Slashdot Mirror
Author Says It's Time To Stop Glorifying Hackers
First time accepted submitter Geste writes "Diane McWhorter pleads in this NYT Op-Ed piece that it's time to stop glorifying hackers. Among other things she rails against providers' tendencies to 'blame the victim' with advice on improved password discipline. Interesting, but what lesson are we to learn from someone who emails lists of passwords to herself?"
glorifying actors, sports figures, politicians, generals, soldiers, writers, artists, architects, Canadians, cooks, race car drivers, the old, children, dogs, accountants, spies, computer programmers, cowboys, drug smugglers, and the disabled.
Note to the press: "Hackers" doesn't mean what you think is means.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Stop falling for the clickbait, Slashdot.
And yea, that's spelled right. In all 57 states.
Next thing you know we'll stop teaching kids to look both ways before crossing the street because we're teaching people not to drive drunk. But this just isn't how the world works.
Why the hell is there a trend nowadays to call it "victim blaming" to give people advice on protecting themselves? Is it really such a bad idea for people to do things to protect their passwords?
I guess telling people to run antivirus is now "victim blaming", too.
FC Closer
So she emailed a list of passwords to herself, didn't bother encrypting it, and kept it in her on-line email account for 9 months, then she's actually surprised when she gets hacked?
I look forward to the day when America gets back to the point where people start taking responsibility for their own actions again, instead of always looking for someone else to blame (and sue) for their own stupidity.
He *emailed* himself his own password list then whines when his account gets hacked.
NO SURPRISE HERE.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Things I learned in reading that blabbering op-ed.
Earthlink is still alive. (shocking, but meh...)
Author likely uses same password for multiple publically known email accounts. (lacks even the least amount of personal information security training)
Seems to think Gawker is a respected, um, network. (HAHAHA!)
Thinks pepole hacking celebrity accounts or high-profile public figures is equivalent to what Snowden and similar whistleblowers do, at least as popularity is concerned. (Err...)
Mentions term 'white hat' like it's a mythical unicorn. (turtles all the way down....)
This is like a nail beutician, commenting on the security of a cars CAN bus. I want my 5 minutes back!
There seems to be no end to pinheads like this who run around and pontificate about crap they know nothing about. And, oh, hey, nice try impressing us with how sophisticated you are..."Oooh, look at me! I was at the museum of modern art! I'm ever so much better than you!" And, of course, she is part of the media class which spends a considerable amount of time glorifying violence to bring in entertainment dollars. The reality is that dumbshits like her owe most of their modern existence to "hackers" such as the Royal Society and others who refused to accept what they were told as conventional wisdom of the day and began "hacking" science and the natural world, producing great advances and inventions, and so on. I'll stop the rant now, and just say that useless flapjaws like her are the reason I ignore the major media...reading virtual fish wrappers like her column just wastes time I could spend doing more productive stuff which will actually help improve the lives of people instead of just making me look stupid in front of a national audience.
If you want to see what real hackers are about, come on down to H.O.P.E. this year, http://www.hope.net./ We're just a short walk away from the New York Times at the Hotel Pennsylvania.
See you there!
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
I'm a hacker,
I'm a snacker,
I'm a mid-night wacker.
I get my lovin' on the net.
Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh
Ok, we're going to snicker at someone e-mailing password lists, because we all probably understand that e-mail, by default, is sent in the clear, and is therefore not secure. It's hard for tech geeks to properly empathize with "normals" who just want to get some work done, or surf around on the net and not worry about getting their computer taken over by some malware.
Honestly, though, it's hard to blame normal users for this. Should a user have to be a computer expert in order to actually use a computer? Some might argue yes, but that doesn't seem too realistic. The fault lies with software developers who blindly rushed features out the door without giving proper thought to the security implications. Microsoft had a really bad habit of this until they made security a significant corporate priority - it's time for Apple to catch up now, as proven by the recent "goto fail" fiasco. The focus has since shifted to softer targets, first Javascript and browser exploits, and then third party plugins as those closed up, such as Adobe products or browser-based Java exploits, and the good time for hackers (no, I'm not going to call them "crackers") is still rolling on.
Honestly, I'm not sure what the answer is: Probably most casual users should actually move away from fully-powered computers and move toward safer, more locked-down systems like tablets and phones (like they have been). For people not doing serious work or creating actual content, these are more than capable, and are certain safer systems in general. Alternatively, getting set up as a limited account in an operating system with a smaller attack surface like Linux would be fine too. BTW, I don't buy the notion that Linux is inherently safer than Windows (granted, that definitely used to be true) - it's a combination of fewer threats (because it's a less rich target) and configuration options - Windows is also very safe as a limited user account). We've seen plenty of serious security holes in very popular FOSS software, even recently. But people buy computers because they actually want to do computer-like things with them, including running popular software. Limited accounts / locked-down systems are not always feasible.
One thing I'd love to see is the death of standard login-password mechanisms. It's too much of a burden for both a normal user to both create and remember a secure password, and for the website to keep that valuable user information secret. We've demonstrated again and again and again that eventually a crack will be found and the info will leak. That's why I'm hoping that something like SQRL will eventually see widespread adoption. It's biggest strength is that it doesn't require trusting ANY second or third party with secrets of any sort in order to keep your identify secure (granted, associated data can still be compromised, but your identify can't be stolen at least). It's a very promising system, but we'll see if it catches on - it's sort of a long shot. But for the time being, something like LastPass is the next best thing. Someone needs to tell the author of this article about it so she can stop e-mailing herself password lists.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
I don't think I have seen one comment that "Guccifier" did was wrong. But, there are plenty of posts calling McWhorter an idiot, a pinhead, a shithead, etc. and telling her to shut up and that it is her own fault she was hacked.
Most comments on here are verbally abusing the victim while completely ignoring the person who compromised her account and posted her personal details on line. And, I am willing to bet that if that happened to any of those posting said comments, the victim would want to kill the perpetrator.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
We glorify much worse in society.
Our top artist, Jay-Z is a man who made a career spanning over a decade rapping about being a criminal(gangsta rapper), and glorying a life soaked in drugs, loose women, and crime.
On the other hand, we have movies like zero dark thirty which glorify torture.
We glorify politicians who lie, cheat, and steal, and we encourage eachother to lie cheat and steal for them.
When a kid is bullied in school they are generally blamed for being weak, socially unfit, or making themselves a target.
Most celebrities, the people who we all mimick, do drugs, drive under the influence, sleep around, and act without a care for the rest of us. If we admit we don't like them, something is wrong with us. We re-adjust our social values around them.
We glorify the press and the news, and when they get caught lying to us, often to assassinate someones character for either social or political reasons, strut around as if their position makes them nobility, and violate each and every rule they tell us they abide by with enough regularity its safe to say they don't exist, we extoll them as the saviors of democracy.
But yes, its hackers. Hackers are making society a terrible place. If computer break ins where any other field besides computers, it would be socially accetable. If you get take advantage of financially, or make a silly mistake, well its proof the capitalists are smarter than you. If the bank takes advantage of your lack of time to fight them, its because they deserve to prey on the weak. If you break into the bank computers because the same smarty pants bankers are to daft to learn your field, your a terrorist.
Somehow hackers are glorified? Another shitty op-ed from the NY Times, a fine publication with a long history of clueless op-ed writers, and hideously snobbish double standards.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again, the NYT is a fine publication, but the opinion editorials are run by a bunch of smarmy yuppie shitheads without any real vantage point in society.