Slashdot Mirror
Why Your IT Department Needs To Staff a Hacker
First time accepted submitter anaphora writes "In this TED Talk, Rory Sutherland discusses the need for every company to have a staff member with the power to do big things but no budget to spend: these are the kinds of individuals who are not afraid to recommend cheap and effective ways to solve big company problems. This article argues that, in the IT world, this person is none other than a highly-skilled hacker. From the article: 'To the media, the term “hacker” refers to a user who breaks into a computer system. To a programmer, “hacker” simply means a great programmer. In the corporate IT field, hackers are both revered as individuals who get a lot done without a lot of resources but feared as individuals who may be a little more “loose cannon” than your stock IT employee. Telling your CEO you want to hire a hacker may not be the best decision for an IT manager, but actually hiring one may be the best decision you can make.'"
I don't need a hacker on staff. I'll just leave a few ports open, like FTP, Telnet, HTTP, RDP, etc. They'll find me and I won't have to spend a cent on payroll! ;-)
They must have had a slow day at TED and needed a talking head.
I think teh point of the original article is not to build your IT staff out of hackers-that-don't-shave-and-keep-swords-under-their-pillow. But having one in the corner that will recall you periodically that "we don't need a supercomputer, we can do it in excel" is sane for a team.
I become very wary when the higher-ups start talking about fixing problems without spending any money. It's usually corporate-speak for "Do everything for nothing." Some things are WORTH spending money on. Some things you absolutely NEED to spend money on. And hacking together cheap solutions only makes it even more problematic when one of these situations arises (Expect to hear "Hey, why do you need a budget bump now? You did fine last year on next-to-nothing"). Corporate culture almost demands that you spend at least enough money each year to not shock the hell out of the boss when you really NEED it one year.
Not to mention that hacked solutions tend to be a fucking NIGHTMARE to maintain over the long-term. Think about the day your "hacker" leaves and his replacement has to come in and try to figure out his predecessor's jerry-rigged mess.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
I'm a big fan of standardized solutions from a name big enough to provide consistent support. That said, sometimes 2 hours spent writing a script is cheaper than 20,000 spent to your vendor to accomplish the same thing.
It's a balance, and it's up to the manager to determine the best financial choice.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
One of the most annoying things I deal with at work is people who think they are "hackers". The best and brightest people follow the rules - that's why they are the best. They break the rules in great times of need. When a project blows up on the weekend and we are going to miss an SLA, etc.
The idea that you want to work with someone who spends their time trying to half-ass things to save themselves time is not only stupid, it's completely the opposite of what you want in a professional environment.
"Hack" in your spare time. Enjoy it, have fun. I know I do. My home-grown projects have none of the constraints my work does. But, don't do it on my company time.
You're joking, right? A hacker is, by definition, someone overqualified for every job where the dress code includes the word "business" in its description. Why the hell would someone like that want to work for peanuts, creating miracles out of thin air with no budget? Because they find it challenging? Bitch, please -- we want to get paid, and if I'm working for a place that values IT so little they can't even come up with a budget for things that would (by your own definition!) render improvements to their infrastructure, what are the odds of promotion? A raise? Benefits? Answer: Zilch. Nothing. Nodda. Zero.
I know it's an unrelated field, and some of you will probably laugh, but when I was in school for graphic design (I already know enough for a degree in IT), one of the things my first teacher told me is: Don't work for free. You're not going to get any exposure, leads are worthless, and charity work doesn't get the bills paid. As a graphic designer, most of us are self-employed and it's essential we know to the nearest half-hour mark how long a project is going to take in billable hours. We need to make our own budget for every project, and everyone and I mean everyone is looking for free work or thinking they can do it themselves with photoshop.
IT is approaching the same commoditization of labor -- Many of us are "contractors" already, but eventually people are going to wise-up and become self-employed because contractors are paid shit and treated as such. Be ahead of the curve people: Don't work for peanuts, and if someone says "there's no budget for what you do," take the hint and move on.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Someone who has coding chops but whose happy place is 50 pages deep in documentation.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
It doesn't sound like that's what they're talking about.
I think they're talking about the "I'll just get shit done where it needs doing, by whatever means I feel most appropriate" type worker. In my work experience, that guy is usually the one that is just an OK programmer, but the only one in the building that actually knows how to work on his machine, too. He probably also doesn't much mind office politics because he'll blow right past it and deal with any fallout when the problem is solved. He may or may not have read the manual. He's the practical person more than the academic, if you're brave enough to stereotype like that. ;)
You wouldn't believe the supposed "really great programmers" I've seen that just throw their hands up when something goes sideways on their workstation, or sit on their hands for days over a management dispute. They're there for one job, to write textbook quality code for a single project, collect the paycheck and be out the door at 5:01 unless someone insists that he stay. That's it. If anything else happens that complicates that arrangement, it's like a train derailment.
I know, I'm being a bit obtuse about the difference where there's a million shades of grey... but it's something I've seen a lot and I agree with the general point.
Agreed. Quality work is made by following processes and using checks and balances, not by trying to patch holes with someone who doesn't understand the whole picture.
One pfSense install later (and a call to corporate) and they were back up and running. Was it done with checks and balances? Approval all the way up the chain of command? A plan? A review? No. They simply said "Do whatever needs to be done and get it back online as quickly as possible." Done. At the next maintenance window, the pfSense 'hack' was replaced.
In the context of the article, the 'hacker' needs to be your 'go to guy' when you are looking for a brilliant solution to a tough problem. (And I'm not saying pfSense was some sort of 'brilliant' solution--I'm saying that it was 'brilliant' and a bit 'magic' to the IT-types at this company....which is why they are no longer Fortune 500)
True enough. If you really want to hire one, though, replace the name "hacker" with "troubleshooter" or "all-round developer". Management can understand why you would want to hire a troubleshooter, as opposed to a hacker who "just makes trouble".
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
There's just one problem that comes with that, and it's called management expectations. I've been doing that sort of hacks for a while. Management says "we need an automated reporting application that gathers data from 5 different sources and displays nicely formatted reports on a web page, 24/7, every 15 minutes, but we don't have a budget for that sort of thing". I got an old desktop, installed Apache, installed an Office suite, created some VBA code that did all that. The reports were displayed best in IE only; under FX, the colors were a bit garbled but oh well, it was a quick hack. Right?
Wrong. Management wanted FX compatibility. I talked them out of it, but it took me longer than actually writing the damn code in the first place. Then they wanted historical data, so I expanded my script to do that. Then they wanted e-mails to be sent to them automatically because they were too fucking lazy to check the damn webpage. Then they wanted 2 more data sources included in the consolidated reports. Then they wanted reports customization.
We have a saying here in my country which sounds like this: "You can't make a whip out of shit and expect to crack it". But management expected just that. There's a pretty thick line between aiming for more and being flat out ridiculous. And needless to say, I am not a programmer and never been one, my job was different but I took this project to see what could I accomplish.
That's the problem right there: you do something with nothing and then they expect you to do just that and more of it indefinitely. So good luck in hiring a "just get shit done" guy. It's good to have one. But the temptation to abuse him is high and most management level dudes have no clue when they cross the line.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
but B.A. Barabbas
Is he the one who pities the fool who put Jesus on the cross?
You just described the job requirement for a trade floor tech. I've been working in the trade support role for ~10 years and that's exactly what we do. On a trade floor where seconds count management doesn't care if you skirt company policy to get a problem solved in the shortest amount of time. IT can address the issue formally post trade close. Corporate IT doesn't always get the urgency with these environments and explaining to them why you need the firewall turned off because it just went postal and started blocking the main trading hub isn't likely to get you anywhere.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
There is a difference. The hacker is an expert in haste and improvisation. When the network is down due to a failure of a nonredundant fiber interface, the troubleshooter is the one who leaves everyone working on pen and paper while a 24-hour urgent delivery of a new SPF is arranged. The hacker is the one who is trailing ethernet cable out of the window on the top floor and back in on the bottom to make a quick-and-dirty workaround that'll have the network somewhat operational again in fifteen minutes.
This is why Scotty always padded his time estimates.