
The time I hacked my high school - fogus
http://nathanmarz.com/blog/the-time-i-hacked-my-high-school.html
======
noonespecial
And they say you can't get a decent education in schools anymore. Everyone in
the Chess Club now has an intimate understanding of how money moves through
governments.

See you in Congress Nate.

~~~
mcknz
More like Wall Street. Generate excessive leverage and let the government bail
you out via taxpayers.

~~~
xilun0
I apparently missed the part were he took part of the money for himself and
his friends after his "business" failed.

~~~
crpatino
He apparently refused to do so...

>> When I graduated, Chess Club had $500 in the bank. I considered holding one
last tournament with _massive prizes_ , but ultimately decided to leave the
money for future generations of Chess Club.

------
ryanelkins
I remember the time I "hacked" my school library's computers. I changed the
homepage on the browsers to my Geocities blog (this was almost 15 years ago).
Later that day I was pulled from class by a security guard. In the library was
most of campus security and most of the administrative staff. They were sure
that I had put my blog on their servers and destroyed their website. They even
had some teacher from the computer lab who couldn't seem to figure it out.
Once I showed them how to change the homepage back (there was a tense moment
when their server took forever to respond) they stopped threatening to have me
arrested and made me sit quietly at a table until the period was over.

~~~
mrcharles
We'd just put a batch file attached to autoexec on our school computers which
prompted with Cannot read C:\ Abort, Retry, Fail?, and then we made batch
files for A, R, and F which just printed "Error" or something similar.

It was pretty awesome watching the "computer expert" claim the harddrives had
died and needed to be replaced.

~~~
illumin8
I did something similar - I had TSR programs written for DOS that "simulated"
viruses. They simulated viruses like Cascade (where all of the characters on
your screen would fall to the bottom and lie in a pile every few minutes) but
didn't actually replicate.

I put this in the autoexec.bat file on every computer in the lab during my
Pascal programming class. The next class was a word processing class.

Apparently the FBI was called to investigate when the computer teacher
couldn't figure out that it wasn't a real virus. I wasn't really punished
because I hadn't done any damage, but my parents got called.

As usual, someone with limited computer skills that can't get a better job
somewhere else, ends up teaching computers for slightly more than minimum
wage.

We used to have a lot of fun on the Novell network as well when the IT guy
(think comic book guy from the Simpsons in real life) would walk away from his
desk and leave it logged in. We would give ourselves admin and wreak havoc for
a few hours until he noticed there was more than one superuser.

~~~
thaumaturgy
> _As usual, someone with limited computer skills that can't get a better job
> somewhere else, ends up teaching computers for slightly more than minimum
> wage._

Statements like this make me rage a bit; students have to put up with non-
technical teachers in part because precious few people in the high-tech sector
can be moved to do teaching work in their community.

It's as much our fault as anyone else's.

~~~
illumin8
Fair enough, but the comment is not meant to denigrate the teacher. I would
much rather see a system that paid teachers appropriate salaries for their
skill sets so that they could get qualified educators instead of the least
common denominator.

Why should qualified high-tech people work for substandard salaries? You can
say out of the goodness of our hearts, but if the service they provide is
valuable enough, and I think it is, they should be compensated appropriately.

~~~
thaumaturgy
Clifford Stoll has explained this far better than I could [1], but aside from
the sheer intrinsic value and altruism of taking time out to be an amazing
teacher for some students, it can also serve some really practical benefits:
if you want the next generation of adults to have a firm grasp of science and
technical issues -- whether they later operate a cash register, enter a career
in politics, or build the next Amazon -- then it makes sense for us to find
the time to teach these skills to students.

If you want open source software to take over the world, teach programming to
kids. If you want sensible social policies where science and technology are
concerned, then teach science and technology to kids. If you want more
rational discourse in the future, then teach logic to kids.

Saying, "this is somebody else's job" -- even if you're also saying that it's
a valuable job and they should be compensated well for it -- is not just self-
serving, it's short-sighted.

[1]: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj8IA6xOpSk>

~~~
Retric
<evil>I don't care about future generations, if you want me to teach you need
to pay me real money to do so.</evil>

Clearly there are people willing to significantly sacrifice their family's
financial future for the good of the community. However, there are not enough
such people. Thus paying more money allows you to pull in talented people who
don't feel the need to sacrifice for their community.

PS: You don't actually need to pay market rates. You just need to reduce the
sacrifice enough to attract talented people. EX: I would be willing to take a
small paycut to do scientific research, but I am unwilling to take the massive
paycut it would take to do so.

~~~
thaumaturgy
Then you all are getting exactly the world that you deserve.

~~~
marvin
You can sit on your high horse forever if you want, but altruism only works
when everyone is altruistic. Do you really expect technically competent people
to work in an environment where free thought and initiative is punished and
bureaucratic nonsense is everywhere...while being paid a third (or less!) of
what they would be paid in the industry? That's the choice potential teachers
like me face. Personally, I would love to teach, but the pain just isn't worth
it. The choice seems like a no-brainer.

Going into teaching would be stupid because (1) I'd be miserable if I had to
fight the bureucracy (2) said bureocracy would prevent me from having the full
impact I could have as an instructor and (3) I wouldn't be anywhere near
properly compensated. Is that much pain really worth the joy of making a small
difference? You're selling yourself short to a stupid and old-fashioned
system.

Perhaps changing this would be possible if there was some parallel school
system that was completely private and received support from the government in
addition to fees from students/parents. Ironically, this is the system we
currently have i Norway, but the creation of new private schools is in
practice outlawed by the government..severely restricting the possible avenues
of teaching and probably limiting the wages of the teachers who want to work
there.

~~~
thaumaturgy
> _...but altruism only works when everyone is altruistic._

Not a big fan of open source then, I take it? Or volunteerism in general?

> _Perhaps changing this would be possible if there was some parallel school
> system that was completely private and received support from the government
> in addition to fees from students/parents._

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_school>

Also, after-school programs. Or, getting involved in a school board.

There are numerous and ample opportunities for someone with the means and
motivation, but I think the real issue here is:

> _I wouldn't be anywhere near properly compensated._

I've been wrestling around lately with an ever-widening sense of dismay I have
at HN; it's only a problem for me because it's the last community of sorts
that I participate in. There are numerous other hobbies and interests that all
have their own groups of people, but the advantage to online communities is
that they're always there when you need them and not there when you don't.

Anyway, I was whining to a good friend recently about this, because I'm having
some trouble adjusting to the idea of not being a member of any communities
anymore, and he tried to tell me, "Fuck the money-chasers."

I fundamentally can't relate to what seems to be the majority here on certain
issues. It doesn't at all make sense to me that anyone could have this thought
process that goes, "Here is a problem ... and I will complain about it ... and
I have the power to change it ... but I won't."

How do you think bureaucracies change? They change when enough strong-willed
individuals get involved.

Are you waiting for them to change themselves? Nothing changes all by itself;
every single improvement in society is brought about by someone who worked for
that change.

Where do you think the funding for teachers comes from? Teachers get their
funding from voters, and all voters have been students. If students don't go
through school and see, really see, that there was value in their education,
then they won't be motivated to vote to spend more money on it.

The silliest thing is that we're constantly surrounded by examples of altruism
working. The recent "offer HN" series -- which seems to have died out now --
were triggered by just a couple of people choosing to donate their efforts.
The recent popular memorial post for Luke Bucklin and family
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1861964>) is another example of the
impact that a little bit of altruism can have.

And then there's you. I don't think we could ever reach a point of mutual
understanding on this topic, because -- and I mean this with no disrespect --
nobody can afford to pay you enough to be altruistic. It looks like more
people here see your point of view than mine.

How could I expect to be able to get usable advice on my business from HN
then? The odds of my finding anyone here that would understand my motivations
and limitations are looking pretty slim.

There seems to be a rampant social disease right now, where "hard" problems
are concerned, in which those are always somebody else's problem. A lot of
talented people are happy to pour effort into building social networks and
other trendy things, because there's money and prestige in that, but when it
comes to problems like education, public policy, government, and community
development -- those are all somebody else's problem.

That makes me a little bit concerned for the future.

Anyway, this is probably all just a colossal waste of my time and yours. I
haven't got anything else to contribute to HN.

~~~
prodigal_erik
It's not just about hoarding cash. When you act so as to maximize your income,
you have found society's consensus that what you are doing is the most
important and valuable thing you could offer. Altruism disregards all that
feedback from everyone else, in favor of doing what you think we should want
most from you (even though we demonstrably don't).

~~~
thaumaturgy
> _When you act so as to maximize your income, you have found society's
> consensus that what you are doing is the most important and valuable thing
> you could offer._

That's not how economics works.

~~~
Retric
For a wide range of economic situations it is true. Ignoring theft and other
edge cases where the system breaks down the fact that Google's founders made a
ridiculous amount of money directly relates to the value they created. Do you
really think they would have created more value for humanity at larges as
kindergarten teachers?

There are many ways that this breaks down. In a world of finite resources
Money provides a feedback loop which says "repairing and selling car X is
worth it but nobody will buy car Y so it's not worth repairing." It also says
becoming a Dentist has more value than a Plumber and Poor artists should find
something that creates more value.

PS: Conceder that the world is not filled with identical copies of you.
Individuals have different values, goals, talents, and resources. Finding the
best way to utilize humanity and its resources is a ridiculously complex
problem, but the act of buying / biding on what you want communicates your
desires. It also bribes people into doing things that they don't want to do
because they can then get other people to do things that they want.

~~~
thaumaturgy
I made a number of points in my diatribe, and the only one that was responded
to was the implication that some people are more concerned about hoarding
cash. Among my first points was an example of the value of volunteerism that
many on HN should find relevant.

Frankly, I find the notion that money is the only indicator of social value
not only despicable, but fundamentally wrong in the context of economics. I
also think that there are so many utterly obvious counter-examples in so many
industries and in so many areas of the world that anyone who still holds this
view could not possibly be convinced otherwise. So, I don't see any point in
continuing this conversation.

------
citricsquid
Excellent, although the "we didn't need so much money" might give the
impression they were taking money that other clubs could have used, although
that's government for you!

~~~
sp4rki
I'm under the impression that this hack didn't really mean other clubs got
less money. On the contrary, it seems to me that thanks to his actions (which
resulted on the restrictions for all clubs being softened) caused all of the
clubs to make more money with increasing lunch sales.

~~~
megablast
The other clubs did lose out, since he was taking spots in the lunch queue he
did not need, and stopping other clubs from using.

Nowhere does it say they council changed its restrictions due to the chess
club.

The fact is, chess club does not need much money, nor fancy chess sets.

Nevertheless, good work, nobody was really hurt, survival of the smartest club
and all that.

~~~
cbr
> Nowhere does it say they council changed its restrictions due to the chess
> club.

Actually no: "Soon afterwards, the student government relaxed the rules to let
clubs have lunch sales more days per week."

------
RyanMcGreal
Once again, a perverse incentive accomplishes the opposite of its intended
objective.

------
dgant
Similar to "Better to do and ask forgiveness, than to ask permission first"

~~~
teaspoon
The punchier version is, "Better to ask forgiveness than ask permission."

~~~
salvadors
Punchier still: "Ask forgiveness, not permission".

------
symkat
The students who bought the food at the lunch sales most likely did not care
what their money was going to. This was not like paying taxes, it was getting
restaurant food at a markup at your high school. I'm sure that those who
actually thought about where the money for their food was going were few and
far between.

The end-result of this hack was that the student government opened up selling
outside food at lunch time _more often_ for _more clubs_ than previously
allowed.

I see this as good for everyone involved, with the possible exception perhaps
of the poor kids.

~~~
araneae
Or the rich kids' arteries.

~~~
symkat
The high-school I went to served pizza and french fries regularly. The food
was extremely unhealthy and to my knowledge that hasn't changed much. It's far
easier to deep fry a few hundred pounds of tater tots than to make a few
thousand sandwiches and sliced apples.

I doubt either option was fairly healthy for the students, but I wouldn't use
a high-school cafeteria as the epitome of healthy living.

Also for some reason the rich kids at my school typically brought their own
lunch and ate more natural food than the middle-class or the poor kids.
Anecdotal at best, but that was my experience.

------
blizkreeg
In the late 90s there was an email service in India that mailed you a check if
you logged in a minimum number of times a month (heady dotcom dayz). I
received a few $5 checks - in Rupees that was a decent amount of pocket money
for a student!

While playing around once, I figured that if you entered the answer to the
"Pet's name" security question as "pet's name" verbatim, it gave you the
password in plain text! And this for _any_ account.

It was fun hacking into email accounts. I tried to persuade the girl I had a
crush on at the time to join the service saying she could get money if she
uses the service. She never did. Woman's intuition I guess.

~~~
eru
Somewhat off-topic, I guess.

------
colbyolson
While I approve of finding a way to get your foot in the door for lunch sales,
the soon abusing of it really turned me off. Too much like politics really.
Other clubs or the school itself could have used that money.

~~~
sp4rki
I wouldn't call this an abuse. It made it so all the clubs where making more
money, so everyone was really profiting from this.

~~~
pyre
Even though the rules about one sale per week were relaxed, it seems like each
day could only have one club making a sale, and there was still a queue for
those days. He was saying that since his group had a 'precedent' of 'needing
money' they still got priority in that queue. There is no guarantee that other
groups were or weren't missing out on money. There is just isn't enough
information to make that statement.

~~~
sp4rki
Yeah let's put it this way. Say school has no vacations so they used to get 52
sales a year, in which of course the clubs with a precedent of needing more
money took precedence. Now say they now get 104, or hell... 156 sales a year
because of the change in rules. Let's say that clubs that needed money took
80% of the days (this not changing in the worst case scenario), leaving 10 or
11 days for the rest of the clubs before, the remaining sales for this other
clubs increases to 21 or 32 respectively.

The only way that the chess club was going to take away sales from the other
clubs is if their percentage of sales increases, and even then it would have
to increase beyond a threshold where it started eating up the extra days
beyond the original sales the other clubs where having.

Sure it could be the case that other clubs where missing out, but it is _very
much_ more probable that everyone was benefiting from the chess club 'hack'.

Besides, you could argue that if your club does nothing to take at least some
advantage of the relaxed rules it's the other clubs' fault, not the chess
club's. In the end the clubs profited, the members profited, and the
businesses that provided the food profited. This is a good compromise if X
club didn't get much benefits after all.

------
BrandonM
An excellent hack that left a bad taste in my mouth.

~~~
lylejohnson
All those references to school lunch?

------
mattparcher
Lucky. At my high school, the cafeteria made it real hard for anyone but the
student government to sell food at lunch — our club had to collect dues from
members who wanted pizza delivered. Then again, I knew a guy who would drive
to the local taco shop before lunch and then sell _real_ burritos to the other
students to make a few bucks.

------
jasonlbaptiste
Please tell us about the time you, nathanmarz, most successfully hacked some
(non-computer) system to your advantage. :D

------
hfinney
With great power comes great responsibility.

------
hnal943
If only your student body showed fiscal constraint, this wouldn't have worked.

------
n-ion
i know this will come off as dick-ish...

just saying this hack seems more like a ruse... which i guess is a hack... i
was expecting more from such an inflammatory title...

------
aneth
This is one of those questionably ethical "hacks" that entrepreneurs commonly
use to gain advantage. There was no great harm, but there was deceit and some
harm. Socrates would not approve, but I think Paul Graham would.

When the victor tells the history, everyone cheers around the campfire, while
the defeated cry foul and regroup their forces for revenge.

