yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Actually, otherOS only had access to less than half the cpu. I'm sure it's more than half. OtherOS has access to 6 of the 7 available SPE cores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOOOOOOO Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The whole linux thing ... If you bought a house, and you had a massive hole in it ... and the agent said "Oh it's ok, that's a perfectly fine hole. No one will come in and do anything bad". And then 6 months down the line, the neighbourhood became violent, filled with crime etc, and your agent came back and said "We've filled in that hole for you ... you can't use it anymore, but you're safer" ... That's essentially what Sony has done. They didn't remove OtherOS for any reason other than the ability for the system to be tampered with. It wasn't secure enough clearly. Anyways ... not agreeing or disagreeing about that. I am just trying to show that Sony did have a good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeEsquire Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I'm sure it's more than half. OtherOS has access to 6 of the 7 available SPE cores. Pretty sure OtherOS had access to all the cores, but not the GPU. While playing a game, the game had access to 6 of 7 cores because the 7th was reserved for the PS3 OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The whole linux thing ... If you bought a house, and you had a massive hole in it ... and the agent said "Oh it's ok, that's a perfectly fine hole. No one will come in and do anything bad". And then 6 months down the line, the neighbourhood became violent, filled with crime etc, and your agent came back and said "We've filled in that hole for you ... you can't use it anymore, but you're safer" ... That's essentially what Sony has done. They didn't remove OtherOS for any reason other than the ability for the system to be tampered with. It wasn't secure enough clearly. Anyways ... not agreeing or disagreeing about that. I am just trying to show that Sony did have a good reason. I agree with this analogy for the most part. The only thing that I would change is that the agent would remove something. Maybe you bought the house because it had a good furnace, then the agent deemed it unsafe. They remove it and don't give compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I agree with this analogy for the most part. The only thing that I would change is that the agent would remove something. Maybe you bought the house because it had a good furnace, then the agent deemed it unsafe. They remove it and don't give compensation. why shoudl they give compensations, 3 years down the line the warranty on the furnace is out anyway. much like the SOny license said they could remove it down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 why shoudl they give compensations, 3 years down the line the warranty on the furnace is out anyway. much like the SOny license said they could remove it down the line. I think you are speaking of the EULA, which doesn't need to be accepted to use the PS3. It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! Haha ... okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think you are speaking of the EULA, which doesn't need to be accepted to use the PS3. technically it does, unless you use a proxy(as in another person to click accept). but if it's your PS3, chances are you saw the shrink wrap, and the Eula when you started it up, and again when you created an account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 technically it does, unless you use a proxy(as in another person to click accept). but if it's your PS3, chances are you saw the shrink wrap, and the Eula when you started it up, and again when you created an account. A EULA is only required to be accepted if you have a PSN account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! Ummm... I don't think anyone said that you can't? A EULA is only required to be accepted if you have a PSN account. Or most likely before any OS update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_c_b Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! That's right, you can, as long as you don't hack the PS3 software to trigger the rail gun, then you are outside of the license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stingray Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! Please do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidSolstice Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 What do people not get about the difference between hardware and software? Yes, it's your PS3. Want true freedom? Make your own OS for it, and don't base any of it on the current firmware. Want to play PS3 games with your newly made unique firmware? That's too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 What do people not get about the difference between hardware and software? Yes, it's your PS3. Want true freedom? Make your own OS for it, and don't base any of it on the current firmware. Want to play PS3 games with your newly made unique firmware? That's too bad. That isn't Sony's main argument. Here is Sony's complaint: http://www.scribd.com/doc/46739943/Complaint They argue that by removing circumvention protections that they have placed, that hackers are committing a violation of the TOS. However, acceptance of the TOS is contingent on whether or not you use PSN. Geohot has never used PSN however. Geohot never distributed any of Sony's code, all his code is 100% original. However, individual users can compile that code in private, which many agree is 100% legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 That isn't Sony's main argument. Here is Sony's complaint: http://www.scribd.com/doc/46739943/Complaint They argue that by removing circumvention protections that they have placed, that hackers are committing a violation of the TOS. However, acceptance of the TOS is contingent on whether or not you use PSN. Geohot has never used PSN however. Geohot never distributed any of Sony's code, all his code is 100% original. However, individual users can compile that code in private, which many agree is 100% legal. Claims he has never used PSN. He better hope he never logged in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Claims he has never used PSN. He better hope he never logged in. Sony should know :) They claim a tag called "GeoHot" belongs to the George Hotz being sued. There are a few inconsistencies, however, the tag is spelled as "GeoHot", which is not how geohot spells his name (all lowercase). Also, he doesn't live in Rhode Island, and is not 15. (He lives in New Jersey and is 21). Other than that, Sony doesn't have much ... and they can't prove that that is his tag. There are a million iPhone jailbreak fans that could have made that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 That isn't Sony's main argument. Here is Sony's complaint: http://www.scribd.com/doc/46739943/Complaint They argue that by removing circumvention protections that they have placed, that hackers are committing a violation of the TOS. However, acceptance of the TOS is contingent on whether or not you use PSN. Geohot has never used PSN however. Geohot never distributed any of Sony's code, all his code is 100% original. However, individual users can compile that code in private, which many agree is 100% legal. You actually accept the ToS whenever you update your firmware - better read up on what you press Accept on next time. If he ever updated his firmware, which I'm pretty sure he did - ding ding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverskull Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I have a general interest in driving my neighbor's Lexus. My Mazda is not a substitute. Guess I have the right to drive my neighbor's Lexus... Did you buy your neighbor's Lexus? Because I bought my PS3. That includes its cell processor. It's my PS3 and if I want to launch it out of a rail-gun at a crowd of people then I can! I bought it! Sure, go ahead. You'll get thrown in jail because you launched stuff at people with a rail gun. The fact that it was a PS3 makes no difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Sure, go ahead. You'll get thrown in jail because you launched stuff at people with a rail gun. The fact that it was a PS3 makes no difference. And there lies the issue with "It's my hardware, I can do what I want with it"; not if what you want is illegal or breach of contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 You actually accept the ToS whenever you update your firmware - better read up on what you press Accept on next time. If he ever updated his firmware, which I'm pretty sure he did - ding ding. Updating a PS3 does not subject a user to the PSN TOS or any other agreement. The 3.55 firmware may be accessed, without encountering any agreements, directly from the Sony website at http://dus01.ps3.update.playstation.net/update/ps3/image/us/2010_1207_ca595ad9f3af8f1491d9c9b6921a8c61/PS3UPDAT.PUP Upon installing the firmware, the only agreement encountered by an end user is an agreement with SCE which is not a party in this lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Updating a PS3 does not subject a user to the PSN TOS or any other agreement. The 3.55 firmware may be accessed, without encountering any agreements, directly from the Sony website at http://dus01.ps3.update.playstation.net/update/ps3/image/us/2010_1207_ca595ad9f3af8f1491d9c9b6921a8c61/PS3UPDAT.PUP Upon installing the firmware, the only agreement encountered by an end user is an agreement with SCE which is not a party in this lawsuit. Sony Computer Entertainment isn't part of Sony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yekGLzhQ4Qju1FtAVcC4 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Sony Computer Entertainment isn't part of Sony? SCEA =/= SCE =/= SONY SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC vs. GEORGE HOTZ; HECTOR MARTIN CANTERO; SVEN PETER; and DOES 1 through 100, Defendants read the court docs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soniqstylz Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 SCEA =/= SCE =/= SONY SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC vs. GEORGE HOTZ; HECTOR MARTIN CANTERO; SVEN PETER; and DOES 1 through 100, Defendants read the court docs SCEA is the American arm of SCE, and Hotz is an American citizen being tried in an American court. You're grasping at straws here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts