Talk:PlayStation 3 Jailbreak
|WikiProject Video games||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Should this really get a Wikipedia article? We're talking about an illegal commercial product here. If this gets an Wikipedia article, you could as well make articles for every modchip, which is not tolerated here AFAIK.
- This section might be able the modchip at the moment, but I see it ending up like a number of other hack-specific articles (Mainly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ios_jailbreak , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_DS_storage_devices , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psp_homebrew , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooting_%28Android_OS%29) and so on. Articles about hacking devices tend to have a lot of history, and usually get covered (media wise) by a lot of places. Making them notable I guess? Regardless, its something people like reading up on (regardless of the reasons) and as such as long as its note able should have a page. Maybe this page should indeed be re-designed to focus more on the aspect of Homebrew/Unsigned code rather then the modchip its self. More on the process and the variants then a product. One that I'm pretty sure Sony sued them over or something... --Jaryth000 (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The photo is about a clon of PS Jailbreak, I think. The original one hasn't got that hole at the end. http://www.chipspain.com/es/consolas-451/playstation-3-118/desarrollo-y-copia-ps3-133/ps-jailbreak-playstation-3-5231.html Strange55 (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- I'm wrong, the photo with the hole is about the sample of PS Jailbreak. The final version hasn't got it. Strange55 (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- It's not illegal in many countries. However, as stated previously, even being illegal does not void encyclopedic relevance. --Mapep (talk) 20:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
There have been no reports of Jailbroken PS3s getting banned. There was misinformation that was spread early on due to an old image of an unusual PS3 error, which got reposted amid new PS3 Jailbreak news and was taken to be true. If this is what that line is based on, then it is untrue and should be removed. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it should be an article. It should be noted somewhere, I'll look to see what other modding communities have on Wikipedia, but this article as it stands isn't very good. WhereAmI (talk) 18:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
A couple of things about the legality section that I think are odd...
- The bit about this device being banned in Australia should probably be rewritten. "Outlawed" suggests government involvement by passing a law, but (according to the cited Kotaku article) it was a court order in a civil matter. It should also be made clear that ONLY this specific device was blocked, and only because it shipped with pirated Sony software.
- The 3rd point refers to someone called Hotz, yet no such person is named earlier in the article. His full name is listed below this section. If this person is important to the device, he should be mentioned at the beginning of the article.
- The 2nd point does make mention of GeoHot - is this the same person as Hotz?
- 2nd point could be broken down to more points if the section is to remain in point form. It's got more than one piece of information.