Really? I updated and it transformed into a waffle. How odd.No your 3DS turns into a pancake.
Not entirely true since entry points that were patched after 9.9 are being explored. The general rule is NEVER update unless your updating to an already exploitable fw version.It's fine to update to 10.1 if your already on or above 9.3.
If you read that thread it was debunked....Not entirely true since entry points that were patched after 9.9 are being explored. The general rule is NEVER update unless your updating to an already exploitable fw version.
I'm aware. What I'm saying is that before that thread was made we didn't even know there was a possibility for a new exploit for 9.9. So we don't know what else was patched between 9.x and 10.x. devs may have shit they havent shared yet. it is still always safer to maintain the lowest exploitable firm.If you read that thread it was debunked....
Well we do know what was patched and all of it is useless. You can check 3DBrew. BTW, that (debunked) exploit was only ARM11 kernel. He was gonna have you downgrade for ARM9. If you're on n3DS and above 9.6 you can't downgrade anyway.I'm aware. What I'm saying is that before that thread was made we didn't even know there was a possibility for a new exploit for 9.9. So we don't know what else was patched between 9.x and 10.x. devs may have shit they havent shared yet. it is still always safer to maintain the lowest exploitable firm.
Already been debunked by multiple credible people like Steveice10.I'm gonna laugh if there suddenly is an 9.9 exploit, but not for 10.1 XD That's why I'm not updating. Nope. Never.
Again, that was only one possible exploit. Who's to say there won't be signiture patching for <9.9 out of nowhere like the Pastebin that fathered pasta?Well we do know what was patched and all of it is useless. You can check 3DBrew. BTW, that (debunked) exploit was only ARM11 kernel. He was gonna have you downgrade for ARM9. If you're on n3DS and above 9.6 you can't downgrade anyway.
Already been debunked by multiple credible people like Steveice10.
Well if we already know that everything patched in 10.0 was useless, then any kernel hack would be using an entrypoint that wasn't patched in 10.0 and thus would work.Again, that was only one possible exploit. Who's to say there won't be signiture patching for <9.9 out of nowhere like the Pastebin that fathered pasta?
And if the yellows, smea, etc have an arm9 exploit you can be sure they won't share it. But that's not to say it can't be leaked. Again like pasta.
I mean, you do what you want. Updating only limits possibilities. I've personally learned, as a rule, not to update and it's always served me well.
Because you fully understand every aspect of each function that was patched, and without a doubt know exactly how they work and why they aren't exploitable. Or because those with a reputation of with-holding information related to any possibility of piracy says so.Well if we already know that everything patched in 10.0 was useless, then any kernel hack would be using an entrypoint that wasn't patched in 10.0 and thus would work.
Well one's already been proven true. Plus, it's always been "fully functional 3DS > kernel hack" to me.Because you fully understand every aspect of each function that was patched, and without a doubt know exactly how they work and why they aren't exploitable. Or because those with a reputation of with-holding information related to any possibility of piracy says so.
View attachment 26846
There's the missing piece. So if op prefers eshop over possibility of exploit, then update. Which I assume isnt the case since he asked if it was 'safe'. You could have just said that instead of arguing the pointlessness of not updating, which is misinformation at this point.Well one's already been proven true. Plus, it's always been "fully functional 3DS > kernel hack" to me.
Well jimmy the pancake got a girlfriend waffle...Really? I updated and it transformed into a waffle. How odd.
Not really, it's not like his 3DS is gonna burst into flames if he updates. It's going to work exactly like it does now.There's the missing piece. So if op prefers eshop over possibility of exploit, then update. Which I assume isnt the case since he asked if it was 'safe'. You could have just said that instead of arguing the pointlessness of not updating, which is misinformation at this point.