[Noisebridge-discuss] [drama] My Hair Is On Fire - Current events that are shaping your rights as we speak
Snail
snailtsunami at gmail.com
Thu Mar 17 02:43:16 UTC 2011
A ninja guru rockstar wizard hacker has turned you into a whale. Is this
awesome? (Y/N?)
Y
Sorry, I was going to make a collage photo of a ninja guru rockstar wizard
hacker, but turns out this is a text adventure.
I approve of this co-option! By the way, I'm now co-opting the word hacker
to refer to people who make puns and use words that probably don't exist
"technically", like "co-option". Is that cool with you guys? It's like
hacking language, right? Right? Guys ... I'm still cool, right? Eh? [Joking:
I was never cool.]
And then I'm going to co-opt THAT definition of hacker to refer to a place
which has particular good horses for rent to see if the language will
eventually re-evolve into referring to computer experts as hackneys, through
a trail of taxis and worn-out art. That would make me smile, like this. :D
http://everything2.com/user/mcd/writeups/hacker?displaytype=printable
-Snail
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Will Sargent <will.sargent at gmail.com>wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am hearby co-opting the words "ninja" and "rockstar" to refer to
> moderately competent computer programmers.
>
> I'm not sure exactly what a ninja guru rockstar wizard hacker would look
> like, but I bet it's impressive.
>
> Will.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Mike Williams <merwanwilliams at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> What about Gurus and Wizards?
>> http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/hacker.htm
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:43 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> in my experience, the earliest use of "hacker" among
>>> computer types was for coding (e.g. hackers' conference
>>> of 1984 or 5).
>>> soon after, with growing awareness of the internet,
>>> people not directly in the coding community began to use
>>> "hacker" with the nefarious meaning you've described.
>>> a fairly quick response from the coder set was to
>>> insist that "cracker" had the nefarious meaning and
>>> "hacker" was the code artist, possibly something of an
>>> untutored renegade, but most importantly enthusiastic,
>>> and not necessarily malevolent.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 12:17 -0700, erik swedberg wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > your use of the word hacker to describe people who do stuff with
>>> > electronics and software is itself a co-opting of the term that used
>>> > to have to do with breaking into systems (for fun, learning, or
>>> > malice) and phreaking - the connotation includes a healthy dose of
>>> > subversion - think war games, or guys in trench coats meeting in
>>> > shopping mall food courts with well-worn vinge and brunner paperbacks
>>> > in their pockets.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > it sometimes befuddles me that lots of people seem to have forgotten
>>> > the history. think of all the awesome scientists and engineers who
>>> > worked on electronics and software from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and
>>> > 90s - sweet dudes with beards (and all these folks:
>>> > http://www.luckham.org/LHL.Bell%20Labs%20Days.html): bell labs, the
>>> > guys who wrote unix and its variants, the programmers for the atari
>>> > 2600 games, woz, ham radio operators, the dudes who invented the
>>> > transistor (http://www.corp.att.com/history/milestone_1947b.html), the
>>> > guys who made the first video games using oscilloscopes - none of
>>> > these folks were then called hackers, whereas now they would all
>>> > qualify under our current definition.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > and the word is changing again, to be more inclusive of those not
>>> > engaged in the dark arts. for the modern people who want a badge to be
>>> > proud of their hard-earned electronics and computer skills, i propose
>>> > a new word: hobbyist.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -erik
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>>> > From: Evan Bangham <ebangham at gmail.com>
>>> > To: rachel lyra hospodar <rachel at mediumreality.com>
>>> > Cc: noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> > Sent: Wed, March 16, 2011 1:53:48 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] [drama] My Hair Is On Fire -
>>> > Current events that are shaping your rights as we speak
>>> >
>>> > I'm glad you asked. I'm afraid that I've done some thinking and I'm
>>> > going to be back peddling from some of my previous statements.
>>> >
>>> > Allow me to posit, if I may, that Noisebridge is a community that is
>>> > made up of both makers and hackers.
>>> >
>>> > Lets define hacking using these words using some of the verbiage we've
>>> > previously laid out in the thread.
>>> >
>>> > Hacking:
>>> > "To attempt to solve a problem by artfully applying skills and tools
>>> > in or closely related to the areas of computer programing or circuit
>>> > design without reference to a plan or instructions." I don't think
>>> > many would argue that it was people in software that started using the
>>> > word in relation to writing software before it started to
>>> > linguistically crawl its way into other circles.
>>> >
>>> > Maker:
>>> > If you use this same definition as hacker and remove the reference to
>>> > computer programming and circuits you have the word 'maker'. Makers a
>>> > la Make magazine, make stuff using tools in a skillful manor without
>>> > reference to instructions much as hackers do. The only difference is
>>> > that making is not using code or circuits and is thus not considered
>>> > hacking. Making can involve anything from sewing and crafts to
>>> > designing and building bicycles.
>>> >
>>> > By my definition of the words hacking and making, the building of
>>> > robots for instance, is not hacking, but is in fact, a combination of
>>> > making and hacking. Those that build robots could be either makers or
>>> > hackers, or both. Building various components of a robot could, if
>>> > involving software and electronics be considered hacking. For example,
>>> > if I'm writing a quick and dirty piece of software to enable the robot
>>> > to track some object using a camera, I'm hacking. If I'm building a
>>> > robot arm using a metal shop, I'm no longer hacking, I'm making.
>>> >
>>> > In consideration of our robot example, one could come to the
>>> > conclusion that it's natural for the definition of hacking to be
>>> > intertwined with things that have historically, not been considered
>>> > hacking. Clearly this fact does not suddenly make the words synonymous
>>> > just because the skills are used in concert with each other. Any
>>> > broadening of the definition of hacking to suddenly include all forms
>>> > of making are simply an appeal to some sort of linguistic relativism.
>>> >
>>> > My motives for starting this discussion is that we hackers have spent
>>> > time and sacrifice learning our craft. All those nights in front of
>>> > the keyboard, staring at the glowing screen or heads buried in books,
>>> > learning gate logic and object oriented design patterns take their
>>> > toll on the body and spirit. From society at large we are in some
>>> > cases scorned and alienated. Given these sacrifices, we wear the our
>>> > badge of hacker with pride, that is pride in our ability to make (or
>>> > break) cool shit with electronics and software as our reward.
>>> >
>>> > Now we have a situation where non hacker activists see that we apply
>>> > our specially honed skills in technology evermore in the capacity to
>>> > fight against government and corporation's attacks on our freedoms.
>>> > They see that because we are outcasts that we are beholden to no one
>>> > but our selves and are own free ideas. This leads the non hacker
>>> > activists to think "hey man, that's hip, thats cool, these people
>>> > fight the power in such a creative and awesome way!" "I want in on
>>> > that piece of pie and become an individualist hacker like those other
>>> > guys!" so they appropriate our word and our institutions for their own
>>> > means to help cheerlead and message for their own non hacking related
>>> > ideas and groups.
>>> >
>>> > Hackers and makers love political involvement and we have groups like
>>> > the EFF doing our bidding, so it makes sense to have groups inside
>>> > noisebridge that specialize in politicking(for lack of a better
>>> > word). Its when people start calling the act civic engagement hacking
>>> > that a line has been crossed. Its at this point that the word has been
>>> > misappropriated and the effect of this miss appropriation of the word
>>> > hacker, is to minimize the importance of the skills that we sacrificed
>>> > our time and sanity for.
>>> >
>>> > This swindling of our brand disempowers us and our community. In my
>>> > conversation with various hackers in noisebridge (Cobalt being one of
>>> > them) I've been told that noisebridge's failure to dedicate itself to
>>> > hackers and that its all inclusiveness, is limiting their involvement
>>> > at noisebridge. I'm not in complete agreement with that view, but when
>>> > I'm hearing hackers aren't willing to come to noisebridge to start
>>> > cool projects because people with the necessary skills to help them do
>>> > so aren't available at noisebridge, partially due to non hackers and
>>> > non makers infringing upon the space, making hackers feel unwelcome.
>>> > This disappoints me greatly.
>>> >
>>> > Noisebridge is a community of makers and hackers, but they are not one
>>> > and the same. Noisebridge embraces makers and hackers equally and
>>> > rightfully so because both are a means to making cool shit that
>>> > requires a wide range of skills to produce. Makers can directly help
>>> > hackers and vice versa. Hackers need food to survive just like anyone
>>> > else, lets have some cooking classes, both hackers and makers benefit,
>>> > great! Hackers like beer, let's make some beer, awesome! Makers like
>>> > making stuff out of wood and metal, hackers like coding and circuits,
>>> > lets make some robots.
>>> >
>>> > Its when we have a breakdown of the partnership between makers and
>>> > hackers that there is friction. Let's say some makers start hosting
>>> > classes like "hacking yoga". Oh wait, that's already happening isn't
>>> > it? It would be all good if there were coders or electrical
>>> > engineering types in the class, but if I had to bet, it would be that
>>> > they are very much in the minority in that class. Now that we've got
>>> > makers, non makers and non hackers using the label of hacking for a
>>> > yoga class that hackers do not benefit from, naturally this makes the
>>> > hackers pissed off.
>>> >
>>> > This is why people who do code and circuits get pissed off when the
>>> > see the word hacker used so loosely. I hope this lets people better
>>> > understand the situation at a kind of sociological level at least.
>>> > This is not just some pet peeve, it is very real and its effects can't
>>> > be positive for the community at noisebridge.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Fuck I should start a new project "Hacking Noisebridge"
>>> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:30 PM, rachel lyra hospodar
>>> > <rachel at mediumreality.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > What does it mean, to hack?
>>> >
>>> > Is sewing hacking? garments are a technological system we use
>>> > to
>>> > regulate temperature. I use a machine to modify them,
>>> > creatively and in
>>> > contravention of established norms.
>>> >
>>> > If yes, what about other dimensional art forms? i just used a
>>> > table saw
>>> > on plywood, is that hacking? Plywood is a highly engineered
>>> > material.
>>> > Is this only hacking if i use it as a truss, so that its
>>> > properties are
>>> > called on to distribute force? what if i use it for its
>>> > unnatural flatness?
>>> >
>>> > if no, what about if i sew a circuitboard into a garment? is
>>> > it only
>>> > hacking when there is conductive thread in my machine? what
>>> > about when
>>> > i am sewing an insulation layer?
>>> >
>>> > Stop saying what isn't and define what is!
>>> >
>>> > On 3/14/2011 11:36 PM, Evan Bangham wrote:
>>> > > Politics|Cooking|Art|Writing != Hacking
>>> > >
>>> > > Yes, hacking can involve creativity and breaking established
>>> > norms, but you
>>> > > can't just use it as a blanket term to describe doing
>>> > anything that involves
>>> > > these things.
>>> > >
>>> > <snip>
>>> > >
>>> > > The slow food hacking thing I suppose enters the realm of
>>> > hacking to a
>>> > > limited extent because it is using chemistry and the like,
>>> > and I imagine is
>>> > > subversive in some way. I could say the same about
>>> > photography and the like
>>> > > as long as it breaking the established norms of the medium
>>> > and is harnessing
>>> > > technology in some way. Traditional fine art however, can
>>> > never be 'hacked'
>>> > > because it is just so far removed from the realm of anything
>>> > related to
>>> > > technology or science.
>>> > >
>>> > > I think in many senses I'm being far to accommodating for
>>> > these expanded
>>> > > definitions of the term as it is though.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
--
-Snailssnailssnailssnailssnailssnailssnails
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20110316/683481b0/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss
mailing list