Emasher Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 You can do what you want to it, but as soon as it affects/involves anyone else, that's what's wrong! As far as I'm aware, the guy didn't just keep to himself did he. So you're saying that only he should be allowed to use the hardware for what he wants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellmeister Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Well yeah, but as soon as he does anything that gives him an advantage it is affecting other people i.e. being able to download illegal games free etc. He should only be able to mod the hardware in a way that isn't copying/ using anything from anyone else. I think. Not sure how annoyingly pedantic you want to be about the precise wording of everything though. You paid money for the use of the PS3 and the capabilities of the PS3, doesn't mean you should distort what is available on there at the loss of someone else is what I am trying to say effectively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Giving someone the tools to do something doesn't make you responsible for their misuse. Yes people can use this to pirate PS3 games, and I'm as against that as everyone else, but Sony should be going after the pirates, not Hotz. The code he released is just the code that allows software to be run on the system. I really don't see a moral problem in allowing people to install software on hardware they paid for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellmeister Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Giving someone the tools to do something doesn't make you responsible for their misuse. Yes people can use this to pirate PS3 games, and I'm as against that as everyone else, but Sony should be going after the pirates, not Hotz. The code he released is just the code that allows software to be run on the system. I really don't see a moral problem in allowing people to install software on hardware they paid for. Yes it does. If you give someone a knife which (unfortunately I can't remember precisely, reasonable? virtually certain? That which the reasonable bystander ought to think?) has a chance you know they'll use it to kill, it is a crime. If you give someone a house's security code because you know they might misuse it, that is a crime. They use their own tools to break in but you help them to do the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 The PS3's security is there in the first place for a reason, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 The code he released is just the code that allows software to be run on the system. Yes, he did release code that allows for homebrew. He also released additional code (that isn't required for homrbrew) that allowed for pirate software to be used on the PS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Yes, he did release code that allows for homebrew. He also released additional code (that isn't required for homrbrew) that allowed for pirate software to be used on the PS3. Source? From what I understand he released the root key, which is basically a password that the PS3 requires software to have before it will run. This technically allows both piracy and homebrew. Yes it does. If you give someone a knife which (unfortunately I can't remember precisely, reasonable? virtually certain? That which the reasonable bystander ought to think?) has a chance you know they'll use it to kill, it is a crime. If you give someone a house's security code because you know they might misuse it, that is a crime. They use their own tools to break in but you help them to do the crime. Except he doesn't have the opportunity to profile anyone he's given the code to. He can't profile each and every person who downloaded the key. It would be more like selling a knife to a stranger on eBay and them going to kill someone with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Source? I can't be bothered finding it. Even if it's wrong, it doesn't really matter. It would be like copying keys to a museum and giving them to anyone who asked. Sure, they could use them to look at exhibits at night but 90% would want them in order to take something. It would be more like selling a knife to a stranger on eBay and them going to kill someone with it. Which is why it's illegal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I can't be bothered finding it. Even if it's wrong, it doesn't really matter. It would be like copying keys to a museum and giving them to anyone who asked. Sure, they could use them to look at exhibits at night but 90% would want them in order to take something. Which is why it's illegal... Selling knives is illegal in the UK? I didn't realize you're government was THAT restrictive. Your example would only work if you were giving the key to someone who happened to own the museum, seeing as its not Sony's hardware anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pit-Jr Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Legal or not, it was an antagonistic dick move. He knows it, Sony knows it, and developers know it. Id bet my life that the overwhelming majority of PS3 users bought the system with the understanding and acceptance that it was intended to run licensed software, like every video console game before it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Why should it matter what it was intended for. You don't sign any legal agreement when you buy a PS3 stating that you're only going to use it to run licensed software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Why should it matter what it was intended for. You don't sign any legal agreement when you buy a PS3 stating that you're only going to use it to run licensed software. I'm pretty sure you do have to agree to the terms in order to use the software. If you don't want to use the software then you are completely free to use the hardware for whatever you want (I believe the US Army uses a load for one of their supercomputers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pit-Jr Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I said legal or not.... Its just hard for me to paint Sony as the bad guy here. I put myself in their shoes. They spent the millions in resources developing it, mass producing it, bringing it to market, implementing a unified online system, protecting sensitive account information, securing 3rd party software support, maintenance, bandwidth, etc. , employing thousands of people in the process. Making those root keys public undermines all of that ^^^^^^ and its why i can't fathom why anyone would spend 2 seconds defending it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 (edited) I'm pretty sure you do have to agree to the terms in order to use the software. If you don't want to use the software then you are completely free to use the hardware for whatever you want (I believe the US Army uses a load for one of their supercomputers). I was talking about the hardware, but you have a point. And that said, agreements like that are quite commonly found to be non legally binding by courts. At the same time, this is purely legal stuff we're talking about. I'm more interested in why people find it immoral to run any software you want on hardware you own. Its interesting to see how differently people are reacting to homebrew being available on the Wii, and it being available on the PS3. Edited April 15, 2011 by Emasher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 (edited) I'm pretty sure you do have to agree to the terms in order to use the software. I'm going to put up a letter on my front doorway stating that "By allowing your product into my home, you grant me permission to do with it as I please". It'll be official and everything. I'll totally put my signature on it and junk. Might even use a letterhead should the mood take me. Edit: Or better yet, I might pen an email directly to Sony with the disclaimer at the bottom reading "By opening this email..." etc. Private emails from companies always have similar disclaimers at the bottom with something about "you can't sue us for breach of confidentiality if we send this to the wrong address". Edited April 15, 2011 by Goafer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 At the same time, this is purely legal stuff we're talking about. I'm more interested in why people find it immoral to run any software you want on hardware you own. That isn't the immoral part. The guy knew full well that the main use of the information he released would be for piracy. It isn't the first time he has done it, either. He released the Linux hack that allowed piracy. As a result Sony had to remove the Linux function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 So why is it seen as acceptable on the Wii but not on the PS3 for most people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heroicjanitor Posted April 15, 2011 Author Share Posted April 15, 2011 Maybe because the wii is so much more restrictive? Enabling dvd playback and region free games is easy homebrew and nice uses. Ps3 already allows a lot, not much homebrew can do that is useful. Maybe. I don't know. I can't think of much I would want from my ps3/psn that homebrew would enable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debug Mode Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 I think the issue of piracy would be a lot more relevant if it was actually easy and prolific. As far as I can tell, there is no way to remove the 'FAT32' restriction on the USB devices connected to the PS3 which is how many pirates were hoping to utilise when pirating PS3 games. Because of this, pretty much all PS3 games are unreadable due to the 4gb file restriction on the FAT32 format. So, because of the security the PS3 uses for new hard drives inserted requiring formatting as well, the PS3 needs to be converted into a virtual FTP server, some thing that although an application exists for, a lot of people still have no idea on how to use correctly. And even when you had succeeded in doing that, there's no straight forward means of patching the ISO to be openly read by the PS3. So the only real activity of those who have jailbroken their PS3's is developing their unsigned code for the system (allowed by law), the use of emulators and the re-enabling of their own choice of firmware such as Linux. Big whoop. I'm not saying it should go without consequence though, their license for the firmware (the key issue of the debate) should be ceased and they should be forced to either buy a new PS3 or pay for a new license to have it running again by online verification for firmwares that are not tied to the motherboard. It's a non issue which has happened on pretty much every console now that has been blown out of proportions. You pay for the hardware, you should be allowed to do whatever you want with it. You should have the features that were advertised with it without fear of removal. The only part of the issue of the argument I DO agree with is the open release of the keys by Geo Hotz which could have been extremely messy. Why they targeted 0verflow is beyond me because as far as I know, they just hacked the thing and were going to release tools, not the key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) I hope Sony buy the movie rights. Okay, this HAS to be bullshit (In part due to the shitty site) but I can't help posting it. Sony has supposedly worked a deal with George Hotz for the movie rights to his life story Edited April 21, 2011 by Daft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts