That just happened!

JD_Shadow

Contributor
CRank: 13Score: 152360

To N4G: Please grow up before debating me about Geohot

Okay, yeah, I have my opinions about the Geohot hack, and I'm sure you do.

Okay, I'm fine with that. If that's what you think, then by all means. If you think he needs to pay up, then go ahead and think that! All I have ever asked when debating me is that you, one, say things with facts to show that you know what you are talking about, and two, you act like an adult by not telling me to confirm or die, or using the stuff like “kill that f**k” that we've been seeing. How that sort of crap gets not only condoned or encouraged is beyond me (shame on the mods for not doing anything about this, still). You don't have to change the opinion, just the attitude.

However, I do have to point this out because it speaks to the heart of what is going on right now. I posted a response to a N4G user who I will not name because I want this blog to be approved, even though you might within minutes know who it is I'm referring to ( http://n4g.com/news/719804/... ). The post was about how the term “hacker” was too broad of a term because it could mean a variety of things. I remember a message board I used to frequent. The owner bought a UBB license (remember UBB?). Knowing the code it was written in, he went in and began adding additional functionality that wasn't originally in the program. He referenced it to hacking. It wasn't illegal to do that, since he wasn't exactly going to get our IP addressees or anything like that.

Actually, now that I think about it, he was “modding” the thing. But you could call it a hack.

Anyway, following that comment, I got a PM from the guy that I responded to. Here's where it hit the fan for me:

“Hacking the PS3 is illegal. You are in error concerning the DMCA revision. The adjustments to the DMCA, as per the findings of the Library of Congress Court covered devices such as smart phones and excepted them to the DMCA.

“However, video game consoles were not provided an exception under this ruling. You can either keep this info to yourself or do the right thing, research the finding, and then post the facts back in that thread. The decision you make will define you as a person.

http://thetechjournal.com/e...

For one, look how we word this. Define me as a person? I view that as a threat. Either change what I think or else. How else could I view that?

Secondly, go back to my post that started all this. I had already mentioned this in that and several other threads (and I had mentioned the LoC's actions, though I didn't mention the LoC by name). I don't condone cheating. I don't like it, I don't do it. Unless it's using a code that the developers themselves put into the game. I've mentioned my opinions several times, and you should know that I don't validate opinions for anyone.

Secondly, his link is exactly WHERE I got MY info from. Mind this part of the story:

"The news was well received by Civil Rights activists like Jennifer Stisa Granick, civil liberties director with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and others who had been pushing for this exemption and others for years now. Stisa Granick told the Huffington Post on Monday “You bought it, you own it” and it seems the Library of Congress agreed."
Keep in mind, too, that I fully support the EFF, so of course I've been following them for a while. I should know that the EFF “pushing” for something means more than them saying things. They take action. They get their visitors and members to take action by sending e-mails and calling their local representatives. This is petitioning for something to happen. I mention this in my whole post. If this poster could only read that post, he would've noticed that. Not to mention all the controversies that the DMCA has created (I keep saying that, too).

Lastly, this is a guy that, up until now, I had always thought about this guy as someone who posted worthwhile comments on the site. I've thought that he knew what he was talking about, and never thought that he deserved the BS he got from the 360 fanboys on this site. However, it seems as if he completely ignored my past opinions about him and just went for the knife to backstab me without thinking twice.

However, after PMing him about that, his only answer was:

“It isn't a threat. The fact that you perceive that comment as such tells me all that I care to know concerning you. Your remarks read like a guilty person in the midst of a panic attack. Whether you like it or not your actions tell me, your friends, your enemies, everyone what you are. If you won't post the truth someone else will. The truth is the very act of hacking the PS3 is illegal. Have a nice life.”

Excuse me! What right does this guy have to say that to me? Of course I respond, but this time, not in a kind way, because THIS is EXACTLY what I'm saying you shouldn't be doing when debating me. Don't say that my opinions need to change (and yes, he IS saying that I have to change my opinions). I said that my opinion stands, I brought my facts, that how dare he say such things (he knows nothing about me), and that I did my damn research. Finally, I suggested to him that perhaps he's the type of person that's condoning and encouraging the wishes of physical harm on Geohot.

I read a post on Ripten at http://www.ripten.com/2011/... from “Tom Ato” which was equally as disgusting (and of course, I responded AND flagged that comment. Not holding my breath on anything happening to it). This disgusts me, and Tom, and the N4G user, are only examples of how repulsive the attitude is getting here.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not minding the debate. However, grow the hell up before doing so. Change your attitude before saying your opinion (and no, your attitude is NOT your opinion).

JD_Shadow5212d ago

HAHA!! And now this guy has blocked me after giving me this:

"If you think that was a threat then let me suggest you never leave home, find a closet, and avoid the internet. Does the word sissy mean anything to you?

What was the consequence of you not changing your opinion? Well? Where did I say die by the pen? I am referring to the opinions others would have of you but it seems the opinion you are forming of yourself isn't particularly high. Guilt, eh? All I said is your actions would define you. A threat carries with it promises of something occurring. You actions define you whether you act or not since no action is an action.

You are unable to comprehend the very structure of a threat. You are an idiot. That isn't a threat either but rather a simple and honest evaluation of your lack of reasoning. You do not know what constitutes a threat. What seems to be bothering you is the realization of your errors. Some call this the guilt of the incompetent. It's reaching a pathetically humorous stage where the calmer I become the more angry and rampant you respond. Temper, temper, tsk tsk.

I don't have to think PS3 hacking is illegal because what I think is immaterial since the law has already stated that circumvention of security measures on the PS3 is illegal.

You also do not understand Sony's case against George Hotz. They do not have to prove Geohot's actions are illegal. The court has stated they are. They simply have to prove Geohot committed the set of actions that the court and the Judge HAVE ALREADY STATED ARE ILLEGAL. That is what you are unable, due perhaps to moral or mental deficiency, to grasp.

Whatever the case further conversation with you is ridiculous and a waste of my time. Anyone unable to comprehend A) the definition of a threat, and B) clearly stated law, isn't worth the air it takes to push out a fart."

Odd that he's saying that there was already a verdict to a trial that hasn't even started yet. Not to mention that it's pretty damn cowardly to block someone. He didn't want a debate. He just wanted me to validate his position. I will NEVER do that for ANYONE here on N4G. Angry? YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT I AM! I'll leave it to you to realize why I am and should be!

lex-10205212d ago

I like the points you make in this blog. I feel that some of what you say should be applied to everyone anytime. People really should learn to use facts and logic when arguing instead of wild emotions. I also agree with you that saying things like "go die" or "STFU" are just childish by nature and should never be included in an argument or debate.

What I don't understand, and perhaps you can explain this to me (and I'm not trying to start an argument here I'm honestly attempting to understand), is that Geohot won his court case against Apple (when he hacked the iphone) because the court deemed that hacking his iphone was not illegal since it was his property right? And that since his intent was not to distribute or steal copy-written material, merely to make his own material (homebrew I believe it's called) he could not be charged with stealing from Apple. Basically, Apple could not prove that he had mens rea (guilty mind), or could not prove that he hacked intending to steal. Couldn't the same defense be used against Sony?

JD_Shadow5212d ago

Yes, they can, and in a way, they already have. Hotz' view is that the DMCA exception for smart phones should've been applied to more than just smart phones, and if you're intentions are legal, then why shouldn't you be allowed to do it? The releasing of the root keys seems to be the elephant in the room, but at the same time, what drove him to do that? The OtherOS issue is a weird one, because many feel as though Hotz was the reason why Sony removed it, but you can also argue that Sony was trying to find a way to get out of the guarantee made by the Linux devs so they could get it off of the fats to free up memory (remember that it was never on the slims, and the Linux devs promised it would remain on the fats when they were asked about it). This could mean that Sony was just giving an excuse that the mainstream would accept and would follow like sheep while the real story was kept hidden.

The problem Sony has is their attitude towards their own hardware and how closed does it have to be in order to prevent pirating and cheating on online games? The act of them really wanting to keep the case in CA seems suspect because it's telling us that Sony might not feel very confident that they can win the case if they don't have specific judges, or they think that if they keep dragging Hotz out there that it'll drain his resources and be forced to settle without Sony having to prove anything. They've been known to be very vicious in how they fight in court battles, even if it doesn't seem as though they can win it.

With the homebrew, I think that's the whole issue. Sony's not been friendly at all to that community. See the PSP firmware updates that constantly screws over homebrew and the infrared communicator removal.

But yeah, they can and, in a way are, using that defense. It's a damn good one, too.

Captain Tuttle5212d ago

You're a pretty good writer but you need to grow a thicker skin.

--------5212d ago (Edited 5212d ago )

Seems like an intelligent guy, but needs to man up a bit. I couldn't care less what anyone thinks of my opinion on N4G, this is how the internet works. Now mindlessly disagree with this comment you bastards! ;)

Mr_Bun5212d ago (Edited 5212d ago )

You are posting in the comment section of a video game website that caters to people, ages 13 and up, but you expect all replies to you to be mature? I agree with Tuttle's comment.

jut4205212d ago

I don't think most will care...

Christopher5212d ago (Edited 5212d ago )

I agree that there are people here who express opinion in a manner that is not constructive and typically filled with anger more than anything else. I find this true with most topics, though, and not just topics relating to hackers and piracy. The fact of the matter is that it's not going to go away and you will note that most posts tend to be as "helpful" as these and yet result in more hits for N4G, which results in more revenue. So, don't expect this to change anytime soon.

As far as your thoughts on hacking, I would agree that it is an extremely broad term today. I've complained about someone modifying an XML file on their PS3 to show different text being claimed as a hack as ridiculous and not at all in the spirit of what hacking has meant over the years.

What GeoHot has done is a hack. It's not a mod. I say this because what he hacked wasn't his hardware but the software that Sony developed and owns the rights to (the XMB OS files that manage what files can be run against the system, whether you can install OtherOS, and your access to PSN -- that last one being the most important element in the case against GeoHot). You cited a few times that it's his hardware and he can hack/mod it all he wants. I would completely agree with you with regard to the hardware but would vehemently disagree when it comes to the hacking of the software, which is the item of contention for which Sony is taking him to court.

The biggest difference here between this case and Apple's iPhone case is that jailbreaking the iPhone was found to be legal and a manner in which users would not be restricted by a single provider. You will note if you read the case that was not specifically made legal by this was the creation of custom code that would run on the iOS software. This of course happens anyway, but is impossible to really track and enforce. I say it's different here because Apple claimed security issues and yet their storefront application was never broken or bypassed by the jailbreak, only the phone itself. With the PS3 jailbreak, though, it allows direct modification to who has access to PSN-specific data as well as the possibility to affect the security of others by sending malicious attachments via PSN as well as in P2P encounters (games, video chats, etc.).

Most of the other materials brought up in the case against GeoHot, such as whether he has a PSN account, whether he's played a 'pirated' game on it, his statements about getting a job to prevent further hacking/security issues, and his history is merely to serve as additional evidence against GeoHot in his knowledge of what his hack has done to reduce the possible level of security they attempt to impart via the PSN and how it could lead to financial loss.

LightofDarkness5212d ago

It's a simple case really. So long as Sony can prove that their conduct with users and their Terms of Service are fair (they are) and that Geohotz's actions have damaged their profits (which, as before, were accrued in an ethical and fair manner), then Mr. Hotz is quite liable for these damages. It really is quite that simple. There is almost no need to invoke and cite the DMCA, I think almost any judge will be quite convinced of his liability before that needs to be brought into it.

The only real issue then is how he is going to pay up (I'm sure he can't), and does he deserve jail time if he can't.

Show all comments (22)
30°

Pragmata Preview:  Yes, it Exists, and Yes, It’s Kind of Great | CGM

After years of silence, Capcom’s elusive space thriller Pragmata finally gives us something concrete—and it’s surprisingly worth the wait.

Read Full Story >>
cgmagonline.com
40°

Cave Crave Release Date Crawls Out of Hiding

3R Games have announced the release date of the upcoming Cave Crave for Meta Quest and Steam VR, and later on PSVR 2.

Read Full Story >>
xrsource.net
40°

Surrealism, Horror to Collide in New Ways in Concierge

By combining puzzle-solving with a trippy art style and a disorienting setting, KODINO's Concierge aims to take horror fans on a wild ride.

Read Full Story >>
hardcoregamer.com