What are the ethics of PS3's potential security crack?*

It's the same for me too, but not if the device is sold at a loss and the developers, especially the small guys, are put in a compromised position. The incident my cause Sony to reconsider some of its bolder plans too, and any attempt to counter exploits may cause inconvenience to legitimate users (e.g., PSN/XBL banning the wrong people).

Not saying he's there yet, but these are my principles.

 

+1. I don't understand these people. I'd rather he created something instead, which requires actual talent, not a degree in E.E. and unlimited time.

The funny thing is, this time running Linux is not a valid excuse. If it took him 5 weeks, why didn't he do this in 2007?

 

Well, people can be misdirected or lured. I know friends who were offered at least US$1 million cash for one-off jobs. I am okay with that, but I dislike people who hide behind "principles" when the real objective is the money, or other selfish reasons. Sometimes I am flabberghasted when extremely smart people were used/tricked for the wrong reasons.

Other times, it's just what they want to do with their time/lives.

 

Boycotting is not a viable alternative when ALL the current platforms employ such measures. I'm not ready to quit my favorite poison.

The pirate party's a bunch of maroons from what I've seen, I'd rather vote for an amalgamate of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Charlton Heston than for those clowns...

Secure hardware does not exclude open hardware. Commercial software can absolutely continue using their security measures while at the same time accommodating free development as well. It's just short-sighted greed from manufacturers that make consoles completely locked-down to everyone but licensed developers.

Why?

I own the device. I'm not RENTING it from them. Therefore I should be the one who decides what I can do with it.

Yes, we all know the original PS was such a commercial failure...

 

In this case, the exploit starts from the OtherOS open system mechanism. So while it is true that secure hardware does not exclude open hardware, it is extremely difficult to do. It usually means that performance will suffer since extra checks need to be performed during run-time.

As for short-sighted greed, show me the finances of Sony and Microsoft that says they are raking in tons of money now compared to the resources they have already sunken in (and will continue to invest this fall again). Nintendo adopted a different business model and is more resilient to hacks like this, but it also means we don't get to play with advanced hardware invested by Sony and MS ahead of time.

Not going to tell others how they should use their devices. But their actions can affect the developers and other users negatively.

Doesn't mean it will always follow the same rule. It's not like the law of physics. It's people. Things can happen in undesirable ways.

I can see potentially positive outcome from the incident, but by no means they are guaranteed to happen as "scripted". The economy and landscape are different from decades ago. I have been to Asia rather frequently. I know how bad things can go.

In any case, this is certainly an interesting development. Curious to see how Sony will react, especially on the online side and general user experience. They largely neglected the PSP in the early days, and Homebrew offered more usable and more compelling solution than the standard software. Hopefully they learn from that lesson. Don't make us _show_ them how to do usable software.

 

Sony will "always" have some protection (quite a lot, actually) regardless of how bad their hardware security gets compromised from the fact their games go on BR discs, and that most people have no means to duplicate them. BR burners are still much pricier than DVD burners, and most users see no need for a PC BR drive either, hence the units are quite rare still. And I foresee things staying basically the same; there's no pressing need for people to buy BR units and it will continue to be difficult to duplicate PS3 game discs.

Then add the fact most BR burners can only burn single layer discs, and if the PS3 game is spread across both layers it becomes even more difficult to pirate it, even if it was possible to get the PS3 to run it...

And of course, a PS3 game that is several dozen gigabytes in size is going to be difficult to download over the internet and somehow install on the PS3's harddrive, if a hack was devised to somehow enable harddrive installs of cracked games... Also, even the largest 2.5" HDDs available right now can only hold relatively speaking a handful of games.

So I have a difficult time seeing how Sony's future existence is doomed because of this news, or how a system open to non-commercial uses could be harmful to Sony and their current devs. It sounds a bit too much like FUD, IMO.

 

As part of your agreement with sony or microsoft to use the software that comes with your console you have stated that you will not reverse engineer, copy or modify said software.

Now if you can find a way to mod you console without breaking that agreement then all power to you, but claims that you have the right to do so is simply not true.

 

They can easily isolate these two. Microsoft has done it with the free XNA/C# development kit. You can use the full hardware (all 6 hardware threads, GPU, live network) using the free XNA kit (with some minor restrictions). Microsoft has even gone so far in homebrew support that you can even publish your homebrew games and sell them (Indie games - http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/community/default.htm). I don't see how they could support homebrew better than this.

Like said before in this thread Sony also supports homebrew (you can officially install Linux to your PS3). Too bad you can't access the GPU, but the powerfull Cell CPU is fully accessible. This is enough for most homebrew applications and simple games.

So you can't really say that Sony and Microsoft didn't try to support homebrew. Both supported homebrew officially without any mod chips or software mods needed. Still both consoles got eventually hacked to play pirated games. I doubt that this hack allows them to run unsigned code on PS3. But now you can modify the data, just like with Xbox. I still wouldn't say either of these platforms are fully hacked, as you can't run your own code. Being able to fool the system that copied discs are legal or to modify your profile/savegame data is not something I consider full access to the hardware. And is not something that helps homebrew development at all.

 

Those agreements are not valid in lots of countries, so...

 

Oh but they don't have to. All you need is factory in Asia making these counterfeit copies that will show up in flea markets. Or if the ISOs can be loaded off a USB drive you don't even need that.

Jim downloads game A, Tom downloads game B, they copy it. Heck, at that point you might even be able to rent the game and make the ISO yourself.

It's not, but the "we cracked it for homebrew" argument is mostly BS. Thr xbox360 allows anybody to develop for it via the XNA program. That never prevented the firmware hacking. On the PS3 you had Linux. Let's face it: most people are selfish and greedy and given the choice of not paying for something they will certainly not. I know several people with modded xboxes that were banned right before MW2 came out. I laughed at them

See one of the problems I have is that next time I go online Peter with his modded console might be using a wallhack in MW2 and there ends the fun in online gaming. It's PC online cheaters all over again.

I admit I wouldn't mind having full access to the RSX to play with the hardware but if that means people will be able to run pirated games I'd rather not.

It seems some people buy a hammer and complain because it's not a good screwdriver. If you want a completely open system get a PC or a Mac, not a console.

I hope this guy gets defeated by the Cell's security, he's not doing anybody a favor.

 

What if you didn't buy the console but it was given to you? You haven't agreed to any terms in such a case, so there's no fair way you can be held by. And that's assuming they are even legal, which as Apoc says is questionable. Finally, what recourse do the console companies have? If you fail to use your console according to terms you have agreed to, then the penalty would be to remove/brick your console, thereby voiding the company/client arrangement. I guess that could be considered fair although there'll be plenty of people who disagree. But in itself it doesn't stop reverse engineering. Sony could now approach GeoHotz and demand he surrenders the PS3, but the crack is made. Now if he were to build his own PS3 from the reverse-engineering, then he'd get his ass handed him, which is principally what those laws about; but he isn't doing that.

I don't think there is any law which prevents cracking of CE devices. If there is, someone will have to point me to it. You buy the goods and are free to do what you want with it. However, there are laws against piracy etc. If GeoHotz sells a modchip, in some countries at least, he may get served. But if his research is turned into a modchip by someone else, he isn't accountable, any more than I would be having made a kitchen knife used by some stranger in a grizzly murder.

 

Who cares if people run pirated games or not? psx, ps2, wii, x360, ds for example had/have tons of piracy and all of them are succesfull systems. I don't think piracy has much to do with sales. Besides that its the same as with music. People only have so much money, or only are willing to pay a certain amount. They might end up getting it a other way but that doesn't mean they would have bought it if they couldn't get it for free. Games are expensive and somebody might want to play 3 games a month which would be 180 euro's. Well a lot of people don't have 180 euro's a month to spend on games so you might only buy 1 and download the other 2. Doesn't make it right to do but given the status of the systems above I don't think piracy kills a system either.

 

The people who make/publish the games.

 

As Shifty said, the people who spend countless hard hours (especially during crunchtime) making the games people want to play.

Pirating the game is the same as going up to them and spitting in their face...or worse.

They are basically saying, "Woo, I endorse slavery. Make these games for me for free you filthy slave. Yes, I deserve to make money for my work, but you lowly game developer don't."

Regards,
SB

 

If you don't have the money to spend on gaming, there's a simple solution. Don't game. Piracy is never the answer.

Thing is, Sony still lose money on the PS3, so you are getting loss-leading hardware on the premise that you buy 2-3 games and another controller. If people stop buying those 2-3 games (it does happen, look at PSP, soft hack, tech-savvy userbase) the ecosystem of the console becomes lop-sided and Sony can no longer be aggressive with pricing.

 

Reply to a post in the Tech thread

This argument is age old and I completely disagree. Have you ever considered that the PC situation is just evolution of the industry? Its not exactly easy being a PC gamer and consoles have simply superceded it for the time being. I suppose should consoles fall the same argument would be used that piracy killed them. Everyone moves to the next system for gaming and expect that the previous system should have as many gamers as it had at its prime. To me its a cycle, fewer exclusive PC gamers-----> developers focusing on consoles----> fewer interested PC gamers and on and on. Also consider the kinds of games PC is suited to without a controller. RTS games, RPGs and shooters. RTS games have fallen in popularity, wow has the rpg gamers and rpgs are on the consoles in force. Shooters are the main attraction on PC should that really be what the users there desire. I just wish ppl will try to see more than just "piracy is the cause." An industry will not survive with that kind of simple thinking.

I am not quite sure I understand the first part of the bold text. How does it affect fellow gamers if it cannot go online?

Definitely not because of piracy and definitely wasn't dropped for that role because of piracy either. it seems the assumption is the ps3 will be worse off for being hacked yet the hacked consoles are leading it. Logically the argument makes no sense. Even if you don't see a benefit, you can't quite provide evidence for an disadvantage either.

That box would be giving money to the gaming industry? No. Would they be able buy a game for that box? Point is, buying a ps3 for whatever purpose isn't something you should be trying to argue against. So if someone says they want to do more with that system I don't think your stance on protecting the industry is served by telling them to find a different system to accomplish it.

Possibly

Not my point. He was saying that its all about piracy and cheating. There are many benefits people choose to ignore because they are paranoid about something that has been happening forever. Piracy is easiest to blame for failures.

I was referring to those doubting his work when they really have no practical idea or the mind of a hacker.

Sony will drop manufacturing costs when they sell more consoles, they sell more consoles faster when the hardware is hacked. I am going to ignore piracy comments because its pretty much a witch hunt situation.

 

That is like saying if you don't have the money to buy food, don't steel, just starve. Ofcourse there is a big difference between dying and having fun but it boils down to the same thing. Fact is its easy to tell people how evil piracy is (and hypocritical as I'm sure 99,9% of the people on this forum has or had pirated content at some point in their lives) when you have a well paying job like the majority of the people on this forum has I think but when you are for example a student or a kid you can't afford to buy every game you want. Does that mean you are evil and spitting in the face of people who developed the game? I don't think so. That doesn't mean everybody should just download like it is a good thing but in most cases there is no damage done either I think because if you can't afford the game, you won't buy it.

 

#1) Being hungry doesn't entitle you to steal. It's still a crime, albeit with an extenuating circumstance.

#2) They don't boil down to the same thing at all. 'Because I really wanted it' isn't an extenuating circumstance.

So you don't game. Gaming's not a necessity, it's a luxury. You have no right or claim to any content that you don't own. Just because you can get it for free doesn't make it legal or right.

You don't get to judge whether it does damage or doesn't. A large part of the damage claimed by publishers due to piracy doesn't translate into actual loss of income, but they're still the injured party. Hell, a lot of publisher/developer talk involving piracy is less about lost sales (which of course can't be gauged accurately) but rather by the perception of lost sales and the sting of people consuming your product without paying (and guess right, it's within their right not to want you to play their game if you haven't paid for it). The latter is enough reason for a lot of publishers and developers to move away from making games for certain systems.

 

Thank you. I get the same old arguments from people who do it, and when you throw this in their face, they start sounding like broken records. Likewise for movie piracy. The simple point that any lost revenue ultimately affects smaller jobs and not the big suits is completely lost on them.

If anyone thinks that gaming or any form of entertainment is a necessity, they certainly need a hard dose of reality.

I'm underemployed and back to school after a painful year, so I'm naturally cutting back because of time constraints and an ethical stance.

 

In a way I consider comment about if you can't buy it don't game as selfish. Who loses but the person who misses out on a form of entertainment they enjoy? I can't, in good conscience, tell someone not to pirate if I know the hardship they would have to go through to get the game.