You miss the point. A "hacker" may have written the software he used, but that doesn't make him a "hacker." It makes him a (mis)user of tools produced by his betters, like most common criminals. The distinction is important because it criminalizes by inference an otherwise lawful pastime. "Close enough", as they say, only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades:-).
The problem of educational technique is only 1/2 the problem, at best. The real problem, just like in the rest of the sciences, is working conditions. As long as it's OK to call people "geek" to their face and pay them shite, most smart kids will continue to gravitate towards business degrees because that's where the money and respect are to be found. No hard science job pays as much as the manager that they answer to, as long as that situation remains so will low enrollment.
Slashdot Mirror
You miss the point. A "hacker" may have written the software he used, but that doesn't make him a "hacker." It makes him a (mis)user of tools produced by his betters, like most common criminals. The distinction is important because it criminalizes by inference an otherwise lawful pastime. "Close enough", as they say, only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades :-).
Seriously, it's bad enough to see it in mainstream media.
The problem of educational technique is only 1/2 the problem, at best. The real problem, just like in the rest of the sciences, is working conditions. As long as it's OK to call people "geek" to their face and pay them shite, most smart kids will continue to gravitate towards business degrees because that's where the money and respect are to be found. No hard science job pays as much as the manager that they answer to, as long as that situation remains so will low enrollment.