GEOHOT takin it to tha streetz dawg

[msmrx57]

[*]You have a perfectly good PC that can already do anything you want, why does your PS3, phone and iPod have to each do anything imaginable? I'll never understand why everyone wants devices that do a ton of different things below mediocrity instead of a device that does one or two things sublimely...when did specialization become a sin?

But I want mine to play PS2 games... Which Sony wants to force you to have a seperate machine for simply because they make more $$$$$. They should just charge more for a machine that does instead of gimping the hardware so it can't. If I had the abilities to turn my pc into a machine that could run the games I enjoy Sony equipment would be on Ebay in a heart beat. I would love to have one machine that could play whatever disc you throw in PS3, Xbox, Wii whatever. Unfortunately I know bupkis about programming or I'd work on it myself. Personally if I did buy a PS3 I could careless about internet, that's what my pc is for.

[x88x]

It's already too late for the security of the PS3, but it's not too late to make geohot an example.

Which is exactly the problem I have with Sony's behaviour. It's like 'The Emperor's New Clothes'. Don't put on some pants, punish the person who dared to point out that you weren't wearing any in the first place. ..yeah, that's definitely a sustainable security model.

The fact that Nintendo keeps patching the security holes means that they don't approve of what's going on.

Wouldn't they make the channel official if they approved?

Not necessarily, on either point. The fact that they patch the security holes mean they want their console to be as secure as possible, which is a very good thing for normal users. It doesn't necessarily mean that they don't approve of what those people are doing on their own unpatched systems. Conversely, the fact that they aren't suing the people finding those security holes doesn't necessarily mean that they approve, either. I don't really know what Nintendo's official or unofficial position is on the issue. That being said, even if they do approve of the homebrew channel, even if they love it, it will probably never be made official for one very simple reason. Liability. Right now, if you load some homebrew software on your Wii, Nintendo has zero responsibility to ensure that that software will work as intended and not break your system. If they made the channel official, they would have to approve every piece of software before it could be run, really defeating the entire purpose of the channel.

They're probably just letting the hackers do a free Q/A check on their code.

Yes. That is exactly what they're doing. It happens in the PC software industry all the time, and has done for decades.

If Sony is successful with this and similar lawsuits, who's to say Nintendo and Microsoft won't follow in the same foot steps if necessary?

The difference is how the security systems work on the three consoles. On the 360 and the Wii, the system security and the DRM security are completely separate systems. On the PS3, they're the same system. As Nightrain mentioned, people had been pirating PS3 games long before geohot came around. The reason Sony are so scared is not because piracy is suddenly possible, it's because now people can start poking at the underlying OS, and (god forbid) make it do things that Sony didn't intend it to do.

You got that backwards: the PS3 is a game console with added features. PS1: game console with CD playback. PS2: game console with DVD/CD playback. PS3: game console with BR/DVD/CD playback and internet access.

Where do you draw the line? If I sold PC's with a custom OS that only did media center stuff, plus had a web browser, would you say that it's a media center with internet access or that it's a computing platform that happens to be running software that makes it a media center with web access?

If you want to bolt wheels on the thing and make it fetch you a beer or two while gaming and streaming 10 movies at once, knock yourself out. I assure you that you won't be sued. Also, post a worklog.

But I couldn't do that on a modern PS3 without the work that people like geohot have done...which is exactly my point. There are plenty of other uses for the access that these people enabled besides piracy/griefing/etc.

• Why? (see below)
• You have a perfectly good PC that can already do anything you want, why does your PS3, phone and iPod have to each do anything imaginable? I'll never understand why everyone wants devices that do a ton of different things below mediocrity instead of a device that does one or two things sublimely...when did specialization become a sin?
• Where did Sony advertise homebrew software? Otherwise, what manufacturer-advertised feature?

• What if I want to make a game that works on the PS3 and get it to people who don't have PCs, or who don't like gaming on their PCs, but I'm not going to make money off it so I don't want to have to pay for the official PS3 API? I forget how much Sony charges for it, but iirc it's in the multi-thousand $ region, at least.
• Because I can....why do I need any more reason than that? To mirror your rhetorical, when did generalisation become a sin?
• They didn't advertise homebrew software. What they did advertise was the 'otherOS' feature, that let you run Linux on the PS3. Granted, the hardware access was majorly gimped, but still.

On another note, I finally checked out the court documents (couldn't access scribd when they were first linked), and I found this quite humorous:

In early January 2011, Hotz publiclydistributed the circumvention devices necessary to access that level, providing them to thepublic via the Internet and releasing software code that will allow users to run unauthorized or pirated software on the PS3 System.
Id
. at ¶¶20-25. Unless this Court enjoins Defendants’unlawful conduct, hackers will succeed in running and distributing Circumvention Devicesthat run pirated software on the PS3 System.

Let's see here:
1) Defendent released security details to the internet.
2) People made copyright circumvention tools using said details.
3) If you don't punish defendant, people will keep making copyright circumvention tools.
...what they fail to mention is that even if they do punish him, people will keep making those copyright circumvention tools anyway...or that people had been running pirated software on the PS3 long before geohot came around.

I've been trying to think of a more direct analogy for all this, and I think I may have found it. Malware development.

It is perfectly legal for me to analyse software any way that I want to. In fact, now I'm even allowed to make as many copies of that software as I like in the pursuit of security analysis. It is perfectly legal for me to find security holes and publish those anywhere I want. It is even perfectly legal for me to write malware that exploits those security holes and publish that code anywhere I want. And I can run that code as long as I want on as many systems as I want, as long as I have the consent of the owners of those systems. The point where I cross a legal line is if I run that code (or cause it to be run) on any system without the owner's consent.

This does not only apply to PC software either; this applies to any software running one any system.

The thing that Sony is calling into question, whether they want to admit it or not, if whether the person who bought a PS3 is actually the legal owner of that system. IIRC, Sony does actually specify in the PS3 EULA something along the lines of 'any software run on this system must be approved by Sony'. This is essentially the same situation that the iPhone was in a year ago. I think the outcome of this case will hinge a lot on how much power the courts decide the EULA can have.

[LiTHiUM0XiD3]

new info on this at his site... and his new blog http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/

[mDust]

On another note, I finally checked out the court documents (couldn't access scribd when they were first linked), and I found this quite humorous:

I also found a lot of their claims to be humorous and/or misleading.

Where do you draw the line? If I sold PC's with a custom OS that only did media center stuff, plus had a web browser, would you say that it's a media center with internet access or that it's a computing platform that happens to be running software that makes it a media center with web access?

There isn't a clear line, however, the PS3 is the 3rd generation of a game console. It's primary function is to play games that were designed for it and only it. It's marketed to gamers. You don't see PS3 commercials focused on the BR or internet browsing capabilities. Even when it's completely unlocked it won't be able to do everything a PC can do...especially not as well.

when did generalisation become a sin?

It isn't a sin, but it's crap. Quality>quantity. Why would I want to watch a movie on a 2" screen? Or listen to music coming from an 1/8" mono-speaker? Or type something like this post on a 3" keyboard? If I had no other choice I suppose I'd settle, but otherwise these experiences are highly muted. I know some film directors and music artists that would b**** slap anyone they caught 'experiencing' their work on a phone.

[Killa_Ape]

[*]You have a perfectly good PC that can already do anything you want, why does your PS3, phone and iPod have to each do anything imaginable? I'll never understand why everyone wants devices that do a ton of different things below mediocrity instead of a device that does one or two things sublimely...when did specialization become a sin?[/LIST]

http://playstationlifestyle.net/wp-c...ng-685x206.jpg

Sony is the one who claimed it could do everything, maybe PS3 owners should sue for false advertising.

Edit: Missed a word.

[msmrx57]

Sony is the one who claimed it could everything, maybe PS3 owners should sue for false advertising.

Now there's an idea. Counter suit.

[x88x]

I also found a lot of their claims to be humorous and/or misleading.

Heheh, very true.

There isn't a clear line, however, the PS3 is the 3rd generation of a game console. It's primary function is to play games that were designed for it and only it. It's marketed to gamers. You don't see PS3 commercials focused on the BR or internet browsing capabilities. Even when it's completely unlocked it won't be able to do everything a PC can do...especially not as well.

Yes, it's the third generation of a game console, but every generation has gotten closer and closer to being a general purpose PC. And there are a lot of benefits to using the unique architecture of the Cell processor that Sony used in the PS3. ..if you can actually access it fully, that is. From what I hear, in the normal 'otherOS' mode, the access that the OS has to the hardware is severely restricted by the firmware, only allowing access to one out of the seven SPE's and, iirc, severely limiting access to the system memory as well. There are several organizations who have built PS3 clusters since the release of the system, including one that the US DoD was finishing up this past December (IDK if it's up and running yet, but form a few articles from Nov and Dec, I'm guessing probably) that is ranked at the 33rd most powerful supercomputer in the world..for 'only' $2 million. I can't find the reference right now, but I seem to remember reading that they got Sony to make them a special firmware that fully unlocked access to the hardware while running Linux.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010...scusses_n.html
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010..._using_pl.html
http://www.smartplanet.com/technolog...omputing/5720/

[x88x]

maybe PS3 owners should sue for false advertising.

Funny you should mention that...
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...in-lawsuit.ars
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...10218181557455

[Beta-brain]

Sony really seem to have lost the plot on this, the video that was posted on youtube by George Hotz and later taken down by him in compliance with a court order was obviously watched by a lot of people and Sony have now demanded that Google hands over the IP addresses and any identifying info on those that watched the video on youtube.

It's unclear whether Google will comply with the request, It's a dangerous precedent to even be able to obtain the details via the legal process, of someone who simply watched a video posted on youtube and has to be very worrying for what the future might hold if big companies can demand and obtain such information about people, what are Sony going to do with this info if they get it, I don't own a ps3 or want to hack one but if I had watched the video which I haven't what are they going to do, blacklist all the IP's from the playstation network? Oooh, now I'm scared.
This info was in this weeks Micro Mart magazine.

[x88x]

Sony have now demanded that Google hands over the IP addresses and any identifying info on those that watched the video on youtube.

o_O ...seriously? Wow, I had not heard that...I think someone at Sony has a screw loose. Here's hoping Google tells them to take a hike.

This is more and more reminding me of the whole mess that happened when the first AACS key was cracked. ...though Sony is getting quite a bit more aggressive this time.