]

The thing is, even when you purchase it, its still Sony's console, and they can do what the hell they want with it, and you as the consumer has to abide by the the rules given by Sony.

Apply that logic to everything.

Watch the world die.

Be glad Sony doesn't run the world.

(a bit exaggerated, but there's something strangely... communistic - possibly fascist, about Sony... not that communism is entirely a bad thing - it's a decent governing system that's just been misused a lot; the biggest problem is... how do you apply communistic property control over a luxury consumer good that is a product of capitalist society?).

That's my disturbing realisation for the day. Enjoy!

 

[fordneagles]

Hacking/tinkering/modifying the CONSOLE (the hardware) = Totally fine
.
*GeoHot
.
.
.
Hacking/tinkering/modifying/pirating a GAME (the software) = Totally wrong

Personally I think GeoHot is somewhere about... there* on the scale of wrongness in this case.

Will be interesting to see how this turns out