Rasmussen Does An Anti-Net Neutrality Push Poll

January 1, 2011

Rasmussen Question: “Should the Federal Communications Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?”

I’m in favor of Net Neutrality, but I would answer “NO!!” to the above question. Frankly, I think anyone who understood the issue would likely say “No” to the above question, because the regulations placed on radio and TV bear absolutely no resemblance to the ideals of Net Neutrality (which is why the EFF opposes all FCC regulation). But most importantly, I think anyone who didn’t understand the issue, would be lead astray by that question. They would be lead to believe that the above question is somehow relevant to current issues, and it simply isn’t. Net Neutrality is not about censoring porn or “bad” language. For those in doubt, I might suggest looking up the definition of the word “neutrality”.

I might have let this question slide, if Rasmussen hadn’t associated it with Net Neutrality (given it’s lack of practical relevance to the issue). But, far from distancing this question from Net Neutrality, they titled the page for this question with “Questions – Net Neutrality – December 23, 2010”. So, either Rasmussen simply doesn’t understand what Net Neutrality is, or they are blatantly misrepresenting it in an attempt to get the type of results they want. One might think Frank Luntz had a hand in this somewhere…

Net Neutrality is about non-discrimination of internet content. The discrimination of content violates Net Neutrality regardless of where that discrimination comes from; whether it be from the Internet provider, or government regulation. Rasmussen asked a question about the violation of Net Neutrality, and framed it as the definition of Net Neutrality. They might have just as fairly asked “Should freedom of speech be protected by criminalizing dissent?”

I don’t like opinion polls in general, but I really hate opinion polls that blatantly misrepresent the issues.


CR-48 Speed

December 18, 2010
Google’s CR-48 is running on a single core Atom processor, and so it’s not quite as snappy as some people might be used to.  Here are a couple ways to improve performance on the CR-48.

1. Prevent your browser from loading flash automatically.  Flash is a notorious recourse hog, and that fact is made exponentially worse under Linux (Chrome OS runs on Linux), because Adobe tends to treat Linux development as a low priority.  Supposedly, Adobe is working on this problem, but for now, you might want to do this:

Go into Chrome OS settings (click on the wrench, then click on settings).
Click on “Under the Hood”.
In the privacy section, click on “Content settings…”.
Click on the “Plug-ins” tab.
Change the setting to either “Click to play” or “Block all” (I use “Click to play”, but you may have trouble with that option syncing to your desktop Chrome browser at this point).

2. Prevent your browser from loading javascript automatically.  I don’t use this option anymore, because it can get rather annoying to manually allow javascript on every website where I want it, and given that I want it on almost all the websites I go to anyway, this option became effectively useless to me.  However, it will improve the speed your websites load, so if you want to give it a try, here is how:

Same first 3 steps as #1 (go to settings, then “Under the Hood”, then “Content settings…”).
Click on the “JavaScript” tab
Change the setting to “Do not allow any site to run JavaScript”.

Both of these options will show you a small icon in the address bar when something is blocked, and when you click on that icon, it gives you some options about what you want to do regarding the blocked content on that page.

Neither of these options will turn the CR-48 into a speed demon, but the plug-in blocking in particular is likely to improve your browsing experience tremendously.


Google’s CR-48

December 15, 2010
I just received Google’s CR-48 Chrome OS notebook, and I’m ecstatic.  I didn’t actually believe I’d get one.  It’s far too soon to give a full review, but here are some of my preliminary impressions. 

It’s a little slower than I was expecting.  It’s not bad, but I was expecting something a little snappier, given all Google’s talk about speed.  This particular notebook runs on an Atom N455, which is a single core 1.66GHz processor.  Honestly, I think a lot of the speed issues would be alleviated by running a muti-core processor, given how modular Chrome is (just open a task manager in Linux while running Chrome/Chromium, and you’ll see what I mean).  From what I’ve heard, the commercial products being made by Acer and Samsung will use multi-core Atom chips, so I’m not worried about speed issues when this product actually comes to market.

Google tried to emulate the modern Macbook trackpad, and it works okay.  It’s a little more persnickety than my Macbook’s trackpad under OS X, but no worse than when I’m in Linux.  That’s not too surprising, given Chrome OS’s Linux core.  Much like modern Macbooks, you can also click simply by pushing in on the trackpad, but it takes a lot of force to do, so I don’t use that feature much.

Everything else about the machine seems fantastic so far.  The keyboard is easy to type on (I’m typing on it now, in fact),  The OS syncs with your desktop Chrome browser, so everything I had on Chrome/Chromium automatically showed up on my laptop when I signed in.  And best of all, there is no branding on this thing at all.  No Intel sticker, no manufacturer logo, no nothing.  It just is.  I love that.

I do have one odd side note, though: There’s no Ethernet port on here.  I don’t see that as a bad thing, as much as it’s a statement by Google about how they think laptops and netbooks should be used.  I get the impression that they see a very sharp contrast between stationary and portable computing, and a massive OS running on a laptop plugged into the Internet via Ethernet just goes against the idea of portability that a laptop is supposed to represent.

I’m going to spend some time trying to live almost exclusively on this laptop, and we’ll see how that idea of portability actually holds up.  Now, if only I could find a way to get Diablo II installed on this thing…


Chrome OS

December 13, 2010

Recently, Google made some major announcements about the Chrome web browser, and Chrome OS.  I’ve always been intrigued by the concept of Chrome OS.  That concept being that users only really use their web browsers anyway, so why load a desktop OS in the background, if all you’re going to use it for is to run the web browser.  That idea falls short on Desktop computers, but makes a lot of sense to me for laptops and netbooks.

As I see it, desktops and laptops are designed for different things.  Desktops are good for stationary tasks, while laptops are good for portable tasks.  Chrome OS is meant to make the portable tasks that much more portable, thus making the laptop that much better at doing what it was designed to do in the first place.  A machine running Chrome OS would be a great web browser, chat, and e-mail device.  It would make a horrid media server, but then again, so would most laptops (unless you never took it anywhere; in which case, why did you get a laptop?).

It’s obvious by now that I love experimenting with new Operating Systems.  I played with the Windows 7 Beta all the way up to its official release, and I’ve been playing with Linux distros for many years (Arch has officially become my favorite, by the way).  For that reason, I applied for Google’s Chrome OS pilot program.  Truth be told, I don’t expect to be selected for it, if only because I’m one dude in a city of 1.37 million, and even if Google were to distribute their pilot program by location, my chances of getting in aren’t very good.  That being said, if I do get selected you can bet I’ll do a review here.  Otherwise, I’ll eventually have to find a version of Chromium OS that I can install on my Macbook, because I don’t think it would be fair to review Chrome/Chromium OS in a Virtual Machine.  It’d be too like running Chrome/Chromium the browser.  I also don’t want to just build the developer version from source, because I don’t think that would be a proper user level experience either.

 


Rolling Release Linux Distributions

November 21, 2010

I’ve been experimenting with Linux distributions that have a rolling release model.  These distros don’t have a 6 month release cycle with major updates each release, like Ubuntu; ideally they just update themselves little by little as you normally update your system.  In theory, if you’re always up to date with your updates, then you always have the most modern version of the OS.  This concept appeals to my lazy nature, as well as my desire to always have the most recent version of whatever OS I’m running (which is why I don’t just use a Long Term Service version of Ubuntu).

First, I replaced my Ubuntu installation with Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) because I’d seen some good reviews of it, and the rolling release model appealed to me.  Thus far, I think it’s a fantastic OS.  It’s not quite as user-friendly as Ubuntu for a few reasons, but I actually like it more than Ubuntu.  Everything seems to run snappier under LMDE, and I prefer the default Mint panel, menu, and themes.  I originally worried about potential stability issues involved with the rolling updates (sort of like the stability problems I’ve had with in-place upgrades in Ubuntu), but I haven’t experienced any problems so far (though I haven’t used it for long).

Next, I decided to set up VirtualBox so I could try out other rolling release distros.  So far, I’ve tried Sabayon, Aptosid, Arch Linux, and Chakra.  While I respect Sabayon for trying to make Gentoo more user-friendly, it broke after the first update, so that was an instant fail.  Aptosid was stable, and I really like the fact that there’s a default KDE version, but it sticks very strictly to “Debian’s Free Software guidelines”, which are draconian for a desktop OS (they don’t allow Firefox in the repository, to say nothing about Flash, and heaven forbid an Nvidia driver).

Arch Linux was an interesting mixed bag.  After the instillation, you’re left with a basic command prompt and almost nothing else.  I only managed to get GNOME set up by following a Youtube tutorial.  But after that, everything seemed to run extremely well, and the bleeding edge versions of nearly everything I wanted were already in the default repositories. I started to like Arch’s minimalist ideal, and debated about putting it on a new HDD partition. However, the installation and setup was still pretty intimidating to me, so I looked into Arch based distros and came across Chakra.

I thought Chakra was simply a version of Arch Linux that automated the instillation and setup.  I was wrong.  Chakra is actually in the early stages of becoming its own stand alone OS, and as such it has moved farther away from Arch than I had originally thought.  While Chakra did automate the setup, it also took Arch’s minimalist idea, and applied it to the repositories.  They’ve purged their default repositories of all GTK apps.  They have special standalone “bundles” that you can download and install separately, but they don’t have very many, and this sort of application segregation seemed very strange and stifling to me.  I’m a fan of KDE, but there are some GTK apps that I like, and not all of them were in the prepackaged “bundles”.  Also, since Chakra is not Arch anymore, it’s currently in an Alpha stage of development, and I experienced some minor bugs as a result.

Thus, I went back to Arch Linux, and decided to install that on my HDD instead.  I resigned myself to the need for a laptop next to my desktop, so that I could look things up if I ran into trouble.  There were certainly some speed bumps where the laptop proved to be essential, but I eventually got the desktop up and running smoothly.  This time, I installed a minimal KDE desktop instead of GNOME, and I’ve been very happy with the result so far.  The OS is very snappy, and I love the fact that the more you use it, the more the OS starts to reflect its user.  Because Arch doesn’t come with anything preinstalled, the only applications on your computer are the ones you put there.  Because Arch doesn’t automatically configure or automate anything, the only things that your computer does are the things you tell it to do.  In a PC world dominated by Microsoft Windows, Arch Linux is a breath of fresh air in that respect.

Unfortunately, I don’t personally know anyone to whom I could recommend Arch.  As much as I’ve fallen in love with Arch’s command-line software management tool (Pacman), there are people out there who weren’t even comfortable with Synaptic in Ubuntu, to say nothing about cracking open a terminal and installing things via apt-get.  Arch is not for people who are new to Linux.  If you hate the command line, and manually editing config files scares you, then avoid Arch.  But if you already have a lot of experience with Linux, Arch could turn out to be a wonderful OS for you.

In conclusion, Ubuntu is still probably the best distro for novice Linux users, if only because everything made for Desktop Linux is made primarily with Ubuntu in mind (in that respect, Ubuntu is to Linux what Windows is to the PC), but Linux Mint Debian Edition is shaping up to be an excellent alternative.  If the rolling release of LMDE turns out to be stable in the long term, I expect its popularity to escalate rapidly.  In contrast, Arch Linux will never be popular with Linux users who are switching from Windows, but it’s also an exceptional OS, and it’s quickly become one of my favorite distributions.


Voice Recognition

September 19, 2010

Voice Recognition is not ready for prime time, IMO.  A little automation around the edges is fine, but given that my Google Voicemail has translated my mom saying “playin’ Monopoly” as “plan that I’ll kill you”, I don’t think it should be used in any important setting.


Cheap Geek: Game Prices

August 2, 2010

I promised myself that I would never spend $60 on a video game ever again.

When Final Fantasy 13 came out, I got it on launch day from Target. They were offering a $10 gift card with the purchase of the game, thus offsetting the price slightly, even if I still had to hand over that $60 up front. Overall, I liked the game; the combat was great, but the storytelling wasn’t very good (the foundations of a good story were there, but the execution sucked).

Months later, I purchased Mass Effect 2 on sale for $24 on Steam. I loved it. Mass Effect 2 is one of the best Video Games I have ever played. What’s more, simply by waiting 6 months before purchasing it, I spent less than half what I did on Final Fantasy 13. This experience of spending less money on a game, and liking it more than the $60 game I bought previously has happened to me many times before. Mass Effect 2 was the last straw. I promised myself I’d never spend $60 on a game again. Given that nearly all video games drop in price over time, there’s no reason to spend $60 on one as long as I’m willing to wait for a better price.

However, that also means I’m not going to play StarCraft II for a while. I have loved every game Blizzard has made for the past decade and a half, and while I have no doubt that StarCraft II is a phenomenal game, I refuse to pay $60 for it. That’s just over my limit.

In the meantime, I installed the original StarCraft on my Ubuntu partition under Wine. It runs flawlessly, and even after all these years it’s still a good game. More importantly, playing the old game also helps to quell my desire for the new game. I highly recommend the old StarCraft if you can’t play the new one for whatever reason.


Cheap No Contract Cell Phone Plans

May 25, 2010

I’ve been experimenting with no contract cell phone plans recently.  About a year ago, my contract with Sprint ran out, and while my overall experience with Sprint had been positive, my 3 year old cell phone was starting to glitch on me, and I was feeling a little restricted by their $30 (about $36 including taxes and fees) 200 minute per  month plan.  I wanted a new phone and I wanted a plan that didn’t charge me per text, and wouldn’t charge me through the nose if I spent more than 200 minutes on the phone during the weekdays of a month.  I also didn’t want to spend more on my cell phone service than I was already spending.  Unfortunately, my only options with Sprint were to either stick with the plan I already had, or upgrade to a much more expensive plan.  Neither of those options were particularly appealing to me.

I chose to try Cricket wireless first.  Once, a workmate of mine had started using them, and she had spoken very highly of their cheap unlimited plans.  I knew they used a CDMA network, and I also knew that they could flash your current phone’s firmware to their network so long as it was a CDMA phone.  I assumed I could simply ask them to flash my current phone at the store and start using their cell phone plan.  If things worked out, I’d buy a new phone later.  Unfortunately, that wasn’t how things turned out.  When I went to the store, I was informed that, while they did offer to flash a phone’s firmware, they charged money for the service (about $40 for my Sprint Sanyo), and had to send the phone away to do it, meaning I wouldn’t get the phone back for about a week.  In an attempt to make that rather shocking revelation sting less, the store clerk told me that if I bought a new phone there, I’d get the first month of service free, which overall could result in paying less for the first month than if I had my phone flashed to Cricket.  Plus, I’d be able to leave the store with a working phone, instead of having to wait a week to get my old glitchy phone back.  None of their phones were subsidized, so I was not happy with that alternative.  Nevertheless, I thought it was the best option available to me at the time.  I purchased the cheapest phone they had, and left the store with a working Cricket phone, and my soon to be non-working Sprint phone.  Transferring my Sprint number to Cricket was more complicated than I’d expected, but it worked out in the end.

I hated the Cricket phone.  The phone itself was a candy bar style Samsung SCH-r211, which was completely functional, yet completely repulsive.  The phone itself was ugly, all the sounds it made were from low end midi files that sounded terrible, and even after I figured out how to lock the keypad, it would magically unlock itself in my pocket, and start randomly clicking through menu options.  Maybe I had gotten attached to my old flip style Sanyo, but I disliked the r211 quite a bit.  That fact wasn’t helped by Cricket’s spotty coverage.  Just in my apartment, Cricket’s signal topped out a little over half strength and goes to almost nothing in a matter of feet (the bad receptions spots tending to be any place I might be inclined to sit down).  On top of that, sometimes there would be a delay between when a person called me and when my phone actually started ringing (around a 2-3 ring delay).  All these things annoyed me quite a bit.  It seemed to me that the only benefit I was experiencing by going to Cricket was the unlimited talk and text plan for the same price as my old Sprint plan.  However, that one benefit wasn’t worth the problems I was experiencing, since I actually don’t use my phone enough to justify that sort of plan.  I wanted the capability to talk and text more without paying through the nose, but I didn’t want to exchange network reliability for that benefit.  So after a few months, I decided to try something else.

Next, I decided to try a pre-paid cell phone service called Straight Talk.  The company is owned by TracFone, and runs on the Verizon network.  For the same $30 as the Sprint (200min) and Cricket (unlimited) plans, Straight Talk sort of split the difference by offering a $30 plan with 1000 minutes and texts, plus 30mb of data.  Also, I think the only additional charge on that $30 is basic sales tax (which means this plan is effectively around $3 less expensive per month).  And much like with Cricket, I needed to buy the phone separately, though this phone was less expensive than the Samsung r211.

Overall, I liked the phone itself, but wasn’t particularly happy with the service.  The phone was the LG 220c, and I don’t really have any complaints about it.  It’s a solid flip style phone that seems customizable enough.  The first thing I did when I got it was use some of my 30mb trying to get my Final Fantasy ring tones on the phone.  I’d never experimented with custom ringtones before, and I was eager to try it, since I was paying for those 30mb anyway.  Thus far, I don’t really see why people spend money on custom ringtones, but they’re fun if they’re free.  The problem was the service itself.  Simply activating the phone took a full 24 hours for no apparent reason.  I’d read enough horror stories online about transferring phone numbers that I didn’t think it was worth trying.  Every time I try to place an outgoing call, the phone tells me how much time I have left to talk before actually placing the call.  And again, there seems to be a delay between when a person calls me, and when my phone actually starts ringing (though this time it’s only a 1 ring delay).  Initially, I was also disappointed with the reliability of the Verizon network’s signal strength in my apartment, but in retrospect, there’s a good chance I was simply being oversensitive to it.  It was undeniably stronger overall than the signal I was getting from cricket, but it had similar variations.  Truth be told, I think it had simply been so long since I’d bothered to look at the signal I was getting with my Sprint phone, that I’d forgotten that the signal strength had varied with that phone too.  I wasn’t satisfied yet, and I was very unhappy with the amount of money I had already spent on this experiment.  I was on the verge of deciding that “you get what you pay for” applied rather negatively to all of these “budge conscious” alternatives.

Last, I tried an AT&T GoPhone.  At this point, I was seriously thinking about just signing up with AT&T, but before I did I needed to make sure AT&T would be a good option for me, and that I couldn’t simply live with one of their pre-paid plans.  The AT&T pre-paid rate plans are more complicated than all the other plans I’d tried, but their $1 per day plan allowed for unlimited calling to any AT&T wireless number.  Given that the few people I spend much time talking too on the phone use AT&T for their cell phones, I figured that I wouldn’t be spending much more than $30 per month, even if I talked on the phone every day (which I don’t).  I figured that even in a worst case scenario, I wouldn’t be spending more than 50 texts and 50 non-AT&T minutes a month, and at 10 cents/min and 20 cents/text, I’d still be around $45 per month (which would be less than the 2-year contract plan, because I’m not paying 20% in taxes and fees).  Also, because this was AT&T, I had no doubts about being able to transfer my original phone number to them.  I decided to purchase the Samsung a167 because the $50 package already came with $30 of talk time (effectively making the phone itself just $20, or so I rationalized), and because I’d seen good reviews of the phone.

The phone itself was great.  It’s also another flip style phone, but unlike my original Sanyo or the LG 220c, there’s a good lip around it making it extremely easy to open with one hand.  It’s also not so small or skinny that it feels awkward to hold.  And to be completely honest, I also love the color.  I know that’s superficial, but it’s true.

The problem is that the AT&T signal strength in my apartment sucks.  By which I mean it’s almost non-existent.  None of the data/internet features work, and every call I make stutters and sounds heavily compressed.  I’m lucky to get a single bar during a call regardless of where I am in my apartment.  Put simply, this was the most disappointing part of this entire experiment.  I’d been lead to believe that AT&T had a good network here in San Antonio, but apparently I’m living in a near dead zone for them.  I still transferred my original phone number to the GoPhone because I didn’t want to lose it when I canceled my service with Cricket, but going from Cricket to AT&T was actually a step down for me, believe it or not.  On the plus side, AT&T has comparatively wonderful customer service.  The entire process of transferring my Cricket number to AT&T (which included a call to customer service) took a matter of minutes, while the mere activation of Straight Talk (a completely automated process) took 24 hours.

Overall, though, I was greatly disappointed, and was unwilling to waist any more money on this experiment.  I was also unwilling to go back to Sprint, and spend at least $45 per month (about $54 including taxes and fees) just to get talk & text access similar to what I had with all of these other cheaper options.  I decided to settle…at least for now.

I told the people most likely to call me to do so at the Straight Talk number.  The biggest reason I wasn’t satisfied with Straight Talk was because I didn’t trust their customer service, and I worried that if something went wrong, I’d be left high and dry with no real good way of dealing with it.  I still worry about that, but my AT&T GoPhone is going to remain active for a few more months anyway, and while the signal sucks, it’s good enough to use as a backup phone if Straight Talk craps out on me.

As much as I doubt it, I still hope that AT&T will fix the weak signal around my apartment.  I brought it up with customer service when I called to transfer my number, but I don’t know how seriously they’re likely to take it.  If this gets fixed within the next 3 months, I can just start using the GoPhone exclusively.  If it doesn’t get fixed within 3 months, I hope Straight Talk demonstrates more reliability during that time than it did during activation.  Either way, I am not going to spend any more money on unsubsidized phones for a while.  I don’t regret this experiment, but it was a lot more expensive, and a lot less fruitful than I expected it to be from the start.


Net Neutrality

October 28, 2009

More than anything else, I voted for Barack Obama because of his support for Net Neutrality. I wanted Healthcare reform too, but Net Neutrality was the big issue for me, and I’d have simply stayed home on election day, had he not openly supported that issue. The FCC, as a result of Obama’s new appointments, is now trying to implement Net Neutrality regulations. It’s no surprise that there are many on the political right now getting up on their soap box to bash Net Neutrality.

During his campaign for president, I criticized John McCain for his computer illiteracy. It’s really too bad that the anti-Net Neutrality advocates (they would call themselves “free market” advocates, but that would be ignoring markets that exist almost exclusively within the Internet, like Google and Facebook) are being represented by someone like John McCain. Even though I think the anti-reform advocates are wrong, I also think some have worthwhile points to make, and deserve to be heard. Unfortunately, it seems the people standing on the tallest soap box in opposition, are the people who clearly don’t have the slightest clue what they’re talking about.

There’s an argument to be made that the FCC shouldn’t be allowed to make up regulations on their own, and then implement them without congressional approval. Even members of the EFF are making that argument. I think it’s a valid point, and I would prefer to see binding legislation on this issue, rather than just FCC regulations that could easily be repealed at any time when the next administration comes in. However, this isn’t an argument against Net Neutrality; just against the FCC doing things unilaterally.

The few worthwhile arguments against Net Neutrality itself almost all revolve around the idea that the infrastructure was built by private companies, and thus those companies should be able to do what they like with that infrastructure. It’s a good ideological argument, but it ignores the issue of private monopoly, and the government subsidies taxpayers gave to those private companies to help them build that infrastructure. But even though that argument is flawed, it’s still immeasurably better than the “new fairness doctrine” malarkey coming out of some people. Net Neutrality is about forbidding the regulation of speech on the Internet (particularly by ISPs), which is the exact opposite of what the fairness doctrine was all about.

I believe the United States has been the most innovative country in terms of Internet start ups. Without Net Neutrality, companies like DIGG.com, mint.com, and people just looking to make a little money with their blog through advertising, simply wouldn’t have anything like the opportunities they have had in the past. Most of the websites we go to regularly wouldn’t have been viable businesses if we allowed the ISPs to run the Internet the way many of those same companies run cable television.  We need to ensure America’s continued dominance in this space, and I don’t think we’ll be able to do that without Net Neutrality.


CFW, PSN, And DRM

October 27, 2009

Sony has recently blocked PSP users using the 5.50 GEN custom firmware from accessing the Playstation Store. This affects me, because I recently updated my firmware from GEN-B to GEN-D, which has resulted in all my PSN games no longer being recognized as legitimate, because I can’t log on to the PSN and re-authenticate my system.

I used to really like buying PSX games from the Playstation Store. Why buy a PSP game for $20 and have it locked to just the PSP, when I can buy a PS1 game for $10, and play it on both my PSP and PS3. The Playstation One section of the Playstation Store was a place for great deals, in my opinion, and I spent a lot of money there. For that reason, I’m rather disappointed that I can no longer play any of the PSN versions of those games on the PSP.

However, this would have been a much bigger problem had I not already owned most of those games in other forms. A few hours of experimentation, and I was able to rip a lot of those games from the UMDs and PS1 discs I already had. I bought those games from the Playstation Store for convenience. I didn’t know how to rip games before, but now that I do, I have more games on my PSP’s flash drive than I ever did when I could buy them from the PSN.

John Gilmore has said that the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. The same principle behind that statement can be applied to tech geeks and DRM. So long as DRM doesn’t get in my way, I have no problem with it. But if it tries to stop me from doing what I want to do with my own property, I’m going to find a way around it.

Sony has every right to block people who use custom firmware from accessing the PSN. In fact, I think ensuring security on their systems is probably a very good idea (better late than never). But for people like me, the cat is too far out of the bag at this point; I can’t go back to the official firmware anymore. They need to offer more applications and retro games on the store, so people aren’t tempted by the homebrew apps in the first place. Emulators and e-book readers are the gateway to CFW, and if people find out how to rip games themselves (which isn’t all that hard), they won’t have any need for the PSN anymore.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.