Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Looking Closely at the Restrictions of Linux on the PS2

Posted by timothy on from the gpl-trumps-doesn't-it dept.

Hal-kun writes: "I wrote an interesting article about Sony's upcoming Linux distro for the PS2 and some intellectual property concerns I have with it. It's an intresting look at how Sony limits the ability to have full access to the system, yet being able to keep it under GPL."

2 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Red rag to a bull by joebp · · Score: 4, Flamebait
    In order to get Linux running on your PS2, you must boot the system using the PS2 Linux DVD. During boot, after all the copy-protection stuff is taken care of, the system lays down the Runtime Environment. This is basically a layer that hides access to the SPU2 (Sound Processing Unit), the input/output processor, the hard drive, the CD/DVD-ROM system, the controllers, memory cards, USB, i.Link and other peripherals.
    I doubt it'll be long before there's a work-around. Placing such limitations on a piece of hardware or software never works.

    See: CSS, DVD regioning, Windows XP Product Activation, PS2 Copy Protection, eBook encryption, et al.

    When will big business learn? If something is secured in a paranoid way, it will be overcome to a degree. The prize is too big.

  2. Re:SONY changes it's mind due to THIS article. by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    "...and those who protect their property are wrong..."

    Thanks for the waste of time.*

    Without going into too much detail -- that you are obviously aware (otherwise you couldnt skillfully troll in such a way) -- your rabid 'property' assertion is malformed.

    Intellectual "property" is not "property": it doesnt exist. It is an agreement, an artificial construct -- not a real thing . Now, outside of the "Get off my Property or Ill shoot you" United States, there is not such a radical concept of "personal property", in fact, allot of nations manage to share a great deal in their civil society.

    So, really, you are making a very contentious point, failing to realize that your bias and pre-disposed perspective is not shared by all people (that 'intellectual property' exists && an individuals property is the most precious and unquestionable 'right' (the former was born by plutocrats && the latter by McCarthyism (+ unnatural adherence to the US Constitution without critical analysis (read: "American Democracy as a Religion))) but i digress).

    So, where does that leave your post, and my ill-prepared retort? Nowhere, from my perspective you are a slave to your myopia and I -- who doesnt agree with ultimate-right of personal property or intellectual-property (in total) -- am a Neo-Communist.

    Basically, you drop a blatent non-sequitur on /.; get modded +1 insightful, and I am amazed at both the moderator and yourself for not being able to recognize an argument beyond the skill of an 8th grade debate team, and I welcome the Anti-Communist bigotry that I will illicit.

    *You certainly wasted my time with your narrow and skewed world-view -- how did you enjoy my wasting yours with mine?