Support NeoGAF

[StevieP]

Really?

These guys aren't neo, they are not the one, this isnt the movie vendetta, we are not living oppressed with our freedoms removed.

But as a father, an employee of a company, not sony's but a fortune 500 so it can one day be the target of another group for another reason. I would not want to be dragged or have my family dragged into some silly war.

What if someone from anon, on his own takes that information and harasses a family member of an exec or a judge or lawyer? And that family member is going through depression or something, and a personal invasion or smear on their character publicly or through child services or through the school causes that person to go deeper into depression or to worse suicide. That's a huge what if but its a possibility and an example of how what one sees as just a good ole lulz could actually be more damaging than you know.

Taking the law into your own hands? But i'm what's wrong with America? I go to to work i pay my taxes and i teach my children to obey the law and fight for what they believe in legally.

Threatening peoples families to call child services? And what for? to break a copyrighted os? to stop the legal actions against a hacker?

If your involved in this or support this, yes an animal and you are what is wrong with america if you support this.

All this is doing is building a strong case in favor of government and corporate policed internet.

Again people stop watching movies, you are not Neo from the Matrix, your not sending a robot from the future to the now to protect you from the terrible corporation that is going to take over the world.

You are a human being that should know right from wrong. Threatening to call child services or to announce that the person has an std? really that's what is right way to do things in America?


Please question yourself if you believe that and your family upbringing if you believe that.

This is no longer just about can the firmware be hacked and if geohot's case should be moved to another state.

Are you seriously saying you condone their actions? Are you going to fight for their release if they get arrested for such actions?

It's all about freedom. As long as we are talking about your freedom's not mine right?

Have these people's kids been phoned yet? No? OK. Are people actually taking IRC discussion seriously here? Your mistake. My problem is with condoning a "police state" mentality. It is wrong in every conceivable fashion, just like *actually* picking on someone's family is wrong. The problem is that in America (and a few other countries including mine) the loss of liberty is accepted for "security" (which is a faux-statement). Condining the law is one thing, one which I support. Condoning the loss of freedom is one which I do not.

 

[patsu]

There was a post recently on the World of Warcraft forums in which a user was complaining because *Blizzard* weren't doing enough to stop him recieving *emailed* phishing attempts.

Only 1 user ?

In this case, if they found out the truth, the anger will most likely shift to Anonymous... About their social engineering attack involving innocent people, which may get people fired for releasing customer details. About DDOS attack affecting innocent gamers, worse *if* they use innocent people's computers to participate in the attack.

 

[patsu]

Have these people's kids been phoned yet? No? OK. Are people actually taking IRC discussion seriously here? Your mistake. My problem is with condoning a "police state" mentality. It is wrong in every conceivable fashion, just like *actually* picking on someone's family is wrong. The problem is that in America (and a few other countries including mine) the loss of liberty is accepted for "security" (which is a faux-statement). Condining the law is one thing, one which I support. Condoning the loss of freedom is one which I do not.

We don't know yet.

Also the argument of liberty vs security is case by case. It's impossible to do a generalized coverage. Sometimes it's one way. Sometimes it's other.

 

[MalboroRed]

Have these people's kids been phoned yet? No? OK. Are people actually taking IRC discussion seriously here? Your mistake. My problem is with condoning a "police state" mentality. It is wrong in every conceivable fashion, just like *actually* picking on someone's family is wrong. The problem is that in America (and a few other countries including mine) the loss of liberty is accepted for "security" (which is a faux-statement). Condining the law is one thing, one which I support. Condoning the loss of freedom is one which I do not.

They're basically discussing whether to harrass people through phone pranks regarding someone's KIDS, it's disturbing and the threat of harassments like this should be taken very seriously. The fact that tactics like calling someone pretending a child got rushed to the hospital even crossed their minds showed that these people are scum fucks.

 

[Zoe]

They're basically discussing whether to harrass people through phone pranks regarding someone's KIDS, it's disturbing and the threat of harassments like this should be taken very seriously. The fact that tactics like calling someone pretending a child got rushed to the hospital even crossed their minds showed that these people are scum fucks.

I think they were actually saying to call the kid's school saying the parent's in the hospital. That's even worse.

 

[MalboroRed]

I think they were actually saying to call the kid's school saying the parent's in the hospital. That's even worse.

Seriously, they're asking for law enforcement to get involved.

 

[StevieP]

Seriously, they're asking for law enforcement to get involved.

So you guys are still taking IRC discussion seriously. Have you people never seen what IRC is about? It's like 4chan in realtime.

Anyone here old enough to remember what newsgroups used to be like?

 

[phosphor112]

Have these people's kids been phoned yet? No? OK. Are people actually taking IRC discussion seriously here? Your mistake. My problem is with condoning a "police state" mentality. It is wrong in every conceivable fashion, just like *actually* picking on someone's family is wrong. The problem is that in America (and a few other countries including mine) the loss of liberty is accepted for "security" (which is a faux-statement). Condining the law is one thing, one which I support. Condoning the loss of freedom is one which I do not.

Nice PR damage control mate.

 

[eastmen]

Really?

These guys aren't neo, they are not the one, this isnt the movie vendetta, we are not living oppressed with our freedoms removed.

But as a father, an employee of a company, not sony's but a fortune 500 so it can one day be the target of another group for another reason. I would not want to be dragged or have my family dragged into some silly war.

What if someone from anon, on his own takes that information and harasses a family member of an exec or a judge or lawyer? And that family member is going through depression or something, and a personal invasion or smear on their character publicly or through child services or through the school causes that person to go deeper into depression or to worse suicide. That's a huge what if but its a possibility and an example of how what one sees as just a good ole lulz could actually be more damaging than you know.

Taking the law into your own hands? But i'm what's wrong with America? I go to to work i pay my taxes and i teach my children to obey the law and fight for what they believe in legally.

Threatening peoples families to call child services? And what for? to break a copyrighted os? to stop the legal actions against a hacker?

If your involved in this or support this, yes an animal and you are what is wrong with america if you support this.

All this is doing is building a strong case in favor of government and corporate policed internet.

Again people stop watching movies, you are not Neo from the Matrix, your not sending a robot from the future to the now to protect you from the terrible corporation that is going to take over the world.

You are a human being that should know right from wrong. Threatening to call child services or to announce that the person has an std? really that's what is right way to do things in America?


Please question yourself if you believe that and your family upbringing if you believe that.

This is no longer just about can the firmware be hacked and if geohot's case should be moved to another state.

Are you seriously saying you condone their actions? Are you going to fight for their release if they get arrested for such actions?

It's all about freedom. As long as we are talking about your freedom's not mine right?

I'm sure Geohot loved that sony outed where he lived in court documents even though sony could have put that information in sealed documents. Now everyone knows where Geohot lives . So why shouldn't we all know where Sony employees live ?

If i was geohot i would have demaned that in the court papers personaly.

You do understand that this is a huge company against one dude ? A huge company that doesn't seem to want to play fair and will bend and break all your freedoms to win what it wants to win ?

 

[phosphor112]

I'm sure Geohot loved that sony outed where he lived in court documents even though sony could have put that information in sealed documents. Now everyone knows where Geohot lives . So why shouldn't we all know where Sony employees live ?

If i was geohot i would have demaned that in the court papers personaly.

You do understand that this is a huge company against one dude ? A huge company that doesn't seem to want to play fair and will bend and break all your freedoms to win what it wants to win ?

I have not seen a single document stating his address without it being censored. Most people following this already know he's from New Jersey, a small state, meaning anyone can narrow it down easily.

 

[patsu]

If you look at his YouTube rap, that's what he wanted all along. Being a very public figure, getting sued by Sony.

As for lawsuit, everyone plays to win legally. Only the judge decides what is fair according to the law.

 

[Zoe]

I have not seen a single document stating his address without it being censored. Most people following this already know he's from New Jersey, a small state, meaning anyone can narrow it down easily.

If you're a homeowner, your address is almost always public. It's one of the hardest things to secure.

He also has a residential address on his website domain anyway.

 

[NullPointer]

Why?

I can understand Sony's reasons for removing OtherOS, if it truly did have to do with security and cutting costs. But people who bought a PS3 expecting to pay games, watch blurays, and run OtherOS got screwed.

If you offer a service and then are forced to remove it, at least offer your customers recompense. A refund wouldn't necessarily have made OtherOS people happy, but it would've been fair. In the US at least neither the retailers nor Sony would accept refunds except for rare occasions.

On that basis I hope that the US Class Action suit leads to some damages and at least some compensation for those most affected.

 

[MalboroRed]

I can understand Sony's reasons for removing OtherOS, if it truly did have to do with security and cutting costs. But people who bought a PS3 expecting to pay games, watch blurays, and run OtherOS got screwed.

If you offer a service and then are forced to remove it, at least offer your customers recompense. A refund wouldn't necessarily have made OtherOS people happy, but it would've been fair. In the US at least neither the retailers nor Sony would accept refunds except for rare occasions.

On that basis I hope that the US Class Action suit leads to some damages and at least some compensation for those most affected.

How would you identify someone asking for a refund for a used PS3 as someone who actually uses the otherOS functionality?

 

[NullPointer]

How would you identify someone asking for a refund for a used PS3 as someone who actually uses the otherOS functionality?

The gets into murky waters of course, but as a class, I'd expect some form of compensation to all owners who were within their warranty period at the time that OtherOS was discontinued, regardless of whether they actually used the functionality. That same class should have been entitled to refunds at the time.

I'm no lawyer though, but that seems about right to me.

 

[phosphor112]

If you're a homeowner, your address is almost always public. It's one of the hardest things to secure.

He also has a residential address on his website domain anyway.

Well, yes, I know that, but I'm just saying, in the legal documents, I don't recall seeing his number, but those legal doc's are the least of his worries in terms of people finding info about him.

There are websites that you can type in someones name, or plug in their facebook, and it'll find out not only wear you live, but how much the house is worth, how much taxes you pay, how (approx) income you make... etc...

Also, the other guy said "why not herp derp and show the addresses of the execs for sony derp?" Well, the execs aren't the one suing, it's SCEA that's suing, that and number is also public.

 

[MalboroRed]

The gets into murky waters of course, but as a class, I'd expect some form of compensation to all owners who were within their warranty period at the time that OtherOS was discontinued, regardless of whether they actually used the functionality. That same class should have been entitled to refunds at the time.

I'm no lawyer though, but that seems about right to me.

There are tens of millions of units out there, how much would be enough to "seem right" to you? Ten bucks? A hundred bucks? We're talking about tens to hundreds of millions of dollars here.

As a PS3 owner I wouldn't want them to spend that kind money to pacify an extremely minute number group of people who actually use the otherOS functionality when they can spend it on developing games I would want to play.

If we're putting value to the otherOS functionality, should I request for a refund for a functionality they put in which I never wanted to use but might have been factored into the overall cost of the machine since I'm really buying the PS3 for gaming and gaming only? If I don't use the RGB port, I still paid for it, should I get my money back for that? It's a slippery slope we're going down here.

 

[NullPointer]

There are tens of millions of units out there, how much would be enough to "seem right" to you? Ten bucks? A hundred bucks? We're talking about tens to hundreds of millions of dollars here.

As a PS3 owner I wouldn't want them to spend that kind money to pacify an extremely minute number group of people who actually use the otherOS functionality when they can spend it on developing games I would want to play.

Hey, I never used or had any interest in OtherOS myself, but the way I see it Sony's actions were unjust and did damage to some of their consumers. The expectations that OtherOS users had for using their PS3 were created by Sony after all. So Sony should be held liable for removing that functionality.

As far as dollar amounts? That's for a court to decide. I'm just saying I'm on the side of the class action suit. But just for the record, I'm *not* on the side of GeoHot or Anonymous.

 

[eastmen]

Well, yes, I know that, but I'm just saying, in the legal documents, I don't recall seeing his number, but those legal doc's are the least of his worries in terms of people finding info about him.

There are websites that you can type in someones name, or plug in their facebook, and it'll find out not only wear you live, but how much the house is worth, how much taxes you pay, how (approx) income you make... etc...

Also, the other guy said "why not herp derp and show the addresses of the execs for sony derp?" Well, the execs aren't the one suing, it's SCEA that's suing, that and number is also public.

Except before the case I didn't know what geohotz real name was .


Also a SCEA doesn't do anything , its a company it can't do anything , only the suits at SCEA can do anything.

So yes they should be publicly found out .

 

[googleplex]

I'm sure Geohot loved that sony outed where he lived in court documents even though sony could have put that information in sealed documents. Now everyone knows where Geohot lives . So why shouldn't we all know where Sony employees live ?

Oh god what?!

What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Zoe]

Except before the case I didn't know what geohotz real name was .

Just because you didn't doesn't mean that a whole lot of other people didn't either.

That's what happens when you go on national TV promoting your lastest exploits.

 

[Curufinwe]

Except before the case I didn't know what geohotz real name was.

That's just your own ignorance. His real name was no secret - here's an iphone story from July 3, 2009 that calls him George Hotz.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/07/geohot-sneaks-out-iphone-3gs-jailbreak-early/

 

[beast786]

Except before the case I didn't know what geohotz real name was .


Also a SCEA doesn't do anything , its a company it can't do anything , only the suits at SCEA can do anything.

So yes they should be publicly found out .

While we are at it. What is your real name and address

 

[squatingyeti]

Well, yes, I know that, but I'm just saying, in the legal documents, I don't recall seeing his number, but those legal doc's are the least of his worries in terms of people finding info about him.

There are websites that you can type in someones name, or plug in their facebook, and it'll find out not only wear you live, but how much the house is worth, how much taxes you pay, how (approx) income you make... etc...

Also, the other guy said "why not herp derp and show the addresses of the execs for sony derp?" Well, the execs aren't the one suing, it's SCEA that's suing, that and number is also public.

The actual complaint was that SCEA was sealing all kinds of documents and abusing the system. They were sealing posts from forums that were publicly accessible and websites. Not because they had anything secret in them, just because they wanted to keep outside parties from knowing the stuff they were claiming as evidence. Then, they exposed Nintendo's private keys earlier and how to get them by not filing that under seal. At the same time, they filed a document that seemed was only useful in outing Hotz's home address and that wasn't under seal despite public forum docs being sealed during the same round of filing.

I believe the court had previously agreed that stuff like that should not be made public due to the nature of the case. Hotz's attorney had to make a fuss about it to get it fixed, if it was (haven't checked).

 

[keyrat]

To me it's so cut and dry: a law (DMCA) which lets you crack security on your portable computer (iPhone) but doesn't let you do the same for the PS3 is inherently unjust. It would be unjust if it didn't let you modify your iPhone either.

A system where you need to spend hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to even get a ruling on said unjust law is inherently unjust.

Finally, Sony using that unjust law to sue a guy into permanent debt is unjust.

There, case closed.

 

[Zoe]

The actual complaint was that SCEA was sealing all kinds of documents and abusing the system. They were sealing posts from forums that were publicly accessible and websites. Not because they had anything secret in them, just because they wanted to keep outside parties from knowing the stuff they were claiming as evidence. Then, they exposed Nintendo's private keys earlier and how to get them by not filing that under seal. At the same time, they filed a document that seemed was only useful in outing Hotz's home address and that wasn't under seal despite public forum docs being sealed during the same round of filing.

I believe the court had previously agreed that stuff like that should not be made public due to the nature of the case. Hotz's attorney had to make a fuss about it to get it fixed, if it was (haven't checked).

Just for the record, the Nintendo thing was refiled under seal.

 

[beast786]

To me it's so cut and dry: a law (DMCA) which lets you crack security on your portable computer (iPhone) but doesn't let you do the same for the PS3 is inherently unjust. It would be unjust if it didn't let you modify your iPhone either.

A system where you need to spend hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to even get a ruling on said unjust law is inherently unjust.

Finally, Sony using that unjust law to sue a guy into permanent debt is unjust.

There, case closed.

Wait?

Let it be unjust law, but it is still a law. Hence, If you break it, then also be ready for the consequence that follows it.

You cant break the law and then complain about being caught.

If you have a problem with the law, then fight the right way.

 

[jcm]

There are tens of millions of units out there, how much would be enough to "seem right" to you? Ten bucks? A hundred bucks? We're talking about tens to hundreds of millions of dollars here.

I never actually used OtherOS, but I still feel like I was harmed by the decision to remove it. It's the principle of the thing. Sony sold me a machine that could play video games, watch movies, and run Linux. Then they made me choose to between those things.

Now, Sony can make a reasonable argument that they've added lots of functionality for free, but I still think some compensation was in order, and would have gone a long way towards heading off the class action suit. They wouldn't even have to give real money. $15 PSN credit would have been a reasonable gesture, as far as I'm concerned, and would have cost them very little.

If we're putting value to the otherOS functionality, should I request for a refund for a functionality they put in which I never wanted to use but might have been factored into the overall cost of the machine since I'm really buying the PS3 for gaming and gaming only? If I don't use the RGB port, I still paid for it, should I get my money back for that? It's a slippery slope we're going down here.

That hypothetical has nothing to do with the actual situation. When I bought my PS3 I knew it had an RGP port I wasn't going to use. I did not know that Sony would be removing Linux.

 

[keyrat]

Wait?

Let it be unjust law, but it is still a law. Hence, If you break it, then also be ready for the consequence that follows it.

You cant break the law and then complain about being caught.

If you have a problem with the law, then fight the right way.

Yes, you should be ready for the consequence, but I'm more concerned about someone justifying the action of breaking it as wrong beyond what the law says.

The law is unjust and only a millionaire could fight it through the courts, which is also unjust.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

...Yes.

This brilliantly enlightening point of view has never been brought up in the countless threads on the subject and thoroughly debated before.

Mind explaining why you think someone who bought something that has two functions has to then buy another one after x months in order to do these two functions? Sounds like they were deceived to me.

Well if you believe that Sony did this purely to fuck with these people, then I don't even....

There was a reason and no matter what it was, I'm sure as shit it wasn't "ha, we roped 'em in.... now let's pull the plug of this much desired feature. They won't even notice. "

A warning was issued. Even an apology of sorts (If I'm remebering right). Surely they didn't toss a feature out of the blue "just because". They knew people bought the system for that function as an added bonus and taking it away, as well as BC, probably stung a little knowing what it meant for business and their reputation. So yeah, it was a sacrifice. Maybe they hoped their fanbase/userbase would understand and also make a sacrifice, so to speak.

But come on, people. This is the backlash evil Sony deserves for removing an optional feature? And to those questioning my questioning certain types who used otherOS.... really? I mean... really? I'm not labeling, I was simply talking from Sony's standpoint... and quite generally I might add. If you weren't that type, why take offense? Sony made the call, not me.

 

[squatingyeti]

Did they apologize for losing the ability to play future BD movies as well? Newer movies require an update to BD players. It's not widespread at the moment, but it will be as all the studios and movies move to it. Sony, humorously, has already started. You cannot currently receive the update to play those movies unless you update your PS3 firmware beyond an OtherOS capable revision.

 

[DangerousDave]

Did they apologize for losing the ability to play future BD movies as well? Newer movies require an update to BD players. It's not widespread at the moment, but it will be as all the studios and movies move to it. Sony, humorously, has already started. You cannot currently receive the update to play those movies unless you update your PS3 firmware beyond an OtherOS capable revision.

I suppose that all other companies that made non-updateable BR readers, or that can't support features of newer BR, like web connection, should appologize, also.

 

[Serenity]

After reading many of these threads I can't really understand what the people wronged by the otherOS removal are up in arms about at their personal use level.

1. If you were that into otherOS then it is highly likely you would install any CFW as soon as it was available due to the many complaints of otherOS being gimped and not having access to the RSX

2. Even if you hadn't been in to otherOS and were just waiting for CFW then you would be making the same choice sony gave when updating from fw 3.21(lack of psn access and being locked out of future games)

3. Nothing has ever stopped anyone from installing CFW on their console phone or whatever despite the DCMA so why the uproar because gehot is getting sued. Will you remove your CFW if sony wins the case?

Finally I ask, if sony had never removed otherOS and gehot still released his work would you all(freedom fighters) not of installed CFW and continue to use stock otherOS? I think we know the answer.

 

[NullPointer]

Finally I ask, if sony had never removed otherOS and gehot still released his work would you all(freedom fighters) not of installed CFW and continue to use stock otherOS? I think we know the answer.

People have to separate the two issues. OtherOS being removed is a completely different can of worms than CFW, even though some people may try to link the two.

The issue with OtherOS is whether its OK for Sony to force customers to choose between OtherOS and other PS3 capabilities after they've purchased the system, and whether customers are entitled to any compensation for the loss of that functionality.

The CFW issue is all about whether purchasing the hardware grants you the right to modify that hardware's firmware, and moreso whether its even legal to do as it involves circumventing security measures.

GeoHot is involved in both issues, and people like to muddy the waters by saying that we wouldn't even have these CFW issues if OtherOS stayed around, but the answers to both of these questions would remain.

 

[Big Papa Husker]

Is PSN still being affected by their hacking? I can't get logged in.

EDIT: Nevermind, it was because of the new Terms of Use.

 

[Gravijah]

Is PSN still being affected by their hacking? I can't get logged in.

I'm on right now.

 

[C4Lukins]

Really fuck these guys. Of all the issues you could take with the world, they choose this......
I am not a big Sony fan, but I do realize the PS3 is not a PC. Consoles have rules. And the PSP taught them not to be open to the masses. Because the masses are cunts who do not love gaming like most of us here we need laws and such.

So in this instance I am routing for Sony, because the opposition provides me nothing as far as creativity or entertainment.

Really fuck them and each one of you defending them.

 

[Neuromancer]

Really fuck these guys. Of all the issues you could take with the world, they choose this......
I am not a big Sony fan, but I do realize the PS3 is not a PC. Consoles have rules. And the PSP taught them not to be open to the masses. Because the masses are cunts who do not love gaming like most of us here we need laws and such.

So in this instance I am routing for Sony, because the opposition provides me nothing as far as creativity or entertainment.

Really fuck them and each one of you defending them.

*clears throat*

In remarks made to Japanese website Impress Watch, and translated by consumer website Beyond3D, President and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment Ken Kutaragi has commented in more detail on the concept that the PlayStation 3 is a computer, rather than a game console.

Kutaragi pointedly commented of the next-gen console, which is due to launch this November at dual price points of $499 and $599 in North America: "We don't say it's a game console (*laugh*) - PlayStation 3 is clearly a computer, unlike the PlayStations [released] so far."

He went on to outline a scenario where many parts of the PS3 were upgradable, much more like a PC, noting: "Since PS3 is a computer, there are no "models" but "configurations"", and continuing (though talking in the theoretical): "I think it's okay to release a [extended PS3] configuration every year". It's clear from the comments that Sony is indicating that it will be possible to upgrade hard drives and perhaps even other components easily.

The Sony CEO gave another example in the interview: "As PS3 is a computer... it also wants to evolve. We'll want to upgrade the HDD size very soon - if new standards appear on the PC, we will want to support them. We may want the [Blu-ray] drive to [have a writable version upgrade]." He then tempered his comments: "Well, BD may not develop like that, though." But extensibility is what Sony is stressing that you get for the price of a PS3, nonetheless.

Kutaragi's comments echo a recent Phil Harrison interview in which he commented: "We believe that the PS3 will be the place where our users play games, watch films, browse the Web, and use other computer functions. The PlayStation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC." The combined executive comments appear to signify a change in marketing tactics for the company, who may have always had this scenario in mind, but are pushing it much more strongly following a somewhat mixed E3 showing from a PR perspective.

You were saying?

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9642

So I would argue, fuck Sony for telling us it's a computer, then stripping away features that made it a computer when that becomes inconvenient for them. I say they get what they deserve.

 

[DangerousDave]

*clears throat*


You were saying?

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9642

So I would argue, fuck Sony for telling us it's a computer, then stripping away features that made it a computer when that becomes inconvenient for them. I say they get what they deserve.

This is PR bullshit like 4th dimension.

The concept in here is that is not "open" like a PC, is that, unlike previous Sony consoles, is an upgradable console where more and more features are added, instead of having the same features day 0 any year 10 (like PS2).

 

[Safe Bet]

Of all the issues you could take with the world, they choose this......

...

 

[JVIDICAN]

Is this new? :/

Anonymous is staging a 24-hour, in-store boycott at Sony stores around world on Saturday, April 16. So far over 1,000 people have RSVP'd through Facebook.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2383344,00.asp

 

[blaccat]

So people are joining this facebook group with their real accounts?

what a bunch of morons

 

[Wario64]

In-store boycott? lol. Really?

 

[Huff]

So people are joining this facebook group with their real accounts?

what a bunch of morons

Not so anonymous now

 

[Donos]

wow. this really needs a :lol

 

[itxaka]

So people are joining this facebook group with their real accounts?

what a bunch of morons

Yeah. How they dare to stage a real boycott for something they don't agree with? They should be passive consumers like the majority. Much better for corporations if everybody just agreed with them and never complain.

 

[patsu]

I'll be there to buy a few items and let Anonymous know they should stay away from PSN hacking and PS3 piracy. Job vacancy is scarce, so they should stay away from hacking Sony job search sites too. Basically, just stay out of the way from regular folks who just want to carry on with their lives.

After that, I can deal with Sony myself should they violate consumer rights. I don't really need them to represent me.

 

[blaccat]

Yeah. How they dare to stage a real boycott for something they don't agree with? They should be passive consumers like the majority. Much better for corporations if everybody just agreed with them and never complain.

Yea joining a group created by Anon is the way to do it. Right?

 

[fernoca]

Yeah. How they dare to stage a real boycott for something they don't agree with? They should be passive consumers like the majority. Much better for corporations if everybody just agreed with them and never complain.

I think he's talking about the "irony" of a group of "anonymous" people, joining a group with their "real names" and pictures and information of their jobs and everything.

But hell yeah store boycott!! That'll show them!

 

[Professor Beef]

Wow.

Really?

Wow.