Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is true hacking dead? What we lost

c0de517e.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 194 posts

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#21

Post by lsofzz »

pleasecalllater wrote: post #18

Three things: 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself that he/she has the right to say who is a "true hacker" and who is not. 3. AND THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX5Xy3a2uJU Thank you Jayson.

> 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not.

The way I see it, `going fast and breaking things' is an iterative process. IMHO, it should not be viewed as `go fast, break things and _never_ iterate to fix things'.

Just thought I'd toss my two cents on it.

> 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself that he/she has the right to say who is a hacker and who is not.

No idea why you feel binary. If you like to call yourself a hacker - fuck it - go for it.

The connotation in the beginning were that hackers were pioneers, thinkers, achievers and great motivators. Over time, the meaning has been mutated and engineered by the media to mean `malicious' and `conniving' thieves/criminals.

To this day, I still stick to the original definition of a `hacker'. I don't give a two fuck about what the media likes to call it.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#22

Post by blihp »

japhyr wrote: post #13

It feels like the word "hacking" is losing more and more meaning over time. In the beginning it was a word only people heavily into computers used. Then around the time of War Games it became a more commonly-known word, and connotated breaking in. Over the last couple decades more people became aware that hacking sometimes refers to building technical projects. But it still has a heavy connotation of breaking into a…

I don't think its lost meaning as much as it has a completely different meaning than it used to. It seems pretty common when something goes mainstream, as computing has, for original definitions to be tossed aside while the terms get re-appropriated by/for a more mainstream audience.

This happens all the time in other parts of culture whether music, fashion or whatever. So I guess it shouldn't be too surprising that it's happened in tech too. Doesn't mean one needs to like it, just accept it for what it is.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#23

Post by puszczyk »

peteforde wrote: post #16

There was a time when I used to fret that the era of tinkering was coming to an end. Crypto was going to be illegal, they were going to put DRM on speakers, and our computers are designed to be completely locked down to the degree that you can't even add more RAM to a MacBook Pro. However, I think that the rise of Linux, Raspberry Pi and Arduino, OSS and Github and massive package repos for every language, Adafruit,…

I agree with your comment and feel similarly about the piece.

The last paragraph though:

> I really didn't enjoy this op-ed, and I wish people wouldn't bring it a larger audience by posting on HN.

I think it’s good to have it here, even if I disagree with the article it made me think why and started a valuable discussion in the comments.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#24

Post by Heyso »

peteforde wrote: post #16

There was a time when I used to fret that the era of tinkering was coming to an end. Crypto was going to be illegal, they were going to put DRM on speakers, and our computers are designed to be completely locked down to the degree that you can't even add more RAM to a MacBook Pro. However, I think that the rise of Linux, Raspberry Pi and Arduino, OSS and Github and massive package repos for every language, Adafruit,…

Unity is amazing, I agree. Moving from scratch to unity seem like a big step. Why not play with a 2d game library on the browser (with typescript, and a teacher to give a starter project and the basics) ? Making games in 2d is a very similar experience a smaking game in 3d, just easier. Unity can be overhelming with the richness of what it propose.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#25

Post by Animats »

peteforde wrote: post #16

There was a time when I used to fret that the era of tinkering was coming to an end. Crypto was going to be illegal, they were going to put DRM on speakers, and our computers are designed to be completely locked down to the degree that you can't even add more RAM to a MacBook Pro. However, I think that the rise of Linux, Raspberry Pi and Arduino, OSS and Github and massive package repos for every language, Adafruit,…

the author wasn't talking about hacking but recreating the exact same conditions that existed when he was a young person...

That sums up the article. Kids can do far more today than in the Commodore 64 era. On the other hand, the field is much bigger, so they won't be doing the same thing as their local friends. But there will be someone on the web doing something similar to talk to.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#26

Post by dijit »

lsofzz wrote: post #21
pleasecalllater wrote: post #18

Three things: 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself that he/she has the right to say who is a "true hacker" and who is not. 3. AND THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX5Xy3a2uJU Thank you Jayson.

> 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. The way I see it, `going fast and breaking things' is an iterative process. IMHO, it should not be viewed as `go fast, break things and _never_ iterate to fix things'. Just thought I'd toss my two cents on it. > 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself…

There was a term from the early 00's for malicious "hackers", which was crackers.

Yes, it doesn't have the same ring to it so I understand why the media didn't latch on to it.

But if the media is unwilling to budge should we just make a new word? "Hack" was never a good term to begin with, originating from the model railroad club at MIT.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#27

Post by username90 »

pleasecalllater wrote: post #18

Three things: 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself that he/she has the right to say who is a "true hacker" and who is not. 3. AND THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX5Xy3a2uJU Thank you Jayson.

> I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not.

Going fast is revered, breaking things is not. And why is going fast so important? It is because an individual can't accomplish much when going slow. Why are individual works important? Because individuals do things that would never get funding, they make decisions that would never pass a committee and they can pivot the entire direction of a project many times in a single hour without any issues. Therefore many problems can only be solved by hackers as large teams are too restricted to do them.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#28

Post by pjmlp »

> Even the Demoscene, one of the last bastions of true hackerism, is completely uninterested in the ideology of software licenses and contracts.

Demoscene never cared about this kind of stuff.

In fact of the interesting challenges of the Demoscene was trying to find out how competing groups achieved some demos, without having access to the said information, while in process outperforming their demos at parties.

This is one of the key differences between Demoscene and anything FOSS related.

And also why game developers as offsprings from Demoscene, also don't care about them, rather about IP and how to extract the best experience out of a given piece of hardware, regardless of the OS, API or NDAs that one has to go through.

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#29

Post by lsofzz »

dijit wrote: post #26
lsofzz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. The way I see it, `going fast and breaking things' is an iterative process. IMHO, it should not be viewed as `go fast, break things and _never_ iterate to fix things'. Just thought I'd toss my two cents on it. > 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself…

There was a term from the early 00's for malicious "hackers", which was crackers. Yes, it doesn't have the same ring to it so I understand why the media didn't latch on to it. But if the media is unwilling to budge should we just make a new word? "Hack" was never a good term to begin with, originating from the model railroad club at MIT.

> There was a term from the early 00's for malicious "hackers", which was crackers.

Yes.

> But if the media is unwilling to budge should we just make a new word?

Not sure how that will pan out :-)

Re: Is true hacking dead? What we lost

#30

Post by atoav »

username90 wrote: post #27
pleasecalllater wrote: post #18

Three things: 1. I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. 2. How come that someone thinks of himself/herself that he/she has the right to say who is a "true hacker" and who is not. 3. AND THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX5Xy3a2uJU Thank you Jayson.

> I have no idea why "hacking" aka "going fast and breaking things" is so glorified while "building good reliable programs" aka "good programming" is not. Going fast is revered, breaking things is not. And why is going fast so important? It is because an individual can't accomplish much when going slow. Why are individual works important? Because individuals do things that would never get funding, they make decisions…

It is entirely possible to do something slow and well and still do it alone and esentially without funding. As a film maker this is one of the things I love about writing and programming: there is no money needed only your time (which of course also costs you something). But it is perfectly possible to sit alone in your chamber and write a great piece of software that competes with the best out there. Try doing that in Film. This would be really a field where you wouldn’t get far without people and money.

Whether you hack it together quickly or meditate on it for ages doesn’t has much to do with it, I’ve seen both. Maybe the person with the quick hack just tries to solve a problem while the slow person likes the intellectual challenge of solving it in a “good” way.

Post reply on HN