On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:03:24PM -0800, Darren C Vyff wrote:
> I just wanted to add my little bit into this, worthless as it may be...
actually i think you bring up a very good point...
> Peole like slashdot etc etc have to start distancing themselves from the term
> "hacker" or redefine it to hopefully keep the packs of corporate lawyers out
> there from descending upon them like locusts. Let's face it, the last couple
> of years have shown that instead of fair use laws being upheld, the act of
> hacking a DVD player to run under *nix or anything without paying a liscensing
> fee to some person is illegal. Anyone remember Divx? It came and went
I think thats why I eventually succumbed to the cracker/hacker fiasco, I got tired of
having to explain what a hacker is to people. I do not put "hacker" on my business
cards, or roam the net with "hacker" as a handle or anything, but people know me for
my skills, and unix, etc, and they're always asking to define the hacker confusion,
the press says one thing, it says another thing, compsec professionals say yet another
thing...
It's unfortunate the term "hacker" generally has a negative connection to it, and i
can see why slashdot and the esr/rms folks are fearful. The verb "hack" has been a
regular part of my vocabulary for years, its hard to shake. Awhile back some friends
(who are very well-known in the computer security world) and I came up the idea of
coming up with a new term for the press to mutilate, maybe "hackers" in the ESR sense
should call themselves bowelmovers, wartlickers, or some other seemingly "uncool"
term, heh.
