mhiller
asks this interesting question:
"When those of us who code refer to ourselves as 'hackers'
in mixed company, we always have to explain exactly what we
mean by that - that we're not trying to crack into NORAD
computers with our machines or anything else like that.
Experience has shown that it's hard for a smaller group of
peopleto act against the forces of linguistic change in the
larger world. This is particularly true in the case of
pejoration; when a word acquires a negative or taboo
meaning it tends to stick. For this reason, I feel that
our best efforts may not be enough to shake off the
definition of 'hacker' that the public has largely locked
on to. Perhaps we should promote the use of a different
term instead."
I've always been one for educating people
on the proper terms, but with the media still largely
not-getting-it, would we be better off finding another
group moniker? There's more. Click the link if you're
interested.
mhiller had more to say. Here's the last bit:
"The confusion stems from the fact that we're using the term
'hacker' in its earlier, non-pejorative sense, but that's
not the meaning it's taken on in the popular imagination.
To Random Joe on the street, the term 'hacker' means what
we call a 'cracker'.
Being a dabbler in linguistics, I can tell you that this
isn't a unique process. When a formerly positive or benign
word starts taking on a negative connotation, linguists
call it pejoration. For example, the term 'villain'
originally meant 'belonging to the villa', and referred to
people now usually called peasants.
The best thing I could come up with was the term
'white-knight hacker', which isn't very good. So I ask
Slashdot: What might be a better (or at least less confusing)
way for us to refer to ourselves?"
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that a negative definition of "hacker" wasn't really erroneously created. Many of the early system intruders (those who slashdotters like to call "crackers") were indeed hackers, who came up with clever ways to bypass security. When not doing that, they were often writing innovative new programs in a variety of fields. These people, while they broke into systems, were legitimately hackers, by any definition of the term.
The problem is that the media has expanded this to cover anybody who breaks into systems. While some people who break into systems are hackers, not all are, just like while some hackers break into systems, not all do. System intruders (or "crackers," if you prefer), and "hackers," are neither synonymous or mutally inclusive (as the media erroneously assumes), or mutally exclusive (as many slashdotters erroneously assume).
That's the problem. Some hackers are crackers, and some crackers are hackers. However, some crackers are not hackers, and some hackers are not crackers. You cannot say "all hackers are crackers," (what the media and people like IBM's security guru say), but you also can't say "no crackers can be considered hackers," as many slashdotters say.
That's a problem because it's subjective. How do you decide if somebody is worthy of being considered a "hacker"? It's much easier (but wrong) to classify one based on whether they break into systems or not, an erroneous oversimplification of which both the media and slashdotters (and things such as ESR's jargon file) are guilty.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Granted, it's currently used to refer to Unix sysadmins more than programmers, but there's a pretty big overlap between the two groups.
Although it could spark a divisionary pretitle thingy, what if we were to take a word such as Da'Shain (from the Wheel of Time series) and prefix hacker to it, to to emphasize the intended usage of the word. Although you could just say "I am the White Hacker of the North" or something I guess. I find a particular intrest in this however. There are many different kinds of people who can be classified as hackers, in different fields and different styles, under different pretexts, etc. So, saying that you're say, a "Da'Shain Security Hacker" would be like saying "I'm one of those guys that beats the shit out of my own systems to try and make sure I can't beat the shit out of it". It's close to what alot of people I know of do, they say they "benevolently hack" or something that only the most media-worshiping mind could mistake as sarcastic irony.
I notice that alot of people don't seem to assosiate the cracker definition of hacker when people say they are art hackers, or automobile hackers, or that they hack around with . It's only when used in the digital sense that they find this queer idea. These same people also tend to get nervous when they see these people who present themselves and nice -and indeed kickass- people get near a computer of some sorts.
I believe I may take psycology courses in college. If I do I will probably try to attempt the biggest mindfuck hack the world has ever seen to fix a few million people's heads.
I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.
You obviously aren't a hacker.
--
Oooo-kay.
The way I see it, a typical title for this scene has to have one pun in it, whether good or bad (eg WINE, Pine, and all the rest..)
So how about;
Sorceror.
Obviously, it's a play on source, but it also is analogous to "wizard", as suggested earlier; and sorceror has overtones of creation-of-things rather than destruction, making it more clear what we are on about.
Might be a bit too Tolkienesque, but I'd like to hear what people think!
Don't bother telling 'them' anything. What is a 'computer nerd' anyway? Someone smarter than the average joe who knows his way around computers. This is something to be ashamed of? 'Computer nerd' is just a perjorative version of the 'computer genius' that computing-challenged mothers, S.O.'s, assorted friends and relatives like to throw around when they're bragging.
Same meaning, different implications - but y'know, I think that anyone who thinks that being smart is something to be ashamed if is a someone who's opinion is not worth worrying about.
(And yeah, I know, it's easier to say than to do with shifts in internal reactions to things like that, but just try telling yourself, every time you hear that, 'nerd==genius => he just complimented me, but thinks he insulted me.' I think it'll help.)
--Parity
'Card carrying' member of the EFF.
i've had Code Poet on my business cards for 3 years now.
Synergies are basically awesome, and they're even better when you leverage them. -PA
If people ask you if you break into white house computers, it's a good way to start some conversation about what you do and clear up the misconception at the same time.
The term "gweep" has staged a recovery around WPI in the 90's (as opposed to the original set of the 70's). For more information, go here. Though I don't believe my name is listed there, I am still an "official" WPI gweep. While we feel we "own" the name (more of an academic birthright than anything else), anyone who is truly a hacker should feel free to call themselves a gweep.
Fortunately, gweeps and gweeping have never taken on the meanings of crackers and cracking. And an even better feature: it's a syllable shorter than "hacker".
--The basis of all love is respect
Cheers,
Thad
The Bolachek Journals
Right now, the public may think of "hackers" as the way the media presents them. However, consider this: There have been revolutionaires in the past that at the time were looked at as violent, dangerous people who had no good intentions at all (at least from the perspective of the "other side"). However, if those revolutionaires win the war they are fighting, then looking back, people tend to see the losing party as the "evil ones". That's how history works. It won't be over night, but it can be done.
So what should we do to preserve our name? I have a few sugguestions. First of all, any time a cracker makes the media cut, its important to make sure that news is reported properly. The mainstream isn't going to get it right for a while, but if a large number of supplentry articles show up with a different set of terminology, then those phrases will start to catch on, and the media will start using those instead.
It also might be a good idea to stray away from the term "cracker" and create a new term such as "computer vandal". Cracker and hacker sound too much alike and are unlikely to sway the population.
Also, any time a "white hat hacker" makes the news, it is important to use the word "hacker" in a white light. Don't go out of your way to dispell the notition that just because he's a hacker he's not automatically bad, but write it in such a way that it is automatically assumed that hackers are already good and its only the few bad seeds that give the bad names to a community.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
Perhaps we should retain hacker, and call the crackers L33T H@x0rz because the crackers are obviously more knowledgable than we are
cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
I've never liked the term 'cracker', for several reasons. First, it already has several meanings, such as something you eat with cheese, or as already mentioned a po'white Southerner. I dislike using 'cracker' in a computing sense mainly because it only makes sense in comparison to hacker, and that is precisely the behavior we are trying to change. No newspaper is going to use a headline like "FBI traces origin of cracker", because it sounds like they're investigating saltines or something. So, the editor thinks, "what rhymes with cracker?" and comes up with "hacker".
To change people's behavior, we should think of a catchy term that the media will prefer to use rather than hacker. The best way to do this is to find a term that so-called crackers will use to identify themselves, rather than calling themselves hackers. Obviously, "luser" and "script kiddie" won't work, even if they are accurate descriptions. The term must be kewl, but unambiguous, obviously relating to breaking in to computer systems.
How about e-bandit, webjacker, or net outlaw? I know, those all suck, but maybe someone else can think of something better.