From hungary-online-owner Wed Mar 8 16:08:20 1995 Return-Path: owner-Hungary-Online Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) (fnord) by nando.yak.net (8.6.5/8.6.5) id QAA05881 for hungary-online-out31415; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 16:08:20 -0800 Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) (fnord) by nando.yak.net (8.6.5/8.6.5) id QAA05863 for hungary-online; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 16:08:00 -0800 Received: via =-=-=-=-= from carlson@odin.net for hungary-online@hungary.yak.net (hungary-online) Received: from odin.net (root@omega.odin.net [193.130.116.3]) (fnord) by nando (8.6.5/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA05743 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 16:06:13 -0800 Received: from [193.130.116.13] by odin.net with SMTP (8.6.10/1.2-btv) id BAA15320; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:19:09 GMT Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:01:15 +0100 To: Hungary-Online@hungary.yak.net From: carlson@odin.net (Steven Carlson) Subject: Re: (HOL) hackers vs crackers: let's make the distinction Sender: owner-Hungary-Online@hungary.yak.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Hungary-Online@hungary.yak.net Hmm ... I see I've hit a nerve with my comparison of the business and hacker ethics. I just dashed that bit off as I was sending the column. I was pissed. In retrospect, however, it still makes sense. But let me clear up one point: > >The hacker creed lacks any other ethic. [...] > > Lack any other ethic? This doesn't sound like the same Steve Carlson > talking...it's a really gross generalization to make. Maybe _ethic_ is the wrong word here. The point I was making is that hacking is morally ambigious. The hacker's goal is to find a solution to a problem - to completely master a technology. Right or wrong doesn't play much part. Hacking certainly has its "code", as Dave points out - a shared set of values like the freedom of information and so on. But as Tibor says this code includes a decidedly anti-authoritarian streak. In fact, as a "fringe" culture, hackers live by their own set of rules which are entirely self-defined. What distinguishes good hacking from bad? The line is _very_ blurry. No wonder the media and public are confused. The hackers have defined the bad guys as "crackers", but this obviously isn't taking. Dave mentioned Steve Levy's book _Hackers_. I can also recommend _The Hacker Crackdown_, by Bruce Sterling. In his book Sterling explains the semantic difference, but then bows to common usage and accepts the public use of "hacker". (_The Hacker Crackdown_ is also on the Net. I don't remember the URL). Mitnick _is_ a hacker. However he's also a childish showoff. You might even argue he isn't even a very good hacker. But you can't deny he's cut from the same wool. "Hacker" has become a buzzword because the public is only now learning the ASTONISHING power of the Net to leverage individual creativity. What a shock it is to learn that one nerd at a computer can wreak _havok_ with the paragons of Western capitalism! No wonder losers like Mitnick get drunk with the power of it. IMHO the term "cracker" will never be widely used and understood by the public. But I'm sure sooner or later the whole thing will blow over. A hacker is a hacker and there are good ones and bad ones. Just as criminals who sell weapons of mass destruction to rogue dictators are still called "businessmen", There's room in the "hacker" definition for malicious vandals and wreckless fools. $0.02 =steve= --- Steven Carlson Moderator/Publisher - hungary-online Critical Mass Media Inc. Internet trainer, consultant [+361] 133-4647 in Budapest, Hungary carlson@odin.net ############# # This message to Hungary-Online@hungary.yak.net # was from carlson@odin.net (Steven Carlson) # # To unsubscribe, # send "unsubscribe" to # An announcement-only subscription (less volume) is available # at # Send mail to for more information, # or to if you need human assistance. #############