Dude, you are going to get SO many pizzas delivered to your house because of this.

Sweet! I love pizza!

This post does nothing to advance the discourse about this topic. Equating softmodding to stealing...really?

Also, those games aren't things "Sony has done for us." They are products. If a consumer bought any of those titles, Sony received fair recompense. They do not owe them any sort of loyalty with regard to the legal ramifications of jailbreaking simply because they are past customers. 

Also, "trade secrets" are merely a way for a company to circumvent the limitations of a patent, which leads to a de facto monopoly of a product. They also have nothing to do with computers because the process of reverse engineering is too simple with hardware. A computer company would never rely on the trade-secret method to protect its interests because they wouldn't be protected against reverse engineering. If you want to criticize geohot, I think it would be better to argue from the angle of patent law. And that's a discussion I am neither inclined enough nor informed enough to pursue.

Nevertheless, snark does not imply ethical, moral, or most importantly, legal correctness.

I'm not going to get into this too extensively, because this was intended as satire. But my biggest problem with the "Anonymous" and geohot crowd is the sense of entitlement on display. They act as though Sony (and various other entities) owe them something. When in reality, as you say, it's merely a give-and-take relationship.

Edit: I could have gotten into more extensive patent discussions, but I'll save that for a more serious piece.

I disagree. See these passages:

"what has Sony ever done for us? Nothing, that’s what!"

"Sony must unequivocally release all hardware specifications for the PlayStation 3 and the forthcoming NGP."

"these unlawfully impede the consumers’ god-given right to steal."

"We will immediately stop purchasing the games we pirate! Sony will never recover from losing us as valued customers!"

The tone is ironic. The article indicates an anti-jailbreaking stance.

The first quote was a Monty Python reference. The whole paragraph was, in fact.

And as for the rest. there's two things no one can claim for any one individual: what they find sexy, and what they find funny. Ironically, I remember reading that from Roger Ebert.

I agree that it's satire.

Merriam-Webster:

Satire: A literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn.

Good ol' Wiki has a pretty decent entry, too:

In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

The problem is that I don't think this particular satire is very insightful. First of all, it doesn't prove that jailbreaking constitues either human vice or folly. Also, it confuses the notion of patent with the the idea of a trade secret, it sets up a serious strawman argument by conflating jailbreakers and pirates, and it operates under the presumption that consumers inherently "owe" something to Sony.

Just my two cents, though.

I agree with James. No one of any influence or importance actually advocates any of the "satirical" demands within this article. You've set up a series of strawman arguments to knock down.

I recommend reading Lawrence Lessig's Code 2.0 for greater insight on these issues.

@James - Here's my two cents. No, it doesn't advance the discourse on the topic, but neither does Anonymous. There is something to be said about the battle between Sony and GeoHot, sure. Plenty of very thought-provoking arguments could be written defending either side, but I don't think Jason was intending that with this post. I think he was satirizing Anonymous.

Anonymous doesn't go about anything in a polite discourse type of way. They are a collective of Internet trolls who take a side in situations like this and proceed to support their side by harrassing the other side in the most dickish ways possible, because they're trolls. I think Jason did a great job of satirizing them and their extremely childish ways of arguing. No matter what side you fall on I think we can all agree that Anonymous is pretty silly even if they're fighting for what you feel is the right cause.

If you would like a more serious airing of my views on piracy, I covered that here: http://bitmob.com/articles/gamings-entitlement-mentality

As for this piece, I was trying to channel these guys: http://www.stfimages.com/out.php/i5450_life.of.brian.1979.blu-ray.a720.x264.dd51-mysilu-18-29-43-.png

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

Some of the "views" expressed in the piece reflect an inversion of my own beliefs. Some of them I have little investment in. And some of them are just meant to be silly and funny. Most of it merely satirizes the extreme, childish actions of groups like Anonymous.

In point of fact, I never implied that consumers owed anything to Sony, but rather that the inverse is false: Sony owes nothing to consumers. Money changes hands, and the "relationship" begins and ends there. 

This implies, through irony, that previous costumers do owe Sony something:

Apart from Playstation 1, Playstation 2, Playstation 3, Metal Gear Solid, Uncharted, Resistance, Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy Tactics, Xenogears, PSN, and Gran Turismo, what has Sony ever done for us? Nothing, that’s what!

The ironic reading here is that people who have enjoyed Sony products should be grateful (i.e. owe them gratitude, and by extension, loyalty). The only other possible reading is the literal one, which would mean that your hypothetical poster is listing all the (admittedly) great games Sony has published and then saying "Fuck you, Sony!" Nobody would posit an argument in that manner (not even a troll; they'd just cut straight to the "fuck you"), which makes a literal reading impossible. This means that the only reading is the ironic reading.

Your point about a light-hearted jab is well taken, but I think your effort to reframe what is clearly the central thesis of this post by saying "Some of the 'views' expressed in the piece reflect an inversion of my own beliefs. Some of them I have little investment in. And some of them are just meant to be silly and funny " is a bit disingenuous. I agree that some of the stuff about Sony movies is a little off topic, but I have to say that the idea that you would try to lead me off the trail by insinuating that this can be read as a "jailbreaking agnostic" article insults my intelligence a little.

I hadn't read your earlier post -- which seems to come down more on the side of the industry -- before reading this. With that in hand, I have to tell you that I didn't pluck the feeling that you were pro-industry out of a hat. I felt that that sentiment was emergent solely based on this article. Your earlier post only serves to confirm my suspicion about your position on the subject .

So yes, I do think it is a light-hearted jab about the subject when compared to your previous post. That said, it is a light-hearted jab on a topic that I have a fundamental disagreement with you about, and I don't think the satire works because it contains several logical fallacies. Just because you frame an argument in an inverted and ironic way, doesn't mean I can't pluck out the points that your nonliteral statements are making.

Satire (your word, not mine) is merely criticism dressed up in irreverence and wit. And by my reckoning, all criticism is certainly subject to further criticism.

Anyway, this is a touchy subject for a lot of people, so I have to thank you for your civility!

James, I think you're reading into this too much. The paragraph you reference is nothing more or less than a riff on The Life of Brian. If *anything* can be inferred from it, it's that Anonymous feels that Sony is very bad, and (through my proxy), I've demonstrated why they're *not* very bad. That was the gag in Life of Brian, and that's as deep as my version goes.

I never said this was "jailbreaking agnostic", and my views are well-known; I make no attempt to hide them (though my serious piece was more about piracy in general and gamers' corresponding entitlement mentality). I had a very healthy discussion with Rob on the subject. But this "satire" is more about Anonymous itself than any particular position. My most serious satirical jab is aimed at the group's juvenile tactics:

"We demand restitution! Our ceaseless campaign of prank phone calls won’t stop until our demands are met forthwith."

"Sony must divulge the phone numbers and e-mail addresses of its staff so we can taunt them again!"

"We will hack Sony’s phone directory and call them childish names relentlessly! No one will be safe from our taunting!"

And the entire dogshit prank, which I won't quote in full here.

I don't feel this is disingenuous, but it is your right to disagree. And your thanks are well-received: as with every discussion on this site, I believe that diplomacy is the best approach. It's also a learned habit of mine as an editor.

Sometimes, I learn more by reading the comments than by reading the articles. I tip my hat to the Thomas Jefferson reference, though.

For once, I'm afraid I have to side with Jason. Not that I agree with anything that this article states, personally, but because I can see that it's not expecting to be taken seriously, period. Breaking down a joke not only perpetuates any confusion that may arise from it, but also sucks the funny out of it faster than Kirstie Allie can suck down a can of Slim Fast.

It's sort of the same as someone asking, "Why would the Jews go into the bar if they already own it?"

I disagree. I think the Monty Python joke sheds a poor light on Rome, but I think that your joke sheds positive light on Sony because of asdof s,fasdf dsaf....Ah, fuck it!

Impasse'd!

(I'm coining that as dead-end argument-ender as of right now. Noboy can steal it!)

"Nobody can steal it!"

Not if Anonymous has their way. Zing!

No zing! That was the joke! (Maybe it was too oblique?)

Reading this comments thread has been a long, strange journey, bros.

This was a comedic highlight of my day.  Good 'un, Jason.  I love me some Monty Python references.

See also: "Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!"

Thanks Keith! I think our lengthy comment thread debate was equally as entertaining ;)