Support NeoGAF

[Jobiensis]

It also doesn't mean it is suffering. How does one go about proving it is?

It's a stupid argument and there is no point to it. The people willing to pirate a game are not going to run out and buy it if they couldn't pirate it. (I agree with you)

It's been an hour, I wonder how the e-Attorney is doing. The 'screen caps' are painful to look at, but I've been reading through the PDFs. I should be working.

That's probably true for the most part. My main point though is that it's hard to establish such things in a court of law - particularly in determining any sort of damages assuming it was somehow 'proven'.

I see

 

[Raistlin]

It's a stupid argument and there is no point to it. The people willing to pirate a game are not going to run out and buy it if they couldn't pirate it.

That's probably true for the most part. My main point though is that it's hard to establish such things in a court of law - particularly in determining any sort of damages assuming it was somehow 'proven'.

 

[Raist]

Thought this comment was interesting, found it over on that article I linked just now. It's from a Corporate Strategist:

Yeah well the whole "they should have sued him when he claimed he'll one day hack the PS3" is completely stupid, just like the whole argument about "you should prevent it by making your system open!!1!". Almost no one gave a shit about Linux when it was available, and the PS3 is still the most flexible and open system as far as peripherals etc go, so...

 

[The Faceless Master]

so? which came first? why did someone develop a hack that JUST allowed piracy?

bro, you said the 360 didn't have homebrew, i said it did, then you... CHANGE THE QUESTION? c'mon son.

so the 360 has a good tie ratio despite also suffering from piracy. that doesn't mean that it's tie ratio isn't suffering because of piracy.

so, piracy is a "major problem" on the system, yet it still retains a tie ratio that's higher than the PS3, a system that remained unhacked until relativelt recently, but you still want to mention some arbitrary amount of suffering?

before or after piracy? honest question there.

after. there was no way to run code on either before piracy was an option.

it's not a reason or a justification. geohot came into the scene because OtherOS was removed. people were trying to hack the PS3 before he came in, and we can only speculate how long it would have taken without him.

sure, people were, and what did they have to show for it?

but it would have fallen eventually, maybe not much later at all. him having noble reasons for doing what he did doesn't mean that Sony are responsible for it.

people were already trying to hack the PS3. they may have encouraged a handfulmore to try with what they did, but that doesn't mean that they 'deserve' piracy on their system.

quality over suantity. the right tool for the job. etc, etc...

like i have said, i fully support anyone who wants to hack a console for any reason. i fully support anyone who wants to mod their console for any reason other than to commit piracy.

totally agree.

i fully support any platform owner that wants to brick or lockout any systems that have been modded in any way shape or form, whether to fight piracy or not.

you must to be out of your fucking mind to support such craziness!!!

 

[plagiarize]

It also doesn't mean it is suffering. How does one go about proving it is?

unless your position is 'piracy isn't harmful' i don't think i'm making a crazy claim there. i don't believe that every downloaded or copied game is a lost sale, but i'm pretty sure the percentage of lost sales is greater than 1%. when millions of copies are downloaded, even 1% would be would be tens of thousands of lost sales.

That's where you are nuts. And I'm quite sure courts would agree.

i don't think the courts would think me 'nuts'

the only way a platform holder can brick a console that has been modded is if that console is still online and downloading updates. if you have modded your console, the platform holder has no responsibility to make sure that any updates they send out *won't* brick your console, because they no longer have to support your console in any way shape or form.

i just don't think you can, as an end user, expect to be connected to sony's network with a modded system. they have no contract with you saying they have to provide that service.

i'm saying this in the world where you have to actively say 'yes' to an update though... i'd feel differently about it if they could throw a switch and magically break any modded console attached to the internet.

legally, you might be right that the court would side with you, but it's my opinion that Sony can fight modded consoles any way they see fit, bricking included. but like i say, i'm talking about the current climate where such a 'bricking' would have to happen by installing a firmware update of some kind.

if the modders can figure out how to unbrick it (as with the PSP) i'm fine with that too.

 

[Raistlin]

you must to be out of your fucking mind to support such craziness!!!

Ya'rly.

It's seriously one of the most absurd things I've read here in a long time. Locking out of a service like Live/PSN? I don't have to like it but they have every right to do it. Kill-switching your system though ... are you fucking serious?

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

you must to be out of your fucking mind to support such craziness!!!

It just never gets old :lol

 

[Emitan]

If Microsoft wiped the motherboard clean of everyone who pirated Windows they'd be sued and lose so fast you'd blink and they were in the red. How the hell can you think it's a good idea to brick the system of someone who wants to run homebrew?

 

[KtSlime]

Yeah for back up purposes right?
I can't really think of another reason...oh wait!

You have it here first from Hex, Sony R pirates; they sell bluray burners and media. :lol

 

[The Faceless Master]

unless your position is 'piracy isn't harmful' i don't think i'm making a crazy claim there. i don't believe that every downloaded or copied game is a lost sale, but i'm pretty sure the percentage of lost sales is greater than 1%. when millions of copies are downloaded, even 1% would be would be tens of thousands of lost sales.

i don't think the courts would think me 'nuts'

the only way a platform holder can brick a console that has been modded is if that console is still online and downloading updates. if you have modded your console, the platform holder has no responsibility to make sure that any updates they send out *won't* brick your console, because they no longer have to support your console in any way shape or form.

i just don't think you can, as an end user, expect to be connected to sony's network with a modded system. they have no contract with you saying they have to provide that service.

i'm saying this in the world where you have to actively say 'yes' to an update though... i'd feel differently about it if they could throw a switch and magically break any modded console attached to the internet.

legally, you might be right that the court would side with you, but it's my opinion that Sony can fight modded consoles any way they see fit, bricking included. but like i say, i'm talking about the current climate where such a 'bricking' would have to happen by installing a firmware update of some kind.

if the modders can figure out how to unbrick it (as with the PSP) i'm fine with that too.

no way, they could totally include a secret bricking function that randomly activates 4 hours into Killzone 3. i mean, they won't because they aren't nuts, but they could.

 

[sangreal]

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order has been
scheduled for argument on Friday, January 14, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.

 

[Jobiensis]

legally, you might be right that the court would side with you, but it's my opinion that Sony can fight modded consoles any way they see fit, bricking included. but like i say, i'm talking about the current climate where such a 'bricking' would have to happen by installing a firmware update of some kind.

I don't see how any court would look upon that as something acceptable.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order has been
scheduled for argument on Friday, January 14, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.

Thanks again

 

[plagiarize]

bro, you said the 360 didn't have homebrew, i said it did, then you... CHANGE THE QUESTION? c'mon son.

my point doesn't change in light of that fact. so the 360 now has homebrew. last i was aware it only had piracy. people actively wrote hacks for the system that only allowed piracy, and console owners performed such hacks to commit piracy.

my point was that people were obviously trying to open the system up to piracy specifically and that piracy wasn't a 'side effect'.

so, yeah, i don't think it changes anything to find out that i was wrong about the 360 not having homebrew.

my point is that people were trying to hack the PS3 prior to linux being taken away. that they didn't have the same success as the people trying to enable piracy on the 360 doesn't make it magically true that the PS3 has only been hacked as a direct result of them taking away linux.

the hackers were trying before it was taken away. that the one who succeeded first only showed up because linux was taken away, in no way shape or form means that the hacks wouldn't have come ANYWAY.

 

[angelfly]

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order has been
scheduled for argument on Friday, January 14, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.

Sounds like thats going to make or break Sony's case.

 

[NeoUltima]

Maybe off-topic. What is this "blackb0x FTP v1.2" someone on my friends list has been using a lot recently?

 

[plagiarize]

I don't see how any court would look upon that as something acceptable.

i'm not a court. i don't have to share their standards and rules. i'm just giving my personal opinion of what i think is okay, as an individual, to help illustrate where my opinions are coming from.

if modding your console became illegal (as it is in some countries), i would still hold the opinion that modding your console is okay.

if you mod your console, and then apply an official firmware to it (or a hacked firmware), and your system is bricked as a result (either accidentally or on purpose) i have zero sympathy for you, because you knew there was a risk of said bricking when you modded your system in the first place.

 

[Emitan]

Maybe off-topic. What is this "blackb0x FTP v1.2" someone on my friends list has been using a lot recently?

FTP server. Access your PS3's file system from a PC.

if you mod your console, and then apply an official firmware to it (or a hacked firmware), and your system is bricked as a result (either accidentally or on purpose) i have zero sympathy for you, because you knew there was a risk of said bricking when you modded your system in the first place.

Hang on. Purposely bricking a console and it happening accidentally because of homebrew are two COMPLETELY different situations. One is your own fault. The other might be basis for a class action lawsuit and certainly would be if someone purposely bricked someone's PC for any reason.

 

[Raistlin]

unless your position is 'piracy isn't harmful' i don't think i'm making a crazy claim there. i don't believe that every downloaded or copied game is a lost sale, but i'm pretty sure the percentage of lost sales is greater than 1%. when millions of copies are downloaded, even 1% would be would be tens of thousands of lost sales.

My point is how do you go about proving it in a court of law? Sure it seems to make sense logically, but legal issues are obviously held up to more rigor than that. 360 has a better tie-ratio than PS3 during it's non-hacked period. I'm just not sure how to prove people would have gone out and purchased the content otherwise, etc.

i don't think the courts would think me 'nuts'

the only way a platform holder can brick a console that has been modded is if that console is still online and downloading updates. if you have modded your console, the platform holder has no responsibility to make sure that any updates they send out *won't* brick your console, because they no longer have to support your console in any way shape or form.

Actually that isn't what the kill-switch supposedly is. It wouldn't require a firmware update, it's supposedly something already available to Sony that can be commanded online. Assuming it exists do you think activating that would hold up as being a justifiable move by Sony? You don't think they'd be sued and lose?

Okay though, let's say that isn't the situation. Let's say it really must be an update for the firmware that causes it? The only way Sony wouldn't be liable is if it actually was an accident. The chances of that are quite small obviously. In reality, it would most likely need to be a deliberate action. Problem is since CFW needs to exist for this to occur, it means 'hackers' can look at the OFW and prove that it was a deliberate move by Sony. Again we're back to the same situation. Do you think that move would be held up as justifiable in a court?

i just don't think you can, as an end user, expect to be connected to sony's network with a modded system. they have no contract with you saying they have to provide that service.

I know. I said as much,

i'm saying this in the world where you have to actively say 'yes' to an update though... i'd feel differently about it if they could throw a switch and magically break any modded console attached to the internet.

Read above. My understanding is they can. Regardless it still doesn't mean they can intentionally brick your system because you actively down an update.

legally, you might be right that the court would side with you, but it's my opinion that Sony can fight modded consoles any way they see fit, bricking included. but like i say, i'm talking about the current climate where such a 'bricking' would have to happen by installing a firmware update of some kind.

if the modders can figure out how to unbrick it (as with the PSP) i'm fine with that too.

lol

 

[captmcblack]

RE: GB and PS1 piracy vs. homebrew, there was never really a time where either system existed in which piracy didn't exist. In those days, there was little to no copy protection on well...anything, really. There were pirate multicarts almost day and date with the GB, and cartridge copiers circa 1992 from various companies. With PS1, same thing - bootlegged silver discs existed almost instantly as well. However, at least in the case of the PS1 there was legitimate homebrew development that corresponded neatly with the rise of the Internet - as well as Sony's own embracing of open development via its Net Yaroze program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze

Hobbyists that didn't want to use the Net Yaroze kit did it via Caetla/Goldfinger/Pro Action Replay/GameShark's parallel port connection and debugging capability. Using one of those devices plugged into the PS1's parallel port, you could then connect to the parallel port of a PC and send/receive/run programs on the PS1 freely. This functionality was how homebrew got big on PS1, circa say...1997 or 1998.

Homebrew software development has always been around on every console and handheld, but for it to become something realistic and discussed freely and widely, the Internet had to come to exist first. Before the Internet, most of this discussion was on mailing lists and Usenet groups.

 

[Jobiensis]

that they didn't have the same success as the people trying to enable piracy on the 360 doesn't make it magically true that the PS3 has only been hacked as a direct result of them taking away linux.

Yes it does. The people that did it, did it because of Linux. If you are saying others would have done it eventually, well they had 4 years.

in no way shape or form means that the hacks wouldn't have come ANYWAY.

And it in no way shape or form means that the hacks would have come AT ALL.

 

[plagiarize]

If Microsoft wiped the motherboard clean of everyone who pirated Windows they'd be sued and lose so fast you'd blink and they were in the red. How the hell can you think it's a good idea to brick the system of someone who wants to run homebrew?

i don't care if it's a good idea for MS or Sony and i didn't say that i wanted them to do it, i said that if they wanted to do it that i wouldn't have a problem with it.

if microsoft wanted to do what you described, and it put them out of business, i'd think it was stupid, but i wouldn't think it was wrong.

 

[RyanDG]

I don't see how any court would look upon that as something acceptable.

No court would. Equipment manufacturers have already lost this argument. You cannot purposefully set out to brick a users equipment. However, if an update is released and the side effect of the update is that the unit may have conflicts with current modified firmware, the company would not be held liable if the equipment is rendered useless as it was a willing choice by the user to a) install the modified firmware and b) then run the update presented by the company that stopped their services from working.

 

[Emitan]

i don't care if it's a good idea for MS or Sony and i didn't say that i wanted them to do it, i said that if they wanted to do it that i wouldn't have a problem with it.

if microsoft wanted to do what you described, and it put them out of business, i'd think it was stupid, but i wouldn't think it was wrong.

Sabotaging people's hardware isn't wrong? If your car's manufacturer came to your house and destroyed your car's engine and internal parts beyond repair one night for putting in a new radio you'd be OK with it?

 

[CadetMahoney]

This could get interesting.

Meanwhile, Microsoft must be laughing like mad now.

Well they had their fare share of piracy and so forth, I think they're rather indifferent to the issue. They would only celebrate if Sony games start flopping in 2011 whilst theirs remain the same. In fact we could even see a bump in PS3 sales as ppl scramble for the free online and free games with cheats. Some ppl would even be satisfied with offline trainers for the their games.

Man it's be like xbox 1 days of madness. Youtube videos all over of ppl playing with trainers for their "walkthroughs".

 

[squatingyeti]

i fully support any platform owner that wants to brick or lockout any systems that have been modded in any way shape or form, whether to fight piracy or not.

WHAT WHAT WHAT WAT WAT WAAA? Jesus christ, if you've ever purchased ink for a printer that wasn't made by the manufacturer, I fully support the manufacturer in their endeavor to blow up your printer. /stupid analogy

My god, if corporations could have you breed like the Duggars...

 

[plagiarize]

Yes it does. The people that did it, did it because of Linux. If you are saying others would have done it eventually, well they had 4 years.

And it in no way shape or form means that the hacks would have come AT ALL.

so platform holders are supposed to rely on the random chance that the good hackers are smarter than the evil pirate hackers?

 

[RyanDG]

i don't care if it's a good idea for MS or Sony and i didn't say that i wanted them to do it, i said that if they wanted to do it that i wouldn't have a problem with it.

if microsoft wanted to do what you described, and it put them out of business, i'd think it was stupid, but i wouldn't think it was wrong.

I'm all for banning console ids and Sony taking certain steps (ie, removing USB updating capabilities on systems through firmware update), but I really have a hard time seeing where anyone can justify saying that Sony should be able to brick a console. That seems to fly in the face of any sort of consumer protection that at the very least we should be granted when we purchase a system.

 

[JADS]

i don't care if it's a good idea for MS or Sony and i didn't say that i wanted them to do it, i said that if they wanted to do it that i wouldn't have a problem with it.

if microsoft wanted to do what you described, and it put them out of business, i'd think it was stupid, but i wouldn't think it was wrong.

Until your system is hit by a false positive :lol

 

[LeCapitan]

so platform holders are supposed to rely on the random chance that the good hackers are smarter than the evil pirate hackers?

Isn't this normally the case?

 

[angelfly]

RE: GB and PS1 piracy vs. homebrew, there was never really a time where either system existed in which piracy didn't exist. In those days, there was little to no copy protection on well...anything, really. There were pirate multicarts almost day and date with the GB, and cartridge copiers circa 1992 from various companies. With PS1, same thing - bootlegged silver discs existed almost instantly as well. However, at least in the case of the PS1 there was legitimate homebrew development that corresponded neatly with the rise of the Internet - as well as Sony's own embracing of open development via its Net Yaroze program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Yaroze

Hobbyists that didn't want to use the Net Yaroze kit did it via Caetla/Goldfinger/Pro Action Replay/GameShark's parallel port connection and debugging capability. Using one of those devices plugged into the PS1's parallel port, you could then connect to the parallel port of a PC and send/receive/run programs on the PS1 freely. This functionality was how homebrew got big on PS1, circa say...1997 or 1998.

Homebrew software development has always been around on every console and handheld, but for it to become something realistic and discussed freely and widely, the Internet had to come to exist first. Before the Internet, most of this discussion was on mailing lists and Usenet groups.

Damn that takes me back. I had a caetla as well as a gameshark flashed with the caetla rom. I did want a Net Yaroze but there was no way I could afford a $700 hobby console.

 

[squatingyeti]

I'm all for banning console ids and Sony taking certain steps (ie, removing USB updating capabilities on systems through firmware update), but I really have a hard time seeing where anyone can justify saying that Sony should be able to brick a console. That seems to fly in the face of any sort of consumer protection that at the very least we should be granted when we purchase a system.

Sorry, you didn't hear? Consumers around the world are even giving up on the idea that purchasing something means you own it. Now, you're leasing that item you own. That game you just played, you're leasing the code on the disc.

Fuck, I can't wait until I get sued for letting a friend borrow a hardback book.

 

[plagiarize]

My point is how do you go about proving it in a court of law? Sure it seems to make sense logically, but legal issues are obviously held up to more rigor than that. 360 has a better tie-ratio than PS3 during it's non-hacked period. I'm just not sure how to prove people would have gone out and purchased the content otherwise, etc.

Actually that isn't what the kill-switch supposedly is. It wouldn't require a firmware update, it's supposedly something already available to Sony that can be commanded online. Assuming it exists do you think activating that would hold up as being a justifiable move by Sony? You don't think they'd be sued and lose?

i was just giving my opinion as stated. i wasn't talking about this supposed kill-switch which i think should already be clear from my follow up comments. i've already said i wouldn't support something like that kill-switch. i hope that is clear by now.

Okay though, let's say that isn't the situation. Let's say it really must be an update for the firmware that causes it? The only way Sony wouldn't be liable is if it actually was an accident. The chances of that are quite small obviously. In reality, it would most likely need to be a deliberate action. Problem is since CFW needs to exist for this to occur, it means 'hackers' can look at the OFW and prove that it was a deliberate move by Sony. Again we're back to the same situation. Do you think that move would be held up as justifiable in a court?

in a court? probably not, no. i still wouldn't have any problem with it though personally.

i didn't mean to cause a shitstorm with that comment.

 

[Raistlin]

WHAT WHAT WHAT WAT WAT WAAA? Jesus christ, if you've ever purchased ink for a printer that wasn't made by the manufacturer, I fully support the manufacturer in their endeavor to blow up your printer. /stupid analogy

My god, if corporations could have you breed like the Duggars...

AHAHAHA


I'm glad the backfire is hitting full steam

 

[The Faceless Master]

my point doesn't change in light of that fact. so the 360 now has homebrew. last i was aware it only had piracy. people actively wrote hacks for the system that only allowed piracy, and console owners performed such hacks to commit piracy.

my point was that people were obviously trying to open the system up to piracy specifically and that piracy wasn't a 'side effect'.

so, yeah, i don't think it changes anything to find out that i was wrong about the 360 not having homebrew.

my point is that people were trying to hack the PS3 prior to linux being taken away. that they didn't have the same success as the people trying to enable piracy on the 360 doesn't make it magically true that the PS3 has only been hacked as a direct result of them taking away linux.

the hackers were trying before it was taken away. that the one who succeeded first only showed up because linux was taken away, in no way shape or form means that the hacks wouldn't have come ANYWAY.

the 360 DVDROM Frimware Hack that only enabled piracy was just an update to a hack on the original Xbox that did the same thing. it's not like it was some radical new idea that sprung up. just like the Wii, previous gen vulnerabilities that still lingered were exposed.

let's say... just hypothetically that MILLIONS of people were *trying to* hack the PS3. they all failed. GeoHot comes in because of OtherOS and F0F come in because of OtherOS and they succeed. the motivations of the people who have nothing to show DO NOT MATTER, even if there were a million of them.

 

[Raistlin]

i was just giving my opinion as stated. i wasn't talking about this supposed kill-switch which i think should already be clear from my follow up comments. i've already said i wouldn't support something like that kill-switch. i hope that is clear by now.


in a court? probably not, no. i still wouldn't have any problem with it though personally.

What also should have been clear from my original post was that bricking your system, even if via download, would not be accepted by courts as being within the rights of a manufacturer.

You went on to argue against that ... only to then admit that a court would agree with me.

WTF are you even arguing . If it is your opinion that it's okay ... well that's your opinion. Obviously me and basically everyone else are going to shit all over said opinion, but yeah it's your opinion.

What's confusing here is that my original post was specifically talking about the courts. I mean, I'm not sure how much clearer "That's where you are nuts. And I'm quite sure courts would agree." can be :lol

 

[RustyNails]

I will never have GAF as my legal analyst team!

 

[plagiarize]

let's say... just hypothetically that MILLIONS of people were *trying to* hack the PS3. they all failed. GeoHot comes in because of OtherOS and F0F come in because of OtherOS and they succeed. the motivations of the people who have nothing to show DO NOT MATTER, even if there were a million of them.

not having succeeded yet does not equate to a failure.

that's like saying that if Darwin hadn't discovered evolution no one else would have, because all the other scientists trying to understand diversity of life failed to come up with a theory.

 

[CadetMahoney]

It's rather ridiculous. I don't know why companies think they can buy cheap from Korea, out source assembly to China, move technical support to India, and get upset when people want to participate in globalization. :lol

post of the day.

They sent him $1 via paypal and are using it as evidence that he accepted donations :lol

Just when you think you've seen it all from Sony :lol

Mr. Hotz has never utilized an account with PayPal in connection with any activity relating to the Playstation computer. . . the only evidence put forward of Mr. Hotz’ Paypal account appears to be a transaction initiated by the plaintiff.

That doesn't get any virtue points from me. Beginning to dislike Sony now. They're going on my shit list alongside Capcom. *Looks for shit list.

 

[Jobiensis]

/stupid analogy

The sad thing is, it could be a reality. It would be entirely possible and printers use the same model as consoles. Luckily Lexmark lost their DMCA suit.

 

[captmcblack]

Damn that takes me back. I had a caetla as well as a gameshark flashed with the caetla rom. I did want a Net Yaroze but there was no way I could afford a $700 hobby console.

Yep, I had me one of those Caetla-flashed Plugmod/Game Enhancer/Action Replay things, as well as a Gameshark I eventually flashed with Caetla. I always loved games, but once I fell down the rabbit hole of actually being able to TINKER with games and code, the love became a lifelong, permanent sort of thing. I owe stuff like homebrewing for my programming knowledge, my hobbies and even my job :lol

Also, I love how much people love their companies now. We're happy to let them do anything they want to us and take anything they want from us, as long as they keep nameless asshats from shooting us through walls and fucking up our k/d ratio in Black Ops!

 

[Raist]

Also, I love how much people love their companies now. We're happy to let them do anything they want to us and take anything they want from us, as long as they keep nameless asshats from shooting us through walls and fucking up our k/d ratio in Black Ops!

Well, you know, some people don't give a shit about Linux, while getting their online game fun spoiled by cheaters pisses them off. I'd say that's fair enough.

 

[The Faceless Master]

so platform holders are supposed to rely on the random chance that the good hackers are smarter than the evil pirate hackers?

platform holders are supposed to rely on making great hardware and software and having great marketing and support, causing people to exchange money for their products and services.

 

[Emitan]

Well, you know, some people don't give a shit about Linux, while getting their online game fun spoiled by cheaters pisses them off. I'd say that's fair enough.

You want to lose your consumer rights for the rest of your life because someone might cheat in Killzone? :lol

 

[Raist]

You want to lose your consumer rights for the rest of your life because someone might cheat in Killzone? :lol

The fuck are you talking about?

 

[Emitan]

The fuck are you talking about?

Setting a precedent of you not owning hardware you buy.

 

[jmdajr]

You want to lose your consumer rights for the rest of your life because someone might cheat in Killzone? :lol

ah..come on now

 

[captmcblack]

You want to lose your consumer rights for the rest of your life because someone might cheat in Killzone? :lol

Fuck getting what I paid for, or getting more out of it...somebody else might get trophies they didn't really earn! And if everyone takes advantage of it, Sony will die and Nathan Drake will be homeless!

 

[angelfly]

Looks like geohot is going to be on G4 tonight:

I will be on G4's "Attack of the Show!" tonight(1/13/2011) at 7PM EST

 

[The Faceless Master]

Until your system is hit by a false positive :lol

there is no reason why that should happen. there are several ways to detect already as many people have pointed out.

 

[jmdajr]

Looks like geohot is going to be on G4 tonight:

everyone hates g4 though