[Noisebridge-discuss] What is the true hacker ethic?

[Geoff Schmidt]

I don't think that outsiders are necessarily, or even typically,  
angry. And I don't think hubris is long tolerated in a community of  
true contributors.

I think the difference between outsiders and contributors is scale of  
identification. Outsiders identify with the group of people around  
them socially, contributors with something larger but abstract.  
Outsiders see themselves as contributors, at least to their group; the  
people outside their group are seen as aliens and outside the scope of  
analysis.

In turn, people's scale of identification is determined powerfully by  
the level of security they have felt in their life.

> How do we work with each person to help them evolve?

First, by framing the case as one of evolution! KATZ!

Without gravity, which direction will a tree grow? And other than  
gravity, what does it need but sunlight and water? (For purposes of  
poetry, let us neglect nitrogen-fixing bacteria.)

On dates various, Jason Dusek wrote:
>  Hackers must also have a characteristic fault; what will it
>  be? It seems the outsider is characterized by anger; the
>  contributor, hubris.

[...]

>  Maybe the "outsider" is a stage on the way to "contributor"? I
>  think it takes a different moral sensibility to be committed
>  to others' welfare, as opposed to one's personal excellence.
>
>  Perhaps the outsider/contributor space is a projection from
>  the space of moral evolution. In that case, I think we must
>  set aside the notion of a general approach to helping people
>  move from one stage to the other. Each person's evolution is
>  individual, triggered by events of hidden significance. How do
>  we work with each person to help them evolve?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20090614/c16a555c/attachment-0003.html>