RichDevX's PayLoad - Throws PS3 into real SERVICE mode!

[RatAndDragon]

@RatAndDragon: Making people give you their source code via force is, technically, a violation of article 1 of my constitution as it is an initiation of force, and a rather unnecessary one at that since the same constitution I outlined also protects the right to reverse engineer. If GPL has actually been used to force people to hand over source code, then, just like most other copyrights, it is being abused. No one should ever have the right to force you to do anything. Remember, the only moral use of force is self defense.

No, that is the only moral use of force in your moral code. This is not a universal truth in any way whatsoever. This is a libertarian myth and something we see on the internet a lot. If you are a libertarian then I suggest to you that you're the one with moral problems. Tax, for instance, is necessary and does much good. As are laws governing corporate behaviour, they protect us from neo-feudalism.

Yes, the GPL has been used to make people release source code to their GPL derived stuff on multiple occasions. It doesn't usually involve the courts but it has, and more often has involved the threat of court involvement. Reverse engineering is no substitute for full source code, and I do believe the GPL is a good and moral thing. I give you free access to my work if you agree to reciprocate, is the foundation of it. I see nothing wrong with that.

I don't mean to sound snarky there, but this current meme that getting rid of copyright entirely is somehow a good and just thing, I can't agree with it at all. It's not that some people would have a hard time making money so easily without copyright, it's that many or most of them just wouldn't do it at all.

[yoshi314]

@RatAndDragon: Making people give you their source code via force is, technically, a violation of article 1 of my constitution as it is an initiation of force, and a rather unnecessary one at that since the same constitution I outlined also protects the right to reverse engineer. If GPL has actually been used to force people to hand over source code, then, just like most other copyrights, it is being abused. No one should ever have the right to force you to do anything. Remember, the only moral use of force is self defense.

the point you missed is that if you take a piece of code under some licence, you should accept that licence.

it's clearly written in GPL - if you make modifications to GPL licenced code, you have to share your modifications. that may be either by putting them on the website, adding them to driver disk, shipping them to people that request it, etc. if you do not want it - do not use that source code.

enforcing GPL happens when somebody violates the licence. takes GPL licenced code, alters it and doesn't publish their modifications. this is happening at mass scale nowadays, and that is why GPL enforcements are so frequent nowadays.

this is the only reason GPL enforcements are being made. most abused piece of code is linux kernel and busybox shell, in that regard. they are used in most embedded linux-based devices (routers, media players, TV's, etc)

Taking something from someone by force is objectively morally wrong (the ends do not justify the means, especially when it means sacrificing your principles). However, anything you buy or receive as a gift is yours to do with as you please, including taking it apart to see how it works, making modifications and/or improvements, or even creating and marketing your own variant, even if you give it away for free. No one has the right to tell someone what they can or can not do with their own property (regardless of what Sony says, if the box didn't say "licence" or "rental" on it in big bold letters, and you didn't sign any legal contract at the moment and place of purchase, your PS3 was sold to you under the de-facto premise of ownership). Taking things by force - bad, taking things apart - good. It's such a simple and natural concept, why is it so hard for people to get? Reverse engineering IS a skill, it IS a valid form of research, and those who do it have in fact earned their rewards, including the right to profit from it.

companies don't like other people figuring out their technology. mostly to maintain the upper hand position against the competition. also there is a concern of people not really reading licence agreements

also, reverse engineering is still borderline activity, legal-wise. it's fine as long as you are making a competitive product, but not if done in order to make a profit.

[crnrts]

Uh, didn't Mathieulh CREATE PSGROOVE????

PSGROOVE was based on psjb's exploit being reverse engineered by a team of hackers. Anything can be reversed and recreated with next to no knowledge of how the orginial creation works, math copied psjb, thats all...

Say what you want, Mathieul could make 1,000 programs, and withhold 999 of them. It's his right as the author of his programs. But he released one, the most important one. And for that, his coding and his coder friends are worth...well, more than your whole life smalls.

in your opinion hes worth more, math did nothing for the ps3 scene, geo is the man that got people interested, geo was instrumental in the results we see today, absolutely nothing to do with that pretentious dick, math.

[garyopa]

There is no reason to bump an old thread like this, that was nothing more then a Rumor and no Proof.

Closing thread!