So a lot of people here seem to fall into two categories: - shaming developers who don't release exploits, call them childish - shaming people who want a release (whiners), call them childish And I think we've got a bit of this going on: http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2939 That is, outside of the loud, obnoxious people, there are valid opinions that can be had here. Yet due to those very people, both sides view the other side as somewhat toxic. There's two worlds: 1. Exploit is released to the public Pros: - People can use the exploit on at least 5.5.1 - Developers without the exploit can use it to develop homebrew/wii u sdk apps - Developers interested in exploiting can learn from it and potentially help exploit in the future - Kernel homebrew can be run on store-bought Wii U's - Builds the "community" Cons: - Nintendo would definitely have the exploit and could patch in a future release - It's been held private for this long, might as well keep waiting (don't make the waiting pointless) 2. Exploit is kept private until another exploit is public Pros: - The (rumored to be very stable) kernel exploit can be used in the future - With a future deeper exploit (such as IOSU) it would be very useful to have a stable kernel entrypoint - People who are "in the know" can technically request access to further their understanding now - Nintendo can't easily patch it if it's not released - Potentially builds the long-term "community" Cons: - If a new private exploit came about and followed this same logic, neither would be public - Latest Wii U firmware is not exploitable - Developers who could request access might not want to, as they would prefer it be available to all Assumptions made: - There is only one 5.5.1 kernel exploit that works - That exploit is stable - That exploit would be perfect for deeper level playing later - Nintendo would actively patch the exploit These are not the only arguments that can be made, and there are surely more factors at work here. These are some of the most popular "valid" points that I've seen be made by both sides. I'd like this thread to be an argument. But I'd also like the argument to focus solely around these pros/cons/assumptions (or new VALID ones). No whining or calling the other side childish. I have the impression that a lot of developers that have the kernel exploit are more quiet than not quiet because anything that they say can be a lightning rod for flamers. This is a "safe space" in that regard. But please, let your opinion be known.