Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
Are you scared of hackers?
Yes 11%
No 46%
What's a Hacker? 0%
I don't care! 0%
Who cares! 3%
Bring it on, I can take them! 38%

Votes: 26

 What do people have against hackers?

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Dec 16, 2001
Not all hackers are bad, but whoever posted the "Is Your Son A Computer Hacker?" story obviously thinks otherwise... The story at the below listed URL is not entirely true. I'll give it some credit, but it has so many week points.
First off, changing ISPs is not only to get around security measures. Some ISPs just plane suck! Also, you might want to change ISPs to get a faster internet connection, Sprint Broad Band for example. There is some truth in trying to get past security measures, and AOL is extremely good at not letting that happen, but anything is possible with computers, ANYTHING! Second, not all programs show up on the "Install/Remove programs" list. I know how to prevent them from showing up, but it can create some real problems to try to Uninstal the program. Also, Bonzi Buddy, I use it for many things, and have never used it for hacking. I'll admit, it probably can be used for that, but I find it just plain anoying, and deleted it within a week. I would suggest just keeping it away from you children, for sanities sake. Third, I'm constantly updating my computer. A faster video card enables faster game play. More memory increase game speed and loading. Larger Hard drives alows more games to be placed on the computer. The technological world is constantly changing and advancing, and computers require updates. Also, AMD's may be made in a third world country and lack saftey measures, but tell me, how do you program a processor? AMDs run more efficiently than the Pentium 4, but you must NEVER overclock an AMD, they will burn up so fast that it'll be gone before you know it. I personally prefere an AMD, but a 900 Pentium 3 will suffices nicely. Fourth, some hacking books actually have very useful programming techniques for speeding up internet comunication on a game, and making larger files load faster. They are not all bad, but they can teach you a lot. Read the material in the book before freaking out. If your child is into programming, then you have a little less to worry about, I use a book that has some hacking techniques in it for my job, and it hasn't effected me in the least. However, if your child is a programmer, find out what they program. If it has anything to do with SPAMMING or anything to do with non-standard ports, then you have a reason to worry. Fifth, 45 minutes on the computer is nothing. Have you ever tried to have an Tribes2 Tournament in 45 minutes? It's impossible. I spend about 5-6 hours a day on the computer. I keep good grades, and I don't have any brain damage from radiation! The radiation crap is like anthrax, the media makes it sound all big and scary, but in reality, it's below average (or not at all). Newer monitors are designed to lower any radiation output, and if you are suffering from brain damage, you probably don't know how to use the computer anyway. Sixth, Quake is not just a meeting ground for hackers. It is a violent, gorey, fun 3D game. If that's the Quake that the author was talking about. I have played it before, and it is a fast paced 3D action shooter. There's hardly anytime to talk. Worry about them if they're obsessing over the Quake IRC chat. I believe it the server, and only worry if they're not playing a game every-so-often. Also, just because your child plays violent computer games doesn't mean that they're going to shoot someone. I play Unreal Tournament, Quake III, Tribes II, and am helping to program another game, currently known as project Nomad. It is a 3D Action Shooter, and I'm haven't killed anybody yet, except during game play. Seventh, Rising levels of testosterome in young men can make them agressive and disagreeable. This is natural around the teenage years. Every teen hits a rebelious stage in their life, it's just one of those natural things. Take it from me, I've been there. It's not just related to the anti-social computer life, it's just puberty. Girls on the other hand, well, I don't know, go ask a doctor. It probably has something to do with either a falling level of estrigin, or the 'cramps' Eighth, There is a completely legal O/S (Operating System) out called Linux, it may be spelled Lunix, I'm not sure. Linux, however, is a O/S used by hackers, but only because you can costumize it, if you know how to program. It is a handy alternative to Windows, and can be made compatible with most other O/S's. Don't be too worried about them using this O/S, though, if they ask, and don't try to hide what they're doing, then nothing is wrong. Also, you can fix your hardrive by saving anything you want, and just bombing/formatting it. You can completely wipe out everything on your hardrive, except Windows. It's not that hard once you know how. Ninth, During the rebelious stage, many teens will try to dress in a fashion that their parents will not approve of. Don't take it as some radical way to express their hackerdom, just take it as rebelion. Spiky hair is also not a problem, and if your child is coloring his hair like a rainbow you should wory, they're either gay, or mental. Hackers are not all that crazy. Also, if they're wearing pacifiers around their neck, please, see a counselor. Tenth, Academic struggle can just be a lack of study and/or stupidity. If your child is spending too much time on the computer, and not studying, limit his time. If he's just plain stupid, well, that's your problem. Math is a hard class. I program, and have a natural nack for it. If your child is a programmer, and can program well, but is still suffering in math they're just spending too much time on the computer. Also, falling grades can just be a lack of commitment and/or interest in school. You can't judge a book by it's cover. Not all rebelious, stupid, dumb-dressing, programming nerds are hackers. Given, there are a few, but are all blondes stupid? No, don't steriotype anyone for any reason. There is a problem however, when your child has reached the stage called 'nerdvana' and has become one with the computer. They're spending a little too much time infront of the interactive tube. I've reached that stage, but I hide it well, and I will only say that if you're child can hide it well, you'll never see it. Questions, e-mail me at


In comparison to the 3583+ flames posted... (5.00 / 2) (#1)
by elenchos on Sun Dec 16th, 2001 at 11:43:20 PM PST Mr. Gibbons fine article, how you you rank yours? Do you think you have outdone all 3583 of them and written the definitive reply to this fearsome and world-famous article, or do you modestly place your self more towards the middle of the pack, in the neighborhood of the 1500's? Surely you would never post this if you rated your screed below the middle of the pack.

I'm really curious about this.

I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

3583+ comments? (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by because it isnt on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 05:19:46 PM PST
That's an extraordinary amount of comments. If we multiply that by the Adequacy Editor factor (also known as the Adequacy National Socialism factor), that reveals a staggering 22,543 comments were originally posted to the story. -- because it isn't

hackers != crackers (none / 0) (#2)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 01:10:03 AM PST
Iposted this on that lamers post and ill post it here hackers DO NOT break into computers that is crackers

Have a good one.

Title contradicts content (none / 0) (#3)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 02:30:35 AM PST
If, as your title claims, "Hackers!" equals "crackers", why do you insist otherwise in the body of your comment? Perhaps I've misread you. This is not unlikely, since you have dispensed completely with all forms of punctuation.

It doesn't contradict (none / 0) (#11)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 11:58:51 AM PST
the != sign means "isn't equal to"
so bacially he said
hackers aren't crackers
NOT hackers ! are crackers

No, it doesn't (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 01:05:52 PM PST
In mathematics, a boolean "not" is usually represented by a "~". This "!" nonsense must be very obscure, and certainly out of place on a site in which the discussion tends to take place in English.

computer idiot, hush (1.00 / 1) (#16)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 06:33:06 PM PST
in various computer programming languages, != means not equal to, including VB and Java. SORRY YOUR ARE TOO IGNORANT PLEASE GO AWAY!

Ah, that explains it (none / 0) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 01:01:45 AM PST
You're talking in computer language. Why? I'm not a computer. You aren't talking to any computers here. Has it occurred to you that this habit you have of addressing everyone as if they are computers is a symptom of deep seated social anxieties and a rejection of human interaction?

Computer languages aren't so hard... (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 01:59:45 AM PST learn when you want to.

"Bang" ('!' mark) as prefix is used as "not"; != translates as "not equal", !know is "not know". According to my experience, anyone with IQ higher than IQ of a building brick and the tiniest amount of will to learn can master it.

Other symbols have their special meanings as well; ie, '|' is "or".

So the famous Hamlet's quote can be written as:
...and because of the binary arithmetics, the result is FF.

-- The Mad Scientist

Easy or hard... (none / 0) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 03:32:56 AM PST
...there's no reason to replace English with computer languages. English will do fine for talking to people. Save the machine code for the machines, ok?

When I checked last time... (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 06:42:17 PM PST
...the primary role of a language was to serve as transport layer for thoughts. All its other features thus should be subordinate to this function.

Japanese acquires a lot of new words from other languages, mainly English ("sarariman" being one of numerous examples). When there is a missing concept in the original language, or the original language is not effective enough, the most natural thing is to adopt new word, or derive it on-fly.

In some areas, usually technological, so called "human" languages have shortcomings - being it lack of needed concepts, its ability to make sentences with several possible meanings (which can be funny but in real communication it is mostly just confusing), or just needing too many characters or syllables when there is more effective way of expression. Why English shouldn't acquire new words and structures from say C or Lisp, if it will address these faults? English is live, developing language that should be continually adjusted to meet the changing communication needs.

Or it will end as just another dead language, catching dust together with classical Hebrew, Latin, and COBOL.

-- The Mad Scientist

you are a funny man. (none / 0) (#26)
by nathan on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 07:29:28 PM PST
Hebrew as it was spoken ca. 1500 BC is certainly 'dead,' in the sense that no-one from 1500 BC is around any more, but the language itself is alive and well. Latin is no more dead than is Spanish, if you catch my drift, and as for COBOL, there are a whole lot of people making their livings with it.

You make a grave error when you conflate computer 'languages' with human languages. Programming 'languages' are a symbolic layer for human consumption overlying binary code. In other words, a programming language does not convey, nor does it attempt to convey, concepts. It conveys operations. It makes no more sense to say that Lisp is a 'language' than it does to say that about arithmetic.[1]

Unless we're going to start directly manipulating the data structures of our brains, which I devoutly hope will never occur, computer 'languages' are a dead letter in the development of human languages. People use computer 'language'-derived jargon in order to set themselves apart and show off their familiarity with computer programming, and even so it's the most primitive borrowings imaginable.

If, tomorrow, I go over to CS and hear people speaking Lisp, I promise that I will shoot myself in the head.

[1] Yes, I am familiar with Turing, so please don't bother.


PS - English has a perfectly good word for 'not.' It's "not." It even has a perfectly good symbolic-logic symbol for it, "~," which predates electronic computers by two hundred years or so. "!=" is a revolting g**kism.
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

You missed the point. Completely. (none / 0) (#27)
by RobotSlave on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 07:53:35 PM PST
Yes, anyone of adequate intelligence can easily interpret the odd little symbols that you use to communicate with your computer. And the fluidity of living language is not in question here. What we're interested in, Mad Scientist, is you and your emotional deficiencies.

Go back and look at the pedantic explanations of the meanings of your precious little symbol-language. Note that there was no difficulty at all in translating, into plain English, the significance of each and every token. Clearly, we are not looking at a situation in which a word is imported from another language because the primary language lacks a sufficiently similar word.

Why, then, do you insist on using your computers-language when speaking to humans? Your anonymous interlocutor (cough, elenchos? cough) has floated the notion that your rejection of human language in favor of machine language is an expression of social anxiety. This seems reasonable, and you have, interestingly, said nothing to the contrary.

I have a hunch, though, that there is a bit more to it. My clue is your odd definition of language as a "transport layer for thought," when it is abundantly clear that language is much more than a cold conduit whereby utterly independent beings may relay dry theories, if they so choose.

I suspect that you see other human beings in highly mechanistic terms; in effect, you see them as powerful but poorly (or less poorly) programmed computers (ah, but this is a subject for a separate essay). If this is in fact the case, then there is a question that I would really appreciate an answer to: Do you see yourself as a similarly mechanistic entity, or do you instead view your own emotions as the only ones in the world that are not the result of indifferent mechanistic processes?

Your answer would be most illuminating.

© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

Yes, but... (none / 0) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Dec 19th, 2001 at 09:50:46 PM PST
Go back and look at the pedantic explanations of the meanings of your precious little symbol-language. Note that there was no difficulty at all in translating, into plain English, the significance of each and every token.

Absolutely true. However, it isn't exactly true the other way. English's major drawback is the absence of structures that would rule out by design the possibility of multiple meanings. Accurate translation from symbolics to English is always possible. Translation from English to symbolics is often highly problematic (ie, when you say 'or', do you mean OR or XOR?). (Same problems are often faced when translating between two "human" languages as well. I read many articles that gave sense only after translating them back to English. A German friend reported same experiences so it is not limited to my language.)

My clue is your odd definition of language as a "transport layer for thought," when it is abundantly clear that language is much more than a cold conduit whereby utterly independent beings may relay dry theories, if they so choose.

I should clarify a little. By "thought" I meant any "mental image", being it theory of relativity, a poem, or an instruction how to make the VCR stop displaying that blinking 12:00. What other functions language has than both realtime (spoken, or Unix "talk") and offline (written) exchange of mental images?

Do you see yourself as a similarly mechanistic entity, or do you instead view your own emotions as the only ones in the world that are not the result of indifferent mechanistic processes?

Considering that by stimulation (ie, electrical) of certain areas of brain (limbic system) you can cause emotions, and that emotional responses are heavily impaired or even entirely missing when there are lesions or injuries of these areas, I have strong reasons to suppose that emotions are more mechanistic than is commonly believed. (I don't understand why I should be any exception?)[1]
Regarding the poor/non-poor programming, judging the level of poorness is highly subjective and I will refrain from it. This topic will be clearer after explaining how consciousness works. (I read something about coherent quantum states in networks of neurons, but my quantum physics knowledge sucks so I hadn't understood it well, and it was long ago.)
Regarding the significance of being of mechanistic nature - imagine someone from 100-200 years ago (or not familiar with technology) talking with the most modern natural-language conversation system (ie, Julia, ELIZA, HAL), unaware it is a machine. Will he later consider it a dead mass of metal and silicon, or will he assign it supernatural features, ie. demon posession? To quote A.C. Clarke (hope I'll not botch it): Sufficiently evolved technology is virtually indistinguishable from magic.
After all - when the structures of brain will be copied to electronic circuits, including the functional blocks responsible for consciousness, will there still be meaningful functional differences, beyond the implementation details (fed with electricity instead of glucose, etc.)? Will there be reasons to keep those two forms of "life" in strictly separated categories? What when these two will get merged into a human-computer unit?

The Mad Scientist

[1] - All animals display emotional states. Even insect can act agitated, which could be considered emotional state. There are even tests with simulated emotional states for computers and computer-controlled robots, and detection of emotions of the operators (so called "affective computing").

Not always.... (none / 0) (#14)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 02:34:18 PM PST
Hackers sometimes crack, but only for the challenge. The major difference between hackers and crackers is

Hackers do things for fun, for the experience, without malicious intent.

Crackers do things to destroy, to ruin, and WITH malicious intent.

I crack things all the time, but I don't destroy the systems when I leave, I just cover my traxx.

Just one word... (none / 0) (#4)
by Lint on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 02:48:36 AM PST

Other than that, I have nothing against hackers. That's what firewalls are for--though I'm sure some here would categorize them as the personal computing tool of Satan. ;)

Your denial is beneath you, and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs, I see through you. Bill Hicks

If you know nothing about computer, don't speak... (none / 0) (#5)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 03:33:47 AM PST
This article is totaly BS, AMD is NOT and 3rd world base company, it is an PURE Blood nice big eagle american company. Both Intel and AMD made their CPU in your so call 3rd world, but have you been to these 3rd world contries? (Malaysia and Thailand?) now the world tallest building are in Malaysia, and world 5th tallest building are in Thailand. Not to mention 3 out of 10 richest man in the world are from these countries.

Another point on AMD is that their CPU will burn up without a heat extractor either overclocked or NOT. It is just the way it was designed, so live with it.

Bonzi Buddy CAN NOT be used as a hacking tool you dum ass... the only way you HACK is either by overflow exe or brute force crack. Both of them require a port scanner. Which AOL does NOT protect you nor limite you from doing so. After reading your article, it really makes me wonder if you know anything about computer / hacking or not.

The final point is that no HACKER you so called use Linux as the OS for Hacking, it is just another kind of OS, tell you something, Linux gives you more protection toward Hacker than the Windows. Linux is widely used under industrial standard, Yahoo use Linux and Apache server to host their Website, so does IBM, CNN, NBC, even FBI and CIA...

So, please STOP your BS and go read some book...

World's tallest building (none / 0) (#6)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 03:45:56 AM PST
All five of the world's tallest buildings are TV towers in the US of A. Perhaps you need to do some more research? Your post was full of similar factual errors.

Not quite (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 05:42:42 AM PST
World's tallest buildings. Only one of the top five is in the US. The two tallest buildings are in India and China. Malaysia has one in third, but there are no Thailand buildings in the top 100.

Nope (none / 0) (#20)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 01:07:09 AM PST
You're probably restricting the field to inhabited buildings. This is a cynical attempt to play down the superior architecture of the USA. all five of the world's tallest buildings are uninhabited TV towers. All five are in the USA. If you are going to start arbitrarily redefining "building" and "tall", we'll end up arguing about things as irrelevant as highest inhabited floors. Best to keep it simple, I think.

AMD feeds the poor (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 07:34:57 AM PST
I don't think it was Malaysia the story talked about, the AMD processors are only assembled there. The actual fabrication takes place in 3rd world sweatshops.

However, this is not such a bad thing, it brings in much needed investments and hich-tech jobs to the poor and suffering in Texas and Germany. Remember, most of them have no jobs at all, the people in AMDs sweatshops are the lucky ones!

WRONG!!! (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 07:31:16 PM PST
Linux is widely used under industrial standard, Yahoo use Linux and Apache server to host their Website

Yahoo runs on freeBSD.

Thank-you (none / 0) (#23)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 12:55:56 PM PST
Thank-you for not being a shit head like some of the people who responded to your post.

Nobody has anything against hackers (none / 0) (#7)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 04:36:42 AM PST
Especially not here. I don't understand where you're getting this idea about hacker-dislike from.

Hackers/Crackers (none / 0) (#10)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 11:28:36 AM PST
ok kiddies.. obviously somebody has to set you straight.. number one.. the media lies.. yes thats right, actually they dont like.. they are just morons who dont know anything about what they think their talking about...

Hackers=people who A.write/rewrite programs to run faster, or to enhance what they do.. EG removing timers on trial versions.. ETC.

crackers=people who rule the internet.. from hacking webpages to r00ting j00 box its them.. everone seems to think that crackers are bad.. maybe they are, but then again maybe they arent.. but i dont give a fuck what people thinka bout me so it dont matter..

and third

Carders=god.. dont fuck with carderz.. cuz we 0wn and .. fuck off if yous dont like us.. btw.. #1 sign your kids a carder.. he wants to move to romania/other foreign country that doesn have carding lawz.. or not strict ones..

duckmann=your god

irc=kicks ass

come and visit me on DaL.nET

good job. (none / 0) (#12)
by nathan on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 12:33:49 PM PST
Mr. Gibbons tells me that he's forgiven his son, coloured his own hair, bought an AMD, learned pearl, started h4x0r1ng your b0x3n, watching hentai porn, taking drugs, and spanking into a sock, and he's never been happier in his life!

Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

amd chips (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Dec 18th, 2001 at 02:05:45 PM PST
i figured i'd flame on this since no one else has -P
amd chips kick all ass. you can overclock those as long as you want (as long as you don't have a crappy heatsink/fan and proper voltage going to it..coupled with a good motherboard) and you won't have problems. to see some proof of the chip in action, you only need to see reviews of it...i'd say go to and check out any of their reviews on the newest AMD processor called the "Athlon XP" has a confusing name and rating system for how powerful the chip is when compared to Intel processors, but that's only because there're so many people out there that think AMD is practically the devil's tool. and as for the chips being manufactured in sweatshops by 12 year old children...THATS IMPOSSIBLE. MACHINES DO IT. bloody idiots...they need highly controlled environments to assemble these things because they're so small (they use a manufacturing process somewhere in the region of .15 microns...really damn small). also, Intel is the one lying to you. They actually DECREASED the performance on their chips just so they could get higher Mhz (operations per second).
anyways...enough of my ranting.. go to this place for a full review of the newest AMD chip, the Athlon XP 1900+


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to