Hackers: The Art of Abstraction

Oooh! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:07 · Score: 0, Redundant

It's by a journalist, and its about hackers and artists. I bet it's entirely free of inaccuracies and pretension, then!

CHAOS by SisyphusShrugged · 2004-03-01 01:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

Chaos is what drives the creative process, I believe it was Heidegger that said that All Creation is Destruction, which makes sense because when you create something you destroy its original state, the unadulterated, virginal state before creation!

--
Post apocalyptic gaming goodness

Re:CHAOS by millahtime · 2004-03-01 01:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Chaos is what drives the creative process"

It really depends on what you are trying to create. If you want to create strictly art then maybe chaos drives teh creative process but much of the creative process is due to there being something needed to be created. Like something an engineer creates. An engineers creating something has little to do with Chaos and a lot to do with structure.

--
Evolution or ID?
Re:CHAOS by FraggedSquid · 2004-03-01 01:30 · Score: 1

That would make the Manhatten Project one of the most creative projects ever then?

--
You don't need a lab to make mud.
Re:CHAOS by Alephcat · 2004-03-01 01:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

somthing that an engineer makes has everything to do with chaos, it is making a "stable" state out of chaos. Yes the engineer makes something that is needed, but you have to have chaos for it to be needed.
Re:CHAOS by Jotaigna · 2004-03-01 02:01 · Score: 1

this can be translated to the very nature of the universe as entropy always is growing. It can be interpreted as chaos of matter. When you try to put some order to something(say boil a kettle or build a tower) you relase energy and increase entropy hence reducing the total order of particles. And with time, the tower will fall and the water will cool, rerelasing all the energy concentrated on it, in a chaotic way. For us, is not chaos what matters, is the order we create, to use, while it holds.
In a creative process you relase huge amounts of energy(sweat, blood, tears, other ideas, brainstorms, useless thoughts, etc) while putting some energy in an ordered form(your creation).

--
"The quality of life is inversely proportional to the number of keys on your keyring."
Re:CHAOS by millahtime · 2004-03-01 02:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

"it is making a "stable" state out of chaos"

When the microwave was invented was it chaos? Or was it someone wanted a quicker way to cook? The tools to do the same things already existed but weren't as easy. Where is the chaos in that?

--
Evolution or ID?
Re:CHAOS by Alephcat · 2004-03-01 02:25 · Score: 1

"When the microwave was invented was it chaos? Or was it someone wanted a quicker way to cook? The tools to do the same things already existed but weren't as easy. Where is the chaos in that?"
my meaning was that the materials the things were made of were in a state of chaos, do you find microwave cookers just growing from the ground?
Re:CHAOS by TwistedGreen · 2004-03-01 03:00 · Score: 1

I think that calling it 'chaos' is rather unspecific and unnecessary. Chaos is such a grand and suggestive word: from chaos we were created, and to chaos we will return... it has much religion connotation, and is even used (or alluded to) frequently in the Bible. But what does this statement really mean?

"Chaos is what drives the creative process." This seems to be true, but we need not use such grandiose terms. If we consider chaos to be simple earthly strife, such as the need for food or better tools or better profits, then this is a very true statement. It is true on a very real and palpable level: If we had no needs, why would we create?

No offense, but while chaos is a neat word and a neat idea, saying that creation stems from chaos is not particularly profound. It sounds profound, but it's really just a fancy way of saying something obvious.
Re:CHAOS by mwood · 2004-03-01 03:18 · Score: 1

Rather, chaos is the raw material of the creative process. We destroy it when we impose the order of our thoughts; we chip off and throw away the parts that don't look like what we envisioned.
Re:CHAOS by moveax · 2004-03-01 04:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

I have to disagree. Yes, engineering is indeed about creating structure, but that's beyond the point. It's about chaos being the driver of the process, not the result nor target of that process. Creativity is combining things in new and often unexpected ways. You cannot structure that process. You can model creative processes to some extend, but those models will always depend on some randomness, thus on chaos. An example would be a genetic algorithm: this is a creative algorithm, (re)combining existing solutions, and letting the best solutions survive. But you can not have a genetic algorithm (at least not an effective one) without the random function.
Re:CHAOS by The+Unabageler · 2004-03-01 04:46 · Score: 1

why do you think encryption key generators use keystrokes for randomness? typing on the keyboard creates chaos...it takes the stability of the [computer] system even further from just having it turned on, which is quite chaotic compared to having your computer turned off. The power comes from somewhere, and somewhere up that river things are being destroyed in order to send you electrons so you can turn on the computer, induce a state of chaos and end up with what some might say is a pretty damn good piece of software.

And, any engineer would refer you to the second law of thermodynamics: all systems will tend towards increasing entropy. Every bridge is doomed to collapse, engineers just delay that fact.

--
perl -e '$_="\007/4`\cp%2,".chr(127);s/./"\"\\c$&\""/gees; print'
Re:CHAOS by zdys · 2004-03-01 20:31 · Score: 1

Actually it is all about the possibility to differentiate. As clear as the bit is the smallest unit of information it is, that the information is 'generated' by the possibility to differ between 0 & 1.

1
01
11
001
101
011
111

Immagine 1 as creation, 0 as destruction and read from up to down. Observing one digit's place there is an infinite loop of creation & destruction while advancing the number value as complete.

Assuming that analogue states unsupported binary resolution, chaos is the most obvious interpretation for the information system itself. No wrap around more of a wetware buffer overflow hack.

http://213.133.103.139/programmerz/pyrclock.html

Hacking is not an art... by Da+Fokka · 2004-03-01 01:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, maybe for the few true geniuses out there. But for most hackers it's merely a skill, maybe a craft at most.

Re:Hacking is not an art... by millahtime · 2004-03-01 01:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

" Well, maybe for the few true geniuses out there. But for most hackers it's merely a skill, maybe a craft at most."

Is it really more of a skill?? The coding itself may be a skill but the way you do it isn't. Sure maybe for your average joe who knows little but for your hacker the way you code can be art. It's your own style and flavor. I guess the way you code could be considered art. Just like writing poetry.

--
Evolution or ID?
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Oligonicella · 2004-03-01 01:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

You haven't read much poetry, have you? *Most* of it is hacking, not art.

Hackers do not poets make
They just don't have the time
To think for hours upon end
To make their coding rhyme
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Zakabog · 2004-03-01 01:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Except in writing poetry, if you throw out every rule in the book, you can create some masterpieces. Nothing has to fit any kind of mold saying "This works and this doesn't."

When you decide, hey I don't like using loops, lets write 10,000 if statements, you aren't creating art, you're creating a bad program and ugly code. You don't have much freedom in code, I guess you could say efficient code with as few lines as possible is art, but not the same way poetry is an art.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:23 · Score: 5, Interesting

If it's an art, it's more like architecture: you have to conform to strict rules or your code won't compile/building will fall over. There may even be rules imposed by others: coding standards/building regs. Then there's ergonomics to take into account: GUI design/ergonomics of building use.

But within those restrictions, there's still a lot of freedom to express oneself creatively.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by millahtime · 2004-03-01 01:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

"it's more like architecture:"

When designing something it can be both art and architecture. Look at buildings. Many are very artistically done but have great architecture to them. Look at the designs for the new world trade center building. To be the tallest building in the world there is a great amount of detail to the architecture but it is a very beautiful design that is artistically done.

--
Evolution or ID?
Re:Hacking is not an art... by TwistedGreen · 2004-03-01 01:37 · Score: 5, Insightful
Untrue. You still need to follow some rules, otherwise it'd be complete gibberish. Even if you look at the famous Jabberwocky, rules are followed. The words themselves may be nonsense, but:
1. They still conform to proper phonemic structure of English;
2. English grammar is upheld;
3. The English phonology and alphabet are used;
4. Rules of poetic structure are upheld (eg. rhyme, meter, etc.).
Poetry, or indeed any artistic expression, is all about intelligently manipulating a structured system in some creative way. Language is a supreme example of this, and programming can be as well. You cannot throw out every rule, as there would then be no context for understanding the art. Coding is more restrictive than spoken language, but that makes the art of coding all the more esoteric and challenging.

Ever read The Story of Mel?
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:39 · Score: 1, Interesting

IMHO :
Art is the expression of a feeling. A painter, a poet expresses his feelings thru his artwork, and maybe, sometimes, it reaches the audience, and this audience may (or may not) feel the same.

Hacking is not art.
It's "performing a task".
It's "solving a problem".
Even if a hack is well-written code, it does not carry any kind of emotion or feeling. Of course, somebody who watches the code may feel a couple of things :
- surprise : hey it works ! waow !
- hate : gush ! I wish I could have written that !
etc...

But the first intention of the hacker is not to provoke feelings. It's just doing a job. Doing it well, if possible.

Furthermore, I never believed that randomly-generated artworks could be considered as art, because equations or math formula cannot carry human emotions.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Ephemeriis · 2004-03-01 01:42 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not entirely true....even in poetry you have to remain within the confines of what defines "poetry". If I just pour some ink on the page, make a big ol' ink blob...that isn't poetry. If I crumple up some paper in a big ball, that isn't poetry. If I cut off my ear and stick it in a plastic box, it isn't poetry. If I run naked through my back yard, it isn't poetry.

All of that could, possibly, be loosely defined as some sort of art...but not poetry. In order for it to be poetry, you need to obey some basic rules - rules such as writing words on paper. Same thing goes for programming, you need to follow basic rules - such as using valid statements that will actually compile.

Just because the basic rules in programming are somewhat more strict than those of poetry, does not mean that you cannot be creative or artistic with it.

yrs,
Ephemeriis

--
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Zakabog · 2004-03-01 02:01 · Score: 1

I forgot who it was but there's a famous poet that broke every "rule" in poetry. He wrote one poem that was random letters aranged in a weird shape on a page. If someone just decided to write a bunch of random letters in a nice shape and try to compile it, it wouldn't work. Code must follow certain rules, if it doesn't follow those rules it doesn't work, there's no real freedom in code (ok you can make things like the perl camels but I wouldn't call that code art, it's interesting, but not art.) Anything can be considered a poem, or poetry, but only certain things make it as code.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by NoOneInParticular · 2004-03-01 02:28 · Score: 3, Interesting

The poem you refer to is a perfectly legitemate program in whitespace. Depending on the use of tabs newlines and spaces in the poem, it might actually do something useful as well.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by russellh · 2004-03-01 02:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

Well, maybe for the few true geniuses out there. But for most hackers it's merely a skill, maybe a craft at most.

Everything a human can do is an art. High art is merely the pinnacle. We all strive toward it to some extent. An "artist" may simply be one who works for that specific reason.

--
must... stay... awake...
Re:Hacking is not an art... by warrax_666 · 2004-03-01 02:33 · Score: 1

Firstly, he still used letters. That's a restriction.

Secondly, it would be quite easy (almost trivial, in fact) to write a programming language that could interpret any string of characters as a syntactically legal program. (IIRC Malbolge comes close). The fact that the program wouldn't make any sense semantically shouldn't matter, since the "random letters with weird shape" poem presumably doesn't make much sense either.

I think that invalidates your conclusion.

--
HAND.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:54 · Score: 0

Artifice perhaps?
Re:Hacking is not an art... by wastaz · 2004-03-01 03:23 · Score: 1

You assume that the program have to compile.

In your way of thinking, the poem has to compile in a human mind too. The compilation then being that the person in question understands it.
Just as the majority of humans probably didnt understand that poem, so the majority of computers wont understand random code. However, thanks to drunk and sleepless people like the designers of whitespace that someone pointed out earlier, some computers do understand it.

Will they interpret it as you meant it? Who knows! Heck, they might. But who says that a human would interpret your poem as you meant it?

Poetry, 1
Coding, 1
It's a tie!
Re:Hacking is not an art... by mwood · 2004-03-01 03:27 · Score: 1

"If I just pour some ink on the page, make a big ol' ink blob...that isn't poetry."

Nope, it's modern art. Ask Jackson Pollock.

"If I crumple up some paper in a big ball, that isn't poetry."

Nope, it's an Origami Boulder. (URL lost; search engine will find it for you.)

"If I run naked through my back yard, it isn't poetry."

Nope, it's performance art. JJ Doonesbury will probably sue you for plagiarism.

See also recent writings on something called "moetry".
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 04:50 · Score: 0

No, it's not, whitespace is a language like any other, if I just put 500 spaces randomly around in a program it wouldn't compile right and would do nothing.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 04:54 · Score: 0

The poem was to show confusion and anger in his life, anyway if you make a programing language that used "random" numbers and letters, well they're not random if you want them to do something. If you want to print hello world there's specific ways to do that (there are more than one but there's a ruleset you must follow, and even if you switch compilers you're just switching rulesets.)
Re:Hacking is not an art... by FePe · 2004-03-01 07:33 · Score: 1

I don't agree with you that art has to involve feelings. It can express intelligence, structure, ideas and so on and doesn't have to involve feelings. Take music as an example. Most music is indeed about feelings, but some music (especially modern music) expresses logic or structure or some other idea not related to feelings.

--
"Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -- Leo Tolstoy
Re:Hacking is not an art... by MrBlint · 2004-03-01 08:42 · Score: 1

The very existance of a language like whitespace prooves that software can be art.

--
That's very perceptive of you Mr Stapleton and rather unexpected in a G Major
Re:Hacking is not an art... by gnu-generation-one · 2004-03-01 08:48 · Score: 1

"Except in writing poetry, if you throw out every rule in the book, you can create some masterpieces"

Sounds like Perl to me...

Of course, code isn't art if you have coding standards. It's more like plumbing or something.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Bush+Pig · 2004-03-01 14:08 · Score: 1

Even modern music involves expression of the composer's feelings. They may not be as accessible to listeners as is the case with older music (due to unfamiliarity with the form), but they are implicit in the work nonetheless. Additionally, an expression of logic or structure does not preclude emotional content.

--
What a long, strange trip it's been.
Re:Hacking is not an art... by Turmio · 2004-03-01 14:43 · Score: 1

When you decide, hey I don't like using loops, lets write 10,000 if statements, you aren't creating art, you're creating a bad program and ugly code.

Unless you're using perl, of course. TAMWTO.

Hackers and Painters by amitshah · 2004-03-01 01:18 · Score: 5, Interesting

Hackers and Painters by Paul Graham is a great read on why artists and hackers have similar interests and mindsets. A must-read for hackers.

Re:Hackers and Painters by Stween · 2004-03-01 03:26 · Score: 2, Interesting

I haven't read through all of the piece you link to, but his distaste of the term Computer or Computing Science is slightly worrying, and scars the rest of what seems to be a fairly well written text.

What he doesn't seem to have grasped is that Computer Science essentially boils down to algorithmics, no matter which distinct field within Computer Science you are in (be it the study of systems & operating systems, real time systems, networks, graphics, or anything else. The only areas I see as fairly distinct from this are HCI research and databases. Software Engineering is inextricably linked to Computer Science, but is not a direct part of it).

Of course it is possible to come at Computer Science then from a mathematical background or a hacker background. The mathematician is interested in analysing the abstract concept of the algorithm, and the hacker is interested in implementing the abstract concept efficiently, and there are varying mindsets in between.

Computer Science is not quite as "thrown together" as he may think.

This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by xtal · 2004-03-01 01:18 · Score: 2, Informative

There is only one hacker manifesto:

Apologies to phrack for the lameness filter edits.

==Phrack Inc.==
Volume One, Issue 7, Phile 3 of 10

The following was written shortly after my arrest...

\/\The Conscience of a Hacker/\/
by
+++The Mentor+++
Written on January 8, 1986

Another one got caught today, it's all over the papers. "Teenager
Arrested in Computer Crime Scandal", "Hacker Arrested after Bank Tampering"...
Damn kids. They're all alike.

But did you, in your three-piece psychology and 1950's technobrain,
ever take a look behind the eyes of the hacker? Did you ever wonder what
made him tick, what forces shaped him, what may have molded him?
I am a hacker, enter my world...
Mine is a world that begins with school... I'm smarter than most of
the other kids, this crap they teach us bores me...
Damn underachiever. They're all alike.

I'm in junior high or high school. I've listened to teachers explain
for the fifteenth time how to reduce a fraction. I understand it. "No, Ms.
Smith, I didn't show my work. I did it in my head..."
Damn kid. Probably copied it. They're all alike.

I made a discovery today. I found a computer. Wait a second, this is
cool. It does what I want it to. If it makes a mistake, it's because I
screwed it up. Not because it doesn't like me...
Or feels threatened by me...
Or thinks I'm a smart ass...
Or doesn't like teaching and shouldn't be here...
Damn kid. All he does is play games. They're all alike.

And then it happened... a door opened to a world... rushing through
the phone line like heroin through an addict's veins, an electronic pulse is
sent out, a refuge from the day-to-day incompetencies is sought... a board is
found.
"This is it... this is where I belong..."
I know everyone here... even if I've never met them, never talked to
them, may never hear from them again... I know you all...
Damn kid. Tying up the phone line again. They're all alike...

You bet your ass we're all alike... we've been spoon-fed baby food at
school when we hungered for steak... the bits of meat that you did let slip
through were pre-chewed and tasteless. We've been dominated by sadists, or
ignored by the apathetic. The few that had something to teach found us will-
ing pupils, but those few are like drops of water in the desert.

This is our world now... the world of the electron and the switch, the
beauty of the baud. We make use of a service already existing without paying
for what could be dirt-cheap if it wasn't run by profiteering gluttons, and
you call us criminals. We explore... and you call us criminals. We seek
after knowledge... and you call us criminals. We exist without skin color,
without nationality, without religious bias... and you call us criminals.
You build atomic bombs, you wage wars, you murder, cheat, and lie to us
and try to make us believe it's for our own good, yet we're the criminals.

Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is
that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like.
My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me
for.

I am a hacker, and this is my manifesto. You may stop this individual,
but you can't stop us all... after all, we're all alike.

+++The Mentor+++

--
..don't panic

Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by FraggedSquid · 2004-03-01 01:58 · Score: 3, Insightful

"This is our world now... " What a load of pretentious claptrap. You want knowledge? Go to a library. Seriously, this kind of self-justifying wine does little to endear me to the authors cause. Things are "free" to you because others are paying for them. You can argue the toss about the current socio-economic system, but at then end of the day, someone else will be footing the bill. Where I live, all the garden walls are 6 foot high brick affairs, one summer, some bored local kids decided to start throwing stone into gardens, one hit my 3 year-old. The whining excuse got from them was that they "didn't mean to", they were just having "some fun" and it "wasn't their fault". The post reminded me of their excuse, full of self-justification and blaming others for their actions, especially if things go wrong and someone ends up getting hurt. Remember it's not the people at the top, the town planners who designed an estate with little children to do, but the people at the bottom who get hurt.

--
You don't need a lab to make mud.
Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:03 · Score: 0

Those aren't the words of an artist. They are the words of a woe-is-me, the-world-owes-me-everything, crybaby.

Get a grip; then get a life.
Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by xtal · 2004-03-01 02:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

The post reminded me of their excuse, full of self-justification and blaming others for their actions, especially if things go wrong and someone ends up getting hurt. Remember it's not the people at the top, the town planners who designed an estate with little children to do, but the people at the bottom who get hurt.

I wonder to whom and where this animosity is directed?

The events of the late 80's and very early 90's were much different than the world today. The barriers to entry were much higher - there weren't many script kiddies. There was NO free unix. Access to real computers was almost nonexistant - as was free access to almost any telecommunications service. A 'C' compiler could run you real money. The internet did not exist as you know it now, except in the hands of few academics. TeleNet, Datapac, and other networks were the only means to access longhaul data communication.

The exposure of vulerabilities went a long way towards demonstrating that little or no forethought had gone into the security of communications infrastructure. Blue boxing was a driving force to give AT&T a kick in the ass to move to OOB signalling in the late 80's / early 90's.

It's difficult to justify or look back at now, but a lot of the GOOD that you see in the community today came out of the seeds of that movement. Articles and writing such as the Mentor's capture the emotions and motivations behind the hacker mind moreso than any artifical piece of writing ever will.

My $0.02.

--
..don't panic
Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by mwood · 2004-03-01 03:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

Yeah, I been there, but with differences.

I didn't go around breaking others' art; I made some of my own.

I was bright enough to figure out that, if I do it the way the teacher wants it done, I don't get hassled. I can always do it my way when I'm doing it for me, and then nobody has the authority to tell me I'm doing it wrong.

I showed some promise and was rewarded with more challenging (and interesting) stuff by teachers who cared. That's how you *find* teachers who care.

You can learn the system and get what you want. Or you can turn your back on it and let it hit you from behind. Your choice.
Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by StarfishOne · 2004-03-01 04:55 · Score: 0

I understand what you're trying to say.. but on the other hand:

With lowered and or removed barriers more people get on the internet.. and what was that law again about the value of the network growing exponentially with the number of users on it? ;)

Both periodes in times (back then and now) have pro's and con's.

Even as a 23 year old I miss the time of playing/experimenting with the Acorn BBC Micro B and early x86 desktop machines.

I was 'into computers' very early in my life (and hooked forever :O).. the times 'back then' had a certain 'flair'.. especially in ones own nostalgic view.

But I also realise that many computing centres would have killed for the amount of processing power/storage capacity that you can find in the avg. desktop nowadays :)

Enjoy today.. remember the good things... and enjoy tomorrow's possibilites as well! :)
Re:This seems like a bad ripoff of the Mentor. by Mr.+Bad+Example · 2004-03-01 05:03 · Score: 2, Funny

... self-justifying wine...

Anyone know where I can buy some of this? "Come on, have another glass--I'm good for your heart! I reduce cholesterol!"

Art & computers by 192939495969798999 · 2004-03-01 01:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

I believe that art (fine art) and computers are integrally related in the methods of abstract creativity requried for the initial creative phase. After that, they deviate in the techniques and level of creativity required. Fine art generally allows for more creativity, because there is not necessarily the business push to "get it done now". As a fine artist whose day job is I.T. related, I can say that it is an easy transition.

--
stuff |

Re:Art & computers by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:32 · Score: 0

nope,not a clue.It's that first sentence...don't know what it means.
Re:Art & computers by j14ast · 2004-03-01 01:40 · Score: 0

Well mabe good code is like fine art but most production code is not much better than modern art :o(

--
Damn the man!

Also known as: by fyonn · 2004-03-01 01:19 · Score: 4, Funny

Mitnick, Escher and Lamo: an Eternally Twisted Pair.

just the first though that came to me with the description of the book...

Re:Correct. by botzi · 2004-03-01 01:21 · Score: 1

Not because of your reasons but I agree. The act of calling ANYTHING related to precise science "art" can not be anything but a mis(ab)used metaphore. People are getting carried away in their desire to approach science achievements to art.

--
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!

Documentus Legalus by Icephreak1 · 2004-03-01 01:22 · Score: 2, Offtopic

That godforsaken article reads like a legal document! Surely it wasn't written by any kind of literary hacker. I quit reading after the third paragraph.

Remember that KISS principle thingamajig.

- IP

Re:Documentus Legalus by Pike65 · 2004-03-01 01:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

Ditto.

In the time it would have taken me to read that I could have coded a web server, downloaded the X2 demo and solved the Middle Eastern peace problem.

What ever happened to the art of being concise?

--
"If being a geek means being passionate about something, then I pity those who aren't geeks." - Pike65

I always thought... by WegianWarrior · 2004-03-01 01:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

..that 'art' was whatever an 'artist' managed to sell for money to someone with even less insight into what art is than myself...

I may know little about art in a formal manner, but I know what I like. To me, a piece of art should in some way speak to the beholder on an emotional level. By that definition, hacking is not an artform - at least not in my eyes. YMMV off course, but I would define it rather more as a skill or a knack than as an (artistic) ability.

--
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.

Re:I always thought... by JaredOfEuropa · 2004-03-01 01:55 · Score: 1

To me, a piece of art should in some way speak to the beholder on an emotional level. By that definition, hacking is not an artform - at least not in my eyes.
By that definition, hacking is not an artform, but a /. article about hacking is! Judging by the often emotional replies such an article receives... ;-)
YMMV off course, but I would define it rather more as a skill or a knack than as an (artistic) ability.
I agree that hacking isn't art, but I do think that it requires something you might call an 'artistic ability'. Hacking, creating programs and creating art all require a similar mindset, and perhaps similar mental processes. Hacking and art both require a creative mind, but that does not make hacking itself an art.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...

Patents for Creative Hacking? by leoaugust · 2004-03-01 01:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

This expansion of the term "hackers" is a great idea. Now if we could just combine it with the idea of making really "creative hacks" patentable, we might have a solution to the whole mess of US Patents, and democratize the gold rush towards the "patent extortion money" pie.

"... everyone who creates anything is a hacker -- programmers, artists, musicians, writers, engineers, chemists and so on are all hackers and, no matter how culturally diverse we may be, as creators we have convergent interests,"

Think about it for a moment. Creativity deserves to be patentable. Once a hack is patented the "hacker" will then try to dissuade others from using it till they pay him for the rights to use it. Thus we have transferred the policing of the hack to the hacker itself! That is advantage number one.

Advantage number 2 stems from the fact that why let SCO (and other similar scum) try to get away with the patent extortion money. Let all the others who are really creative (hackers) get a share of it too. This way, everyone, programmers, artists, musicians, writers, engineers, chemists, and so on, are now eligible for patents (much better than the measley copyrights) and the patent extortion pie.

And the bonus advantage of making the "creative hacks" patentable is that it would flood the US Patent Office and wash away its patenting sins, and maybe force it to stop giving out dumb patents.

.

--
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...

Plan9 is the fine art of the hacking world by DrSkwid · 2004-03-01 01:34 · Score: 3, Informative

Plan9; the most beautiful code in the most beautiful OS with the prettiest mascot.

--
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter

Re:Correct. by fyonn · 2004-03-01 01:37 · Score: 1

not suer I agree with you. why can science not be art also? science is not as exact as it seems. if you look at the work of artists such as escher. many of their famous artworks are based firmly on mathematical principles (ie strange loops, isomorphism, recursion etc).

dave

For the true unbelievers ... by SuperDuG · 2004-03-01 01:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

Look at the projects we can view the source for ...

Linux, Gnome, KDE, OpenOffice, Mozilla, and ummm lets choose, VI.

These code bases are beautiful works which entail blood, sweat, passion, and thought. There are pieces of Art that I think shouldn't qualify as its not an expression of the creator, yet just a piece of art for arts sake.

Just as not all code is something that is enjoyable for many reasons but some being that the end result sucks or the code is so piss poor the end result sucks.

Is Linus a genuis, nope, is he quite possibly the most creative man in OSS programming, sure. I don't think Linus is a superhuman by any means, but I do know he posses the talent to see something and then make it happen. Just as you can have an artist look at a canvas and then paint the mona lisa on it. Its the coders that can see a picture of what they want the end product to look like and make it happen, is the same as an artist looking towards a canvas and seeing the finished product before anyone else can.

So yes, hacking is an art form, but like any art, not just anyone can do it.

--
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed

But why? by Realistic_Dragon · 2004-03-01 01:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why do all these programmers want to be considered artists anyway?

An artist is someone who ignores function and concentrates on form where they think beauty lies. An engineer is someone who sees beauty in pure dedication to achieving a function in the most efficient fashion.

A perfectly calculated arching cantilever is beautiful, a painting of a waterfall is just an inferior copy.

-- An Engineer

--
Beep beep.

Re:But why? by JaredOfEuropa · 2004-03-01 02:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why do all these programmers want to be considered artists anyway?
Because programmers are just like normal human beings, in the sense that most of them have that subconscious yearning for the approval and respect of their fellow man.

Now look at the amount of respect society at large bestows on artists and programmers / engineers. Artists are generally well-regarded... even the people who think that most artists are lazy and weird, can muster some respect for them. Contrast that with the amount of appreciation programmers garner these days. Most non-techs have little respect for programmers, or geeky activities in general.

A perfectly calculated arching cantilever is beautiful, a painting of a waterfall is just an inferior copy.
Yet very few 'regular' people will notice the beauty in beautiful bridges... but will fork over good money for that painting of a waterfall. Unsurprisingly... to appreciate the beauty of most engineering works, you have to have at least some working knowledge of the underlying principles. But if you know nothing about painting, proportion, shading and composition, you are still able to be moved emotionally by a piece of art. And that is what art is about.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Re:But why? by TwistedGreen · 2004-03-01 02:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

That's certainly an interesting observation... but could non-functional art (such as a painting or sculpture) also be considered beautiful based on these parameters, on a more physical level? Does the efficiency of the construction of even a nonfunctional piece of work contribute to its beauty?

I see that you are suggesting a duplicity in the definition of beauty, yet it is apparent that they are tied together on a fundamental level. One definition is of a mathematical beauty, which values efficiency as an aesthetic. The other capitalizes on organic beauty, the result of human perception and evolved cognitive processes. However, these perceptions are the result of natural forces of evolution which itself values efficiency. Therefore, what is mathematically efficient is also humanly aesthetic: form and function are intimately related. This suggests that there does exist a universal, unified beauty which is present in design, be it functional or not.

This is why programmers can also be artists.
Re:But why? by Vellmont · 2004-03-01 03:06 · Score: 1

An artist is someone who ignores function and concentrates on form where they think beauty lies.

Those are the crappy artists, the ones who think art is about "beauty". Unfortunately they're the majority. (And most of them can't even produce what they're trying to produce). The good artists try to communicate what can't be communicated through words. That's much harder than producing everyday beauty.

I will agree with you that artists tend concentrate too much of form, and function is some sort of basard stepchild. Crappy architects like Frank Lloyd Wright are exhaulted, even though he made dissfunctional buildings. People like Wright are hacks and have hypnotized the masses into ignoring their crappy disfunctional designs by their use of "prettiness".

As far as the "programming is art" discussion goes, I think art has the perception of being about freedom, whereas engineering has the perception of being narrow minded and closed. To escape this many programmers grasp onto the "programming must be art" idea to try to escape the perceived closedness of engineering.

In reality art isn't freedom, and engineering isn't narrow mindedness. In many ways the world of art can be seen as very narrow minded and closed. The current styles that're in vogue are as closed as you can get. The snobbery of the art world isn't a stereotype that comes from a vacuum. In contrast engineering is as open as the laws of physics, and computation will allow. The laws that judge what's good and bad are simply if it works well or not, and generally don't change with the direction of the wind. No one says "steel is out this year as a medium.. why don't you work with brass instead?".

--
AccountKiller
Re:But why? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 03:16 · Score: 0

Why do all these programmers want to be considered artists anyway?

Because they want to be special. Engineers are just workers. People think they understand engineering, even if they can't do it themselves. Artists (in some views) have an elitism and distance to them that sets them apart from other people.

Anyway, I don't think I agree with you. I'd say that engineering is design to a purpose. Art is design to an emotion or feeling. They are somewhat orthogonal, so an engineering design can also be art. Actually, I'd say that that's where an article like this comes from: the same things that make a design emotionally appealing often demonstrate quality design from a practical standpoint. Symmetry and simplicity are often elements of both good design and good art.

Reading "Complications" (reviewed on Slashdot a while ago), the author mused on how medicine is practiced as an art, when there is much evidence that it would have better results if practiced with more of an engineering approach. I'd say the same thing, only moreso, about programming/computer science. First you have to learn and follow discipline: follow the rules and guidelines of programming, get it written, make it work. When you have that down, then you can make it art, not before. (And as many martial arts stories will tell you, it takes many years of discipline before you might "get it" enough to move on.) Looking at Slashdot responses to things like "schedules" and "estimates", you see that there is a long way to go.

As long as programmers consider thier "art" more important than their "engineering", software will continue to suck.

-- Another Engineer
Re:But why? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 04:03 · Score: 0

And when I see your perfectly arching cantilever, I think of a breast, and wonder which is the inferior copy.
Re:But why? by ExoticMandibles · 2004-03-01 04:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, I dunno about you, but I consider myself both. And I've got the paper to prove it!

I have a Bachelor of Arts in Computer Science, bestowed upon me by the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Re:But why? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 09:11 · Score: 0

The Tacoma Narrows bridge was certainly beautiful. A real artistic masterpiece!
Re:But why? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 18:27 · Score: 0

a mathematician very typically will ignore function (at least an any sense an engineer would use the word) and will concentrate on form where she thinks beauty might lay.

the fundemental theorem of algebra is far more beautiful than any bridge, space ship, or computer program.

pure mathematics is an art that engineers should (and do) humble themsevles before.

if hackers are artists, so are bus drivers, by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:55 · Score: 0

so are we all, we are all artists carving our creative juices through the continuing torrent of everyday ups and downs...

wooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh heavy man!

Or maybe someone is trying to pull the wool ?

Nice try.

---
Not a sig.

New York City Hackers by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 01:59 · Score: 2, Informative

Streaming video of NEW YORK CITY HACKERS plus extras available at http://uit.no/breifilm/4276/1 (norwegian). Direct movie link: http://uit.no/breifilm/4276/3

Don't glorify this nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

Hacking an Art? Hardly. Don't try to further glorify this nonsense, little hacker groupies.

And if anyone is considering reading the article with the lame 'manifesto', just read this one paragraph with its rambling, babbling nonsense...

"Production produces all things, and all producers of things. Production produces not only the object of the production process, but also the producer as subject. Hacking is the production of production. The hack produces a production of a new kind, which has as its result a singular and unique product, and a singular and unique producer. Every hacker is at one and the same time producer and product of the hack, and emerges in its singularity as the memory of the hack as process."

Trying to sound intelligent and profound? You fail miserably.

Re:Don't glorify this nonsense. by Jim_Hawkins · 2004-03-01 02:18 · Score: 3, Insightful

Wow...
I've read some bad writing in my day, but this tops 'em all. And I have to agree with the parent post here -- trying to sound intelligent usually nosedives into complete and utter nonsense.
Maybe we should work on the Art of Writing first.
Re:Don't glorify this nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 17:28 · Score: 0

it sounds like Marx through the cone of seclusion. Simply put:

1. Everyone that makes something is affectd in some way by the production of that thing. The trick is to understand how. Marx thought all workers are falsely conscious, ie they believe the lies told by their employers, this keeps them working.

so this paragraph tries to say 'hackers have true consciousness and the rest of you are dumb.' without having to say so.

To everyone claiming code isn't art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sorry, you're wrong. Code is art. We're talking about design, not mechanics. Questions like: functional, procedural, or object-oriented design paradigm? Plug-ins or scripting for extension? How will networking and persistence be handled? How will the software test itself? Which design patterns should be applied in what combination?

The choices require experience and creativity, and it is truly art and beauty at the design level. If you can't see it as art, then sorry, you lack the design experience to understand.

Re:To everyone claiming code isn't art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you can't see it as art, then sorry, you lack the design experience to understand.

Ahh, the old "If you won't think exactly like I do, then you're just a big dummy" defense. That will surely win you some converts.
Re:To everyone claiming code isn't art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:23 · Score: 0

mod grandparent down - troll!
mod parent up - insightful AND amusing!
Re:To everyone claiming code isn't art... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-02 06:53 · Score: 0

Ahh, the old "make it an insult" attack. That will surely win you some converts.
Re:To everyone claiming code isn't art... by GTownBeast · 2004-03-03 04:40 · Score: 1

Sweet mother of crap, this is starting to sound like the "(Cheerleading/golf/chess/whatever isn't a sport" debate...

--
Rumor has it... that Catholic School Girls Rule

Re:Correct. by orthogonal · 2004-03-01 02:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

The act of calling ANYTHING related to precise science "art" can not be anything but a mis(ab)used metaphore (sic)

The mathematician, contributor to the Manhattan Project -- and a founder of modern computing -- John von Neumann, considered by knowledgeable colleagues to have contributed to all fields of mathematics except topology and number theory, disagreed. Describing the qualities of a good mathematical proof, von Neumann wrote :

One also expects "elegance" in its "architectural," structural make-up. Ease of stating the problem, great difficulty in getting hold of it and in all attempts at approaching it, then again some very surprising twist by which the approach, or some part of the approach, becomes easy, etc. Also, if the deductions are lengthy or complicated, there should be some simple general principle involved, which "explains" the complications and detours, reduces the apparent arbitrariness to a few simple guiding motivations, etc. These criteria are clearly those of any creative art.... all this is much more akin to the atmosphere of art pure and simple than to that of the empirical sciences.

(John von Neumann as quoted in William Poundstone, Prisoner's Dilemma).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, given von Neumann's seminal influence on computer programming, his description of a good mathematical proof reads to me very much like a qualities I expect to see in a good algorithm, function, or class when I'm reading or writing code. Foe me, elegance is always of first importance when I -- and I use the word consciously -- craft code: a function that does not flow, a class the instances of which cannot be used in an elegant and (at least from the user's point of view) transparent way, is almost always bad code, and illuminates a lack of understanding on the part of the coder.

Kludges are offensive, not because they don't work -- the only justification for a kludge, after all, is that if nothing else, it works -- but because they are indicative of a lack of craft, and because they indicate a lack of understanding, either on the part of the coder himself, or the on the part of framework/clases/language he is coding in or with. A kludge is bad because it is the pulled thread in the fabric of the program, a pulled thread that threatens or exposes a potential for further and MORE disastrous unravelling.

--
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?

Re:But why? Well YOURE no artist.. by SlashDread · 2004-03-01 02:37 · Score: 1

If you say Artists ignore function, pop-art (and boatloads of later art) has apparently escaped your radar.

"/Dread"

what do you expect, It was written by a child by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 02:51 · Score: 0

I'm in junior high

yes and when you become a Man not a Boy you will realise the difference in your outlook is immense, but of course you know best right ?.

funny how those that cry "everything should be free" the loudest seem to have somene else picking up their part of the bill (in this case parents)

Re:what do you expect, It was written by a child by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 16:00 · Score: 0

funny how those that cry "everything should be free" the loudest seem to have somene else picking up their part of the bill (in this case parents)

...because they can't pay for it themselves. I learned photoshop because I pirated it; took me 2 weeks to download on a 14.4 modem. I learned Pascal and C++ the same way. Im graduating from college soon (Computer Science) and I can't even imagine where I would be (Political Science?) if it were not for software piracy. When a kid wants to use a $600 peice of software, maybe you should just let him.

Chaos, definetly by trezor · 2004-03-01 03:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

The Microwave heating abilities were discovered when fried pigeons kept falling down around a radar-center somwhere. (No, I didn't bother to google)

It was definetly not an invention out of a ingenious mind, more like a random discovery when doing something completely unrelated.

Out of chaos/not-chaos, this would have to be chaos. But I'd rather say coincidental.

--
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.

You sir, are mistaken. by trezor · 2004-03-01 03:10 · Score: 2, Informative

If someone just decided to write a bunch of random letters in a nice shape and try to compile it, it wouldn't work.

You sir, are mistaken :)

Ok, the letters themselves may not be random, but it's still a nice piece of code!

--
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.

with limitations by wfolta · 2004-03-01 03:11 · Score: 3

Actually, the most important thing I've found in art is the very thing that so many pseudo-artistic/expressive people loathe: limitations.

The most creative things I've seen/done involved some kind of restriction on the methods, tools, subject, viewpoint, etc.

In that sensem, it's chaos and limitations, like pouring plaster (chaotic) into a mold (limitation). Like sculpture, it's not what you put in, but what you leave out.

Not entirely true.... by quinkin · 2004-03-01 03:28 · Score: 4, Funny

Not entirely true....

Not entirely true....
Even in poetry you have to remain within the confines of what defines "poetry".
If I just pour some ink on the page, make a big ol' ink blob... that isn't poetry.
If I crumple up some paper in a big ball, that isn't poetry.
If I cut off my ear and stick it in a plastic box, it isn't poetry.
If I run naked through my back yard, it isn't poetry.

-- by Ephemeriis (315124) on Monday March 01, @08:42AM (#8428306)

Now that's poetry...

Q.

--
Insert Signature Here

Damn, that's funny by quinkin · 2004-03-01 03:33 · Score: 1

If I hadn't just posted I'd mod you up.

Hoffstadter references... what will the world bring next? :)

Q.

--
Insert Signature Here

Re:Damn, that's funny by fyonn · 2004-03-01 04:47 · Score: 1

I'm reading it right now, which is why it came to mind. been trying to finish the book for well over a decade. I've started afresh for the 6th time or so :) this time I will finish it, I promise! :)

dave

Define art first... by cherokee158 · 2004-03-01 03:41 · Score: 5, Interesting

I think there are as many definitions of what constitutes "art" as there are aspiring artists (or their parasitical campfollowers, art critics).

I'm a traditionally trained commercial artist. (You are welcome to slashdot my site at spanishcastle.com to confirm that pronouncement). I also have done a limited amount of programming. I find them to be two distinctly different experiences, but not altogether different. I think any act of creation done in the pursuit of excellence can be considered art.

However, I tend to prefer my own simple formula for answering the age old question: is it art? They are:

1) Is it beautiful? (which is a loaded question, too, really)
2) Would you have it in your home? (or, in the case of large works, in your town?)
3) Five hundred years from now, when some future archeologist digs it up, will it still be recognizable as art?

Obviously, some art forms are simply too ephemeral (like music or dance) to meet these conditions completely...although you could also argue that the best of them are preserved in one fashion or another (symphonies are committed to paper, and dances are taught to the next generation)

I think programming might be considered more akin to graphic art than fine art.

Fine art is a form of expression. I am not sure how well programming does this. Were it not for commented code, I don't how one could discern the author of a great piece of code from another.

Graphic art is a form of communication, which programming is designed to do, after a fashion. It is a means whereby a person may communicate with a machine.

Perhaps only machines know the difference? Perhaps we are bearing witness to a new form of art: machine art. Maybe one day, sentient machines will look and marvel at the elegance and simplicity of some tidy bit of code with the same fascination and admiration we might admire an artist's rendering of our own universe today.

I'm still waiting for both hardware and software manufacturers to address the issue of permanence, though...

Re:Define art first... by monique · 2004-03-01 06:53 · Score: 1

Fine art is a form of expression. I am not sure how well programming does this. Were it not for commented code, I don't how one could discern the author of a great piece of code from another.

I think you probably could, if you spent as much time analyzing others' code as some people do studying art. I can most definitely recognize certain *ugly* tendencies in code as belonging to particular individuals!

--
-monique
Re:Define art first... by trouser · 2004-03-01 09:51 · Score: 1

Is it useless? Was it intended to be useless? Probably art.

--
Now wash your hands.
Re:Define art first... by chickenwing · 2004-03-01 11:27 · Score: 1

The thing about programming is that you have to have the appropriate level of fluency (in relation to what you are looking at) to appreciate the elegance of a particular design. So amongst programmers, it is an art, but there is no way for the general public to appreciate programming as art.
Re:Define art first... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 15:05 · Score: 0

I tried to view your web page, all I saw was blackness.

Oh, I need a flash plugin to see it?? The why in the hell do you call it a webpage if has no html????

Why don't you call it your flash page? That would at least be honest. Your claim is a lie. I tend to think of liars as bad artists, con artists really, though a con could be a great hack, but that would be too close to being on topic and this is a troll.
Re:Define art first... by cherokee158 · 2004-03-02 00:33 · Score: 1

That's an interesting postition. The fine art world often defends their art on the same grounds. Tome Wolfe has a rather scathing but fascintating book on the subject called "The Painted Word", which I recommend to art lovers.

I suppose all art rather depends on context...

this kind of self-justifying wine does little to.. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 03:57 · Score: 0

Kids throwing rocks because they didn't know what was behind the wall. Perhaps the most astute analogy to hackerdom there is.

Too bad you can't see it.

Programming is essentially a creative endeavor by rafael_es_son · 2004-03-01 04:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

Programming is essentially a creative endeavor where beauty emerges from the harmonious implementation of function - i.e. a function (creation) in harmony with the object (material or imagined) which is the program's intention to model and with a given set of factors or rules (the API, language, instruction set.) This kind of creativity is in this sense more akin to that expressed in building architecture and industrial design than that expressed in the fine arts and philosophy.

Terming programming as a fine art is quite a stretch apart from the latter's primary concern - which is the creation of beautiful objects. Programming's primary concern is the creation of interactive models of objects in harmony with their material or imaginary counterparts and the boundaries that define the model space.

In this other sense, the aesthetic pleasure derived from programming or observing beautiful code is similar in nature to that derived from the construction or contemplation of philosophical concepts - both can recur to visual metaphors but are in essence invisible.

--
HAD

Work not CHAOS by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 04:06 · Score: 0

Work drives the creative process! Chaos doesn't drive anything, chaos is.

Then comes the designer with purpose and skill.

From there emerges, through work, the Masterpiece by imposing order in chaos.

"Just as neither an engine nor an orchestra
nor a sports team can perform without
the integrated cooperation of all its parts,
so a work of art or architecture cannot fulfill
its function and transmit its message
unless it presents an ordered pattern."
-Rudolf Arnheim

creative? by kyw · 2004-03-01 04:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Art work is there to create an atmosphere, to procure an emotion, so it has a function.

Its not because the function is psychological that it is inexistent. The summit is to be able to associate beautiful with practical form, and that's what design is all about.

I have seen beautiful designs by hackers, so to me many have artistic concepts, and are inspired.

Hacking a way of slicing reality for mathematical minds?
A good cook is creative in his art so is a doctor undertaking a chirurgic operation, so is, so is so is.....

All professions have their amount of creativity, and some are more creative then others, no matter the occupation.

In all cases, the inventor has to master the rules who define the medium he applies, thus to use the maximum possibilities, for the creation to be well balanced, i.e. ingredients in the case of a dish, colours for a painting, sounds for music, etc...

Redefining hackers by arsinmsn · 2004-03-01 04:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

I really can't wholeheartedly suggest that anyone RTFM[anifesto]--it is pretty tough going. (Incredibly, it is apparently shorter than previous versions. Groan.)

The manifesto attempts to redefine "hacker" as pretty much anyone who reworks intellectual material. At this stage of the world, this includes a substantial swath of humanity. Politically, this places a bunch of knowledge workers alongside each other in the trenches, all working to reap the benefits of their insights rather than being victimized by the amusingly named & nefarious "vectorists," who aspire to possess not only all means of communication (vectors) but stocks of information (archives) and flows of information (?just-in-time news coverage?) as well.

Under the banner that information should be free, the manifesto envisages a fairly nebulous post-factional regime that sounds a lot like contemporary anarchism.

To worry about whether or not you like the idea that hackers are artists is to get it exaclty backwards, the point of this is to convince all other knowledge workers that they are hackers. I think that the manifesto author presumes that other knowledge workers should be being flattered by being considered hackers, and that they will be so tickled that they will embrace the notions of the manifesto.

This is not to say that there is not some food for thought here; though sometimes obscurely worded, it really does have some interesting takes on the economy of invention. My caution to readers of the comments, is that whether or not you support this broadening of the term hacker, be careful that you don't accidentally side with a political agenda simply on the basis of that definition.

Art vs. Craft by KludgeGrrl · 2004-03-01 04:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

The idea that something is "art" is a pretty recent idea, in the big scheme of things. What distinguishes "art" from a well crafted thing is difficult to define.

Throughout most of history there were people who mastered crafts. They might be sculptors, painters, cabnetry-makers... And we might look at what they did and say "Hey, that's art! He's a real artist." But what does that mean?

The programmer who writes a workable kludge is a craftperson, and doesn't aspire to art. Yet if s/he is trying to do something more than simply get the damn program to work, the code might be art. It might be beautiful. It might be clever. Might even be a commentary on larger themes... rather like what I conceive of as art.

In my wholly subjective view, craft is craft, art is craft that aspires to do more. And if that is so then why couldn't a hacker produce art? But feel free to disagree!

True Hackers by Sparky77 · 2004-03-01 05:31 · Score: 0

How many true hackers really exist? Seems to me that it's mostly just script kiddies anymore.

--
One bad monkey spoils the whole barrel.

Crab Canon? by quinkin · 2004-03-01 05:57 · Score: 1

I think it's written as a crab canon. Once you (eventually) get to the end, you turn it over and read it backwards. :)

Actually my Monty Python book is written that way...

Q.

--
Insert Signature Here

craft is not poor art by obtuse · 2004-03-01 08:24 · Score: 1

Elegance is a kind of beauty, so call it art if you like. I prefer the word craft. Before you take offense at this, I also think that the term craft has been devalued by assuming that the distinction is only one of skill. Artists study technique to improve their craft, but there is fine art with poor craft.

And there is great craft that isn't art, Paul Revere, or any comparable silversmith would likely been called a craftsman rather than an artist, although he made beautiful unique objects that reside in fine art museums today. Not everyone who made such things was regarded as a craftsman, only one dedicated enough to do it well. Beautiful craft can be so compelling that it gets called art, but I'd submit that is largely because true craft has become rare when everything is mass produced.

Mass production and devaluing craft has also lowered tolerance for trivial imperfections. Why try to make something when it won't be machine perfect? It is easy to forget other values than surface polish. Since I like to make things myself, I decided to try making my own wedding ring, forging it from silver. It could have been perfectly smooth, but my wife asked that I leave planishing marks on it so that it still had the marks of being hand made.

Craft is a worthy pursuit in itself. Music is good example, since not everyone who plays a musical instrument is an artist. Today, relatively few play instruments, but as recently as my great-granparents generation, in order to have music one had to be with people who played it, or play music oneself. In this age of recorded music, many fewer people make music, and their expectations are distorted by popular music and its production values. A singer's voice is corrected, tracks are played until they are perfect and then overlaid with other pieces developed similarly. The result is spectacular, but hearing a friend sing and play the guitar means much to me.

I'm not sure I can define the distinction between art and craft, but I think it may be a matter of intention and limitations. For example, commercial art (which I would describe as a craft) has very specific and narrow intentions from the outset. If there is ambiguity, it is within very safe boundaries. Craft is typically engaged in with a particular purpose from the outset.

Ultimately, the distinction is nearly meaningless. I may find a work of art less compelling than craft. I like to make this distinction to call attention to the values of craftsmanship, but call it art if you like.

--
Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.

Not so by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 08:55 · Score: 0

The process is not driven by chaos. The process is driven by the desire to overcome chaos.

are you an artist? by freejamesbrown · 2004-03-01 08:58 · Score: 1

because you sure don't sound like one.

engineers get paid. all the great inventors and scientists do get the culture and notice.

einstein? hawking? edison? linus? wozniac?

for every michelango, there is a newton.

if you were an artist you'd know we don't get paid shit for any of the work we care about. most of it goes un-noticed until after we die, and that's only if we were truly ahead of our time and actually a master.

there is no recognition. only authors and musicians and film-makers ever get theirs, and that's partly due to the money making machine pushing them out to profit.

near as i can figure, those of us who wear both hats want to be artists because that's our true love. art has a romanticism that science can definitely match, but oh, the girls in the art deparment! we don't have so many of those in grad level cryptanalysis courses.

many feel like being an artist would make them love their work, and it might, but it's all pretty random tho. it's just as easy to fall astray in either field. the grass looks greener, but it's all the same grass. art can often appear to be this "anything goes!" charade that appeals to engineers designing very specific, limited nuggets of their internal abstractions.

at least engineers can pay the bills. that's ultimately what it comes down to... do you want to have the money to have a family and be secure? then science and engineering. or can you can ride on the wind and eat ramen, getting regularly kicked out of a shoebox? then art.

m.

Re:are you an artist? by JaredOfEuropa · 2004-03-01 09:22 · Score: 1

if you were an artist you'd know we don't get paid shit for any of the work we care about. most of it goes un-noticed until after we die, and that's only if we were truly ahead of our time and actually a master.
...
at least engineers can pay the bills. that's ultimately what it comes down to...
Respect and regard for your profession in general is not the same as public recognition for your work in particular. Nor does it directly translate to a fat paycheck.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Re:are you an artist? by freejamesbrown · 2004-03-01 10:17 · Score: 1

i think we live in different worlds then. (especially since you're getting modded up.)
m.

Business 101? by jrexilius · 2004-03-01 10:47 · Score: 1

A line from the hacker manifesto referenced in the post, would serve as a valuable business lesson to many:

"To produce is to repeat; to hack, to differentiate."

Art or Not Art by Harakon · 2004-03-01 12:21 · Score: 1

Hmm first time poster long time listener. Sorry had to say that as this is my first post. Art to me is about the process of creating but so yes any form of creation is an artistic expression but at the same time the purpose of art is to convey an emotion or feeling. So I have to ask how does programming touch people? Yes it changes life and makes things easier for people and it enriches them but does it really make them aware of what they have been unaware of or in other words does it leave them with a feeling. Programming by nature is a tool used to develop other tools. The other question that I would like to put out there is who can really see the artful work of it. Do we put the source code in places so that it can be enjoyed? So do you spend time looking and really appreciating the code and learning how to read it to see the programmer behind the programming? No all we usually look at is how effective and efficient the code is. It is a cold dead language to me that expresses ideas and processes but how can it be alive it if does not express emotions to me. The real beauty is something behind the scenes of what is created. Seem to be rambling but that is fun sometimes too. Also would like to add sorry if this thread was started somewhere else had to get these thoughts out. So how does programming embody what it means to be alive and to live in this world. Does it do that by my previous statement that our world is becoming more stale and logical with the lose of feeling. I understand the moments of developing simplifying and optimizing to the point where you have to step back and wow did i do that and that makes it all so simple and elegant. But want emotions have been felt by other programmer's? For me it is mostly frustration (not knowing), insight(knowing), and exhilaration on completion(doing). But again art is in the eye of the beholder. So what one sees as pure truth and pure beauty to another is just a waste of time and energy. So the question in itself is subjective. Boy I love to dance with my logic traps some times. Well that is all for now.

You can't have it both ways by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 13:25 · Score: 0

Either math and science are eternal and true, and immune to post-modern relativism, or the equation 1+1 = 2 is itself a subjective, mutable act of creativity.

Let me put it another way: you are very arrogant in assuming that all (or most) programming is an analogue to poetry itself, in that you fail to account for other forms of writing. A technical writer (or as they call them these days, "communicator") has to add "style and flavor" to his or her documentation -- no one wants to trudge through yet another textbook of a MAN page, and top-selling technical books (like most from O'Reily) distinguish themselves by making their dry subjects engaging and fun. I don't see you (or any /.er) trumpeting the virtues of technical writers as post-modern poets, and with good reason. If EVERYONE is a poet (including programmers writing code, and livejournal angsty teenagers discussing their emotional issues) then NO ONE is. Coming from an English major background, originally, I certainly agree that most (if not all) forms of thought are at their core interchangeable; certainly creativity and subjectivity have more to do with programming, engineering, and (even) math than has been previously widely recognized by society.

I think, however, that the only true example of programmer-as-poet would be in video game coding (or related technologies): just as the poet must, say, use the single image of a snowflake to make you remember all the glorious visions from your life surrounding winter, so too must the video game coder make the way some leaves ripple in virtual water remind you of all the beauty of natural waters you have ever seen. Just as the poet tries to remain on the "cutting edge" of thought and philosophy, the video game coder must remain on the edge of technology and the representation of reality.

From what I understand the concept of "hacker" (and what does that word mean, really, after all), I would argue that most programmer-hackers are more like essayists, slowly and thoroughly handing society back its ass through remolding preconceptions. I guess so many programmers and developers (including you) refuse to think of themselves, rhetorically, in broader terms because "OMG THAT FUCKING EVIL ENGLISH TEACHER MADE ME WRITE AN ESSAY NO WAY I'M GOING TO BE THOUGHT OF AS AN ESSAYIST" while "OMG BEOWOLF IS SUCH A COOL POEM I'M LIKE TOTALLY A POET, TOO!"

McKenzie's 'Hacker Manifesto' by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-01 16:15 · Score: 0

...reads like obfuscated pap. I just can't get through it without zoning. Seriously. I'm in my early 30s, and have been 'hacking' computers and other sundry things since I was a wee tyke. But this guy's manifesto (which precious few hackers would even read due to their profound ADD) sounds like a whole world of intellect was opened up to him after he saw that 'Hackers' movie. zzzzzzzz....

Architecture vs. Engineering by Dissonant · 2004-03-01 16:30 · Score: 1

You are both thinking of engineering, rather than architecture. While it's true that the latter encapsulates some of the former, there's a reason that the architecture department is part of the School of Fine Arts at most universities.

Charles Babbage - Ada Augusta - Lord Byron by pixelbeat · 2004-03-02 01:09 · Score: 1

The Editor of Linux User & Developer
Richard Hillesley wrote a great article in issue 36 titled
"The Poetry of Programming".

In it he detailed the connection between E De joncourt,
Charles Babbage, Ada Augusta and Lord Byron.

Truely enlightening.

Slashdot Mirror

Hackers: The Art of Abstraction

130 comments