Slashdot Mirror
Swapless PSP Exploit Released
YDKCooKiE writes "According to psphacker.com, an updated exploit for PSP 1.5 has been released, allowing PSP 1.5 users to play homebrew software without requiring the swap trick."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
It's about time to require a new firmware version for all new games
As was shown with the xbox, the secret to entering a new hardware/software market is to create a machine that allows piracy, but discourages it. While there are valid reasons to allowing homebrew software on the PSP, and hacks like this shouldn't be illegal, research like this will lead to hacked games (on to very expensive memory sticks).
Genious on Sony's part. Get an installed base at any price, while paying lip service to piracy. Even at $250, the PSP will be a hit.
Burn Hollywood Burn
Now, I know why they don't allow the homebrew software:
;).
Less game sales
Loss of control (possibility of viruses, malware, etc)
But - I think they could really do something with the homebrew if done right. I had put out some of these in a column I wrote up a couple of weeks ago, and still feel its true.
Sony could:
1. Offer a homebrew kit to developers for $100 - $200 dollars to be used for non-commercial use only.
2. Include big ass disclaimers "You break-a yo' PSP, not our fault".
3. If an application starts getting big, add it to an online PSP App Center and charge for it. 75% of the profits go to the devs, 25% to Sony. Everybody wins, as Sony could built up a library of applications and make some money off of it.
Is this as good as, say, just developing Palm Pilot applications and not getting a developers hard work appropriated by Sony? Naturally not - but half a loaf, as they say, is better than none. In this scenario, more apps for the PSP make it a more attractive device, which means more sales, which means more developers develop for it. At the moment, the Nintendo DS is looking like a better system (I've got two PSP games that look interesting to me, and about 15 DS games on my list for the future).
Of course, this is all just my opinion. I could be wrong. If nothing else, I'm enjoying having a Genesis emulator on my PSP - and the irony that I can play Game Boy Color games on my PSP but not on my DS
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
...and you should be able to hack anything you own as long as it doesn't endanger anyone, deprive them of privacy, deprive them of something else, etc. -- it's yours.
This is part of the issue that the technically savvy face in the modern world. For instance, I could probably hack my car to get better fuel economy and more power, but turn it into something that emits a lot more NOx and CO2. I own the vehicle (it's actually paid for, a 2002 model). Should I have the right to do this? I cannot say that I have an answer to that.
The problem arises because it's hard to define what "endanger someone" or "deprive someone of something" means in most contexts. It's not like everything is simple like murder, theft of physical property, or other 'physical' issues. Take, for instance, the issue of DVD regions. The only reason this exists is political, and it's really unclear as to what damage would result from not having region-coded DVDs. Yes, I know about piracy and the "loss" of revenue, and I can understand the industry arguments, but I don't know that I agree with them. (If 10,000 people pay $10 each for a CD and give me $100,000, and 30,000 other people made copies, listen to the music, what did those 30,000 people "steal" from me anyway? It didn't cost me anything to produce those extra 30,000 CDs, so I didn't lose anything. The extra 30,000 copies didn't deprive anyone else of having a copy either. If, perhaps, I didn't think that $100,000 was enough to make more music I'll do something else, so that original bit of music is the only bit that will ever be out there. It does not make economic sense to continue to derive income from a non-scarce commodity for a lifetime; revenue should be proportional to services rendered or wealth created, not "I gave society this thing once, so keep giving me money forever". But I digress.)
Mostly the reasons for all the "do not hack your own stuff" laws comes from, especially in the United States, the desire to push all liability onto the manufacturers; this necessarily takes away some freedom. If, as a public, we want the freedom to hack our stuff, we have to take the responsibility for the possible consequences back upon ourselves.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
Can it run linux? I can then add all homebrewed software I like.
including this one. I wonder if you can run the exploit on the emulator too...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
As I understand it, the GP32 seems to fit the bill.
Unlike Game Boy Advance SP, Nintendo DS, and Sony PSP, How can I develop and share GP32 games if I can't find anybody else in town that has a GP32 to test on? Especially with multiplayer games, how can I test multiplayer gameplay if nobody else in Fort Wayne, Indiana, has a GP32?
OK, I'll modify my question. What portable game hardware:
Or is it a "good, fast, cheap, pick two, tough shit" situation?
That's exactly right. Under US law (AFAIK, IANAL), agreements are solidified as soon as an exchange of goods takes place - in this case, software for money. So if an EULA is not presented prior to the Point of Sale, it cannot be enforced.
What's more, the last I heard there was a 9th Circuit Court Ruling applying the "First Sale " doctrine to software, regardless of what the EULA says... Which is why those people at computer shows can legally sell you the OEM copies that have "Not for Resale" stamped in big, bold, (useless) letters on the package.
Downloaded software is much more insidious, because many times the EULA is presented before the download... But with Firefox's "Edit Text Box" extension (or whatever it's called), you can change the EULA to whatever you want... or if it's like Sun's EULA, just rewrite the HTML to reflect terms that are favorable to you before you hit 'submit'.
So far I just write in the box that I reserve all rights and privileges and that's all there is to it... I wonder how far one could push it, legally?