absolutely wasn't saying sony was good, but, in a practical sense they are going to respond in certain ways to protect their ecosystem/walled-garden like any other. companies are absolutely going to respond if someone puts out an exe that lowers the difficulty of piracy to "script kiddie" levels, because that's a problem for them. and apple absolutely is going to respond if beeper turns imessage spam into an app/cloud service.
is cutting off everyone's motorized-vehicle access to the beach a good thing? no, but, if you get a few idiots who aren't mature enough to avoid doing donuts and tearing things up in public areas, then that's exactly what's going to happen. it is a predictable outcome regardless of whether it's good for the public or not.
again, the point of the comment is that many hobbies ride in "questionable" areas, or are legal but generally in a position of public trust and self-regulation/self-control, and if people misbehave then the trust and privilege will be taken away. it's not really all that complicated, I've literally watched this happen numerous times across various hobbies.
I watched a county remove motor-vehicle access to a national forest because ATVs didn't stop doing donuts and tearing things up. First it was a couple years of the fire trails having bulldozers take a bite out of them so that ATVs couldn't navigate the forest, after people started going around they just flat-out passed an ordinance that banned all non-license-plated vehicles from the forests.
At this point I think the beeper guy probably is welcoming this, he's trying to make a point or political statement, and the hackintosh and opencore communities are kinda in the crossfire. At the end of the day those communities have a lot more to lose than beeper can ever gain - apple is not going to allow third-parties to exploit old binaries and generated serial-numbers to mass-register non-apple devices into imessage at scale, but, they sure as hell can make hackintosh impossible in the process.
if you're interested in those communities, that's how this guy looks - he is the "hacker" who packaged up an existing exploit into a nice neat package and is marketing it to script kiddies at scale, and ruining the hobby for a bunch of people who have enjoyed it for a decade on the down-low. first off that's kind of a douchy thing to do, independent of whether it's legal. nobody likes the guy who says "well ACTUALLY..." when you ask him to stop tearing up the forest and bringing the county down on your heads. secondly it's absolutely putting them at danger of anti-circumvention provisions (and courting that case seems to be the point) and also serves as an enabling factor for actually-illegal activity at scale, like spam and malware.
like yes, you do bear responsibility when you package up an exploit and market it to the general public.
