Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
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 It is no longer maintained.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.
Poll
When someone says the word "hacker", what do you think of?
A terrorist who uses computers to makes terrorist attacks. 0%
A violent sociopath. 0%
A teenager who enjoys destroying other people's computers. 99%
Someone who possesses an abnormally high affinity with computers. 0%
Other 0%

Votes: 50138

 Hacker Culture and its Misportrayal by Media and Government

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
May 29, 2002
 Comments:
I find that the average person has a large misconception of what hacker is, which is due to both the media and the government. The media portrays hackers as teenagers with some knowledge of computers, who enjoy sending people viruses, crashing websites, and breaking into people's computers using trojan horses. We call people who do that, crackers. The media portrays us as people who have nothing to do with our time except mess with other people's computers, which is far from the truth. The government claims that we steal sensitive information from them and are a risk to national security. The media couldn't be further from the truth....

[Editorial Note] We receive quite a large number of stories like this in the submission queue. Normally they are quickly put aside, and often are not even read by any of the staff. But for some indescribable reason this one seems special; the chaff of the chaff, if you will. Enjoy.

[editor's note, by em] Which reminds me that you should all thank us, the editors of this site, from shielding you from "stories" like this day after day.

[editor's note, by dmg] I would just like to make it known that several other adequacy editors and I vehemently opposed the posting of this clueless article. On behalf of myself and these other editors, I offer my sincerest apologies, and suggest you simply ignore this moronic pile of drivel.

[editor's note, by em] I am starting to think that this story is a "troll", and that many of the comments herein also are so. As thus, I am pondering removing it from the site. After all, Adequacy has a strict anti-trolling policy, and I would hate to see it violated. I still have to make up my mind whether it is really a troll before I do it.

elitism

More stories about Elitism
What a bunch of elitist indie kids
Memoirs of an Ex-Southpaw: a Report from the Trenches
Arrested Development (Part One): Saving the Human Race
The Real Darwin Awards
Harnessing the Computational Power of Autism
AOL - The Saviour of the Internet
The rise of pseudo-connoisseurship and beer
The Democratization of Status. Rap music is to blame.
Are you Adequate?
Celebrating 2000 Years of British Achievement
It's Time We Rounded Up Rich White Males
Why I want to be an American Citizen
God Bless you your Majesty, adequacy.org salutes you!
Engineers, the silent, Anti-Social Killers
It is totally against the beliefs of a true hacker to harm people's computers. Those people that send around all the viruses and crash all those websites are NOT considered to be hackers by actual hackers. They themselves claim to be hackers because they think it's cool ( due to movies they've seen ). Also, the primary goal of a hacker is to learn everything possible in one's lifetime; to know everything, so almost all of a hacker's actions are based around the principal of learning something. Using a trojan horse is not in anyway educational, so real hackers do not use them, unless it's one they made themselves. Hackers also have a general hatred of authority. Authority is used to control people and control what they think, which hackers believe is "evil". Therefore, hackers will try to disrupt authoritarian environments as much as possible. That is why so many hackers are seen as anarchists. That is also why the government does not like hackers. It's because the government knows that hackers are able to truly keep them in check without much reprisal ( only about 5% of hackers are actually caught ). Hackers also believe that being bored is bad to the point of being almost evil. Doing anything that is boring or repetitive means that they are wasting time they could be using to learn something or share their knowledge. About the only exception to doing repetitive things is maybe a mind-clearing exercise or to try to learn a new skill.

Hackers, in accordance with the goal of learning as much as possible, believe that information should be free. This means that hackers believe that all intellectual property should be free and accessible to anyone who wants it. That is why hackers are some of the main opposition against Microsoft, which sells it's software for prices, which are totally insane, while manipulating people into paying for their products by making them "easy to use". However, Microsoft products often seem to be geared so much towards ease-of-use that they loose their functionality. Meanwhile, open-source software, which was started by hackers, is dirt cheap ( often downloadable for free ), and has higher quality than most commercial software. When most commercial software has a bug, it takes the company years sometimes to make a patch to fix it, and then the company charges people for the patch. OSS software is usually patched within three days of the problem being discovered, and is free to have patched. Due to the way corporations cheat people, hackers generally hate big business. This is one of the reasons that hackers tend to build their own custom computers and write their own software ( which they distribute for free ). The goal is to out companies like Microsoft, Symantec, Adobe, and McAfee out of business. Bill Gates is not seen in a good light by hackers. Almost all of the code for his programs is stolen from other companies. Bill just renames a few things, slaps a Microsoft label on it, and sells it for five times what it's worth. His company also releases products which they know have flaws in them, and wait to fix the problems with them until someone complains.

One aspect of hacker culture that has been studied for years is the elitist attitude of hackers. Hackers are a very tight group, and it's hard to get in with them, except the occasional public board or internet chat. Many people see this as us trying to exclude people from our knowledge, or just being mean. There are reasons that we are so tight though. We constantly have to worry about the FBI monitoring us, wannabes who think of hacking like crackers do ( we don't want to give them the knowledge to become a cracker ), and media reporters ( they are highly annoying ). We usually try to keep such people away from us by hiding that we are hackers. In cases in which that does not work, there have been more forceful methods used, such as banning people from our chat rooms ( that's why we use IRC so much; we can ban people ). There are some of us that go overboard that try to scare people away, using anything from faked mail to crashing their computer, but these "extremists" are generally looked down on by hackers. An aspect of our culture that makes a lot of people mad is that we generally have an intolerance of people with a lesser intelligence and look down on such people. We look at the matter in terms of "if people would try to learn, then they wouldn't be stupid, therefore stupid people are lazy". While that may not be fair, neither are the ideas that the general population has about us.

Something that is commonly commented on about hackers is that many of us do not have many real life friends. People just assume that we are anti-social or "geeks" or something because we don't talk to many people in real life. However, we do talk to a lot of people online. People will say that we talk to people online because we can't handle talking to real people, in person. The interesting thing is, among us there is no racism, sexism, religious persecution, or judgments based on appearance. The only way we can find out enough information about each other to have those reactions to people is if we voluntarily give out that information. Whereas in "real-life", there is all sorts of persecution, simply because people are able to actually see and touch each other. Among us, all that really matters is your mind ( and maybe your spelling and typing skills ).

Hackers, despite their goal of attaining knowledge, often have an extreme dislike for school. Our idea is that "Why should we go to school for 8 hours, when we can learn the same thing on the internet in 2 hours?". In many cases, hackers are much more intelligent than their teachers, and many have the knowledge to take the teacher's jobs. In fact, at the time of writing this, I am teaching the computer class at my school, and I am only sixteen years old. As far as school goes, hackers fit into two basic categories, slackers or over-achievers. Those who fall into the slacker category are there because they find school so boring ( because they know all the material already ), that they can't concentrate on it. Then there are the over-achievers that surpass the rest of their class. The over-achievers generally do this with the actual intention of trying to get other people to follow the example ( reducing the amount of stupid people in the world ), or in some case, to make the teachers look bad, as they often surpass the teacher, which leads to correcting the teacher and arguing with them over the class material.

The government generally seems to hate hackers. Most of the time a hacker is caught, the government makes an example out of them to try to scare other hackers. A perfect example is the way that the government treated Kevin Mitnick; basically ruining his life. The reason that the government is so afraid of hackers is that hackers generally dislike the government, and hackers are the only group in the United States that could successfully make an attack on the government or start a revolution without much effort or fear of reprisal. The government relies on computers, especially the military, and hackers have the ability to take away those computers or control them, thus crippling or controlling the government. While no hacker has ever done that, the government is so afraid that is will happen that they want to expunge the country of hackers. What they fail to realize is that other countries have a lot of hackers too, and many of those countries hire them to make "cyber warfare" on other countries. The United States government is not equipped to deal with that kind of threat, so the hackers of the United States end up being the only real defense. Removing us from the country would leave the United States wide open to attack. The government claims to have an info war facility in Washington DC that is for dealing with these sorts of attacks. If that is the case, then why is it that people, in our own country, are able to repeatedly break into government computers, sometimes without even being detected? It is because of this that most attacks against government computers are not reported and are often covered up by the government itself.

To get rid of hackers, the government has tried to use propaganda to persuade the public to believe that all hackers are just like the crackers mentioned at the beginning of this paper. They do this by only reporting the bad things that have happened due to crackers and hackers. Most people are unaware that most of the computer technology we have was invented by hackers. Steve Wozniak, the founder of Apple Computers, is a self-professed hacker. The people that made the internet accessible to everyone were hackers. They took the control of it from the universities and government. Hackers are the people that brought high-level encryption to the public, providing privacy online, and the people who blew the whistle on the NSA's civilian surveillance system called ECHELON. Hackers are for the people and for the good of the world, and the government wants to deprive the world of us?
I hope that this paper has at least shown the viewpoint of hackers to the reader, if not brought them over to the side of hackers.

       
Tweet

Brilliant, utterly brilliant. (1.00 / 1) (#7)
by Lysidas on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 07:52:30 PM PST
Finally something worth commenting on. Well-written, informative, and, surprisingly, correct. I have nothing more to say about this masterpiece.
Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes.

It was more precious than a baby's rosy cheeks. (1.00 / 1) (#13)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 10:48:52 PM PST
Attn: kurobots. I am not referring to spanking baby bottoms, which is merely 4th behind circumcision. Please dont write an article about this comment.


 
And this is from the guy who violates agreements (1.00 / 1) (#59)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 11:03:09 AM PST
You can't listen to Lysidas, he can't even follow his AT&T license agreement. He knowingly violated. I think AT&T should prosecute.


 
I don't get it. (1.00 / 1) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 08:21:40 PM PST
Looks to me like the standard pre-teen techie-wannabe diatribe. Could you highlight the portions that won't make my eyes bleed?

--Anonymous Reader #24601


 
More liberalist tripe. (4.00 / 2) (#9)
by mfk on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 09:34:19 PM PST
Having been a longtime resident of Adequacy.org, I must ask what crack the editors were smoking when they rejected my well-written military submission in favor of this. I will disembowel this 'troll', piece by piece.

Hackers, in accordance with the goal of learning as much as possible, believe that information should be free. This means that hackers believe that all intellectual property should be free and accessible to anyone who wants it.

Very well, sir. How about you post your credit card numbers and Social Security Number for all to see? After all, information should be free?

That is why hackers are some of the main opposition against Microsoft, which sells it's software for prices, which are totally insane, while manipulating people into paying for their products by making them "easy to use".

Evidently, you have no concept of how to run a business. Windows XP is well worth the $400 I spent on it; that $400 is a further incentive to Microsoft to produce Windows Longhorn, which will further accelerate the 3D graphics industry.

However, Microsoft products often seem to be geared so much towards ease-of-use that they loose their functionality.

Baloney. If you have spent more than five minutes working with a Microsoft product, you would have learned that Microsoft products are fast, stable, and powerful enough for the power user.

Meanwhile, open- source software, which was started by hackers, is dirt cheap ( often downloadable for free ), and has higher quality than most commercial software. When most commercial software has a bug, it takes the company years sometimes to make a patch to fix it, and then the company charges people for the patch. OSS software is usually patched within three days of the problem being discovered, and is free to have patched.

You hackers are all alike; how soon we forget the Linux VM fiasco, which once again proves the inferiority of Open Sauce. The fact that people cannot agree on what goes in /dev and what goes in /opt or whatever leads to 5000 different versions of an Open Sores program, all incompatible with each other. Open Sores programs are patched frequently - too frequently, that is. And heaven forbid the user should EASILY install the patch

Due to the way corporations cheat people, hackers generally hate big business. This is one of the reasons that hackers tend to build their own custom computers and write their own software ( which they distribute for free ). The goal is to out companies like Microsoft, Symantec, Adobe, and McAfee out of business.

It is here that I must object to this article once again. The poster is clearly part of a terrorist organization; he even clearly states that a hacker's goal is to drive stolid all-American companies out of business. Furthermore, he advocates building cobbled-together computers, which further raise support costs for these noble companies.

Bill Gates is not seen in a good light by hackers. Almost all of the code for his programs is stolen from other companies. Bill just renames a few things, slaps a Microsoft label on it, and sells it for five times what it's worth. His company also releases products which they know have flaws in them, and wait to fix the problems with them until someone complains.

Bill Gates has revolutionised computing as we know it. Had he not come along, we would still be fighting incompatibilities between a Commodore 1024GB and a Altair Z1000. These allegations that Mr. Gates has stolen code are clearly untrue; all of Microsoft's technology is legally licensed. Perhaps a few knock-off companies have successfully sued Microsoft - but the only reason said companies have won against Microsoft is because of the injustice caused by the legal system.

It is clearly obvious you have not paid a visit to Windows Update; but your general ignorance of Windows cannot be admitted in this article!

One aspect of hacker culture that has been studied for years is the elitist attitude of hackers. Hackers are a very tight group, and it's hard to get in with them, except the occasional public board or internet chat. Many people see this as us trying to exclude people from our knowledge, or just being mean. There are reasons that we are so tight though. We constantly have to worry about the FBI monitoring us, wannabes who think of hacking like crackers do ( we don't want to give them the knowledge to become a cracker ), and media reporters ( they are highly annoying ). We usually try to keep such people away from us by hiding that we are hackers. In cases in which that does not work, there have been more forceful methods used, such as banning people from our chat rooms ( that's why we use IRC so much; we can ban people ). There are some of us that go overboard that try to scare people away, using anything from faked mail to crashing their computer, but these "extremists" are generally looked down on by hackers. An aspect of our culture that makes a lot of people mad is that we generally have an intolerance of people with a lesser intelligence and look down on such people. We look at the matter in terms of "if people would try to learn, then they wouldn't be stupid, therefore stupid people are lazy". While that may not be fair, neither are the ideas that the general population has about us.


Many criminal organizations exhibit the same characteristics that hacker organizations do. Elitism, secrecy - you say "Information should be free" but you refuse to release that information to whoever is 'below' you. Perhaps you should re-examine yourself and the mantra you're preaching, preferably with a good whack on the head to boot.

Something that is commonly commented on about hackers is that many of us do not have many real life friends. People just assume that we are anti-social or "geeks" or something because we don't talk to many people in real life. However, we do talk to a lot of people online. People will say that we talk to people online because we can't handle talking to real people, in person. The interesting thing is, among us there is no racism, sexism, religious persecution, or judgments based on appearance. The only way we can find out enough information about each other to have those reactions to people is if we voluntarily give out that information. Whereas in "real-life", there is all sorts of persecution, simply because people are able to actually see and touch each other. Among us, all that really matters is your mind ( and maybe your spelling and typing skills ).

This is perhaps the funniest paragraph in the entire article. In the previous paragraph, he defends his elitist attitude, but now he says there is no racism or sexism among hackers. Hackers are all pimply-faced teens in their parents' basement using Mommy's cable connection to DoS upstanding sites. If you mention you are a female, you are almost certain to be stalked by some sex-crazed hacker who hasn't got laid yet. If you mention you are black, you're automatically excluded, hackers are white males only.

Hackers, despite their goal of attaining knowledge, often have an extreme dislike for school. Our idea is that "Why should we go to school for 8 hours, when we can learn the same thing on the internet in 2 hours?". In many cases, hackers are much more intelligent than their teachers, and many have the knowledge to take the teacher's jobs. In fact, at the time of writing this, I am teaching the computer class at my school, and I am only sixteen years old.

Evidently, you need a good whack on the bottom with a paddle, or perhaps a good beating had corporal punishment not been outlawed. This only further proves that ignorant teenagers are taking over our public schools; hell, I'll bet you don't even have a lesson plan, you just adlib while the rest of the class either sleeps or plays Solitaire.

Furthermore, this only proves my previous truth that hackers are all pimply-faced teenagers. While you may have a general proficiency with computers, can you tell me which chemicals combine to form disodium inosinate? Can you tell me who Xerxes is, or who won the Battle of Hastings? These are all very important blocks in a basic education, none of which can be accomplished by playing Quake all day

The government generally seems to hate hackers. Most of the time a hacker is caught, the government makes an example out of them to try to scare other hackers. A perfect example is the way that the government treated Kevin Mitnick; basically ruining his life. The reason that the government is so afraid of hackers is that hackers generally dislike the government, and hackers are the only group in the United States that could successfully make an attack on the government or start a revolution without much effort or fear of reprisal. The government relies on computers, especially the military, and hackers have the ability to take away those computers or control them, thus crippling or controlling the government. While no hacker has ever done that, the government is so afraid that is will happen that they want to expunge the country of hackers. What they fail to realize is that other countries have a lot of hackers too, and many of those countries hire them to make "cyber warfare" on other countries. The United States government is not equipped to deal with that kind of threat, so the hackers of the United States end up being the only real defense. Removing us from the country would leave the United States wide open to attack. The government claims to have an info war facility in Washington DC that is for dealing with these sorts of attacks. If that is the case, then why is it that people, in our own country, are able to repeatedly break into government computers, sometimes without even being detected? It is because of this that most attacks against government computers are not reported and are often covered up by the government itself.

Mr. Mitnick has been convicted of wire fraud; there is no excuse for breaking into other peoples' computers. You hackers forget Operation Sundevil, which was a little sting to show you hackers that the government is not your 'toy' to do with as you please - hell, you hackers got your reprisal with Operation Sundevil. No sir, Uncle Sam will not be deterred even if hackers had crashed the AT&T phone network. The United States Army invented computer security as we know it; 4096-bit encryption is considered military-grade for a REASON, you know

Again, I must object. The subtitle of Adequacy clearly states "News for GROWN-UPS. This preteen is not welcome here.


Wow.. (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by DG on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 10:13:35 PM PST
Your lack of understanding of pc history and the legal system astounds me.

Question, have you been visiting richmond? Becuse that would be the only reason you would post their lies. This case in point you can not tell me that bill gates revolutionised computing, that pure propaganda to the highest digree. Apple started it, then ibm came out with their pc and compaq reverse engineered it so they could sell the hardware. All MS did was follow in IBM's wake and snatch the market from ibm, when they came up on monopoly charges.

Seems to me you know nothing about how microsoft makes money. They don't make money via someone going to the store and buying it, they make it through contracts and licences and OEM dealers.

Linux does have problems, but you seem to be stuck in this idea that linux wants to work like a software firm. which if you read about it, it does not. By the way look at personal information as the only thing we don't want free. There are digrees even in free info and personal info is one of them.


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

a few things (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by detikon on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 10:59:46 PM PST
This article seems more to me to have been written by a wannabe or some confused individual. All information should be free? No not ALL of it. Ass for the credit card crack someone made in another post it's called Right to Privacy. How would you like it if someone tried to sell you a car but wouldn't tell you a damn thing about it?

As for DG and mfk...you're both confused. The gist of it is, is that a company (A) would develop a product and license it to another company (B) package, market, sell and provide support. This isn't the only way it was done. The licensing could be open or restrictive such as require any improvements from company B to be resubmitted back to company A.

Company A could also sell a version of the software. While Bs may be user friendly and easy to use, As would be feature rich, compact and fast.

There are a lot of companies that still do this. Some do things that are somewhere in between. Microsoft on the other hand is an evil player. They love software under BSD style licenses (they reall hate the GPL because of this and it should show they really can't right better code).

Note: If you were ever to see the Windows code you'd think it was sloppy and absolute crap. Bill Gates even admitted during the second stage of the ongoing antitrust trial that the Windows code base has become sloppy and bloated.

Microsoft has licensed code before in the old days and done some good buy it. It licensed Unix code (Xenix) and turned around and licensed it to SCO now owned by Caldera. Part of the agreement keeps MS from ever releasing a Unix. However, it does not prevent them from release a Unix-like (ie *BSD, Linux). It only prevents them from developing a Unix-variant (AIX, HP-UX, Solaris).

MS has done a great deal of back stabbing. One such case is Kerberos. The agreement allowed MS to implement Kerberos into the NT code base in exchange for increased development and/or funding as well as some information sharing. MS later turned around and told them to fuck off.

Microsoft has also been known to blatantly steal (ie DoubleSpace) and even dare companies to sue them (Go). They then watched as the would-be competitor went bankrupt from legal fees. Sometimes however it has come back to bite them in the ass (Stacker--DoubleSpace and Sun Microsystems -- Java).

Oh a special note for Yoshi. IE is based on Mosaic. Don't believe me? Open IE and Click Help >> About Internet Explorer. You'll find something interesting about the web broswer that has become integrated up the yin-yang.
Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Distributed under a licensing agreement with Spyglass, Inc.





Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
too much $$$ (4.00 / 1) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 01:36:08 AM PST
You spent $400 for Windows XP? I can get the full version of Home Edition for $200 and Professional for $300 at Best Buy. The upgrade are $99 and $199 repectively.

Next Longhorn isn't about 3d anything. It's about further tying in .NET crap to the Windows desktop. Sorry but anything multimedia is always better done on a Mac.

As for incompatibilities maybe you should research the Linux Standard Base (LSB). As far as your comment regarding the Commodore and the Altair Microsoft did little for either platform. Do you even know how the Altair worked? MS wrote BASIC for the thing. Also I give credit to Compaq who reverse engineered the IBM-BIOS. Bill Gates has a selective memory. Everyone was already doing this stuff or getting ready to when he asked "wouldn't it be neat to...?" Someone just said "yeah" so he takes the credit now.

Now let's talk about the companies that sued Microsoft. So you think it's ok for Microsoft to license Java for Windows and make it in compatible completely violating the license agreement? So much for the company that loves to rant about how we should adhere to licenses. Yeah theirs.

Last but not leasat MS releases on average about 15-20 patches per month. You may think your only downloading 3 (consisting of 20MB) but you''re wrong. Upon closer examination we find those are only categories. Click Show Details to find that each one contains at least 3 patches.

Let's not forget how vague, misidentified, and innacurrate the latest bulletins have been. Not to mentio their numerous grammatical and spelling errors. Tehy seem to point to patches that because Ms can't or won't identify the problem don't do shit.

This month alone Windows has seen more than 30 patches for recent versions of Winblows. XP more stable and secure my ass.


i cannot express how right u are (none / 0) (#157)
by Cyrus on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 07:51:49 PM PST
true, true
Linux and Unix are way more stable than windows will ever be!
This has been Cyrus.


 
Where is RobotSlave when you need him? (4.33 / 3) (#20)
by because it isnt on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 04:48:02 AM PST
I look upon this comment by the so-called "mfk" with disgust. Look at it, people -- it is a glowing advertisment for copyright violation.

Mr. MFK seems to believe he is above the law. He believes he can quote an entire article for his nefarious purposes. Mr. Virtual Mage's copyright have never been so wilfully violated.

In times of peril like these, where an honest writer cannot take a walk on the internet without being brutally raped, where is our self-appointed guardian of copyrights? Where is my honourable man? Where is his shiny gun?

That's right -- the spineless, craven coward has deserted us. He only wishes to toy with the young, defenseless kids who inadvertently break the law. He has no guts to stand up to the gangsters of the copyright world like "mfk".
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

I apologize. (3.50 / 2) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 06:16:33 AM PST
I am a staunch defender of intellectual property, but with the hackers' concept of stealing Intellectual Property at every opportunity they get, I cannot be expected to play fair against these evil hackers. As such, I felt it necessary to quote his entire article point-by-point for both clarity and effectiveness. There were simply too many points that could not be addressed without at least some quote.

I am unsure of what constitutes fair use, but in the future, I will make an effort to respect another person's copyrights.



I am sorry (1.00 / 1) (#28)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:09:01 AM PST
But at adequacy.org there is no such thing as fair use. That is unless you lips are firmly planted on the asses of the editors.


 
'I cannot be expected to play fair' (1.00 / 1) (#32)
by because it isnt on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 10:44:34 AM PST
Might I remind you that two Wrongs do not make a Right.

(although two Wrights made an aeroplane)
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

 
Fear Not. (4.00 / 1) (#33)
by RobotSlave on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 10:56:42 AM PST
I have been doing field research in the deserts of western North America, and I expect to be closely engaged in that project for a while longer. Copyright enforcement at The Adequacy is now wholly in the hands of the Adequacy War Department, and I am sure the Department will do a fine job of quelling copyright violation once the reassignment is complete.


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

 
You Sir are a twat (2.00 / 1) (#29)
by PotatoError on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:10:31 AM PST
"How about you post your credit card numbers and Social Security Number for all to see"
Another example of how morons can't get the right end of the stick.


"4096-bit encryption is considered military-grade for a REASON"
Encryption isn't owned. I could encrypt something in 4096-bit if I really wanted to. And NOONE could decode it...not hackers and not US army...only me :)



<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

Finally a real inteligent word ... (1.00 / 1) (#49)
by Narcissus on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 10:05:24 PM PST
TWAT .... I was waiting for someone to use beautifully colorful words such as this one since I started paying attention to adequacy.
Hopefully posters will start using such coloquilisms as cooder or cunt also ... God bless if someone actually comes up with something better.




--------------------------------
Ok, who picked the flower???

 
Ah, but... (3.00 / 1) (#38)
by budlite on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 01:22:06 PM PST
The poster is clearly part of a terrorist organization; he even clearly states that a hacker's goal is to drive stolid all-American companies out of business.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every major company's goal to snag as great a market share as possible, with maybe the added bonus of driving their competitors into the ground?


nonono... (2.00 / 1) (#40)
by foon on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 02:12:18 PM PST
but isn't every major company's goal to snag as great a market share as possible, with maybe the added bonus of driving their competitors into the ground?
This is absolutely not true at all. A privately held company exists in order to make money for its owner. A publicly held corporation exists to increase shareholder value. The key is usually profit...of course, a business can increase its share price even if it is presently losing money, if there is a strong belief in the investment community that their business plan will result in profits in the future. But profitability is ultimately the key.

Consider, for instance, one of the corporations currently a darling in the terrorist hacker software community, Apple. You might not know it, but Apple's absolute market share has absolutely imploded over the last the 10 years, and in fact its even lower now than it was when the corporation was seen as near death in 1997. Yet why is their stature so high? Even as their market share has declined, they have been able to cut costs and increase their profit margin from sales to their existing customer base. They have not driven their competition out of business, unless you mean the mac clone industry, most of which was small, had little financial viability, and was dependent on Apple for hardware and software in any case. If profitability can be increased by reducing the size of a business, or creating additional competition, or giving products away for free, a business will do that. If it can be increased by doing the opposite, they will do that, also.


 
RE: liberalist tripe (none / 0) (#94)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:35:51 PM PST
Is 4096-bit what they are considering military standard now? Damn are they outdated.


4096bit, bah! (none / 0) (#159)
by Cyrus on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:13:49 PM PST
4096bit isnt even that great.
i have files enrypted in 5024bit, does that make me better than the military? well, maybe in the technological know-how field. ;)


That's fun (none / 0) (#191)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 08:57:22 AM PST
4096 is nice. I'm working on a 128KByte (1MBit) private key encryption standard for use with playstation memory carts.


 
re: More liberalist tripe (none / 0) (#97)
by jbryce on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:58:49 PM PST
And heaven forbid the user should EASILY install the patch

Installing patches in gnu/linux is incredibly easy. Open a terminal window, and type "apt get dist-upgrade" and it does it for you

Much easier than windowsupdate.microsoft.com amd office.microsoft.com


exactly! (none / 0) (#160)
by Cyrus on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:18:37 PM PST
anyone who thinks Linux is too 'hard' is just blinded because they wont take the time to learn, all they want to do is criticize it cuz they dont know how to use it.
This has been Cyrus.


 
Pimply ignorant teens? (none / 0) (#141)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 03:14:24 PM PST
Generalizations are not useful. I happen to have a bachelor's degree in psychology and am currently pursuing my masters. Oh, lest I forget, I'm 30 years old too.
Granted, there are a lot of ignorant teens who call themselves 'hackers' out there (they are referred to by the mainstream hacking community as 'script kiddies')and open source software has had it's problems. But can you honestly say that Microsoft hasn't? Have you been living in a vacuum? Windows is stable? Get real.
My biggest question is, "What are you so afraid of"? It sounds as though you seem terrified that a 16 year old might actually be smarter than his/her teacher. Ever listen to classical music? Mozart was just a pimply ignorant teen too, huh? Or is it that you're afraid a 16 year old might be more intelligent than you?
Actually, it makes me mad that a 16 year old is teaching a class, not because I begrudge his/her ability. I tend to think more of why a school has to HAVE a teen teaching. My tax dollars hard at work. But I guess you're just too inadequate (gotta love the pun) to look beyond the fact that someone else is brighter than you.



Suddain_mischiefe


 
Eand wat af gindah deescreminayjin? (2.50 / 2) (#10)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 09:45:33 PM PST
Eeya een Inglaind, uuev goh aye problim wat wif tie gindah deescreminaydjen -- deh ende-riprisindaychin av wimin en cimputeh sionciz. Deheu thenk te "Hacker Culture" kintrebuts te dis?
Eh, Guvnah? Eh?

--Ruprect


 
A good movie on this topic (3.66 / 3) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 10:14:20 PM PST
I used to hold the opinion that hackers were violent terrorist sociopaths, but a couple of days ago I saw an entertaining and informative movie about the subject that cleared a lot of things up for me.

Hackers is about a group of happy-go-lucky teenage computer hackers who uncover a conspiracy by a large company to dump oil in the sea and blame it on hackers. The computer hackers go after the would-be environmental terrorists and hack into their Gibson (a brand of mainframe computer) to stop them. While this is going on, the government and the big corporations have the police convinced the hackers are techno-terrorists, and our protagonists have to run from the cops. It really is quite a roller coaster of a ride!

I have a few questions about the movie to ask:
  • The hackers were often depicted riding skateboards and rollerblades on busy city streets. This is quite a dangerous activity. Do hackers wear protective equipment when skating?
  • While hacking into the Gibson, the hackers were going after the 'colonel'. I've often heard a few of my computer expert friends talking of this 'colonel' and wondered about just who he was. Is he a friendly colonel? What is his job?
  • The hackers also went to a lot of dance clubs were loud techno music was playing and drug use was no doubt going on. Do hackers worry about the dangers of filling their bodies with illegal drugs, or is this part of 'learning all you possibly can'?
And finally a couple of questions to you, Virtual Mage.
  • You mention that hackers blew the whistle on the Echelon program run by several intelligence agencies (NSA, GCSB, MIsomething). If this is true, when will they be tearing down the facilities at Waihopai etc?
  • You state that hackers believe that information should be freely available, yet you acknowledge that you withhold information from the media and 'crackers'. Is this a contradiction?
  • You state that big companies are evil, and yet a self-proclaimed hacker, Steve Wozniak founded such a company. Does he want to destroy his own creation?
I hope you can take time out of your busy teaching schedule to answer a few of my questions.


The problem here is... (4.00 / 1) (#55)
by budlite on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 05:41:03 AM PST
...the latter-day ambiguity of the word "hacker". On the one hand, we have the malicious teenagers who break other peoples' systems for fun. On the other, we have the meaning taken from the geek subculture, which means a much more benevolent person writing software and experimenting with their own computers for personal gain, and often the gain of the computing fraternity in general.

I think Steve Wozniak most likely falls closer to the latter.


so? (1.00 / 1) (#57)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 06:10:10 AM PST
how on earth does this refute the original comment?


 
Wrong. (3.66 / 6) (#60)
by RobotSlave on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 11:07:30 AM PST
Your notion that the word "hacker" has only a "latter day" meaning of "criminal" is provably false. This lie has been so effectively spread by the likes of Eric Raymond through pseudo-authoritative organs like the "Jargon File" that many geeks now swallow the untruth whole, and take umbrage at anyone who challenges the myth.

In April of 1983, when the press (specifically, The Wall Street Journal) first used the word "hacker" to refer to something other than an amateur golf enthusiast, the word was already being used within the "geek" or computer enthusiast "subculture," to refer to a person who habitually attempts to break computer security.

Perhaps the greatest irony of this campaign by Raymond and others to rewrite history is that the other great Orwellian stab at nerd language control came from the same group, but employed a more effective tactic: nerds around the world now use the phrase "Open Source" rather than the not-quite-so-libertarian "Free Software."

These machinations are quite obviously part of a political agenda, and those who insist on advancing the NewSpeak are playing into the hands of political manipulators.

You have nothing to lose but your chains, nerd.


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

I always wondered why... (3.33 / 3) (#68)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 08:02:37 PM PST
...you never bother to present examples of anything beyond this Wall Street Journal. Even the negative use of the word. Perhaps you could provide us with information where it was first publicly used.

Oh look a Wall Street Journal article about golf. So what?

Etymological information regarding the word HACKER.

These days, most people think of hackers as anti-social types who break into business phone lines, ATM machines, cable, and government computers. Hackers are the new hi-tech outlaws.

Though the idea of hacker as outlaw has some truth, much of it is certainly hyperbole ($10,000 an hour?). The overuse and misuse of the word hacker has been chafing against me of late. I've always understood a more benign definition.

Time for some schooling. According to Steven Levy's seminal 1984 book Hackers, the idea of a "hack" came from the M.I.T.'s Tech Model Railroad Club. In the late 1950s, the members of the club would use the term to denote any project that was undertaken just for the "wild pleasure taken in mere involvement." Those who took pride in building better connections between relays were called hackers.

Wireheads that they were, it's no surprise that when a new mainframe computer, the TX-O arrived on campus, many from TMRC were instantly drawn to it.

To most people then, computers were bulky unfriendly machines that took up entire rooms and crunched numbers for insurance companies or scientists. They had no relation to the public at large.

To these hackers though, these computers presented a whole new realm of possibilities. In the ensuring decade, they prodded the TX-O, and, later, the PDP-6 to play chess, hum Bach, emulate ping pong, act as a adding machine, and play space war games.

All these applications were called hacks. Such work was seen as frivolous. These programs were written for no other reason than to be simply to have them be admired and improved upon by other programmers. In hindsight, its obvious these hackers were radically rethinking the way computers could be used.

But hacking provided an addictive high. As Levy writes,
When you programmed a computer you had to be aware of where all the thousands of bits of information were going from one instruction to the next, and be able to predict--and exploit-- the effect of all that movement. When you had all that information glued to your cerebral being, it was almost as if your own mind had merged into the environment of the computer. Sometimes it took hours to build up to the point where your thoughts could contain that total picture, and when you did get to that point, it was such a shame to waste it that you tried to sustain it by marathon bursts.
To better suit such cerebral thunder runs, these misplaced geniuses would slip into 32-hour days fueled by cokes and lemon jelly wedges. For a dedicated few, outside norms were considered irrelevant - fashion, college degrees, even personal hygiene. One particularly notorious hacker, Richard Greenblatt would get so caught up in projects that he'd neglect to bathe. As a result, whenever Greenblatt would rub his hands together over the keyboard, little chunks of dirt fell on the keys, called "blatties" by other annoyed users.

Eventually a philosophy emerged from M.I.T. known as the Hacker Ethic. The one and all-holy central tenet was this: information should be free. Hackers believed in free information the way hippies believed in free love.

And oddly enough, at the time, it made sense. The way information works is strange. Keep it for yourself, and no one else will expound upon it, use it, or employ it in their own designs. If it's obscure, it's worthless.

But if you leave information for others to tinker with, say a program you wrote, it will take hold, become stronger, better, and, at least in some small way, add to the collective knowledge of humankind.

This is why for years so much software was placed in the public domain. If anyone saw a way to improve, say Xmodem, a program for downloading, they were free to do so. Copyrighting a program was considered heresy. In those early years at M.I.T., programs were left around for others to tinker with, the creators admitting someone could easily improve upon their design.

The idea made perfect sense in the collegial atmosphere of M.I.T.. Outside the campus, however, this ethic has since caused headaches for companies, such as Bell Atlantic, that don't particularly appreciate people taking a curiosity in how their systems work, having them improved upon, or having it hacked for free phone calls.

The hubbub you hear these days is sound of the Hacker Ethic rubbing against corporate propriety.

As maligned as the word means, its easy to forget how valuable hacking is. It has made the Internet largely what is today: People doing stuff with no promise of financial gain, but simply because it would be interesting to do it. The word has been tagged with an unfair rap. I just hope curiosity and inventiveness won't be taken out with it. --Detikon


Do you feel more relaxed now? (3.50 / 2) (#81)
by RobotSlave on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 02:00:54 PM PST
Perhaps you'd like a cigarette?

That was the biggest fucking wank I've read in ages.

Listen up, shithead. The cited article in the Wall Street Journal wasn't about golf. It was about computer criminals. And it was one of the first uses of the word with respect to computers in the press. There may be a couple earlier references, and there are certainly plenty of later ones. At that time, the word "hacker" was universally used to denote computer criminals, not just in the press, but amongst computer enthusiasts. This is the point. "Hacker," at that time, is what a geek called a computer criminal. It did not acquire this meaning at the hands of "the media." You want citations? Spend five minutes with Lexis/Nexus, and you'll find hundreds, you pathetic, bleating, little shit.

The question, in the face of this overwhelming evidence, is how computer enthusiasts came to refer to the criminal element in their midst as "hackers" in the years between the construction of the first general computing machines and the introduction of the personal computer, and the concomitant dawning of public awareness of computer crime, in the early eighties.

There is, I think, only one plausible answer. I've typed it up at length, so that even pissy little revisionist historians like you will have a shot at understanding it.

Do you have any notion of what the word "etymology" means? Did you notice that in all of your tedious burbling about the early-computing mythos that we have all read about hundreds of times, you never told us why amateur technologists started referring to each other as "hackers?" Hmm?

I know the answer to that, too.

Are you ready to examine the stories you've been parroting, Detikon? Do you think you can handle the truth? It's coming, ready or not.


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

Etymology? (1.00 / 1) (#82)
by tkatchev on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 02:23:00 PM PST
Is that the study of insects, by any chance?


--
Peace and much love...




Almost. (4.25 / 4) (#83)
by RobotSlave on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 02:56:39 PM PST
I believe you're thinking of entomology, the study of buggery.


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

 
I read it -- makes sense (none / 0) (#91)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:56:59 PM PST
Did you <i>really</i> read it RobotSlave? Perhaps you missed the first four paragraphs of the essay. Maybe you should go back to school and learn to read.

Could you provide a link to the archived Wall Street Journal article you keep mentioning?

ETYMOLOGY
1. the history of a linguistic form (as a word) shown by tracing its development since its earliest recorded occurrence in the language where it is found, by tracing its transmission from one language to another, by analyzing it into its component parts, by identifying its cognates in other languages, or by tracing it and its cognates to a common ancestral form in an ancestral language
2. a branch of linguistics concerned with etymologies

Basically the origin of a word


Read? (none / 0) (#108)
by RobotSlave on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 12:03:17 AM PST
Oh, yes, I did read the first four "paragraphs" of your "essay." Or were you talking about the article? I have no intention of reading the article. I already know what it says. It's the same whitewashing and bleating revisionist history that gets vomited up by the Raymondites every time someone has the temerity to call a computer criminal a "hacker."

We've all read it a thousand times. There's no need to read that propaganda again.

Here's your link, but you may have trouble with it. I doubt your browser will handle it correctly. You will have to use a "public library card" plug-in, which is not available for Linux.

Link:
<a href="1. Walk to a public library. 2. Tell the librarian that you would like to look at the Wall Street Journal for April 13, 1983. 3. Learn to use a microfiche reader. 4. Read it and weep, fuckface. 5. While you're there, have the librarian show you how to do a periodical search for 'computer hacker'">CLICK HERE</a>.

If you are so stupid that you believe that everything worth knowing or reading can be had for free on the internet, then this argument is over, and you have lost.

I see you've learned how to operate a dictionary, and copy a definition into a comment. But do you know what the word means? If you do, then surely you realize that your origin-myth of the word "hacker" fails to provide an adequate etymology for that word. Doesn't that bother you just a teensy little bit?

PS-- Tell me, Detikon, why do you always start posting anonymously when you're losing an argument?


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

 
RE: Good movie (3.00 / 3) (#62)
by Virtual Mage on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 03:12:17 PM PST
About the skating thing:
Not all hackers skateboard or roller blade. That movie was based on the culture of the early 90's, when just about everyone skated.

About the drugs:
I myself do not use any drugs, and neither do any of my friends (as far as I know).

The Kernel ( that's how the computer term is spelled):
The kernel is the central part of an operating system. The brain if you will.

The information thing:
We have begun to withhold information from these two groups because the media has a tendency to twist it around an use it as negative propaganda against us, and crackers, if given the knowledge, will go out and use to harm people, which is not what we stand for.

Wozniak:
If he had not gone into busness, PC's would not have become publicly available. It wasn't for the money. I saw an interview with him on TV and that's what he said.

ECHELON:
We are not an organized group. We are a classification of people, a culture. I have no idea what other hackers are planning to do. I will say this. Within a few months, there's going to be a worm out that is somewhat like klez or nimbda, but will be one of the most dangerous anyone's seen yet. I heard that from some people I know. So, I'm just trying to warn the general public about it ahead of time so you can all take precautionary actions.

I hope this answers your questions.




For future reference (4.00 / 2) (#63)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 05:35:13 PM PST
It wasn't nerds who blew the whistle on echelon, it was the government of France. You guys just got publicly bent out of shape about it more than anyone else. Honestly, how would nerds find out about top-secret listening stations?


RE: For Future Reference (3.00 / 1) (#76)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 10:14:56 AM PST
Actually, in Aistralia, the hacking group Cyberarmy did in fact "blow the whistle" on echelon. While many governments are aware of echelon and have gathered information about it, the people who actually try to do something about it fall into two categories, hackers and a smal number of politicians.


 
RE: For Future Reference (corrected) (2.00 / 1) (#77)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 10:16:05 AM PST
The corrected post

Actually, in Australia, the hacking group Cyberarmy did in fact "blow the whistle" on echelon. While many governments are aware of echelon and have gathered information about it, the people who actually try to do something about it fall into two categories, hackers and a small number of politicians.


Why are you scare-quoting your own phrasing? (none / 0) (#101)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 09:26:21 PM PST
Australia publicly admitted the existance of their signals intelligence directorate. It had nothing to do with nerds. Complaining about things on weblogs doesn't count as doing something, and that's all nerds have ever done about echelon.


 
Oh how silly of us! (1.00 / 1) (#78)
by because it isnt on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 10:37:06 AM PST
We made the classic mistake - we thought it was possible for nerds to work for governments. Your super-advanced SpazTech brain(tm) has computed that all goverments around the world have a unilateral policy barring the employment nerds. Especially technologically inclined nerds. Especially the ones in the security services. Most especially the ones who INVENT THE FUCKING SPYING TECH.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

I know, I know (3.00 / 1) (#84)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 04:19:57 PM PST
Everyone's a nerd is if you say they're a nerd. Just like how everyone in history who ever had a novel idea was unknowingly adhering to the "hacker ethic".


Yeah, I watch the TV too. (none / 0) (#90)
by because it isnt on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:46:06 PM PST
All that spying's done by cool people with leather trenchcoats and mirror shades, or gentlemen in suits quaffing Martinis. No nerds there, nosiree!
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Take your meds, man (none / 0) (#98)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 08:43:56 PM PST
Come back to reality. No matter how much sarcasm you hurl at me, history will not be changed. Nerds didn't know about echelon until governments told them about it. If you do your research, you'll find that nerds have accomplished very little to justify their ego problems. Every time I've checked the facts on some nerd achievement or other, I've discovered that the people responsible were simply ordinary men and women with no particular interest in video games, lenix, dungeons & dragons, masturbation, visions of hacking grandeur or self-deceiving misanthropy.


I think someone doesn't know what research is. (none / 0) (#103)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:09:38 PM PST
Not to mention, you're the same guy that "discovered" that amd CPU's are made in sweat shops and are illegal, and that "lunix" was made by the KGB. Yep, your research is really reliable. Oh, and don't forget, Flash is a hacker program.


I have yet to be contradicted by reliable sources (none / 0) (#106)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:19:16 PM PST
Of course, if you do happen to have compelling arguments that might bring doubt upon my findings, I suggest you place them with the seven thousand others who tried and failed. Right now, they're just off-topic.


Virtual Mage (5.00 / 1) (#112)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 02:08:52 AM PST
I removed your comment. It was off-topic. Comments about the hacker article belong in the hacker article, along with all the other comments that failed to convince me that anything I said there was untrue.


That's real mature Mr. Superparent (none / 0) (#120)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 10:22:32 AM PST
So basically you're trying to hide that your wrong by using censorship? Oh, that's truly mature.


Yep (none / 0) (#124)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 11:18:21 AM PST
Everyone else is supposed to offer up proof. However, the editors feel they don't need to. In fact they can link words to subjects that have little or nothing to do with the subject. We're all just supposed to sit back and accept this dribble as truth.

Excuse me but at least the National Enquirer is funny. This site is just idiotic.


Proof. (none / 0) (#125)
by tkatchev on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 12:08:28 PM PST
Firstly, you'll have to prove to me that I should take your moronic childlike crap-for-brain verbal diarrhea babbling seriously.

Until then, goodbye and don't get in my way.


--
Peace and much love...




that's funny (none / 0) (#134)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:36:37 PM PST
That's exactly what I said when I first visited this landfill.


 
You just don't learn (none / 0) (#149)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 04:04:49 PM PST
Do you think you're special? Thousands have tried to prove me wrong by saying essentially the same things you have, only they managed to say it in the right place. See if you can follow their example.


I'm not trying to beat you (none / 0) (#152)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 04:50:32 PM PST
Why are you so adversarial? Work with me here. I'm trying to restrict this story to relevant comments and criticisms. I'm not trying to mess with you or your kind. As for your comment, your "proof" is no more compelling than anyone else's. Dump it on the heap with the rest.


Off topic? I think not. (none / 0) (#167)
by Virtual Mage on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 04:38:32 AM PST
Ok, for one thing, the real reason you want me to put this with the rest is so that no one will read it. Secondly, it is related to my article. It is prooving that Linux and AMD aren't illegal or used just by hackers. I am sorry, but that seems to be heavily related to my article. Also, now that there is an entire thread about what I am trying to say, it is now on topic. Stop deleting it.


No (5.00 / 1) (#168)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 07:13:52 AM PST
I've read it all before. You don't strike me as a particularly original thinker, so why would you have anything new to say? You are insulting seven thousand people by claiming your weak defense of your immoral lifestyle is more persuasive than theirs.


 
compelling evidence? (0.00 / 1) (#123)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 11:14:05 AM PST
Let's start with the fact that you claim memory and motherboards are produced in the sweatshops. AMD doesn't make memory nor do they make motherboards.

Intel has many more factories in Southeast Asia than does AMD. You haven't been able to produce anything worthwhile. You bad mouth AMD and yet hold up companies like Microsoft as holier than thou. Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the numerous companies selling AMD based system. Maybe you hadn't heard how Bill Gates personally called AMD's CEO to have him testify on Micrososft's behalf. Amazing how much support Microsoft show to this company.

That article was completely full of shit.

You wouldn't know a reliable source if it bit you in the ass. Adequacy.org is no better than the supermarket tabloids fat white trash housewives take seriously. If anyone does provide any contradiction you simply write it off as open source mythology. I'm wondering what your excuse is when the information comes from say Bill Gates personal website. Maybe he was abducted or something huh? Apparently microsoft.com is the only realiable source left. You all spout bullshit about CNN, Slashdot, TheRegister (thought you use it as a source), OSOpinion, Newsfactor, Newsforge, and every other media outlet. Maybe the National Enquirer then huh?

So how about the BBC with this little tidbit?


 
j00h r0k (5.00 / 5) (#15)
by John Milton on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 11:18:38 PM PST
Hackers, despite their goal of attaining knowledge, often have an extreme dislike for school. Our idea is that "Why should we go to school for 8 hours, when we can learn the same thing on the internet in 2 hours?". In many cases, hackers are much more intelligent than their teachers, and many have the knowledge to take the teacher's jobs. In fact, at the time of writing this, I am teaching the computer class at my school, and I am only sixteen years old.

I quet schoul whan i was 16 to. I lerned evrythin about plato from yahoo!


-John Milton

...k (1.00 / 5) (#31)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:35:42 AM PST
"I quet schoul whan i was 16 to. I lerned evrythin about plato from yahoo!"

Im guessing you never passed Kindergarten

Most 16 year olds know how to spell "quit" and "learned", abviously you don't.

Indy^_^


OK, Mr. Indy. (3.00 / 2) (#39)
by hauntedattics on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 01:31:25 PM PST
Given that you are the world's foremost authority on spelling and language use, "abviously" we should also listen to you.



well I am not perfect (1.00 / 2) (#45)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 04:28:16 PM PST
I made 1 lousy typo, is it against the law to make a mistake or do I get the chair? Still the John is obviously an idiot

Indy^_^


On the contrary, (3.00 / 2) (#47)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 08:15:04 PM PST
You made 4 spelling/grammar mistakes in your first post in this thread, and 7 in your second post in this thread. Furthermore, John Milton, to whom you were originally replying, made zero, because all the mistakes he pretended to make were intentionally put there to make a point.

Now, as I've asked you before, will you please get an account so that I can ignore your posts without having to read to the bottom of them? It's getting rather aggravating.

--Anonymous Reader #24601


:p (1.00 / 1) (#51)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 10:43:30 PM PST
"Now, as I've asked you before, will you please get an account so that I can ignore your posts without having to read to the bottom of them? It's getting rather aggravating."

I did but it didn't except my account! ROFLMFAO!

Indy^_^


Obviously you're not adequate. (1.00 / 1) (#53)
by walwyn on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 01:09:42 AM PST
Unable to RTFF. Bah kiddies.


A couple of questions. (1.00 / 1) (#54)
by because it isnt on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 04:10:45 AM PST
  1. Do you believe that the Anonymous Reader known as "Indy", is genuinely infuriatingly "l4m3"?
  2. Do you believe this entire article was written by an angsty teenager, who for some reason has the grammatical style, but not the atrocious spelling, of a "teen hacker"? Especially given that the notorious linguist "em" has signed his name to it?

adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Maybe and No (1.00 / 1) (#56)
by walwyn on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 05:47:43 AM PST
  1. I can't quite believe that someone is able to deliberately and consistently put on a "l4/\/\3" act without slipping up from time to time. Witness 'nice but dim' Budlite.
  2. This article is...(see 1).



Excuse me? (n/t) (1.00 / 1) (#58)
by budlite on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 06:58:21 AM PST



 
RE: jooh r0k (5.00 / 1) (#92)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:10:44 PM PST
You know, your insults really turn out to be quite pointless. You can't even spell Linux right. I will also have you know that I am not a school drop out, I have a job (I help with the computers at the local Boys and Girl's club), and I have read many of the classics, including The Republic, the Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost, and Crime and Punishment. By the way, where do you get off calling yourself John Milton? That is indirectly an insult to one of the greatest philosophical minds of this millenium.


 
The conclusion that I have reached (none / 0) (#93)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:26:13 PM PST
I have reached the conclusion that this site is by no means a truly informative source of news or ideas. The purpose of media is to show issues objectively, without bias. I can understand that all forms of media require editing. If no editing were done, the information would range from the very interesteing and factual to nonsensical ramblings. However, the thing that should send up a red flag to everyone here is the comment made by one of the editors referring to "shielding" people from articles such as mine, while posting articles such as John Milton's. The second action that should throw up a red flag to everyone present is the classification of articles. These are both forms of propaganda. By choosing not to show articles and ideas from both sides of an issue, it promotes the thought that there is actually only one side to an issue. Meanwhile, classifying articles causes people to have immediate preconceptions about them. I challenge you to go look at any mainstream news paper. Do they put articles under such classfications as Elitism? No, they classify them by what they are actually about, usually in sections such as Culture, Entertainment, Editorials, ect. Classifications such as that are "ok" because they do not generate any preconceved opinions about the articles within them.
Yes, I came here of my own free will. Not to start fights or try to say that hackers are better than everyone else, or anything of the sort. I came here with the intent of showing our side of the story. I do not ask you to agree with me. I merely ask that you listen to what I have to say, as I speak on behalf of many people.



Silly Liberalist. (none / 0) (#100)
by gzt on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 09:09:02 PM PST
Why do you think the purpose of the media is to provide an unbiased display of 'issues'?

Why do you think propaganda is bad?

I really am interested in where people pick up these foolish prejudices, like, "Discrimination is bad," or, "Science is true." Please, enlighten me.

Cheers,
GZ
PS Stay in school, you're not very special.


Why is media supposed to be unbiased? (none / 0) (#109)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 12:46:27 AM PST
Well, since you have such an amazing intellect, why don't you go open any standard highschool or college political systems book and look up the roll of the media:
1) To act as a watchdog to keep the government in check by informing the public of the government's actions.
2) To provide -objective- information concerning world events and others news.

That is what the government book at my school says. Propaganda is bad because it undermines objectivity.


Thank you (none / 0) (#154)
by gzt on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 05:28:06 PM PST
But my intellect isn't amazing at all.

Yes, that's what a textbook will tell you the role of the media is. I'm a bit surprised that you, who is smarter than your teachers, would trust a textbook. I'll chalk that one up as an appeal to authority. I think you should critically and objectively rethink the role of the media, particularly this medium, since this definition does not suit our context.

Okay, propaganda undermines objectivity. Is that bad? So one side is making their point. They're arguing! Is that bad? That's what propaganda is. You, sir, wrote some propaganda.

All of the great philosophical works are subjective propaganda. As Kierkegaard (who was also a first-rate propagandist) knew well, the highest truth is subjective. I could go on, but you see my point and I don't want to ramble and I have so much to do and it's been ages since I've said anything important and continuing probably won't help.

Cheers,
GZ


 
the communist threat (4.00 / 5) (#16)
by foon on Wed May 29th, 2002 at 11:47:19 PM PST
Obviously the editors of this fine site were put off by the facade of this piece, as a typical knee-jerk reaction to the normal incisive coverage of the hacker phenomenon. But it is in fact cleverly disguised, yet quite vulgar Marixst propaganda. Naturally most hackers are in fact communists or communist sympathizers (henceforth referred to as "comsymps"), but the agenda is normally not put forward so obviously since they want to convince the honest, computer loving public that their use of lunix and tendency to compromise government information systems is merely harmless and not a part of their communist plot. For instance:
Hackers, in accordance with the goal of learning as much as possible, believe that information should be free. This means that hackers believe that all intellectual property should be free and accessible to anyone who wants it.
In effect, they want to undermine the market mechanisms that made computing available to the masses in the first place. The information economy is based, in fact, entirely on the protection offered by strict intellectual property protection. Removing the incentive for innovation offered by patents, copyrights, and trademarks would do nothing but harm. If these people want computer hardware and software, they should be willing to pay the price set by the natural mechanisms of the free market.
Due to the way corporations cheat people, hackers generally hate big business. This is one of the reasons that hackers tend to build their own custom computers and write their own software ( which they distribute for free ).
Utterly incorrect. A corporation simply acts to increase shareholder value. Because of the pressures of competition and supply and demand, the prices charged to consumers are always fair and there is never a deliberate intent to "cheat" customers. If you mean that they attempt to be profitable, that is true, but once more, that is what they exist to due and it is because of that fact that they are able to sell you inexpensive computer components. And as for "custom computers", most "hackers" do little more than screw commodity parts together...the economies of scale needed for modern semiconductor, PCB, and magnetic storage devices are well beyond the grasp of any individual, and your "custom software" is simply a poor copy of the CP/M operating system, commercial software written nearly 25 years ago (and since surpassed by MS-DOS, Windows, Windows NT, and subsequent Microsoft operating systems).
An aspect of our culture that makes a lot of people mad is that we generally have an intolerance of people with a lesser intelligence and look down on such people.
But not enough intelligence to comprehend simple economics apparently.
To get rid of hackers, the government has tried to use propaganda to persuade the public to believe that all hackers are just like the crackers mentioned at the beginning of this paper.
If so they are doing you a great favor. If the public was aware of the Marxism at the heart of your ideology, they would have an even lower opinion of your terrorist activities.


HO HO HO (1.00 / 1) (#27)
by PotatoError on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:01:43 AM PST
didnt you post one like this already?
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

 
Passing a fatal car wreck on the side of the road (1.00 / 1) (#18)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 03:18:54 AM PST
Is just like viewing this """article""" (extra quotation marks for extra derision).

We are drawn to it as a sort of morbid thrill, as well as seeing it as a potent warning of the idiots with whom we must sadly coexist with.


 
so-so (2.00 / 1) (#19)
by budlite on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 04:28:27 AM PST
Not particularly well written, but some good points - however, this person seems far too biased to be able to write a good article on this subject. I may not agree that Microsoft is the only way to go, but I also do not agree that Open Source is best - it's very hard to be objective AND unbiased when writing in the field of computers.

For my part, I think hacking in general isn't always harmful - simply gaining access to a system, looking around and leaving without changing a thing shouldn't be a punishable offence. However, there's also no real point to hacking. Why bother? I don't (despite misconceptions by certain contributors to this site.

I also don't believe Microsoft software is evil - it works, it is generally powerful and reasonably stable. What I do believe is that the prices paid for it are outrageous.


Not to... (3.50 / 2) (#23)
by hauntedattics on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 07:01:55 AM PST
harp on an over-discussed and potentially fatally boring subject, but why is "simply" gaining access to a system, looking around and leaving not harmful? Would you be OK with the guy who picked the lock on your apartment, looked around and left without taking anything?

Face it, hacking is illegal, dangerous and potentially destructive and that's why there's "no real point" to it.



that would make sense... (3.00 / 1) (#30)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:12:47 AM PST
...if all hackers only broke the law. The simple fact that you know very little about what hackers makes me laugh.

The following should interest elenchos:
Read the latest MacOSX ads from Apple. Oh no! Unix hackers! Apple supports hacking!


What is proven by these ads? (3.00 / 2) (#46)
by elenchos on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 05:46:22 PM PST
Is your law made by some computer company and its advertisements? Do you think a crime becomes legitimate and moral because an ad from Macintosh seems to endorse hacking?

I'm amazed. What could an ad possibly say that would make it okay to hack? Let's hope you never see any ads from NAMBLA.


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


yes what does it say? (none / 0) (#164)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 09:17:49 PM PST
We're old hardcore Unix hackers, so a BSD-based system is mother's milk. Everything you expect to be there is there, and it works right.
-Dave Weininger, President, Daylight Chemical Information System, Inc.
What kind of message is that putting out? What kind of message is MacHack conferences putting out? What about HackTV (Apple)? Let's not forget all the hacks (as listed by Apple) available in the developers section for Darwin/Unix.


The message: (4.00 / 1) (#182)
by elenchos on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 05:15:48 PM PST
"Wannabes, 1337 h4axorz, teen druggies, terrorists and wankers, we want your money! Please buy our product!"

This same disease afflicts rap and hip hop marketing, "escort" services, the gun industry, and of course sellers of "glass art" (ie head shops). Even criminals, such as hackers/terrorists, have disposable income, and due to the influcence of immoral and violent video games, hollywood movies, and crack cocaine, the marketing industry has no qualms about pandering to the lowest fiends in our society.

Again, I don't use whatever I happen to see on TV, especially in some advertisement, as a moral compass. No healthy man would even think to do so. What sort of addled brain would use an ad as justification for anything?


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


and the freebies? (none / 0) (#184)
by detikon on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 08:53:19 PM PST
And what about all the free stuff? You don't have to pay for Darwin, DarwinOS, or any of the other OSS. You don't even have to use MacOSX or own a Mac (as there is DarwinOS x86).

Where's the product? Many of the conferences revolve around giving life to old Macs.

Besides, wouldn't it work more against Apple? No it wouldn't because Mac users understand what hacker means. Unlike PC users they haven't been completely dumbed down by Microsoft. Let's not forget that Apple is now marketing their newest OS and computer line toward enterprise business not Joe Schmo average user. Might I suggest you go on over to Apple's website and take a look at the new Xserve 1U rackmount server.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

What? The loss leader? So what? (none / 0) (#185)
by elenchos on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 10:44:36 PM PST
You think Richard Stalinman invented the loss leader? While Adequacy.org exists to serve the public good, I'm not about to serve as your business school tutor. Go read a book on it.

Users of Macintosh's "Apple" computers don't care about marketing ploys like "Open Source". They are primarily homosexuals and perverts who are attracted to the "Apple's" mod, spacey design, reminiscent of a dildo or 1950's sci fi film zap gun. That, and the fact that no computer from Macintosh needs an annoying fan to cool it which would out-drone the droning world beat electronica that is the trademark of the true "Apple" user.

Have you ever wondered how a concept or movement acquired legitmacy before Madison Avenue? There is, if you investigate, a foundation upon which to build a structure of values about right and wrong that makes no reference to tv commercials, magazine ads, or publicity stunts. Look into it, will you?


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


so you're gay? (none / 0) (#186)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 11:23:28 PM PST
Macintosh's Apple computers? I believe you have the back asswards. Next you'll be writing about Windows' Microsoft.

So Apple computers are for homosexuals huh? This comes from I guy that posted how great Apple's computers were and how we should all get one. Hell you even proclaimed that we should all use iMacs because they don't allow you to "play with the insides" (although they do).

I really love this QUOTE:

"Whatever it is, you have to be willing to at least suspect that switching to a Macintosh Apple will make you healthier and more attractive."

How about this one:
"My hope is that if Windows doesn't remove these exploitable security holes, society will switch to the much less hackable Macintosh Apple."

Well it look like you've already done the Windows' Microsoft bit.

But then the mood changes:

"People who insist on exotic media and hardware from boutique outfits like Apple or Lunix are unhappy, but the rest of the world is fine with it."

Then there's all this stuff about Apple computers being non-standard (according to which standard exactly I don't know).

One can only assume that you are either an idiot a homsexual or both.




Using a gay computer doesn't bother me. (none / 0) (#196)
by elenchos on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 02:49:59 PM PST
Why should it?

And an "Apple" is less hackable, and thus provides the model for how future computers ought to be. Not exactly, of course. Future computers should be in steel cases, welded shut and booby-trapped to blow the fingers off any hacker with too many ideas.

In any case, Macintosh's computers are exotic boutique toys, much like specialty beauty salons. And like them, they probably will make you healthier and more attractive, and probably a bit more gay, which is not a bad thing in of itself.

Finally, you ask what standard is. Standard: MS Windows, MS Word, AOL, and Clear Channel. You are free to not like it, but facts are facts.


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


how so? (1.00 / 1) (#200)
by detikon on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 10:42:33 PM PST
How is an Apple computer less hackable? You can both perform hack on both hardware and software. Macs are upgradable. Take a look at most Macs. They use many standard off the shelf parts (excluding micro-processor and video chip. Macs are very hackable.

I fail to see how the case designs of a PowerMac, iMac, or iBook are gay. If so why do PC manufacturers like Compaq, Dell, and Gateway try so hard to copy the new designs (with is difficult given the bulky architecture and airflow required with IBM-compatible PCs).

You would force people to buying a completely new computer rather than being able to install it themselves? Yeah I'm gonna pay $35 from RAM then let some guy charge me $50 buck to install it in under a minute?

Your argument on what defines hardware standards is just plain stupid. Software doesn't define the standards of the PC's physical architecture.

One more thing. Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, and AOL are available for the Mac.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

They copy them because they are gay. (none / 0) (#215)
by elenchos on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 09:55:31 AM PST
Homosexuals are responsible for just about every decent work of art or design in the civilized world.

There would be some additional costs, but they are nothing compared to the $40 billion per year that hacking costs. Without that burden to bear, society could afford all sorts of things.


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


$40 billion per year (none / 0) (#220)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 12:22:09 PM PST
Laughable figure.

I am wondering how much of it is the cost of security measures hastily applied to breached systems, which should've been in place at first.

Company that gets broken into through a vulnerability more than couple weeks old should be held responsible for participating on the breach by their neglect.

If you are doing security the proper way, nothing happens. No results are visible, everything works as it should. So it is very tempting to cut the budgets...


Just imagine... (none / 0) (#223)
by detikon on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 01:08:22 PM PST
...how much money companies would lose because no one would be able to install anything new. That's right you will no longer be able to add RAM, a hard drive, a better video and sound card (for you exreme multimedia types). Just imagine how many people would not invest in a new system because they could pull out that fried sound card or power supply.

Just like your "end programming" campaign this too is not very well thought out. Well it might have been but not by anyone who knows anything about computers.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

Yes, hackers and fanboys and geeks would hate it. (none / 0) (#243)
by elenchos on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 05:45:53 PM PST
But dorks don't run the world. The 99.9% of computer users who don't know or care what a sound card is would be more than happy to do whatever it takes to end hacker terror. Labeling them ignorant is irrelevant. You can go around thinking you are superior to normal people all you want, because what you think does not matter in how the world is run.

My vision for the future of computing answers the needs of the people, and recognizes that the lowly technicians who make the technology work are supremely unwise in choosing which direction it should take. Thus, the overall decisions should be made by normal, non-technical folks (therefore: ban unregulated prgramming, ban hacking) and the whines of the geeks should be ignored.


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


Go on. (none / 0) (#244)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 06:34:24 PM PST
Go on, let the "normal people" decide about things they don't understand (like it would be something uncommon), in this case the technology.

Ban compilers. Ban screwdrivers. Then watch the hightech black market exploding with the energy of a middle-sized thermonuclear bomb, dwarfing the drug underground. Much harder to fight than the drug underground - as instead of junkies the adversaries will be smart, determined, and much more patient, their contraband undetectable by dogs nor piss tests. Watch all the universities turn to bastions of the underground. Watch illegal CDs and floppies swap parties on school playgrounds. Watch half the nation turning to criminals. Watch the international transactions, as your laws would have to be enforceable worldwide in order to be at least barely effective.

Watch your adversaries laugh. :)


Your version of reality sounds exciting. (none / 0) (#245)
by elenchos on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 11:34:01 PM PST
Is it because you don't have anything good on TV over there?


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


I noticed... (none / 0) (#248)
by The Mad Scientist on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 10:43:58 AM PST
...that you brought no real counterargument.

And yes, local TV sucks. (On the other hand, according to what I heard, TV sucks everywhere.) So I read a lot instead, or watch borrowed DivX movies (I prefer English-language ones (translators typically suck), and all you can find in local rentals is dubbed).


Your prediction of the future was extrapolated... (none / 0) (#252)
by elenchos on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 09:49:49 PM PST
...from what?

Tell me the basis for your wetly optimistic (if you're a fanboy) predictions, and I'll respond to that. Something like how my prediction that normal people will control the destiny of computing is based on past experience with the DMCA, FCC, Microsoft, etc. What hackers think is the right thing done the right way is exactly what has not happened. Thus even if what hackers think is right and good were actually so (it is not), history shows that the opposite will happen. Thus, based on facts, I predict an end to hacking.

So. What have you got?


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


...from the market dynamics. (none / 0) (#254)
by The Mad Scientist on Sun Jun 9th, 2002 at 11:44:04 AM PST
Normal people will not control the destiny of computing. Normal people will play the role of the civilians caught in crossfire.

Laws are for sale. Without money for extensive lobbying, your chances to achieve anything substantial are rather low, and the process is lengthy, stressful, and time-consuming. No wonder DMCA happened, no wonder FCC ruled as they ruled. It's all about money.

During my life I done many things. My occassional encounters with the Dark Side shown me that whatever you want can be acquired; the only problem there is money (which can be reduced when you have knowledge you can barter, instead of cash). Illegal stuff typically costs more than the same stuff if it would be legal, because the added risks, losses, and hassle. It is also a bit harder to acquire, but when you know proper people, it is usually still only a matter of a phonecall (or another kind of communication). By making a law, all you will typically achieve is only migration of the goods in question from plain visibility to black market - or a workaround by achieving the same effect by legal means (ie, instead of buying illegal whatever device, buy a legal one and modify it using available equipment). You wouldn't believe what you can do with just a bit of knowledge and a box of junk electronics. Unless you will ban soldering irons, it will keep happening. If you will ban soldering irons, you will have to ban all sorts of heating elements as well, or the hackers will keep turning them to soldering irons; I once improvised one from a cigarette lighter and a piece of thick copper wire, when one of my gadgets broke when I was downtown and waiting for a bus. Ban parts - they will be salvaged from the tons and tons of hightech scrap that fills the landfills. Ban compilers or anything digital - they will be traded in schoolyards, workplaces, and other suitable areas.

You will not win. You can fight, but ultimately you will not win.

I have a question: What do you mean with "fanboy"? According to the structural similarity with "liftboy", "fanboy" would be an air exchange device operator, which doesn't give sense here.


I see an end (none / 0) (#259)
by detikon on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 10:57:13 PM PST
I see an end to elenchos' predictions when he reads the latest reports from the US government and governments around the world. They seem to be embracing OSS. Hell they've done everything but call the latest Microsoft fund white paper complete bullshit.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
I see an end (none / 0) (#260)
by detikon on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 10:58:06 PM PST
I see an end to elenchos' predictions when he reads the latest reports from the US government and governments around the world. They seem to be embracing OSS. Hell they've done everything but call the latest Microsoft funded study and white paper complete bullshit.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
Oh great, anouther amateur "expert" (none / 0) (#246)
by iat on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 06:20:13 AM PST
Your argument on what defines hardware standards is just plain stupid. Software doesn't define the standards of the PC's physical architecture.

Nonsense. Modern CPU chips designed by Intel (and presumably AMD's chips too) contain a number of registers which are throwbacks to the original 8086 chip. These registers are no longer used by programmers, but they are still a feature of every Pentium CPU. Why? To allow backwards compatibility with software written for the 8086. Therefore, software does define the PC's architecture.


Adequacy.org - love it or leave it.

 
Steel cases (none / 0) (#212)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 06:45:33 PM PST
It is a bit hard to build a tamperproof case.

Either it will be only more or less tamper-resistant, or it will be dangerous and irrepairable. You would buy anything expensive that you can't get repaired, or from which you can't extract your data in case of a mishap?

I am playing with the idea of self-destructing data warehouse, designed to meet the specs for police searches and seizures of computer equipment. (If the Big Business will get their way, then even farting in wrong direction will be a DMCA/SSSCA/CBDTPA/whateverA crime prosecuted heavier than planned murder. Then the civilians will have to preemptively protect themselves, as with rubberlike laws everyone is a potential criminal and has to behave that way if he wants to be less prone to fish-and-catch arrest.) It *is* possible to build a reasonably tamper-resistant case, that destroys a crucial part of equipment in case of detecting breach attempt. However, the more secure the design is, the more likely it is to fire on a harmless trigger.

And, given enough eyeballs every protection is shallow. (Give me couple of the "tamperproof" boxes, a X-ray device (I have friends in hospitals and a bottle of whiskey does wonders when it comes to access to equipment), and a week. If the details will not be "leaked" already - I bet a week before official market rollout.) The welds between hardware and software usually have alot of generic weak spots, as most of experts are in hardware with some knowledge of software, or vice versa. True HW/SW people are rare. Beware of a programmer with a soldering iron.


Perhaps there should only be one computer. (none / 0) (#214)
by elenchos on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 09:51:48 AM PST
And many dumb termninals. This would solve several problems at once, including yours. Legitimate users could request that their data be destroyed and be assured that it would be take care of by trusted and certified professionals.

Criminals, of course, would not like it...


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


Trusted and certified professionals (none / 0) (#218)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 11:37:59 AM PST
Who will watch the watchers?

I don't trust your solution. Too much of centralized power -> too big potential for bribes and kickbacks. Power corrupts.

Besides, you would have to give up embedded microcontrollers and centralize all R&D. I am capable of designing a small portable databank with only a PIC-family microcontroller. Would be slow and awkward, but could be designed over a single weekend with only what I have in my lair now.


just one? (none / 0) (#224)
by detikon on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 01:22:13 PM PST
Imagine if everything were centralized. This new computer could easily be controlled by a single consortium. No more decentralized Internet where no one organisation/country has control.

Let us all connect to this one system and store our data there. Then we can watch helplessly as the thing crashes nuking all the data but the economy as well. Even with disaster recovery It would take time to get this system back on it's feet. What about all you data that hadn't been backed up? MS estimates it could take around 2000 hours to recover only a portion of this lost data.

elenchos' ideas see more and more like a commercial for .NET




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

Sheesh. (none / 0) (#230)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 12:19:43 AM PST
elenchos' ideas see more and more like a commercial for .NET

It's become abundantly clear that were it not for the existence of Miscrosoft, your life would have less meaning than it does already.


 
Well done (2.00 / 1) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 05:18:55 AM PST
This is the most lucid item I have read in here in two months. I had almost given up on this site.


 
Quick question. (4.33 / 3) (#24)
by hauntedattics on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 07:06:10 AM PST
When you talk about looking down on those with "lesser intelligence," you're really thinking of those happy, well-adjusted people out there who don't live and die by programming, aren't you?

Admit it, you really look up to them, because they're normal people with social skills who don't lead criminal lives. Get over your shame and re-join society. It's really not too late.



Social life... (1.00 / 1) (#86)
by Crow on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 05:14:22 PM PST
Excuse me, I go out to clubs and parties at least everyday, and I am one of your people that "live and die by programming".

Think about the people that designed this message board, they were just like us, using computers and learning how to program. I'm pretty sure many of them learned how to program from Hackers.

And how much money do you make in an hour? $15, $20? Might have a good job. I make $30+ an hour, and I'm fourteen. That just shows you how successful we are.

In the future, there will be people that will make major decisions, but computers will do much of it. Who's going to design these computers? Us. We are the future, step aside. Don't like that? Tough. It's the future.

__________________________________
I am a nameless crow flying in an empty field.

you idiot. (4.50 / 2) (#87)
by nathan on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:25:29 PM PST
$30/hour is a good job by the standards of Burger King, yes. It's pocket change for a successful professional in any field, and worse than that for any successful business owner. In any case, the availability of $30/hour work at the present time does not guarantee its continued availability, as anyone who used to work in the tech industry could tell you. When my employer even deigns to take contracts, he charges between $90 and $250/hour, but that's only because he really likes the kind of work he did before he got really successful.

In any case, you are an incompetent troll to claim that at 14 you "go to clubs and parties at least everyday." Perhaps it's milk bars you're going to? Go get a new account and try again.

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

Nathan, (none / 0) (#175)
by derek3000 on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 01:08:54 PM PST
maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'd be pretty happy if I made around $60,000 a year. I'm not sure why I would need more; maybe I'm just being short-sighted.

That said, the bragging is obnoxious. What more can you expect from a 14-year old, though?


----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

$60k per year (none / 0) (#180)
by nathan on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 03:57:13 PM PST
I won't dispute that's great money by blue-collar standards. It's also great money by academic brown-sportcoat standards (assistant professor, no income outside of salary.) That being said, why make $60k working full time? There are tons of ways to make it working part time if you have entrepreneurial spirit, are willing to learn about investments, and have the ability to command consulting fees as opposed to a salary.

I know farmers who make $250k per year, nurses who retired as millionaires, section violinists with million-dollar homes and Porsches - how much you end up with has a lot to do with not spending all of your salary, and with learning new ways of thinking about money. Especially if you come from a middle-class background, in which case you have the leverage to do this stuff easily.

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

Money and lifestyle (none / 0) (#208)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 04:21:17 PM PST
When you happen to increase your income severalfold, without changing your flat-broke hacker lifestyle beyond getting better toys (most of them even company-paid as tax-deductible bonuses (I want to stay long-term, so my knowledge is an asset worth of longer-term investments)), in couple months you will become quite wealthy. I don't even count some investments (mostly work or consultations) aside, which are slowly maturing to unexpected cash bonuses.

With flat-broke appearance, nobody asks you for money, which is another advantage. You aren't asked to "higher society" though, but most of them are posers anyway and the rest you usually know from elsewhere through their real abilities.


well, yeah (none / 0) (#209)
by nathan on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 04:28:52 PM PST
Don't let yourself be impressed by having more cash than before, though; it'll lead you to thinking that "upper middle class" is the same as upper class.

Imagine attaining wealth on the level of the real financial elite, say those with revenues of $5mil/year or more. Imagine....!

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

Classes (none / 0) (#210)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 05:44:16 PM PST
Who ever came up with the notion of classes, or even with the notion of need to be part of any?

Upper middle, lower middle, lower upper... All just the attempt to label something too fuzzy to be labeled. Do I need to belong to a social group? I never managed to, regardless if I tried. So I am a group of my own.

Whoever will want to can visit, though. Gifts like interesting pieces of knowledge, latest hightech gossips, xerocopies of authorized-services-only manuals, or discarded hard-to-find equipment (now looking for a smaller x-ray machine, being too lazy to build my own) more than welcomed. Someone's scrap is usually someone other's parts.


you misunderstand (none / 0) (#241)
by nathan on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 02:28:18 PM PST
People who feel that they have to impress others by spending money are not generally mombers of the elite. I'm not suggesting that you buy a tux and start social-climbing.

Still, about .5% of the people control 50% of the wealth. Wouldn't you like to be in that top group?

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

So, economically speaking,... (none / 0) (#242)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 03:16:29 PM PST
...the l33t 0.5% 0wNz us.

I don't have the required BusINeSs SkiLlZ to be l33t enough, anyway. I will stick with my machines. Less backstabbing there.


if you're comfortable being 0wnz0r3d... (none / 0) (#255)
by nathan on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 07:24:52 AM PST
You're free to be.

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

I am not. (none / 0) (#256)
by The Mad Scientist on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 08:12:49 AM PST
Would I otherwise bother with studying of defense means, from cryptography to weapons?


but my point is (none / 0) (#257)
by nathan on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 02:45:52 PM PST
$300 million beats even a bazooka. It buys many bazookas, sniper rifles, hours of training, jackbooted thugs, and so forth.

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

Correct. (none / 0) (#258)
by The Mad Scientist on Tue Jun 11th, 2002 at 03:20:05 PM PST
But I don't have $300 million and the probability I could get them is pretty low.

Besides, you can cause huge losses to more resourceful adversaries even if you are on shoestring budget - you just have to avoid direct confrontation and be closely familiar with the terrain in the war zone. (And couple more requirements. The more of them met, the better your chances get.) See the methods of guerrila warfare, or terrorism.


 
"Class" is not about money. (none / 0) (#213)
by tkatchev on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 10:54:39 PM PST
Contrary to what Americans tend to think.

Here in places with traditional ways of life, "upper class" means something more than simply a wanker with a big moneybag.


--
Peace and much love...




Question. (none / 0) (#216)
by hauntedattics on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 10:22:01 AM PST
Is class in Europe related more to your ancestral heritage or to the way you comport yourself in public?

In the U.S., there aren't a lot of people who can characterize their ancestry as particularly august. It's not even saying that much to claim that your twelve times great-grandmother came over on the Mayflower. This may be why money tends to be used as a social barometer instead.



Class is defined by (5.00 / 1) (#217)
by walwyn on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 10:45:56 AM PST
whether you, your parents, grandparent, great great grandparents, etc, had to buy their own furniture. The further back in time you have to go before the answer is yes the higher your class.


 
Some day, Sprout... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
by RobotSlave on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 08:56:58 PM PST
you will learn what real professionals make in an hour's time, and you will want to put your eyes out for shame at having boasted about earning a piddly little $30/hr.

Do you realize that a goddamned auto mechanic makes twice as much?

Once you've learned what real professionals make, you'll still be a far cry from understanding the kind of money that rich people make. If you're fourteen already, and you're still impressed by thirty bucks, then at this rate, I doubt you'll ever figure it out.


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

 
I think someone has trouble reading (none / 0) (#102)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:02:51 PM PST
No, I most certainly do not mean programming. I mean exactly what I said, people of lesser intelligence. As in academics. As ar as a social life, I have several good friends and people listen weh I speak. That's more than can be said for most preps.


My dear child... (none / 0) (#192)
by hauntedattics on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 10:38:04 AM PST
I really would refrain, if I were you, from calling those without your computer skills "people of lesser intelligence." It makes others angry and causes you to look like a first-class asshole. Just because those "academics" can't teach that computer class that you're teaching doesn't mean that they don't have something to teach you. Learn a little humility, and maybe, just maybe, people will like you better.

As for your social life, you have my congratulations. What do "preps" have to do with anything? And who are these "preps" anyway?



Preps (none / 0) (#206)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 03:24:11 PM PST
From the glossary "Parenting of Adolescents - Teens - From The Mining Company":

preps: kids that are really into school.

My database system hadn't knew any other definition of such meaning, so I think it is probably some local usage.


 
This is a troll (3.00 / 1) (#25)
by Fon2d2 on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 07:24:10 AM PST
At least, for Virtual Mage's sake, I sincerely hope this is a troll.


Virtual Mage does not really exist. (1.00 / 1) (#26)
by because it isnt on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 07:37:19 AM PST
Why do you think he is called "Virtual"? This is clearly an evil ploy of the editors to delude their most loyal readers and send them into a frothing rage at "Virtual Mage".

Before long, I predict that the Stanford professor, Professor Stephen V. Mage, will be recieving e-mail death threats from the enlightened illuminati Adequacy readers who fail to suss this ploy.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Of course (2.00 / 1) (#35)
by Fon2d2 on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 11:13:07 AM PST
"Virtual Mage" is both a stab at hacker/goth/cyberpunk culture (it really is all the same) and an indication there is no "real" hacker behind the article, just the Machiavellian orchestrations of the editors. I often fail to pick up on the subtler clues.

The article itself though almost gives itself away. It maps out the hacker belief system too well, complete with all the angst and discrepencies. It is erudite, yet totally naive. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody spent a long time perfecting it.


Not quite all the same. (3.00 / 1) (#37)
by because it isnt on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 11:29:29 AM PST
  • HACKER = unhealthy obsession with computers
  • GOTH = dresses in black / black makeup / sisters of mercy / poe / angst, etc
  • CYBERPUNK = HACKER + GOTH

adequacy.org -- because it isn't

uhhh... (2.00 / 1) (#42)
by detikon on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 03:55:48 PM PST
CYPERPUNK = skript kiddie + teenie bopper punk

Think Max Knight: Ultra Spy or Hackers (even Angelina Jolie couldn't save that piece of shit).




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
RE: Virtual_Mage does not exist (none / 0) (#95)
by Virtual Mage on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:45:33 PM PST
That is most hilarious. I am in fact a very real person. No, my real name is not Virtual_Mage, but it is the name that I go by on the internet.


I read it on the Internet, (none / 0) (#96)
by because it isnt on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:49:48 PM PST
so therefore it must be true. Thanks for the clarification.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

take editors that much trouble (none / 0) (#165)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 01:34:09 AM PST
I have know V_M a long time from a site called www.blackcode.com. (which is a security site, designed for system-admins (although there are a lot of socalled scriptkiddies))

I don't think the editors would take that much trouble to deceit their readers, don't you agree? =]

Kind regards,

Maarten van Grootel (AKA sub0kelvin)
Holland


 
Hackers explaining Hackers (1.00 / 1) (#34)
by Icebox on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 11:00:38 AM PST
Prior to your reading this comment I want to make it clear that I did not read this story. I skimmed the short section that appeared on the front page and I read parts of someone's point by point rebuttal, but absolutely none of the actual story.

That said, I think the entire argument made by the story can be dismissed, regardless of what it is. The last time I spent the night in a county lockup for public intox, some guy spent the whole damn time telling me about how 'he ain't done nothin', about how 'this arrest was all bullshit', and 'he ain't robbed no old man'.

Essentially, hackers, like criminals, can't really be trusted so why bother worrying about some argument they might make to defend themselves? All they really want is to be left alone long enough to steal your credit card number, shut down your favorite web site, foist counterfeit Anna Kournikova photos on unsuspecting magazine publishers, rob Microsoft of their IP, and molest little children without fear of reprimand. This is what the Open Source movement is all about: masking hackerdom with a feel-good, help-your-fellow-man image.

I say no thanks. Criminals are criminals, no matter what they say.


 
You want the media to treat you better? (4.75 / 4) (#36)
by 91degrees on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 11:18:20 AM PST
Then stop calling your fucking selves hackers!

Geez! Use defines language. If someone wanted to call himself a terrorist, then explained that the correct definition of a terrorist was someone who cleaned floors, would he have any right to complain about "the media" keeping on using the terms to describe butchers like Bin Laden? Of course not!

Here's a thought - Call yourselves coders, or tech-guys, or cyberdudes, or some cool sounding shit from an 80's sci-fi novel! If you're going to call yourselves hackers then its your own fault that people make mistakes!


so let me see... (2.33 / 3) (#41)
by detikon on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 03:40:53 PM PST
...what happens after they change it? After they pick a name and the media and every dumbfuck starts using it instead? Change it again and again?

Hacker has come to mean somthing negative to people who don't better. You think a name change would solve it?




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

No need to change anything (4.50 / 2) (#43)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 04:01:19 PM PST
The media already know the correct word for you. The correct word is "nerd". It's been in use for longer than "hacker", and its meaning has never changed.


 
Yeesh... (1.33 / 3) (#70)
by Crow on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 09:11:29 PM PST
I was going to keep myself from swearing, in order to show my bright side, but you started it...soo...

Why the FUCK should we change our name? WE fucking started with it, not the fucking media! Do you even know where the word "Hacker" comes from? You dumbfuck idiot. Hackers were around before the internet.

They would use phones to gain access to "illegal" information. You wouldn't believe these guys. The true hackers have done so much for our world. We've advanced technology greater than everything else except war.

So, you FUCK OFF, and learn what's right and wrong. We will remain hackers, we are the future. You don't like that? Tough. When you die, who will be the future? US. Not you (you'll be dead...hehe). US.

"Mess with the best, die like the rest." God I love that quote.

_______________________________________
I am a nameless crow flying in an empty field.

hackers can say and call themselves... (4.20 / 5) (#72)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 03:06:57 AM PST
...whatever they want. It's not like anyone is listening.


 
Well, keep the name then. (3.50 / 2) (#80)
by 91degrees on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:36:43 AM PST
Quite frankly I don't give a shit. Keep the name, and live with people thinking you're a bunch of terrorists, or change it so that the world has a better impression of you.

I don't care. Just stop complaining about it. If I call a cracker a hacker, most of the world knows what I mean, except a bunch of idiots who think they're God's gift to computers.


what? (1.00 / 1) (#156)
by Cyrus on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 06:58:59 PM PST
Who said that we think we're "God's" gift to computers?
Haha, "God"! What is "God", show me prrof of the existense of "God"! (I bet your now going to go on saying that every hacker is an atheist? not true)
Because we don't think that. We know more about computers than an average person. We continue to learn more and more about computers.
Computers are the future, sorry to burst your bubble, but they are, not a bunch of idiots on a website for "Grown-ups" that continue to criticize people smarter than them.
Reply with your petty insults, it just shows how immature you really are.
This has been Cyrus.


Well.... (none / 0) (#183)
by 91degrees on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 06:11:56 PM PST
Who said that we think we're "God's" gift to computers?

I did.

Haha, "God"! What is "God", show me prrof of the existense of "God"!

My concept of God is all embodying, and therefore his existance cannot be proved, unless you also accept that the existence of the universe can be proved. This is not relevent to my point. It was a figure of speech. I shall rephrase for you.

....Programmers who think they are better than everyone else....

The remainder of your comments demonstrate this point quite clearly I'd say. Are you really smarter than me? You haven't said anything to demonstrate this yet. Unless this webiste runs without the assistance of computers, then surely it is also part of your future.


 
Moron (none / 0) (#229)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 07:47:02 PM PST
The people responsible for coding the beginnings of all modern computers were called hackers. A hacker, in essence created your computer. so, the media screwed it up, it'sa not the hacker that is in the wrong here.

that's alll i have to say...

oh, and watch your language...it makes you seem low-class, low-intelligence, and as if you are unable to properly express yourself...but if you don't actually TRY and accept that other people have different opinions thatn yours even, i guess you ARE low-class, low-intelligence, and unable to properly express yourself



 
Terms (none / 0) (#249)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 06:16:46 PM PST
The term 'hacker' wasn't even created by computer users. It was created by engineers to describe someone who could 'hack' together a solution to a problem for which no current solution existed using only what was immediately at hand. Computer hackers adopted the term because it described what they did, took bits and pieces of hardwar/software they had available to do something that there was no current means of doing.

Hackers (at least according to the definition given the word by those who created it) exist in all fields. A doctor performing an operation and finding complications that never arose before 'hacks together a solution to the problem' using the tools at hand even though those tools were not designed to deal with the complication he is faced with and creates a new medical procedure using bits and pieces of other procedures he knows. He is a medical hacker (by the original definition). An architect desinging a building that is unlike anything ever built before (the towers in Kuala Lampur that house the world bank for instance) puts design elements from many different buildings together in a new way to solve the unique problems of that building. He is an architectural/engineering hacker (by the original definition).

People were calling themselves hackers long before the media, government, or anyone else ever heard of them. When those groups found out about hackers, they decided that rather than use the term with the meaning given to it by those using it to describe themself, they would instead create their own definition, apply it to only one field, and propogate that definition.

So changing the name they use to describe themself would be rather pointless, since once the media/government found out what they were calling themself, they would flood the country with articles on the evil, destructive, illegal acts of 'electronicists' or 'technosurgeons' or 'cyberintellectuals' or anything else they would choose to name themself. Within a few months, everyone would then describe them as hackers hiding under another name.

The media/government corrupted the meaning of the word hacker, and they'll do the same to any name they choose to use to describe themself.

I call myself a 'computer security specialist.' I offer my services in securing private computer systems from unauthorized access. To find what needs to be secured on the system, after the contract is signed, i proceed to 'hack' my way into the system to find all the exploitable flaws in the system and then figure out how to patch them so that others cannot get in the same way I did.

I also have a few other 'independent security consultants' who i have test systems for me after i've finished securing them. They try to 'hack' their way into the system, and if they do they inform me how they got in so that I can fix the problem.

I am a computer hacker, my 'consultants' are computer hackers. We use our knowlege and skills to find and exploit security flaws in computer systems using bits and pieces of software on hand. We are extremely well paid for what we do.


Pure Propaganda. (none / 0) (#250)
by RobotSlave on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 07:14:49 PM PST
You've swallowed the Raymondite origin-myth of the word "hacker" whole, without the slightest hint of critical thinking.

Engineers did not "create" the term. They borrowed it. Before engineers started using the term, the meaning you ascribe to it was peripheral at best. Doctors were not (and are not) called "medical hackers" unless they were incompetent.

Stop for just a minute, put aside the bleating propaganda, and consider the bloody thoughts that come to mind when a normal person hears a doctor described as a "hacker."

Engineers borrowed the term, and it has never had the wholly positive meaning that the Orwellian historical revisionists are trying to assign to it.

You have been tricked by the propaganda of the Orwellian Raymondite Libertarians. You have nothing to lose but your chains, nerd.


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

 
Lets put this to bed. (5.00 / 1) (#251)
by walwyn on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 07:26:00 PM PST
My Oxford English Dictionary describes a hacker as follows:
A cut-throat, bully.

and gives the following quote from Blythe (1653):
How comes City and Country to be filled with Dropses and Rogues, our highways with hackers, and all places with sloth and wickedness?
An alternative definition is given as:
One who mangles words and meanings

The more things change the more they stay the same.




 
Ouch why attack the teachers? (1.00 / 1) (#44)
by Glassdemon333 on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 04:14:11 PM PST
I can understand your hate for teachers msot kids do, but to try to surpass them? Can't be done, you think you know more then the teacher but you don't. May not be see able to a immature mind but teachers have a gift of teaching just sit and learn.
Also some one made the good point if you don't want to be attacked by the media change what you call your selve's and proclaim this to be white hat hacking.
Also to anyone who wants alittle more info on what Virtual mage talked about and isn't narrow minded go pick up a book called Happy Hacker.


Heh. (1.00 / 1) (#71)
by Crow on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 09:15:34 PM PST
I had a hacker sit and spend 70 hours+ teaching me about Napoleon. I know everything about Napoleon, more than my history teacher dreams of.

Also, he was the best teacher I've ever had. He knew my way, he spoke in my terms.

You, sir, can go to hell. We are the future, you don't like that? Tough. There's no way you can stop us.

_________________________________
I am a nameless crow flying in an empty field.

At the risk of... (1.00 / 1) (#75)
by hauntedattics on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 07:43:54 AM PST
incurring the wrath of a 14-year-old criminal wannabe (I'm shaking in my shoes), why do you keep saying that you are the future? It's not like you geeks are actually capable of meaningful relationships that result in procreation. Admit it, you're just jealous of the normal, well-adjusted folks out there and make up for it by concocting ridiculous revenge fantasies.

As for your "knowledge" of Napoleon, congratulations. Do you have any sense of his place in history and how his rule and ideas affected European civilization for the next century, or can you just cite meaningless details of his life?



Napoleon and world history. (2.00 / 1) (#79)
by tkatchev on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 10:44:53 AM PST
Actually, I don't think his "contribution" to European history is that meaningful; mostly, his defeat postponed the possibility of a "European Union" for several centuries.

In fact, all previous implementations of a "European Union" have been very short-lived and were based on crummy political ideoligies, so I believe that the current incarnation will collapse in a few years, when "cosmopolitan hedonism" will fall out of fashion. (And trust me, it will.)


--
Peace and much love...




I cannot wait. (none / 0) (#88)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:33:00 PM PST
The European "experiment" is just crying out for a dose of good old fashioned human nature to bring the politicians back to reality. The current situation in Europe is untenable. The economics do not add up. You cannot maintain 15% effective unemployment for very long without sparking off a revolution. (Could this be why drugs are so easy to come by in the EU - the powers that be want a doped-up proletariat unable to think critically).<p>
I hope for the sake of the Eastern European nations that EU enlargement does not happen, the last thing these guys need after 40 years of "Communism" is to join the liberalist bandwagon just as it starts to run out of steam.<p>
I long for the EU to step away from the liberalist abyss and embrace its traditional virtues of religious observance, duty to country, and moral rectitude. The current sex-and-trivia obsessed Europe has produced nothing of any cultural significance.<p>
The EU will eventually fail, since it is anti-human, and the French people will not allow it to infringe on their lifestyles. The British will never join the Euro (indeed they never intended to, and only signed up to the EU in order to wreck it from within), and when this becomes clear, the whole sorry game will be over.
<p>
To conclude: Fuck the EU.



 
fascinating! (none / 0) (#89)
by nathan on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:44:20 PM PST
What is your opinion of the effects of Napoleon's educational reforms upon the French intellectual tradition? Do you think that the g**k concept of the privileging of the physical sciences derives from Enlightenment thinking, or from Catholicism? Why are these two questions relevant to one another?

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

 
It's nice to see an article like this. (1.00 / 1) (#48)
by anti filidor on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 09:02:00 PM PST
Sometimes it's difficult to remember that hackers really are so clueless.

I must confess that I didn't read very much of the article, as I enjoyed my dinner and wish to digest it fully, but even the bits that I caught served quite well to remind me of the harsh reality.


 
You guys have been hacked???? (3.00 / 2) (#50)
by Narcissus on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 10:12:19 PM PST
At least I hope so. For the venerable adequacy editors could not in good conscience let this putrid pile of shit actually be posted for the masses to see. It must be some odd exploit in their software or something. I'm looking forward to this being remedied next time I hit my F5 button.




--------------------------------
Ok, who picked the flower???

you are too right... (3.00 / 2) (#52)
by faustus on Thu May 30th, 2002 at 11:09:04 PM PST
Obviously this article was posted by an exploit in the Slash "software" that this site uses. Ironically the fact that this exploit exists is proof that Open Source software cannot be trusted, and instantly debases the articles main points.


--You seem to be suffering from a liberal-arts education.

Actually... (none / 0) (#105)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:14:27 PM PST
If someone were going to hack this site, they'd probably do it by exploiting the actualy structure of the site. For example, these idiots use Microsoft Frontpage and are doum enough to have un restricted access to the scripts directory.


 
No, but it can be arranged (none / 0) (#104)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:11:43 PM PST
No, adequacy hasn't been hacked, but I guess is could be arranged.


Adequacy CANT be hacked (5.00 / 2) (#118)
by PotatoError on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 07:10:11 AM PST
One of the editors is a hacker and the site has just about every security patch.
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

Really? (1.00 / 1) (#121)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 10:26:50 AM PST
One of the editors is a hacker huh? Did everyone else hear that? One of the people that you hate runs this site! Now that's irony.


Community service orders... (none / 0) (#155)
by walwyn on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 06:39:33 PM PST
...are used in some jurisdictions as an alternative to prison. If you live outside of these areas I suggest you stock up on some ointment as you are going to need it.


Excuse me (none / 0) (#169)
by Virtual Mage on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 11:43:42 AM PST
Is your comment directed toward me? To my knowledge, I have committed no crime against adequacy.org or it's affiliates. If I have, then please inform me of it.


Of course it was. (5.00 / 1) (#178)
by walwyn on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 02:11:37 PM PST
We know that you are incapable of hacking adequacy as has been pointed out. However, you claim to be a hacker, and as such, being mindful of your tender years, you ought to be aware of the consequences of your criminal activity.


You are mistaken (3.00 / 2) (#179)
by Virtual Mage on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 02:34:11 PM PST
I have not done any illegal hacking. The only hacking that I have done is in wargames and to test the security of computers and networks. In both cases, I do so with the permission of the owner of the computer/network. That is by no means illegal. I dispute your claim that no one could hack adequacy. You are incredibly aragant to state that this site is more secure than the NASA's or the FBI's, both of which have been hacked. Last time I checked, simple url redirection and custom error messages weren't exactly counted as good security. Not to mention, allowing public access to port 22 is not a good idea. You really should restrict access to port 22 just to the IP's of the editors and turn off sendmail, as there is no reason it should be running.


ummm (none / 0) (#187)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 12:45:05 AM PST
This is just a wild shot in the dark, but what if the editors want to send and receive mail, portscan boy?


Proxy (none / 0) (#188)
by Virtual Mage on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 04:32:11 AM PST
Then I am sure, since they are so intelligent, they would know how to use a proxy so their IP doesn't show up on their mails.


Sure, but (none / 0) (#189)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 07:28:05 AM PST
Wouldn't they still need to run sendmail? And who cares if adequacy's IP shows up on emails from adequacy.org? It's a public site.


Why SMTP is a bad idea. (none / 0) (#193)
by Virtual Mage on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 12:03:23 PM PST
Oh, I see what you are saying. You are trying to figure out why running sendmail is a bad idea. Well, for one thing people can use it so send forged mail, many versions of it have buffer overflows in them, ect.


You will be held responsible for this. (3.00 / 2) (#194)
by elenchos on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 02:29:17 PM PST
Disseminating hacker terrorism how-tos is a Federal Crime. The office of Homeland Security has been notified of your activities and you will be punished for your crimes against society. You punks make me sick! With your skate-boards and your spikey hair, your Mountain-Dew and your stolen credit card numbers.

The only consolation is the sweet, syurpy feeling I get when I see another hacker sent away to Federal Prison for 20 years. Oh yes, you, I mean you.


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


um, right (3.00 / 2) (#198)
by Virtual Mage on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 07:15:42 PM PST
You know, if that were the case, then sites like security focus and CERT would be illegal. Not to mention, I did not actually say how to send forged mail with SMTP or how to buffer overflow it. Oh, and by the way, FreeBSD doesn't run Microsoft Exchange. Also, if somehow you were using exchangem you should know that it may be vulnerable to a denial of service attack which will cuase your CPU to use 100% of it's resources. If you don't believe me, look here: http://news.com.com/2100-1001-928055.html?tag=fd_top or here: http://online.securityfocus.com/bid/4881/discussion/


cat got your tongue? (3.00 / 2) (#219)
by Virtual Mage on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 11:45:16 AM PST
What's the matter, you don't have anything else to say about that, now that you've been blatantly prooven wrong?


 
Maybe (none / 0) (#197)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 05:43:51 PM PST
But that's only if you use Open Source sendmail programs. Since Adequacy uses Microsoft Exchange, you can be sure that their sendmail is free of buffer overflows and cannot be used to launch DOS attacks with forged email. You can rest safely.


 
qmail (none / 0) (#221)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 12:31:04 PM PST
Qmail is a sleek, secure alternative to Sendmail monster and M$-Exchange abomination (which - up to all its own inherent risks and annoyances - can't run under unixes and doesn't give me source code access).

Qmail is simple and hadn't had any more-important-than-negligible bugs for ages. For more, read the link above.


There are others too. (5.00 / 1) (#222)
by dmg on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 01:02:43 PM PST
Tenon systems Post.office for example.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Yes, but... (none / 0) (#225)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 04:35:20 PM PST
...this one isn't free (which translates to licencing hassles and I hate paperwork, and has licencing limits on users so isn't scalable without administrative bumps), I don't have source code access so I can't do custom mods at whim nor audit the code, it is a low-userbase product so it isn't subject of appropriate white-hat scrutiny...

...so I will stick with qmail. Whatever you want there is a patch for - and if it isn't, there is a compiler and an editor and a weekend night.


Hmmm. Do you ENJOY work ? (none / 0) (#226)
by dmg on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 05:11:30 PM PST
I don't have source code access so I can't do custom mods at whim nor audit the code

How many people really ever audit their code ? This is bullshit. Nobody does that in real life. As for custom mods, submit a request and get the professionals to do it for you.

it is a low-userbase product so it isn't subject of appropriate white-hat scrutiny...

Or black-hat scrutiny.

Whatever you want there is a patch for - and if it isn't, there is a compiler and an editor and a weekend night.



I will stick with post.office, and use the weekend for getting laid, and driving my sports car and other fun activities.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

Mostly yes. (none / 0) (#228)
by The Mad Scientist on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 06:10:37 PM PST
Yes, as long as it is purely technical work - coding, soldering, laying cables. What I hate with passion are technical obscurities and deliberate incompatiBILLities (hint, M$, hint) and paperwork. Who ever came with the idea that licencing is technicians' responsibility, when it naturally belongs to Accounting? (Naturally, all IT administrative is in horrible disarray or not existing at all. Nobody ever cared yet. Mission-critical systems keep running and that is what is really important.)

How many people really ever audit their code ? This is bullshit. Nobody does that in real life.

I don't know how you, but I had to do some changes couple times already. One of the cases was when after some system modification one third-party program started coredumping, and triggering libsafe. From the outputs I localized the faulty function, then rewrote the offending piece of code (replacing sprintf with snprintf). Couple more cases I don't remember detailed-enough now. Sorry, either you lose or I am nobody.

As for custom mods, submit a request and get the professionals to do it for you.

Overexpensive bunch of geeks that call themselves "professionals" because they are herded under a suit'n'tie instead of coding on their own? More administrative. Besides I will have it written sooner than I'd explain what I want, especially in case of simpler mods.

You lose this point.

Or black-hat scrutiny.

It is possible - and not really difficult - to look for vulnerabilities in compiled binary. Ever heard about reverse engineering? Couple years back I played with cracking software. I messed with stepping through the code, instruction by instruction. I used decompilers. I reverse-engineered viruses, down to the last byte, when I got something not-too-well-described into my collection (yes, I collect them). I hadn't touched a disassembler (except Microchip PIC code disassembler) for some time already, but in case of need I can refresh and update these skills within few days.

The most common vulnerabilities are well-known - unchecked string functions, strcpy() & Co. and more recently format string (printf()) exploits. The related binary structures of resulting compiled code can be recognized, very possibly even automatically. I suppose it is possible (and I also suppose it is done by motivated adversaries) to write binary code processors that point out potential vulnerabilities from compiled programs.

If you supply the source code, you give the same information to both the attackers and the defenders, plus you give the defenders the ability to personify the code and custom-compile it, so attacks relying on some exact binary file will fizzle. If you supply only the binaries, you still give the full architecture information to the attackers (only slightly obscured), but you take away all the possibilities from the defenders.

You lose again.

I will stick with post.office, and use the weekend for getting laid, and driving my sports car and other fun activities.

I will stick with qmail, and use the weekends for playing with computers and polishing the systems I have to work with. Or designing some funny hardware. Maybe, if we'll decide to get that CNC machine for our factory, I'll learn CAD/CAM and add robotics to my hobbies... :)


Spam (none / 0) (#232)
by walwyn on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 04:47:36 AM PST
Don't forget we supply some of the best cadcam software in the world www.delcam.com


 
this is interesting (none / 0) (#234)
by Virtual Mage on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 05:52:45 AM PST
You know, maybe Microsoft didn't teach you to do any of that, so you assume people don't really do it? I mean, Microsoft doesn't audit it's own code (that's obvious from all the buffer overflows). Not to mention, they endorse the idea that admins should not customize software themselves, they should have "professionals" do it. Did you ever think that maybe Micorsoft might be wrong? I mean, what's more efficient, waiting for MS to release a new version or pathc that has the features you want, and then paying for it, or writing the features yourself, for free, over night?


 
Qmail is nice (none / 0) (#233)
by Virtual Mage on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 05:47:28 AM PST
I agree, I have used qmail and I rather like it. It's free, effiecient, and is only vulnerable to like 3 things.


And... (none / 0) (#237)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 06:02:06 AM PST
...all its vulnerabilities I was able to find were denials-of-service and/or resource drains. Which can be contained by putting limits to resource usage.

(If there is something more serious, please tell me - and tell the author as well, and cash the $500 bounty he posted for a vulnerability report.)


I'm sorry, (none / 0) (#263)
by because it isnt on Mon Jun 17th, 2002 at 11:07:09 AM PST
but you seem to be saying "a bounty is offered for finding flaws in software. Nobody has claimed the bounty, therefore the software is flawless.". As I'm sure you know, that's not true.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

 
haha (none / 0) (#158)
by PotatoError on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:05:01 PM PST
lol d00d!


no, you shouldnt think everyone on this site is the same.
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

 
I agree (1.00 / 1) (#67)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 07:56:23 PM PST
Hey man. I hope that u read your feedback. I think that those critic ass holes that think that all those Preps are social because they have everyone "Look" up at them. Really, hack groups are much more closely knit than other groups. Remeber all u Prep faggots.


ONE DAY(AND IT WILL BE SOON I PROMIS) GEEKS WILL RULE THE WORLD.


We've been waiting a long time. (1.00 / 1) (#73)
by dmg on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:05:07 AM PST
ONE DAY(AND IT WILL BE SOON I PROMIS) GEEKS WILL RULE THE WORLD.

Can you give us a more specific timescale ? Ooops I forgot, "geeks" are incapable of setting a simple deadline and sticking to it. Never mind. I expect you will be ready real soon now...

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
You moron (5.00 / 1) (#117)
by PotatoError on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 07:08:34 AM PST
Geeks already rule the world. Stop spreading misinformation.
<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

 
Ahh, now i understand ... (none / 0) (#190)
by Stealth Tuna on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 08:19:38 AM PST
Really, hack groups are much more closely knit than other groups.

Ahh, so that's why once the FBI catches one, he rats on the rest of the group.


 
Thank you. (1.00 / 4) (#69)
by Crow on Fri May 31st, 2002 at 09:00:12 PM PST
I am fourteen years of age, and I am a hacker. This guy has to be one of the coolest guys I've met. He is right in everyway. Just the other night, my hacking friends and I stopped a virus from leaking out.

What he described above are known as "White-Hat" hackers. There are "Black-Hat" hackers, though, and they are all frowned upon.

White-Hat hackers are the future of America. We are programming "gods", if you will. I make over $30 an hour for local businesses in town. I program, repair, and do other such things for the businesses, and I'm fourteen. I make more money that most of you ever will.

And on the school side. I have learned so many things from other hackers and computer freaks. At the age of fourteen, I know more about history than my history teacher, whom has been teaching for over thirty years.

The movie "Hackers" is really nothing like what hackers are. First off, you never really use the keyboard to hack, you have programs do it for you.

Also, are you saying we can have no social life?
I'm sorry, I didn't know that going to clubs and listening to loud music was against the law. First you people complain that we spend too much time on the computer, but when we wish to go out and have fun, you whine about that, also.

GOING TO SCHOOL takes away from my learning.

Going to clubs and so forth gives me time to think of my real life, spend time with my girlfriend, have fun with my friends.

And are you my mother?
"The hackers were often depicted riding skateboards and rollerblades on busy city streets. This is quite a dangerous activity. Do hackers wear protective equipment when skating?"
Good god.

And to mfk. The $0.0 I spent on Linux is worth it. It's better than Windows XP. Did you know there's an error in XP that deletes your hard drive? Of course not, you don't even know what a hard drive is. I feel pity for people such as you.


<B> LOOK, we are the future, step aside. </B>

That's all I have to say for now.

Virtual Mage, THANK YOU! <B> j00 r0xoRz! </B>
_________________________________
I am a nameless crow flying in an empty field.

Hmm, you have some growing up to do. (4.00 / 4) (#74)
by dmg on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 06:14:57 AM PST
I am fourteen years of age

This I don't doubt. What are you doing reading adequacy ? Didn't you see that this site contains "News for grown-ups" ?

and I am a hacker.

No you are not. You are a BOGUS WANNABE. If you were a hacker, this site would not be up and running. We at adequacy have said it before and we will say it again: Bring it on 14/\/\3rz.

If you really were a true hacker, you would have memorized the words of top hacker guru and open-source ex-paper-millionaire Eric Raymond:

It is better to be described as a hacker by others than to describe oneself that way. Hackers consider themselves something of an elite (a meritocracy based on ability), though one to which new members are gladly welcome. There is thus a certain ego satisfaction to be had in identifying yourself as a hacker (but if you claim to be one and are not, you'll quickly be labeled bogus).

Time to put up or shut up "Crow".

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

That was retarded. (1.00 / 2) (#85)
by Crow on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 04:59:40 PM PST
Why the fuck should I hack this site? I am a white-hat hacker, I don't hack to do damage, I hack to learn. Did you completely miss that fact?

Jesus...

________________________________
I am a nameless crow flying in an empty field.

What the fuck difference does it make ? (5.00 / 1) (#144)
by dmg on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 03:40:34 PM PST
What the fuck difference does it make as to WHY you choose to break the law ? If I come over to your house while you are out, and break in because you have 1a/\/\3 security, and I am curious to see your basement masturbation den, does that make me a 'white hat' burglar ?

Stick your semantic tricks up your ass, hacker, and stay the fuck away from this site. I don't give a shit what color your hat is, just stop your criminal activities now, or we WILL be informing the FBI.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
If you would like to speak... (none / 0) (#171)
by Virtual Mage on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 11:53:25 AM PST
You are welcome to contact me if you like. You can reach me at virtual_mage@blackcodemail.com and you can see my posts on www.blackcode.com as Virtual_Mage. I would post my AIM screen name here, but I feel that too many of the readers are immature enough that they would do something as lame as give me mutliple warnings or something. As far as sending me nasty e-mails, they can do as they wish. They should just keep in mind that mail bombing is illegal and that their IP address is in the header of every e-mail.


 
This is interesting. (none / 0) (#128)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 12:47:10 PM PST
So, basically, you are challenging that someone take down this site? Well, by doing so we would only be playing into your narrow minded perception of what a hacker is, now wouldn't we? I should warn you that there is a movement to take this site down. It's been posted on several bulletin boards and has been mass mailed to many people.


Facts are facts. (5.00 / 2) (#143)
by dmg on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 03:37:27 PM PST
So, basically, you are challenging that someone take down this site?

No, I was not challenging someone, I was challenging 'Crow' to take down the site. And it looks like he has slunk off with his tail between his legs.

The hackers have tried to DDOS this site before and have failed. They have also tried on numerous occasions to 'r00t' our 'b0x3n' with equal lack of success. I was just pointing out to "Crow" that his '1337 5|<1llz' are not very impressive if he cannot even manage to implement a simple DDOS attack.<p> The fact that adequacy runs on rock-solid secure Microsoft W2K servers really seems to have put "Crow" at a loss. But then, that is often the way with skript kiddie wannabe hackers.

HAND

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

MCSE= Microshit Certified Sod on Ecstasy;-) (none / 0) (#148)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 04:04:18 PM PST
What you have said is very typical of an MCSE. You think about DDoS as soon as you hear "hack". Well, if that is what you think hacking is, it's time you get corrected.


Listen up motherfucker. (5.00 / 2) (#151)
by dmg on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 04:37:27 PM PST
Title 18 Chapter 47 section 1030 of the US Code is what I think of when I hear "hack". I also hear the sound of the prison door closing behind you.

If you don't understand this, then I suggest you look it up.

If you are outside the USA, our attorneys have associates in many jurisdictions. There is no hiding place for criminal hacker scum. What happened to Mitnick, Skylarov, Johansen and the rest of them should have demonstrated this to you.

I don't want to alarm you, think of this as a first and only "friendly warning". You really do not want to fuck with the adequacy we have some very powerful friends in high places and our attorneys are like pitbulls, once they have hold of you they will not let go.

Feel free to browse this site, you may even learn something, but cross the line and we will come down on you so hard you won't even know what hit you. That is a promise not a threat.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

nope sorry (none / 0) (#163)
by detikon on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 09:02:30 PM PST
If you are outside the USA, our attorneys have associates in many jurisdictions. There is no hiding place for criminal hacker scum. What happened to Mitnick, Skylarov, Johansen and the rest of them should have demonstrated this to you.

Let's look at one example. How about Skylarov? He was arrested while in the US demonstrating describing something found by his employer. Didn't take a very "long arm" did it? The only reason he ever ran into trouble was because Adobe ran out screaming "DMCA violation!" Well if he did then everyone is guilty who finds problems with Ms software. Imagine how often MS would be screaming DMCA violation.

Shows how bad your research is and how idiotic the DMCA is. Just think how Reuters, TheRegister, Yahoo News, OSOpinion, Newsfactor, and countless other new media don't really have to worry after posting how to defeat Sony copyright protection for music CDs. Oh it's ok if some do it or if they follow someone vague idiotic policy.

I suggest you do a little more research next time. You may find some interesting things and stupidities if you did.




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
check out the stupidities from the MCSE (none / 0) (#162)
by detikon on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:51:20 PM PST
Nobody tries to DDOS anything. They LAUNCH a DDoS attack. It's an acronym not slang. Of course what do you expect.

Second DDoS attacks are not simple. A DoS attack is. A DDoS attack comes from multiple points. In other words if I were to trick every poster on this site into install a zombie program I could make each one launch a DoS. All the together make up a DDoS.

Last but not least we're still not buying it. You web server runs Apache on FreeBSD. A simple trip to Netcraft will prove that. Turning off Friendly Error Messages no longer works as you've finally implemented a redirection. So give it up.

Of course what do expect from someone who not only think MCSE is a positiion but a badge of honor.

MCSE = Must Consult Someone Experienced




Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script.

 
W2k? (none / 0) (#207)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 03:46:40 PM PST
Then they are patched in some way to give out the same IP fingerprints as BSD, and the IIS (as I doubt local MS-friendly staff would dare to use anything other) is patched the way it claims to be Apache.

However, I don't think local staff is so stupid to run a mission-critical service on a Windows box. Even Microsoft people aren't, unless given direct orders from the Management - see the We-Have-The-Way-Out farce.


 
So (none / 0) (#145)
by majubma on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 03:43:34 PM PST
It isn't "censorship" if it's in your favor?

-- All information wants to be free, especially information about what you do in the privacy of your own home.

 
OH WHAT A TROLL!!!! (none / 0) (#116)
by PotatoError on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 07:03:10 AM PST
OMG SITE ADMIN! ARE YOU BLIND????????

"I am fourteen years of age.....Just the other night, my hacking friends and I stopped a virus from leaking out."
Most trolls start like this. They try and make you hate the writer from the start...the more you hate em the more likely you will relpy. In this case it has been poorly done. He mentions he's 14 about 3 times and goes way over the top in the detail.

"What he described above are known as "White-Hat" hackers. There are "Black-Hat" hackers, though, and they are all frowned upon."
This is usual technique too - put a bit of fact into the post to make the trolling seem less obvious. Unfortunately our friend Crow doesn't go far enough and his troll is clear as day.

"I know more about history than my history teacher"
When everyone sees that you must be lying for effect then thats a poor troll.

"First off, you never really use the keyboard to hack, you have programs do it for you."
A bit better, this troll technique is to utilize a deliberate innaccuracy in pointing out a real innaccuracy. This is a stage 2 troll technique.

"Did you know there's an error in XP that deletes your hard drive"
Back to the shit again.

His "I am a programming God" act is immediately dispelled as soon as "</B>" appears in the text. Maybe he did this deliberately but I doubt he has the imagination to do so.

"j00 r0xoRz"
Come on Admin - delete this troll.


<<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

 
You fool. (none / 0) (#122)
by mfk on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 10:31:34 AM PST
As a regular Adequacy.org reader, I am perfectly aware of what a hard drive is. Please, don't stoop to ad hominem attacks by insulting my computer literacy. Hackers have a tendency to do that.

Windows XP's NTFS filesystem is fast, stable, secure, and fault-tolerant, unlike some of the other filesystems out there. Windows XP has no such error that you describe; however, I can name a certain other OS that had such a bug. Please, go here and tell me why kernel 2.4.11 is labeled 'dontuse'. That's right, a FILESYSTEM CORRUPTION BUG!


The roots of NTFS (none / 0) (#127)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 12:41:09 PM PST
So then I suppose you would know that NTFS was an attempt to duplicate Linux'es journaled ext2 file system, and that the ext2 file system is prooven to be more efficient than NTFS. Not to mention, ext2 never needs defragmented, as it saves things in whole blocks rather then on scattered sectors. Oh, and did I mention that linux has the native ability to read FAT, FAT32, NFS, ISO, JOLIET, Mac, NTFS, ext2, and old style IBM file server partitions? Go an try to read any of those with Windows. Windows can only read FAT, FAT 32, ISO, Joliet, and NTFS (if you use XP, NT, or 2000).


Oh? (none / 0) (#137)
by RobotSlave on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:48:04 PM PST
I don't bother keeping up with ridiculous crap like file system particulars, so I was unaware that ext2 had become a journalling filesystem. When did this happen? Could you provide a link?


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

It happened in ext3. (none / 0) (#139)
by because it isnt on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 02:31:40 PM PST
Thanks for mocking my hobbies again, 'Slave. I love you too.

But with regard to your question, the "ext3" filesystem for Linux is, in fact, identical to "ext2", both forwards and backwards compatible. ext3 creates a normal (but hidden) file on the drive to write the journalling data, much like the Windows swap-file. There are no physical layout differences between ext2 and ext3, just this journal file. Here's a link which you don't care about and won't actually read.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

So it didn't happen. (none / 0) (#140)
by RobotSlave on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 03:02:51 PM PST
I thought not.

It would be much easier to keep up on this if Stephen Tweedie had even the ghost of a sense of humor.


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

Depends on the level of pedantry. (none / 0) (#161)
by because it isnt on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:37:09 PM PST
If you're generalising, it's "journalling ext2". If you're being a bit more pedantic, it's "ext3". If you're being more pedantic, it's "a forked version of ext2 with journalling". There are no "ext3utils" like there are "ext2utils" -- the ext2utils handle both ext2 and journalled ext2 partitions. All bug-fixes to ext2 are replicated in journalled ext2. If you want to be even more pedantic, it's called "ext3" so it could co-exist with "ext2" while Stephen was developing it. Pick the level of pedantry appropriate to yourself.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Oh, dear lord. (none / 0) (#172)
by RobotSlave on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 12:28:15 PM PST
Am I reading this right?

Are you trying to take someone to task for pedantry? You, Mr. Isn't?

At any rate, the last time I read anything about linux filesystems, there was a huge brouhaha over whether or not to include reiserfs in the kernel source. Those who argued against it said that journalling should wait for ext3.

No-one was suggesting that journalling ought to be added to ext2, which would then be referred to as "journalling ext2." When they mentioned journalling on linux, they didn't talk about ext2. They talked about ext3, or reiserfs, or whatnot. If history has been revised, and it is now ext2 that was meant to recieve the shiny "journalling" badge all along, then it seems I've missed the memo.


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

I am indeed. (none / 0) (#176)
by because it isnt on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 01:11:52 PM PST
The irony is not lost on me. Fortunately, you are the only person here I could ever have a case against.

Now, in case you hadn't noticed, your original foray into Pedantsville was mirroring my own point-by-point rebuttal. That is, in Linux-land they call the journalling version of ext2 "ext3". The magic point here -- and by no means is this meant to say that "ext3" should be called "ext2" -- is that ext3 does not change the actual filesystem of its predecessor. You cannot mount minux partitions as ext, you cannot mount ext partitions as ext2, you CAN mount ext2 partitions as ext3. It's the same filesystem. One does journalling and the other doesn't. See the fs(5) Linux manual page for further details.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a swanky new Italian suitcase to pack and a intercontinental jetplane to catch in the morning. You can be honourary King of the Pedants in my absence.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Ah, now I see. (none / 0) (#177)
by RobotSlave on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 01:27:27 PM PST
So they're exactly, precisely the same filesystem. With no differences whatsoever. Except for the journalling thingy. Which was the whole goddamned point to begin with.

Have fun in Canadia, Mr Isn't. We will miss you.


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

 
Look, you two. (none / 0) (#138)
by because it isnt on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 02:13:37 PM PST
mfk: Don't pretend that NTFS corruption doesn't happen.

Mage: stop posting such utter rubbish.
  • ext2 is not journalled. ext3 is, and that came after NTFS (which is derived from HPFS).
  • Linux's "native ability" for filesystems is only due to it integrating into the kernel what would otherwise be third-party modules. Windows has 3rd-party software to read all the filesystems you list and then some.
  • NFS is a network protocol for sharing physical filesystems, like MS's SMB or one of the many FTP filesystem implementations. It is not a physical filesystem.
  • You've also avoided listing over two thirds of Linux's "native" filesystems in favour of the ones that Windows PC users would recognise, you stinking Windows bigot.

adequacy.org -- because it isn't

 
Posing hacker alert! (none / 0) (#129)
by huntx7 on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:11:17 PM PST
What a faker. I'd like him to answer what an "algorithm" is. He thinks he's gunna be a programmer, and make money, and he is the future of america, he probaly dosen't know what C++ is and is just learning what Visual Basic is. He probaly just heard all hackers use Linux(which is not ture, and none like Windows, so he agrees with them and says he uses Windows too. He probaly went to google.com and searched for "hacker definition" and came across a site with a definition, ex. hackers.com, and found out most people like white-hats and they make money. *Sigh*, some kids are just so egotistical and have to make everyone think that they are smart, have a perfect social life, and will make more money than everyone else.

He is currently being made fun of at a board im located on, someone there found his message, and posted it, and quoted it.


What a laugh (1.00 / 2) (#131)
by Virtual Mage on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:26:30 PM PST
The computer I am on right now uses Windows 2000 Server, and I have computers with Redhat 7.3, Mandrake 8.2, FreeBSD 4.5, and Smoothwall Linux. I program in perl, assembly, C, bash script, javascript, active X, and python. I am 16 years old and I make more money than most of you ever will. Do not even try to insult me. You are an ant.


I'm laughing (none / 0) (#153)
by gzt on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 05:13:22 PM PST
I'm not even sure what the hardware on this computer is. I am an ant. I get paid $6.50 an hour to lift heavy stuff and prevent people from trying to hop backstage. But, that doesn't mean you're beyond insult, you pretentious foghat. I hope someday you'll grow up enough to realize how silly you sound.

The programming you speak of is uncreative monkey work. It doesn't require much intelligence. Call me back when you can integrate functions in the complex plane or get a crowd to laugh at your improvisational comedy (or at least do well enough to have random women compliment you on your skill).

Cheers,
GZ


You don't know me (none / 0) (#170)
by Virtual Mage on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 11:49:12 AM PST
The interesting thing, is that you don't know me. You have no way of knowing what else I can do, besides programming. There are actually many that would argue that programming can be an art form. I myself have written a poetry book (which does in fact require creativity), and I draw a lot of pictures which several people have used as tattoes and one friend of mine had made into a tranfer sticker for his car. I am a hacker, poet, artist, and other things.


That's swell, Leonardo (none / 0) (#174)
by gzt on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 01:02:32 PM PST
But I wasn't quite earnest when I told you to call back. The skills you possess really aren't the relevant point. Here's what matters: you're being a silly juvenile. Call back (and this time I'm earnest) when you realize how puerile you are.

Cheers,
GZ
PS Almost any act of creation can be turned into an art form. Drawing, programming, music... However, just because it can be an art form does not mean that all examples of it are art and all practitioners are artists.


 
hehehehe (5.00 / 1) (#195)
by huntx7 on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 02:39:17 PM PST
Virtual Mage, do you realize JavaScript is NOT a programming language, it is scripting. And you said it is. "I program in perl, assembly, C, bash script, javascript, active X, and python." - Virtual Mage. You just proved you don't know much about the subject you SAID you program in.


You are confused (none / 0) (#199)
by Virtual Mage on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 07:21:21 PM PST
You know, the defination of a programming language is any series of commands, which can be put in some order, that will cause a computer or device to carry out a task. Not to mention, the very first widely used programming language, BASIC, was actually an interpreted language, meaning it was not compiled, it was read line by line by an interpreting program. The same is true for Python and Perl. Scripting languages and interpreted languages are the same thing. They both fall under the term of a programming language.


hmmmm (none / 0) (#203)
by huntx7 on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 12:48:46 PM PST
I think I see. I heard on sites and tutorials and places it was scripting. Notice the 'Script' in JavaScript. Do you have aim? I like talking to programmers.

Crow: How would you ever have a job, which I don't believe, child labor laws.


 
Um no... (5.00 / 1) (#227)
by Peter Johnson on Thu Jun 6th, 2002 at 06:03:02 PM PST
it was read line by line by an interpreting program. The same is true for Python and Perl.

I'm very much afraid that Perl isn't an interpreted language in that sense. It uses a load-and-go compiler. If you actually knew anything about computers, you'd grasp the distinction.


--Peter
Are you adequate?

actually (none / 0) (#235)
by Virtual Mage on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 05:56:41 AM PST
I figured I had to dumb things down for the people here. I fully realize the difference.


I see (none / 0) (#240)
by Peter Johnson on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 12:42:25 PM PST
So that's why your submission was such unreadable tripe -- you dumbed it down for us!

Carry on.


--Peter
Are you adequate?

 
/\/\3 l33t Haxor... (none / 0) (#231)
by walwyn on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 02:50:28 AM PST
...haxor in MS batch language. HeHeHe LOL.


/|\ 3 2 (none / 0) (#236)
by Virtual Mage on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 06:01:38 AM PST
@echo off
echo /\/\3 2 > C:\windows\startm~1\progra~1\startup\me2.txt
echo Hi.



 
response to hacking article (none / 0) (#107)
by kreisten on Sat Jun 1st, 2002 at 11:42:23 PM PST
I am 42 years old.
I am committed to a long-time marriage.
I am a well respected business woman in the field of Information Technology.
I just saw my youngest daughter graduate from high school with honors.
In other words, I am terribly normal.

I am also very good with computers.

I don't hate the government or the little league. I don't have greasy hair and stay up all night devising new ways to destroy your desktop.

Most everyone uses the word "hacker" incorrectly. The word "hacker" is nothing more than a slang title for someone who is very skilled with a computer. More specifically, someone who is very skilled with operating systems, programming, and the knowledge of networking.

I once accompanied a group of school children to a local manufacturing plant for a tour of the laboratories. At one stop we were privileged to speak to one of the chemical engineers. One of the children asked if the chemist would name her hobbies. She responded immediately that she had few passions but the top of the list was algae. Her everyday work may be in the chemistry lab, she said, but her heart was with the algae. It turned out that she had a doctorate in Phycology. On the way back to the parking lot after our trip, several of the children expressed that they thought that phycology was "stupid", "crazy", or "weird".

What we don't understand we seem forced to label and our tendancy is to label negatively.

Granted, there are some out there who are out to damage and they are disrespectful enough to call themselves by the revered name of "hacker". They desecrate it and reduce the enormous knowledge that the name implies down to the level of a criminal.

I realize that there will be many people who will read this and continue in their judgemental ways. But if only one person stops long enough to acknowledge that once again, as in every walk of life, we have to reserve our judgements for individuals, not entire genera of people, then it was worth the time.

Virtual Mage, your article was written with passion and I applaud you for that.
Here's to being the best at something, whether it's computers or phycology!

-- kreisten








Wesley Willis? (5.00 / 2) (#113)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 02:23:43 AM PST
I am 42 years old.
I am committed to a long-time marriage.
I am a well respected business woman in the field of Information Technology.
I just saw my youngest daughter graduate from high school with honors.

Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!

I am a fourteen year old loser
I get beaten up at school
They really whip my ass
I pretend to hate them for being dumb, so I don't have to admit that I have no friends because I'm too weird

Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!
Haaa-cker!

I am a friendless thirty year old virgin
I still masturbate, sometimes twice a day
I live in my parents' garage
I play computer games online with children instead of living my life like an adult

Rock over London, Rock on Chicago
Hypermints: with caffeine crystals


 
Something to Think About... (1.00 / 1) (#111)
by Dark Raven on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:45:49 AM PST
I have wondered ever since I heard about hacking why it is always thought so poorly of. I have read text files constantly about hacking, cracking, ethics, networking, IP addresses, and many things that are computer related. For all you "Anti-Hacker" people out there I would like you all to know, The media, newspaper and television is all a bunch of crap. They give hackers the worst name possible, and why you ask? So they can get a good story, so they can get money, they don't care if they ruin some 15-year-old kids life. We are all one, and I use say "We" including all the ethical hackers that are still around, not the crackers that destroy computer systems and make viruses, The people that prevent viruses but don't get the credit for it. I also like to inform you the Microsoft products are not to give people an easy program to use. They are made to look pretty to draw attention so people spend hundreds of dollars on their software even when if it wasn't for the industry it could be dirt cheap. Take Linux for example, Linus Torvalds is a hacker and he created one of the largest operating systems used today. What harm is in that? Only good comes out of hackers such as Mr. Torvalds, which is the point we are all trying to make, we all want to learn.


Learning is our main priority; school isn't the best thing to us, because we find it incredibly boring hearing what to do over and over again. We want to learn what we want. We want to choose what we want to learn. We want to have a say in what we are taught, and we do not get that freedom at school. On the Internet, things are so different. You have your "l337" hackers and they will help the new comers. There are thousands of text files written by hackers each day and posted on various security sites. There are programs made by hackers that will prevent computers from being hacked, prevent a machine from getting infected with a virus. Many probably do not know, but the CIA hires hackers when they want to get into file or get important confidential information about something from a place.


Hackers are not bad people, just give a real hacker a chance, and do not get confused with a cracker or "script kiddies" that just make harmful progs. Also as for hackers being nerds, that is not at all true. I am myself am not the most attractive person, but I am no pimply faced geek, I just happen to express a strong interest in computer technology. I have a social life, and it doesn't take place only on the Internet, so that too is another thing the media is wrong on. Something you all should look at is, the good things hackers do more so than the bad things a select few do, and even then look deep into what the did and tell your self if it was for a good cause? I will end with this statement now, Things are not always what they are projected to be, just think about that.


Something else to think about. (none / 0) (#119)
by hauntedattics on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 08:02:02 AM PST
How can you claim the freedom to choose what you want or don't want to learn when you're in high school? Isn't that basically saying that anything you dislike or have trouble understanding isn't worthwhile? Just because you don't like a subject doesn't mean you shouldn't be required to know something about it.



Freedom to choose (none / 0) (#238)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 08:45:13 AM PST
Why not?

When I found that memorizing-intensive subjects (history, literature...) were requiring way too much of my resources while the only end effect was that I sucked slightly less in them, I executed my right to choose.

I gave up on them, claimed D grade as acceptable and cheating in test as permitted, and invested saved time into other subjects, the ones I picked my highschool for - physics, chemistry, electrotechnics, technical drawing, "hard" sciences in general. Result? A mixture of A+ (from tests) and Fs (from those homeworks too simple to be boring - grades isn't important, the knowledge itself is).

This approach is still paying off.


As your case indicates, (none / 0) (#239)
by hauntedattics on Fri Jun 7th, 2002 at 09:35:32 AM PST
you are perfectly free to choose to get bad grades in subjects you don't like. That doesn't mean that it isn't worthwhile to offer those subjects, and to require you to take them. If nothing else, it reminds you that you aren't brilliant at everything, which is an excellent lesson to learn at an early age.



 
Memorizing-Intensive? (none / 0) (#247)
by gzt on Sat Jun 8th, 2002 at 07:52:51 AM PST
If history and literature seem memorizing-intensive, either you're not studying them correctly or they're not teaching them correctly.

But you're absolved, it probably was the latter case. Effective history teachers are rare.


 
Wanker Ethic (none / 0) (#115)
by majubma on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 06:21:40 AM PST
I'll bet you dollars to donuts you've never written a computer program longer than 2,000 lines. (God, that was generous.)

Go to your favorite dictionary and look up "hacker." It will say something like, "a person who is inexperienced or unskilled at a particular activity." Clearly you need to change your unfortunate self-appellation if you want anyone to take you seriously.

I recommend this word for starters.

-- All information wants to be free, especially information about what you do in the privacy of your own home.

 
Do we need this prejudice? (none / 0) (#135)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:42:07 PM PST
I am terribly ashamed to be a "Grown-up". I thought a "Grown-up" would be objective in thought, and not prejudiced towards that which they do not know. From reading through these posts, I see that I am wrong. Nary a one of you has seemingly researched what a "hacker" is. Many of the best "hackers" in the world are brilliant minds at some of the best universities in the country: MIT and Berkeley (hence the BSD version of Unix and the BIND version of DNS).

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html

The link I have provided summarizes the basic attitude and ethics of a true "hacker". I encourage you to read it with an open mind.

Yes, there are quite a few people who have given the term "hacker" a bad name. These people are looked upon with disdain by everyone (hackers included). As the saying goes, one bad apple spoils the bunch. The media uses the term hacker because it is sensationalistic. That's just what they have to do to make money.

Without the hacker community, there would be no computers. All those people building computers in their garages in the early 80's? Those were hackers. Don't you buy their computers (MAC) or software (Windows) now?

Hackers are an invisible crowd. You never know who could be a hacker...it could be your CFO, the janitor who takes out your trash, or even the person sitting at the next table at your coffee bar. Do you treat them with the same disdain that has been shown on these pages? No, of course not, because you don't know that they're hackers. But if you did, would you treat them any differently? Would you automatically think that they were trying to steal your credit card and social security information?

What about me? I am a systems administrator who wants to learn about this culture to better protect my network. I interact with these people, and have no fear or prejudice. Why? Because they help me, they listen to my questions, and they respond intelligently.

Some of them DO, indeed, have harmful intentions (as stated above, they're not welcome most places). But, please, don't stereotype all of them with irresponsible thoughts and actions.

Thanks,
________


Yes. (none / 0) (#136)
by tkatchev on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 01:44:58 PM PST
Yes, we do need this prejudice.


--
Peace and much love...




 
Hackers == Criminals == Terrorists == SCUM. (none / 0) (#147)
by dmg on Sun Jun 2nd, 2002 at 04:03:01 PM PST
No, of course not, because you don't know that they're hackers. But if you did, would you treat them any differently? Would you automatically think that they were trying to steal your credit card and social security information?

Yes, that is exactly what I would think, and in 99.99999% of cases I would be right on the money.



time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
Interesting story, not quite universal (none / 0) (#166)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jun 3rd, 2002 at 02:08:05 AM PST
V_M.

I've read your story after posting a link to this board (BTW, great discussions here!) at blackcode.com.

It reflets many thing I feel, and I know others feel too. Being pushed in a corner with all the criminals and terrorists isn't nice.

About the "all info must be free"-part I have to disagree. Info has to be conceiled when confidentially, I don't want any anargy, but knowledge has to be free. Knowledge, mostly in the form of books, that's why there are libraries.

I don't like microsoft because of the prices they ask for something unreliable (I had to reboot 3 times in half an hour, if I didn't know any computers it would be 20 before smashing it). I don't like their lincensing....paying for every computer a few hundred Euro, EVERY YEAR!! (specially designed for schools). I mean, if you've paid for something (like a house) you don't have to pay anything more!!
But I don't hate well running companies in general.
And besides that, hating is something completely different to disliking. Hating is something that comes right from your heart and is often misdirected and biased.

As for the comments made here about pimply anti-social teens? I'm 19 y/o, have a nice girlfriend, have quite a bunch of friends who are not interested in computercrimes, I'm studying Physics at the university of Groningen, and going to be a physisist in a few years.
Ohyeah...I'm a hacker, not the 3tr33m 3l33t, but the average, computersecurityliking guy.

The things that has been said here are mostly generalising, and biased. That's too bad in my opinion.

V_M...goodluck with your life, but try to look at things a bit looser. MS isn't evil itself, and you don't know it all yet, about how the world works.

Kind regards,
Maarten van Grootel (AKA sub0kelvin)
Holland



 
I commend you. (1.00 / 1) (#201)
by Omega9 on Tue Jun 4th, 2002 at 10:51:12 PM PST
Virtual Mage.. Welcome to Nerd society.. You, so far, are the most intelligent person on Adequacy.org. You explained the extent of most of a "Hacker"'s misconstrued deeds. Although I disagree with being called a hacker, the people who do most of the Credit Card and Social Security card stealing are known as "Script Kiddies" using shitty progs that they use to steal whatever they can find. Script Kiddies are who you should be blaming.. Not "Hackers"


 
This is aimed at you Mr Gibbons (0.00 / 1) (#202)
by LTiger125 on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 08:54:06 AM PST
I have made a very very very long post in reply to your article about your son being a hacker. It has a lot of relevant information on every ones of your points and in some (very few!) cases agrees with the article. It states the truth about a lot of what you have said and i have even offered hints on how to get rid of spyware, trust me if you have bonzi buddy there is spyware on your pc! Spyware would of had nothing to do with your son at all or hackers. Spy ware is forced on to your system without you knowing it by advertising companies such as Cydoor. I suggest you read my article, sensibly named
"Re: Is your son a computer hacker"
I wasnt sure if you were joking but i designed it to be informative to you if you were actually being serious.
please email me at LTiger125@hotmail.com with any questions about that article.

I do not like to abuse people who are simply misinformed though i will admit i did have a good giggle when reading your post i decided i would tell you a few things that may interest you. it took me an hour to type so please read it!!


 
Beautiful... Just beautiful... (n/t) (none / 0) (#204)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 01:32:00 PM PST



 
The poll... (none / 0) (#205)
by The Mad Scientist on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 03:18:53 PM PST
...seems to be rigged.


 
May I add that... (none / 0) (#211)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jun 5th, 2002 at 06:06:23 PM PST
Bill Gates owns you and your mother.


 
to learn everything possible in one's lifetime,.. (none / 0) (#253)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jun 9th, 2002 at 10:18:19 AM PST
...,to know everything, ...
This is a large task you've set yourself.
Congratulations.
So, what areas of knowledge have you included in "everything"?
Given that you dont know everything, how have you chosen, from the little you do know (that aint an insult - none of us know much), what you will look at first?

If you've limited yourself to the digital world then you are ignoring huge areas of knowledge that can only be accessed through experience or awareness. As a human you have access to ways of being that dont fit into code or any language.Two of these non-codeable areas of knowledge are "who are you?", and "what ways can you be in this world?".
Heard of the "luminous egg"?
Maybe you can't know everthing and you are making choices about what areas you are investigating and due to a short and finite life will not be able to investigate everything?
But maybe important areas of knowledge are like climbing a hill and the higher you get the greater the area you can see.

Bon Voyage

And in 25 years time if you've got a shaky marriage, kids on drugs, a big morgage, a stressful boring job and your school friends have been through very messy divorces and done things that are amazing in their absolute blindness and stupidity, and you've done some similar things yourself, and most people around seem to have resigned themselves to an empty shell of a life ("matured" they'll say) you'll find a faint memory of being young and hopeful. And when that happens I hope you will start again to reject boredom, and have the courage to develop the knowledge you'll need then.

Most of us don't.


"Everything has been figured out, except how to live." - Jean-Paul Sartre


 
Ugh..... (none / 0) (#261)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 10:33:49 PM PST
The sheer insipience of people around this site is stupefying in and of itself. Had I seen some intelligent responses to this article, it might have hooked my interest and I'd have started looking around the site more. But what do I see? A desperate dearth of knowledge perpetuated by senescent ignorance. This article is a VERY valid one; Causing harm to someone else's computer is about the STUPIDEST possible thing you can do as a real hacker. Why? Well, because that's the easiest way to get caught. The government doesn't want people being able to snoop around whatever information they like because there will always be immature fools out there (see: crackers) who abuse this power and ruin it for those who actually know what they're doing. Just like many of us feel perfectly comfortable cruising in a car at eighty miles an hour, yet a few people can't handle it and therefore we're all forced to drive slower.

Anyone who uses programs made by others in their "hacking" is probably not really a hacker. Anyone who harms another person's computer intentionally is NOT a hacker. This is taken from an online dictionary (no, not a hacker dictionary):


hacker

<person, jargon> (Originally, someone who makes furniture with an axe) 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.

2. One who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys programming rather than just theorizing about programming.

3. [irrelevant]

4. A person who is good at programming quickly.

5. An expert at a particular program, or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in "a Unix hacker".

6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be an astronomy hacker, for example.

7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations.


Simply put (simply as it can be put, anyhow): a hacker is someone who thrives off of learning as much as he possibly can, and not only loves learning, but loves even more challenging himself by learning what you can't find in any textbook or document. Many, MANY hackers hack security systems and such simply because it's challenging and tests their abilities as programmers. Once they break in, they jet. The fun is in the battle, not the spoils.


You'd all do well to abandon your media-based biases against the image of "hackers." All your ignorance does is draw derision from those more knowing.

--Brosnan


Ammendment.. (none / 0) (#262)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jun 13th, 2002 at 10:53:11 PM PST
I must make a minor ammendment to the above post. There are people who have posted here that DO understand the true hacker ethic and have made informed, fair posts. But the ratio of such posts to all the "NO WAY HACKERS ARE TERRORISTS THEY'RE GOING TO STEAL MY INFORMATION AND SELL IT ON THAT E-MAIL-BAY!" posts is not a pretty one.


Don't flatter yourselves, people. No one wants to know about you THAT badly.


 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org 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 Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.