How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos • Hacker News Board

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#81

Post by woah » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 3:55 PM UTC

VonGuard wrote: post #58

woah wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some strange contradictions here. There's a huge overlap between burning man culture and tech culture. Part of the sentiment against burning man is because of this. The world may not be as simple as you think.

Yes, there is a lot of overlap. But there used to be, too. Burning Man was the place where the weird and the tech came together. These days, with $600+ tickets, it is just a rich kids place to go. But there are still all those warehouses full of weirdos that burn and remain in the Bay Area. Just because Burning Man is now frequented by rich frat people doesn't make it too much less weird and anti-puritanical, the way…

Your comment sounds like it could have been written by someone who had never been to Burning Man. There's kind of an idealization at play in your comment, almost a "noble savage" thing. Ticket prices have increased $190 in the past 15 years. The $10-$20 yearly ticket price increase is pretty insignificant next to what people pay for costumes, art, etc. You're going to one of the least hospitable places on earth, bringing in all food and water, bringing a bunch of art and electronics, then setting it all on fire. It's never been a particularly inexpensive undertaking. I remember being a broke kid in a soma warehouse and having to sell my ticket for rent money and being really bummed. Now I program computers and have money to spend on art to bring to burning man. I'm still the same person.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#82

Post by thwest » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:01 PM UTC

andyl wrote: post #73

Gigamouse wrote: post #13

For those who think this article is too long, here is summary: This gist of the article is that the hacker impulse or ‘hacker ethic’ is a natural human response to large alienating infrastructures that allow little agency on the part of individuals. Hackers take different forms, but are identified by 1) a tendency towards creative rebellion that seeks to increase the agency of underdogs in the face of systems that ar…

That's a summary? tldr My summary: the article is a cultural-marxist parable. The victim is the hacker. The oppressor is the yuppie. In olden days the hacker lived in a sort of eden, but now the oppressor has trapped the hacker in webs of capitalist bondage.

Cultural-Marxist? I thought he was an economist.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#83

Post by Mikushi » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:02 PM UTC

roneesh wrote: post #61

Look, you can construct whatever narrative you want about power, people and the ebb and flow of capital, but it's pointless. People like nice things. There I said it. Most people like nice cedar lined floors, expensive drinks and well cut clothes. And when you have those things, it's marvelous how quickly your disdain for the 'institution' evaporates. Most of us aren't really hackers in that nostalgic sense. We're no…

>People like nice things. There I said it. Most people like nice cedar lined floors, expensive drinks and well cut clothes. And when you have those things, it's marvelous how quickly your disdain for the 'institution' evaporates.

People are made to want nice thing, big difference. It's the result of the exploitation of a natural need (fear) by corporations and the 'institution' through modern advertising and propaganda.

The fact that the disdain reduces/disappears for some is not of any credit to their acceptance of the 'institution', it just shows it works as intended (generating individuals that will not question).

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#84

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:05 PM UTC

jkot wrote: post #28

Lets be grateful for yuppies and their money. Computers and gadgets are today cheap and widely available. And there is finally no social stigma related to nerds. 'Real hacker' who works on AI, security etc.. has now life easier.

[deleted]

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#85

Post by Sven7 » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:05 PM UTC

danielweber wrote: post #78

andyl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a summary? tldr My summary: the article is a cultural-marxist parable. The victim is the hacker. The oppressor is the yuppie. In olden days the hacker lived in a sort of eden, but now the oppressor has trapped the hacker in webs of capitalist bondage.

I really worry about these people trying to free me from a high income career and telling me it's for my own good.

Yup they are dangerous. Be careful Donald Trump.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#86

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

danielweber wrote: post #78

andyl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a summary? tldr My summary: the article is a cultural-marxist parable. The victim is the hacker. The oppressor is the yuppie. In olden days the hacker lived in a sort of eden, but now the oppressor has trapped the hacker in webs of capitalist bondage.

I really worry about these people trying to free me from a high income career and telling me it's for my own good.

[deleted]

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#87

Post by sanoli » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #30

When I realized that the kids of the old money elite began to see Silicon Valley, not Wall Street, as the means to big money, I decided I could never go back. The elitists came to Northern California - a vanguard of social liberalism, student protest, and most importantly communitarianism - and brought their elitism with them. Northern California still exists in the nostalgic hippie image of the 60s, but it's compart…

Well, it's been almost ten years now since my punk friends from the US told me the Bay Area was gone and that the new punk/alternative capital was Portland. Don't know if it still is, but they had all moved there or somewhere else. Almost ten years ago.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#88

Post by chillingeffect » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

gluelogic wrote: post #36

clavalle wrote: post #17

You know what's cool? Ignoring what other people think is cool. Who cares if 'yuppies' 'gentrify' hacking. You neither have to stop doing what you like because groups you don't care for have noticed nor do you have to waste energy and time and fight against them for doing so. Do what you want to do regardless. That is the answer to the author's questions. If you are a hacker, or artist or music lover or anything else…

> Ignoring what other people think is cool. In the end, it really isn't though. It is a bad thing when subcultures are overrun by people who did not come to it organically. What I mean by that is at a certain point, members of a subculture gain a perceived glamour, which incentivizes outsiders to come in for superficial reasons. This dilutes the subculture's original ethos, and if it continues long enough it totally…

>> Ignoring what people think is cool > In the end, it really isn't though.

It's true. The answers are not all found within. An idealized process would more like: Find out about something cool. Working with those people/that scene to improve it. Detect when it's losing its ideals. Nudge it back toward its ideals.

Lots of people who hack out of pure curiosity. It's how humans work and got to be the way we are. That's an ideal. Nowadays, we have people with lots of money distracting the hackers, saying, "Hey, why are you just doing that for the hell of it? You have skills, help me make money and you can have some, too."

It doesn't sound bad on the surface, but it goes wrong for everyone when the idea of someone have "skills" is abstracted to mean "skills that I can use to make $." Most hacking (lock picking, software stunts, diet coke and Mentos) is not commericially useful, at least not directly. But when a hacker suspends their natural desire and directs it toward someone else's ends, the natural "curiosity vector" is not followed. It's not bad, it's just the death of an ideal. The best we can do is help each other identify when we're compromising too much on our curiosity and ideals in chasing that holy billion dollars.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#89

Post by Mikushi » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

kriro wrote: post #26

baseballmerpeak wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go home, yuppies. The last few paragraphs bring it home: hacking is being subverted as a tool of the establishment and no longer, in common use, means working against the establishment.

I really don't like the link to "the profit fetish" in the last paragraph and the implicit undertone of profit being a bad thing. In fact I completely disagree and would call hacking (in the sense it is used in the article) a very direct expression of profit seeking. You change one state to another one that you prefer. If the costs to achieve this are less than the added value that's (economic) profit.

> I really don't like the link to "the profit fetish" in the last paragraph and the implicit undertone of profit being a bad thing

I'm on the other side of the fence, I have yet to find a good argument that defends profit when you weight it against all its fault. As far as I'm concerned the profit race is about the worst thing our specie ever came up with, it's directly responsible for destroying our planet, for the death of millions and as we speak for the lack of future for our specie.

Re: How yuppies hacked the hacker ethos

#90

Post by gaius » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

gluelogic wrote: post #36

clavalle wrote: post #17

You know what's cool? Ignoring what other people think is cool. Who cares if 'yuppies' 'gentrify' hacking. You neither have to stop doing what you like because groups you don't care for have noticed nor do you have to waste energy and time and fight against them for doing so. Do what you want to do regardless. That is the answer to the author's questions. If you are a hacker, or artist or music lover or anything else…

> Ignoring what other people think is cool. In the end, it really isn't though. It is a bad thing when subcultures are overrun by people who did not come to it organically. What I mean by that is at a certain point, members of a subculture gain a perceived glamour, which incentivizes outsiders to come in for superficial reasons. This dilutes the subculture's original ethos, and if it continues long enough it totally…

members of a subculture gain a perceived glamour, which incentivizes outsiders to come in for superficial reasons

It has a real cost to the original members, in terms of their loss of immediate credibility. You see a guy with sailor tattoos. Did he serve in the Fleet, does that speak to his work ethic and skill with a chart or a diesel engine? Or does he work in advertising and drink soy lattes? You see a girl with thick-rimmed glasses. Is she an old-skool assembly hacker, or did she just think they would look cute with her "vintage" dress? It means the genuine people, who have paid their dues, need to prove themselves over and over again to everyone they meet. That is why everyone hates hipsters.