Slashdot Mirror
"Hackers" Really are Anti-Social Geeks
deflect
sent us a National Post Story
that has a psychological profile of "Hackers". Lots of
terms flipped around and lots of blatant stereotypes- although
most of them are fair (umm, of course we spend most of
our time behind computers- very few people get to be hackers
by hanging out in a dojo).
- he's talking about "crackers", not "code hackers". [deal with it, the h/cr debate is never going to die, sort of like "GIFF" vs. "JIFF". :) ]
- he's a nut. Do any of you remember the controversy over the paper he originally wrote? I remember a slashdot article linking to it - it was ridiculous. It said that crackers were sexually abused people from broken homes... huh? When I was younger (around 12/13 years old) I dabbled in that stuff, but it was because it was interesting, not because I was abused...
- He's doing a grad student, and was a former cop. A little biased.
-Stu
his definition of "coder" is the funniest thing I've read... Nice to know that all the "coders" working for Microsoft are "devising evil hacking methods.."
-Stu
A dojo is a martial arts training hall. Technically this only applies to Japanese martial arte (in Korean it's dojang, in Chinese I believe it's kwoon, and so on) but it has become a generic term.
By the way, I am a hacker, and I do hang out in a dojo (have since long before I became a hacker).
This seems to be the definition as given by the press. Note that it cites the age range for the "average cyberpunk" without a precise defintion or references how the age group is defined. The whole article was a series of quotes including hot topics such as Iraq.
While the article contains plenty of buzzwords to entertain the typical reader, me thinks this is pure sensationalism.
Of course, the article really seems to be focusing on crackers rather than hackers, and I can believe that most or at least many malicious computer attacks are committed by somebody who feels like a social outcast and who wants revenge on some segment of the society whom he feels has wronged him. And given that this guy seems to have only interviewed people convicted of committing computer crimes, perhaps that's the only sort of "cyberpunk" he's encountered in his study.
More articles from people who try to put any group in out society into one set of rules so they we can be generalized. Take for instance, the statement, "You know, all of those _____'s are ______'s anyways." That's a poor generalization and in some circumstances is the base for bigotry and racism- not a good place to start for describing any group of people. I for one, don't like the concept they argue for here that you can't work well with people and be good with a computer(or programming, or scripting, or graphics, etc.) People deal with people the way they feel comfortable, and occasionally it ties it with some feeling more comfortable at a computer... my point? Look at tech support- the good ones can talk to people and machines.
null_packet
His descriptions don't sound like hackers to me. Average age of 12 to 28? Cyberpunks? Methinks he refers to another culture.
And speaking of anti-social, how come there wasn't a forum to talk back at?
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Still, after all the years I have been geeking, I have just not gotten the "anti-social hacker" stereotype.
:)
I think the root of the problem is this: The "hackers" who get the most attention in the media are the ones who crack into systems. Aka: "Crackers" (Once we get around to getting hacker and cracker defined in the AP Style Journal, hopefully that will change.. But thats another story). The average cracker is a waste of brain cells who sits home scanning addr blocks for common holes looking for sites to crack. Yes, these people have no lives. No creativity either. I can remember very few "cracked sites" where I though some creativity was put into the page they put up.. (Not that I condone cracking pages..)
The main reason I am offended by the hacker vs. cracker vocabulary problems in the media is because I find myself compared to anti-social script kiddie idiots.
The average white hat is actually a pretty social person. Ususaly someone who like to share what they know with others in public forums. (At least from my experence..)
Bah.. I'm babbling again..
...
. "The future masters of technology will have to be lighthearted and
...
. "The future masters of technology will have to be lighthearted and
. intelligent. The machine easily m
Sorry, but I think real science is not terribly concerned with justifying stereotypes.
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
I'm really starting to wonder what the defintion of a dysfunctional family is. It seems that wherever you look nowadays, you find dysfuctional families. Everyone in school is from a dysfunctional family. Every criminal is from a dysfunctional family.
So what does it mean to be dysfunctional? Is it a requirement that you've been institutionalized, hostipalized, and robbed blind at the hands of family members, or is it something as simple as "my mommy spanked me when I was 5 because I threw the dog off the roof and I've never been the same since"
Script kiddies, which I consider to be more of a nuisense than those who actually know something about what they're doing, are likely not from dysfunctional families at all. They're just morons in need of a severe beating at the hands of someone they hacked to discourage further agressive behaviour at the keyboard.
As for breaking into the highly classified pentagon systems, I still have a hard time believing that. Secure systems like that would be next to impossible to breach, even by dedicated, sophisticated crackers who know what they're doing and have the equipment and training necessary. Even attempting to break into those systems is a federal crime, and I believe that might be what they're referring to.
-Restil
restil@alignment.net
Play with my webcams and lights here