GeoHot-PS3

Let's make a group to help GeoHot, the PS3 jailbreaker who is in court right now for wanting to run Linux on his system. For starters, who wants to DDOS Sony's website? If successful, let's try and gain entry to SCEA developer's group =D

WARNING: The next plane to leave to New York will be blown up.
Truthfully Yours,

Jiihad

>>1
Nah, it's a worthless venture.

>>1
What, so you can carry on using it how you're not meant to? There's a thing called "Terms of service". Go fuck yourself and stop justifying and supporting a scriptkiddie who allows hacker and piratefags to screw it up for everyone.

I hope the judge slams that gavvel down and sends him to drop the soap hell.

Signed,
Fuck you.

"Terms of service"
service has nothing to do with it. the PS3 is a piece of hardware. if i own a piece of hardware i should be able to use it however i want provided i'm not hurting anyone.

>>5
You obviously never read the small print of the TOS that appears on the box, in the manual or on the internet updates. You're an idiot if you ignore those and wonder why if it comes to the worst, Sony sends cops knocking at your door because you wanted to "use it how [you] want".

>>6
Don't bother.  >>5 doesn't understand what a contract is: if he were forced to sign it directly, he'd just get the equipment from a less savory source and manipulate it beyond the listed terms of service anyway, just to not give them the satisfaction.

>>7
Just as well. Hackerfags can never be reasoned with

>>6
>>7
>>8
Stupid fucking troll(s)! I don't recall ever signing a contract to buy a game console.

If you register a warranty or use PSN then yeah, there's a contract. Hotz probably did and Sony probably will use that. But they'd still be suing him either way. That's not what this case is about. Sony doesn't want people jailbreaking their devices. And the only reason they're suing is to send a message to other would be hackers.

Now, I'd like you dumb cunts to explain to me exactly what's immoral about jailbreaking a piece of hardware.

It's funny how, of all political systems, ownership is most consistently disrespected in capitalism.

>>9
This is what was meant by you not understanding it.  We're not talking about morality and; of course you weren't made to sign a contract directly.  That's why I said "if he were forced to sign it directly."

You didn't sign any contracts?  what about Sony?  You may not care about agreements, spoken, written, consentual, or anything like that, but the product you bought has a lot of that in the background that they've made with others in regards to its production, current and future.  Then, they also have their own interests and concerns in the matter.  And you find yourself bewildered why they would sue a person over the product?  You believe the world begins (and ends?) with what you can easily see and with what you choose to read and regard.

>>11
Sony should just not be retarded instead of blaming its loss of profits on its customers. PC manufacturers don't have Sony's problems.

>>12
PC manufacturer's utilize this method to make a profit, the connectivity and interchangeability of different cards and modules.  Sony is following a different policy.  If you understand that, then you're the one who's being unaccommodating.

>>13
And Sony is the one who is being retarded. I guess it's their freedom to lose money.

>>11
We're not talking about morality
Yes, we are. Because if Hotz wasn't acting immorally there would be no reason to "hope the judge slams that gavvel down and sends him to drop the soap hell."

And you find yourself bewildered
Awfully presumptuous of you. I'm not bewildered by anything. Sony is suing because they are protecting their interests (profit). And if what was meant by "terms of service" is Sony's obligations to other parties then it was communicated very poorly.

>>15
At the risk of moving towards talking about D&D alignments, is this a matter of morality or one of legality?  Even if you believe in some degree of absolutes, the two don't always travel in lockstep.

Awfully presumptuous of you.
You'll pardon me then.  I still feel it shortsighted for someone not to realize those things mattered on a level that could affect them.

Oh look, Geofag just cemented his guilt by running away
http://uk.kotaku.com/5784973/ps3-hacker-flees-the-long-arm-of-sony-for-south-american-freedom
It's one thing to be found guilty for fucking with a product he wasn't meant to fuck like that, but run away like a pussy after?
Weak.

Inb4 moralfag.

At the risk of moving towards talking about D&D alignments, is this a matter of morality or one of legality?  Even if you believe in some degree of absolutes, the two don't always travel in lockstep.
I couldn't agree more. But it's a matter of both. I personally think it's more important to be moral than law abiding though, and most people would probably agree. And honestly I don't see how a person could make any kind of judgment on this sort of thing without considering morality.

http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/2011/03/fearmongering.html

>>17
Well don't you feel stupid?

So how did they find out he was tinkering with his ps3? I could unscrew my ps3 and stick components up my ass if I wanted and they'd never know, if I had a ps3 that is.

>>19
To be honest, I don't. Because I don't go round hacking the fuck out of systems in ways I shouldn't be doing. I'd feel pretty stupid myself if I did that and then wondered why cops and lawyers came round to take all my stuff away.

>implying piracy is the only reason to hack

>>20
Yeah. Seriously, this is bullshit. I can do whatever I want with something that I legally bought as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. In no way is he infringing on Sony's rights: it's not their item any longer. It's his.
Now if he stuck the components up THEIR asses on the other hand...

>>17
inb4 cocks floating across a blue sky

>>23
Interesting dilemma. Usually when you stick something into someone else's shithole without permission it is quite a situation, but what if the individual on the receiving end has intellectual property rights on that object? If the action does not cause grievous trauma or permanent damage does that not mean they are anally masturbating themselves?

Looks like OP has got it's wish.
We're gonna getcha, Sony!

People here are fucking retarded. This isn't about piracy, or Geofag making software he knows could be used to pirate/hack consoles. He's in hot water because he publicly released the codes/keys that Sony, as a company owns, hence he's practically stolen and given them out without prior permission, and all the while attaches his name to it going "HURRR Ima steal your codes. You better hire me so I can stop people doing it".

Geofag wanted attention. Now he's getting it. The fact he spurts all his bullshit such as "I don't play games, I just wanted to buy the system" and the "Well I didn't know Sony had an American brance", releases a rap video about him fucking up Sony and asks for donation money, then goes on Holiday just conveniently during his legal case, makes "You mad" photos and previously endorsed the use of software to randomly ban legitimate customers from the Playstation Network makes me want to just punch him in the face with a crowbar for knuckledusters.

AnonOps DDOS'd http://sonypictures.co.uk/ this weekend. They were kind of effective, but I don't really see the point... first, how does censorship (via DDOS) promote free speech? And secondly, why attack a minor site that no one visits in the first place? It makes life a little tough for some of the sysops or IT guys, but that's really it...

>>27
They miss the point: They think they're proving one, but everyone forgets about it after a few hours/days when the target is back online. It's akin to a kid who thinks torturing one ant with a stick is actually destroying an entire nest.

It really is kind of pathetic.

oh, and playstation.com is down

>>28
Nice try. The corporations are actually  a bit freaked out, because of the amorphous nature here. Why do you think they're putting so much energy into HBGary and all that?

>>30
Which is why the corporations can, and have, acquired the means to rat out some of the offenders. It happened back when all the Wikileaks anonymous support was at its peak. I believe about 5 anons got caught.

Noone can truly hide their identity if the government are determined.

>>30
It's still pathetic regardless. Plus the anons are only doing this because they know if Geofag gets beaten, they're wide open for a beating as well.

>>31
Proving my point: that the government is "determined", and thus do care and this is making a difference here.
>>32
You're the same guy who cries "troll" when your losing an argument, aren't you? Nice tactic: name-calling. Let me know when you get passed up to the fifth grade.

>>33
Regardless of your opinion; If the government is "determined" it's because they want to catch whoever was performing anonymous internet vandalism on their websites. It's called protecting their interests.

Secondly, I'm not the only who calls him Geofag. And when did I even use the word "Troll"?

>>34
Point is: it's not useless. They do care.
And if I was wrong about who you are, I apologize, but your use of the word "pathetic" rang a bell.
"Geofag" actually makes me laugh :)

>>35
It's a fitting name for him, considering how he's been acting through this entire thing. He could have done all this stuff anonymously and I'm sure most people would have just treated him as some wacko and Sony would'nt have had this court case. He would have been able to get away with it. He had to attach his name to it. I guess that's why the "Hacktivists" are DDOSing Sony sites: Geofag has become a convinient mascot for them to rally behind. It was the same thing with Julian Assange or Bradley Manning until they got bored of that and moved on.

Basically that is why I'm finding it very hard to take Anonymous seriously in any way.

>>36
And yet, you yourself are anonymous...

>>37
But I don't condone anything they do, especially when they turn to vigilantism

>>38
Do you mean" I don't condone everything they do"?

>>39
No, I mean agree with what they do unless it's one of those very rare instances that everyone can agree on like bashing the WBC

>>40
That is I *don't* agree with what they do.

Shut the fuck up and go back to facebook.

>>42
Oh. Those are the words that will really scare me off.
Listen here, bub, Geo is in the wrong. He was practically sharing important pieces of the system's software without prior permission, not doing most of the work that cracked it, and attaching his name to it. Sony are perfectly in their right to legally sue him. But you won't understand. You're probably one of the underaged pussies that thinks LOIC'ing the hell out of Sony sites will do anything more than be a minor annoyance. Hence you really have no grounds to tell me to fuck off. Whether or not you support Sony or Geohot, the anons DDOSing are just doing it for stupid reasons.

And I don't use facebook. I talk to my friends face to face, not from a basement.

>>43
I don't belive you.........I mean the part at the end about you having friends..

>>44
That's just your bias. I don't agree with your glorious crusade to fight "the man" who's taking away our powers to pirate free shit we should be paying for, so I possibly can't have any friends because it makes me look less credible.

Oh wait, I'm browsing 4chan. How could I possibly have a social life?

Geo was just modifying a PS3 that he paid for and owned. Sony rallied police to kick in his door like he was a fucking terrorist or something. It doesn't bother you that a private company can have police violate your freedom of speech and privacy?

>>46
It was never *his* PS3. Even if you buy the system, Sony still has the legal right to do what they want with it. Just go onto any of /v/s argument threads about it and people will tell you that you don't own the system outright even if you did purchase it. It's only the self entitled basement dwellers with the pro geo/anti Sony mindsets that will say otherwise.

Besides, it's not about him monifying his system. It never was. It's about him hacking the system TO distribute the software codes that are effectively trade secrets that belong to Sony, which allows pirates to pirate free games off the PSN. That's what it's about, nothing else.

All the basement dwelling scriptkiddies looked too much into it and thought it was all about him being attacked to modifying junk. Sony are in every legal right to sue him.

Even if you buy the system, Sony still has the legal right to do what they want with it.
That may be true to some extent but doesn't that bother you? So I buy something and Sony has the right to do what they want with it?

And pull your head out of your ass. Piracy isn't the only reason to hack. How about saying a big fuck you to electronics companies that do this type shit?

So I buy something and Sony has the right to do what they want with it?
How about saying a big fuck you to electronics companies that do this type shit?
Within an existing framework of lodging an increasing slew of grievances against another individual, choosing the method that is not only completely outside of that system but an offense to it is the only correct solution?

Here's a surprising fact; maybe you'll find it surprising: some people don't care about that and are still moderately happy.

>>48
The only reason Sony is pulling "this type of shit" is because people were using Other OS to pirate so they removed it.

But you carry fighting the man and being an angry little snowflake if it helps you sleep at night.

>>49
When the system is literally designed in part by the party with which I have a grievance then, yes. Why is that a problem? And of course many people are happy the way things are. That doesn't mean Sony is right. Happiness does not equal justice.

>>50
Bullshit. Electronics companies deciding exactly how their devices are to be used is becoming increasingly common. Look at cell phone companies. They have a history of fucking their customers over. One of the ways they get away with it is by locking their devices down. Don't believe me? Try buying a cell phone with wifi and no data plan. Electronics companies aren't interested in fairness. And yet, they're the ones writing the rules. Sony is no different. So, tell me, why should I follow their rules?

>>51
Your wording permits me to say the following: you don't give a damn about justice.  You may not even really care what the aforementioned "framework of lodging grievances" is like or how it works, or may have not even considered it until I brought the courts up just then because you feel getting absorbed by a personal, internal campaign is more romantic.  Not only do you disregard, you don't care what other people think, whether or not they are part of that judgment system.

All you care about is feeling like you're in the right.

>>52
I have a feeling >>51 is also that "I hate the police they're all a bunch of self serving thugs because one of them beat me up once for robbing a store death to justia" basement dweller who makes a million fuck the police threads on here.

I just love it when people on 4chan think they know something about me. Let me know when you faggots have an argument that's more than just a personal attack.

>>54
It's not like any of the last half dozen posts that can be attributed to you have had anything of a substantive argument in them.  It's pretty much just been "little you versus big system."

>>55
Then you fail at reading comprehension.

>>56
Fine, if you think you have debate skills let's go back at an earlier point and start over from there, hoping we don't run into a dead end again.

Besides, it's not about him modifying his system.  It never was.  It's about him hacking the system TO distribute the software codes that are effectively trade secrets that belong to Sony, which allows pirates to pirate free games off the PSN.

>>57
Companies don't automatically have the right to suppress "trade secrets". People have the right to look for them.

And just because some (or even most) of the people with which Hotz shares these secrets are using them to pirate games, that doesn't mean he's is responsible for their actions. And it most definitely does not mean that that's the reason he did it.

Companies don't automatically have the right to suppress "trade secrets."
Actually, that's a state specific condition and I will grant you that point - albeit a incidental one - as New Jersey has not ratified the Uniform Trade Secrets Act.  Unfortunately, I will also make that insignificant by pointing out that the state of California is the venue through which legal matters are being conducted and they have ratified the UTSA.  I'm going to void my own point, in that Sony chose California solely because most of the incidental IP traces related to Hotz's websites and instructions came from California, so it really means nothing as far as this is concerned at all.

In any case, moot point.  Yeah, there are cases where companies do have the ability to restrict access to trade secrets; and, of course, they also have the ability to challenge individuals to preserve those secrets in a court of law, the same where an individual could challenge that a company release those secrets.  Either way must have a good reason.

Hotz claims that he initially broke the PS3 open because he wanted more direct access to the video driver.  The reason escapes me and if you could fill that in I'd be delighted.  This kind of justification makes a sort of sense and I would probably not care if the PS3 were my product.  That does not create justification for him to publish sensitive code online against the wishes the people who possess legal right to the software (and Sony did contact him a number of times about this before the suit).  Stymiyng the enabler is Sony's only logical approach.

I thought robin hood was a hero...

>>60
Peculiarities of the story of Robin Hood are such that for every interpretation  you like there are at least one other interpretation, albeit it subtle in difference, that are not as favorable with the conditions surrounding the protagonist and his crusade.  The only thing that never changes is the Sheriff being the true villain and often Prince John being a villain by proxy.

So if you want Robin to always be a hero, just say that he is and don't try to think about it.

Geohot is a fraud and he always has been. Do a dispute on all the paypal donations to teach him a lesson. You owe people an explanations to what was settled as they paid to help you thinking you were fight for their right of the OS.

First of all, Hotz gets sued by Sony. Promises to fight the fight to the end or until he gets a settlement with Sony that allows for an authorized path to homebrew on PS3, OtherOS and an apology from Sony to the scene.

Then, he proceeds to ask for donations. Many people donate to him because of his promise and all the good that would ensue.

Hotz settles with Sony, breaking his promise and letting down all those people who donated to him.

That is the reason why people are so angry at him.


As for the court case itself and why he should NOT have caved in:

It was a civil case, he couldn't have gotten into jail even if he had suffered a complete, and total defeat in court. The worst outcome would be that he would have had to pay quite a large sum of money to Sony, in which the community would most likely have helped simply out of respect for going through the whole thing.

If he had won the case it would have set a very, VERY powerful precedent and enforced general consumer rights in that you are indeed allowed to modify electronics you have legally bought without fear of facing legal difficulties. Also, it would have created a large barrier for these large companies for trying to bully consumers into submission, and would have helped all consumers in general, not just PS3 owners.

Especially the fact that it would have had nationwide (in the US, that is.) effect on consumer rights is the reason why it was so god damn important to go through with the whole thing.

As for the court case if he had settled as per his original promise to the scene:

We would have an authorized way of using homebrew without having to resort to hacks, and we would also be able to enjoy OtherOS. While this is a LOT less important than the precedent I mentioned earlier it would still have benefited atleast the PS3 scene.


The result:

Well, people lost the money they donated to him, he broke his promises, and there is no way of getting the donated money back. Donations are not covered by the credit card company rules and thus cannot be disputed.

Hotz can try to move to China if he wishes to continue hacking, but no one will take him seriously anymore. Or he can release stuff anonymously, but that will still not change anything, the scene has gained absolutely nothing.

>>63
Now this is a post I can understand. Thanks mate.

>>63
I hope we have all learned a valuable lesson: fools and their money are soon parted.

>>59
Your argument is that Hotz had a legal and maybe even moral obligation to not interfere with Sony's prevention of piracy. I would agree with that if Sony was itself a morally conscientious party.

>>63
Yeah, that really does suck. On his blog he wants people to just boycott Sony now. Kind of a bitch move if you ask me.

It goes like this, you say "i'll fight to the end!"
And then you get an anonymous letter saying, if you don't settle immediately you and your family will die in a car accident.

>>66
Oddly, I would also agree with you if Hotz himself was a morally conscientious party.  I just started assuming that neither side was like that from the beginning.

>>68
Fair enough. But what made you decide from the beginning that Hotz was immoral? I'm not trying to make a point with this question. I'm just genuinely curious.

>>69
Because only an idiot would think his attempts to share and distribute secret operating and software codes that are a complete no no and then acts like a massive a faggot during and after is anything but immoral.

>>70
Seriously? He's immoral because he committed a "complete no no"? What are you, a toddler?

>>71
Not really, I just happen to be one of those legitimate users of his system and doesn't take kindly to pirate and hackerfags pirating free shit and cheating online because some lonely attention seeker wanted the world to know he hated a big corporation an awful lot and released the means for them to do that.

>>69
Oh, no, I'm not singling him out.  I try to start from "both sides are wrong" perspective as much as possible and build up rather than build down.  Of course that's subjective, I know, and this thread is already swimming with so much of that held legitimate for whatever petty reasons people can find.

I personally have no sympathy for him, the hacking scene has been underground for years..I personally don't understand why he was trying to get famous/credit through hacking. I remember days when things were released anonymously and through third parties via IRC and other means.

All I'm saying I remember days when shit was released and it wasn't attached to your facebook, your personal blog, and your youtube account(Does anyone know who recently released that K_License Extractor or what Xport even looks like from the original Xbox days, exactly!)...he asked for this shit to happen to him...him and that graf_chokolo fucker......get off that e-fame train..

I try to start from "both sides are wrong" perspective as much as possible and build up rather than build down.
Again, just curious but why? What about "innocent until proven guilty"? And is it possible to have both beliefs?

Not really
So you are somewhat of a toddler but not really. Got it. And "only an idiot" would have an opinion about this without using the same prejudices that you did. Makes perfect sense.

Where I draw the line is the distribution. He gave away both a private firmware and the keys, albeit half the work was done for him. Again, I'm taking Sony's side because I knew it would happen. As I said, it's like standing on a train track. You know the train is coming, so if you don't move out the way, why should anyone help/care? Did people really expect Sony to do nothing? And as far as I'm concerned, Sony's scare tactics worked. It's not like the PS3 homebrew scene came up with anything worthwhile. Look to the Wii for that.

If people had a legitimate reason for the homebrew applications, I'd be fine with it. As far as I can see, the only worthwhile things released are piracy-enabling material. No music backgrounding tools, no feature unlocking/save exporting homebrew, no custom drivers or reversed Move drivers, no 3D enabling in the menu, no bravia media playback enhancement dumping, no BD extraction, no custom XMB's, and the list I could come up with could go on - so tell me then, what was the point all these "hackers" were trying to prove? That they could enable piracy/homebrew/console emulation but then not do much else, it's still very much a locked console because no one wants to put the effort for anything but producing proofs of concept.

The only thing worthwhile from this entire fiasco was a signed permanent TN-D and VSH.

If there are any 'anonymous' protesting SONY  in France on the 16th,kill two birds with one stone, everyone should wear those 'veils' (muslims) that was recently banned...

>>67
Good point.