The Xbox was a modders dream after it was cracked, enabling the console to be used for anything from pirated games to a file server. In the wake of this Microsoft had promised us that the Xbox 360 would be secured "at the silicon level", apparently making it very difficult to crack and the results even more difficult to replicate on multiple consoles.

Well in South Korea they're reporting a booming trade in modified Xbox 360's which allows copied discs to be played in the consoles DVD player, and Microsoft has gone from talking up its vaunted security to downplaying the piracy. The company is promising to fix any bugs such as this with patches and updates pushed through Xbox Live, reminding me somewhat of Sony's farcical ongoing back-and-forth with the homebrew crowd on the PlayStation Portable. One would crack the system, the other would release a patch, this would be cracked a few weeks later, another patch, rinse and repeat.

At the moment times are good for South Korean pirates, where the modification costs around KRW 70,000 (60 Euro); and pirated software is said to be readily available for as little as KRW 15,000 (12 Euro), compared to the standard retail price of around KRW 40,000 (33 Euro), says Gamesindustry.biz.

Ohh great, now even the impartial Beeb is getting on the "Ohh Holy Christ, Will Somebody Please Think Of The Children?!" bandwagon with regards to video game ratings; tussling with the question "Are there some games just too violent?"

Erm, "maybe, but who the hell are you to tell me what's too violent", would be my answer to that. "The game has an 18 certificate and should not be played by younger gamers. But should it even be played at all?" el Beeb asks of Reservoir Dogs, the really violent video game take on the really violent Quentin Tarantino movie of the same name.

Umm, hello, the "18" rating? Must I wave my arms about incessantly here? First of all, for my yank friends, allow me to explain. In the UK the "18" rating is not the same as its equivalent in the US of A. In the US an 18's rating condemns a game to porno shops. In the UK it's more seen as the upper limit - anything over 18's is for over 18's, and games like Grand Theft Auto get this rating, and everything is kosher, with mainstream retail outlets stocking the titles.

Now, the question being asked is "Should we ban games like Reservoir Dogs because they are too violent?" Which part of the Nanny State will be deciding what we can and cannot view and play, so? Living in liberal societies I daresay that we can view pretty much whatever the hell we want within the bounds of reason, thankyouverymuch, and if you begin to censor Reservoir Dogs today then tomorrow you'll be critiquing the perceived non-politically correct elements of Lemmings.

An 18's rating is an 18's rating: Anyone over 18 is an adult, capable of making adult decisions (and paying for them appropriately.) The big problem, of course, is idiotic parents who blissfully admit things such as "I've never really looked at ratings for games." Probably the same parents who would, in a knee-jerk, go all guns blazing for banning Reservoir Dogs.

I understand that many parents don't have a grasp of video gaming. But if you can't read a big red label with a number between "12" and "18" on it then perhaps we ought to consider banning you from parenting.

But the real kicker here is Brownback's Truth in Video Game Rating Act will
bring the video game industry under federal government regulation. First, the
bill would give the U.S. Federal Trade Commission control over describing and
defining video game content. The second and even more chilling proposal will
give the Government Accountability Office (GOA) the authority to evaluate the
ERSB ratings and, if the GOA disagrees with its findings, the potential to
create an "independent" ratings board - and I write "independent" because it
will have no financial interest or ties to the video game industry but will
apparently be a government controlled body.

This is troubling because video games are the current boogyman for Congress - as
opposed to, I dunno, Osama Bin Laden - and video game legislation is gaining bi-
partisan support from the like of Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-NY). I'm astonished how
quickly Republicans will turncoat from their anti-regulation free market
platform when they find a divisive business issue they can portray as a social
crisis. Similarly, I'm astonished that Democrats can't find something better to
do that to demonize video games. While I think the ESRB's system for rating
games is laughably bad, excessive government regulation and censorship isn't the
answer for this or any other matter. But that sure looks like this is where
we're headed.

For further reading, check out the excellent href="www.gamepolitics.com">GamesPolitics.com.

Kudos is to be dished out to Kevin Poulsen, Wired Senior Editor and former code monkey (to say the least); who has written an extremely interesting article about how he, using a search algorithm he programmed himself, managed to do what MySpace has said is not possible in catching registered sex offenders on the site.

You can read the riveting article to see exactly how he did it, but suffice to say police in the US were able to apprehend a convicted and potential repeat sex offender who had been sending suggestive messages to a young boy on MySpace. Poulsen has just come as legally close as any of us could ever hope to get to beating one of these perverts into a bloody pulp with our bare fists.

The only problem is that Wired says it will be publishing the code Poulsen created under an open source license later in the week, thus perhaps enabling some less restrained individuals to go on a witch hunt across the internet. Some of you in the UK may remember the tabloid name-and-shame campaign against sexual predators a few years back, which led to angry mobs terrorising innocent people who were mistaken for some of those named in the campaign. What, I daresay, is to be gained from publishing the code of Poulsen's search to the public at large other than to incite a more high-tech angry mob and drive sexual predators deeper into hiding, where police may not be able to catch them before they can commit their crimes?

I think that Wired has done the world a big favour in pointing out a way to catch at least some of the less intelligent sexual predators who are poisoning social networking sites. They will be doing us less of a favour by giving lynch mobs the tools they need to go out and visit mob justice on predators and perhaps totally innocent people as well. When police set out to nab a sexual predator one of their tactics is to set up a fake meeting at which they can arrest the person who believes he is about to meet with an underage person. I daresay that a lawless lynch mob is not going to pay such particular attention to the laws of entrapment, and some innocent person could find themselves being dragged from their bed in the middle of the night to have justice vested upon them by people convinced that they are putting a paedophile out of business.

This is an emotive issue - so emotive that I myself could not assure you that if presented with a sexual predator and a baseball bat that I wouldn't be inclined to put two and two together to get five. Mobs and vigilantes tend to be less reflective, and I think that Wired could find itself with innocent as well as guilty blood on its hands if it takes the unnecessary step of releasing this search code to the world at large beyond law enforcement agencies.

In case you missed today's href="http://www.twitchguru.com/2006/10/23/mmr/">Monday Morning Rundown
column on TwitchGuru, Thompson sought to have Bully removed from retail
shelves in Florida. However, Judge Ronald Friedman ruled against Thompson after
viewing the game and declaring that the content was no worse that your basic
television programming. As I wrote in the column, Thompson, believing Judge
Friedman would rule in his favor, was shocked by the court's decision and
expressed his outrage in court by calling out the judge. Then he wrote an href="http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/FL-letter-to-judge.doc">open
letter to Judge Friedman criticizing his decisions and conduct in the trial.
Then Thompson really went after the judge by declaring late last week that he
intended to run for Friedman's seat in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in Miami.

So now Thompson could be faced with another adverse ruling from Judge Friedman,
who he has openly and repeatedly slammed. If Thompson is found in contempt, he
could face a steep fine or even jail time. Now Thompson must go back into court
and explain to Judge Friedman why he shouldn't be held in contempt and muster
some semblance of respect the judge. The chances of that happening are about as
high as John Carmack and John Romero forming another game developer. Stay tuned
for more.

So, did you miss me? (The normal response I get to this question is, "You were away?", but you can just say "Yes.") I always love coming back to the world after falling off of it for a week or so, just to see how fast a pace of life we really live and how quickly things move.

My old shooting buddies Jack Thompson and Dennis McCauley are both, notably, in the news. Jack went and nearly got himself arrested for contempt of court, and I've been reading (and watching, thank you Destructoid) the aftermath with some amusement. It's nice to not have to sit around tapping my fingers waiting for something to happen - the suspense annoys me - and so it's nice to have the whole story thrown out in front of me. Probably why I'm such a history buff.

Poor old Jack, always stirring up trouble. At this point I think that the moral crusade has become a bit farcical now that the impetus given it by Hot Coffeegate way back when (a year ago now, isn't it? Damn, we're getting on...) has run out. It was interesting when Hot Coffeegate broke to see what would happen to the industry as it became politicised. It got kind of strange when everyone up to and including The Sims were getting naked in Jack's book. At this point having rows with judges (not Jack's first) is circus stuff. The problem with the moral high ground is that the air is thinner up there, I think...

Jack's previous arch-nemesis (coming somewhere in-between that accused lesbian opponent in an election race and Judge Dredd this past month) Dennis has sold out to The Man, apparently, and GamePolitics has been merged into the Entertainment Consumers Association. Cue back patting and cynical cat calls in equal measure. Back patting because Dennis has done such a good job at building himself and GamePolitics into the de facto source for video game political news. Cat calling is required from the cynical because, well, the ECA is not an unbiased owner and as much as Dennis might tell us that impartiality will remain the buzzword, where have we heard that before?

I suppose GamePolitics has always been biased, in the sense that it views the world of politics from the gamers perspective, as opposed to the knee-jerk tabloid view of things; but becoming part of an organisation which, as Kotaku pointed out, is out for the consumer but without stepping on the toes of the industry, puts a spin on things which is more complex than "Us and Them."

Still, you never know. As a journalist who has been involved in his fair share of rows over this-and-that, including partiality, I don't like it myself when people simply assume that 2 + 2 = 5, and Dennis may well lead the good ship GP through the waters of partiality without completely mucking things up. At the very least the ECA has bought itself a soapbox, at best GP will have got itself a megaphone without any strings attached.

Well, I'm going to get back to acclimatising myself to the week previous of October 27^th. It's a strange new world...

Fox News Flash: PLAYSTATION PORNABLE!!!! EEEVVVVIIILLLL!!!!!!

So, Fox 29 has wheeled out the plastic newscasters and concerned inflections to have a go at the PlayStation Portable. Apparently you can access pornography on it via the WiFi browser. I Am Personally Shocked And Appalled By This. Watch the video, or allow me to paraphrase.

MALE FOX TYPE: Is the PSP on your kids Christmas list? Well, mmuuuaaahhhaaaa, boy do I have news for you!

FEMALE FOX TYPE: I don't want to ruin anyone's Christmas... it's just that it helps ratings

FEMALE FOX VOICEOVER: Portables are all the rage. Everyone has one... and they're Insidious. You can do more than play football or race cars... and no, I'm not mentioning the violent video games we trashed in our previous video game spot... yet. I want to make this out as a wholesome product before destroying everything you believe in. Mmmmuuuaaaahhhhaaaaa.

This thing is actually a giant porn downloading super-computer!

CONCERNED POLICE OFFICER: Parents can watch their kids in the kitchen, or the living room... but not while they have a mobile PSP. Or, maybe just if they just don't care.

FEMALE FOX VOICEOVER: Pandora's box!!!!! ...Erm, what's a Pandora's box?

[Porno flashes on screen, cue concerned mother strapping in child]

CONCERNED MOTHER: What the hell dude?! This thing can access the internet?!!?!!?! And it's meant for kids???!!!!! Why didn't I read the friggen manual???!?!?!?!?!?!

[Cue kid who looked at porn on his PSP... using school WiFi... wait, no, wait, I think I might just see a way in which that might have been prevented... Nope, there it goes again... let's just get back to Banning This Sick Filth]

APOLOGETIC CHILD: I swear I turned it off right when the naughty pictures flashed up on screen.

INTERNET SECURITY EXPERT: Ohh, it's incredibly easy to find. It's that other evil company, Google. In fact, they're all evil in that technology world.

FEMALE FOX VOICEOVER: The stooges of pornography are even cashing in on porn on the PSP! But erm, and you can stop listening to me now, you need a credit card and actual money to be of any interest to pornographers. But hey, supposing your kid gets a credit card? I mean, you bought them a PSP without thinking of the consequences, why not?

...Ugh, I canne go on. So boring, so clich馘 and so simplified it could only be aimed at an audience of easily frightened parents who will, never the less, go out there and give their kids a piece of technology without understanding how it works or even, apparently, what it can do.

The Entertainment Software Association has set its legal dogs upon game blogs including Kotaku and bits bytes pixels & sprites, sending a Cease & Desist nasty letter over a parody ERSB rating t-shirt, "Your Mom Rated E for Everyone."

Naw, here let me find a dictionary for the ESA, I think sympathy is in there. The entertainment industry voice in North America, which protects us from Jack Thompson (or is just an easy target for a lampooning by him), is also do not forget A Big Evil Corporate Voice - their mission, remember, is "dedicated to serving the business and public affairs interests of companies that publish video and computer games". They're not happy that the ESRB rating is being parodied... but wait, parody is an acceptable art form and doesn't constitute copyright infringement! Hurray for those niggling legalities the ESA heads can ignore whilst making eejits out of themselves.

Big blogs like Kotaku can stand up to this sort of a legal challenge, but smaller one-man blogs are not in such a position (such as bits bytes pixels & sprites); strong-arming does, in fact, work when the person you are going after is too weak to defend themselves, no matter how weak your actual legal hand is.

If there's one thing we learn from major console launches, it is that technology and particularly gaming companies hold their customers in the utmost contempt. Customers are mugs who have money in their pockets, and as far as the gaming industry is concerned it seems to be a crying shame that they actually have to provide you with any product to get it.

Ultimate example: Pre-orders. We've all heard a great deal about these over the past couple of months - "PS3 Pre-orders sell out in seven minutes", "Pre- orders being sold on eBay" and so forth. Really and truly however, pre-orders should be renamed "Non-statuatory expressions of interest and tokens of false hope."

When Nintendo launched the Wii here in Europe yesterday there were many people with pre-orders who have been told that they're not going to get their orders by Christmas; though, paradoxically, any games they may have pre-ordered are now in the post while gamers who did manage to secure a Wii are scouring the country for extra supplies of actual software. We could, quite amusingly, now see games rather than consoles going on-sale on eBay.

One woman who spoke to the Beeb put it quite well: "I pre-ordered the console in November from Woolworths website for my son's Christmas present.

"I received an e-mail today informing me that as Nintendo had not shipped enough I might not receive my order.

"So the fact that I had the foresight to pre-order and not disappoint my son means very little as they obviously expect me to camp outside Woolworths for days on end."

Precisely. A pre-order is not a promise that you'll receive a console - indeed, a pre-order isn't for your benefit. It's something for the sales folk to smile about and send out press releases on the back of, while it's the guys and gals who freeze their nuts and other assorted pieces of fruit off in the December nights camping outside of HMV who get the units. Nobody wins, really, except the people selling the consoles: They know that 9/10 disappointed pre- orderers will pick up the console at a later date.

This might seem like a crazy idea, but how about we make pre-orders stick? That is, if you pre-order in the allotted amount of time, you get a unit. Crazy idea, huh? No camping outside of HMV, on top of your pre-order, and no disappointments at Christmas for those with foresight.

Fat chance, but a nice idea. One day, the consumer will be king. For now, he's just a walking, talking wallet.

The world of Wiki is in uproar after it turned out that Microsoft (and heaven only knows who else, eh?) has been offering money for Wikipedia post edits and creation.

Dun dun dun, company takes advantage of open encyclopedia to further its own neferious ends (breaking no laws, one might add.) Roberto got a bit up in arms about this in the office, but my debate is that if leftie's and rightie's, fanboys and girls and so forth can wage massive debates on the most inane and obvious topics, what's so wrong with Microsoft & Co moving in to help screw Wikipedia up more than it already is?

Wikipedia is useful, in certain circumstances, but if you use it as your sole reference then you deserve what you get. Bias and anti-bias bias; comma naziism; power trips and stupid debates reign supreme. As Le INQ points out, there is currently a thought provoking debate on whether or not the "Everywhere Girl" should have a Wikipedia entry. In other words, they're debating whether a real person of some interesting note actually exists.

It's not right that Microsoft should offer money for Wikipedia edits. It's just not worth sweating about, given that so many unpaid posters have already screwed the online encyclopedia so well.

It's been quite a year for gaming blog Kotaku. First, the site got blackballed by Sony after Kotaku adhered to journalistic principles and refused to cave to Sony's threats regarding the publishing of a PlayStation Home rumor that ultimately proved to be true. Now Kotaku has Jack Thompson on its tail. The Florida lawyer and anti-gaming activist has asked the FBI to investigate Kotaku.

Apparently, Thompson believes the gaming blog is "targeting" him and encouraging its readers to make threats on his life. The day of the Virginia Tech shooting, a Kotaku reader posted a comment on the site suggesting that Thompson "be shot for taking the opportunity to leech off a tragedy to push his own agenda." Ironically, Thompson contacted the FBI after he got owned by Kotaku editor Brian Crecente, who wrote a detailed article dissecting Thompson's claims of a connection between the Virginia Tech shootings and violent video games (as of this moment, there is no connection).

And here's the best part: Crecente, a former newspaper reporter who covered crime and police beats in Denver, contacted some folks he knows over at the local FBI office. Apparently, the FBI isn't ready to put Kotaku on its most wanted list; the agency told Crecente it probably won't even look into the situation. Rather than take the opportunity to bash Thompson for making their lives difficult, Kotaku took the high road and issued a note to readers asking them to refrain from making threats again Thompson. "If nothing else, that makes gamers look like a bunch of immature hotheads," Crecente wrote. And that is yet another reason why Kotaku is one of my favorite gaming sites.

In the case of the Sony flap involving the PlayStation Home report, Sony eventually made up with Kotaku (after the blog made the blackballing public and called out Sony). However, I don't advise anyone to hold their breath and wait for Thompson to make nice with Kotaku.