
Paul Buchheit: Applied Philosophy, a.k.a. "Hacking" - paul
http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2009/10/applied-philosophy-aka-hacking.html
======
Harj
_Every system has two sets of rules: The rules as they are intended or
commonly perceived, and the actual rules ("reality"). In most complex systems,
the gap between these two sets of rules is huge._

i don't think it's possible to overstate just how true this is in the context
of social/people hacking. the smaller the gap, the more effective your
social/people skills will be.

~~~
iamelgringo
A corollary:

My father worked in the non-profit sector for years before starting his own
business. One of the best lessons he taught me was this: In any organization
of sufficient size, there is the official power structure (the org chart) and
the unofficial power structure (how things actually get done).

The trick is to find out what strings to pull and get things done. I've used
that idea for years trying to get things done in my day job in health care.

~~~
jonny_noog
In my experience, this is incredibly relevant in government, which depending
on how you cut it is an organisation or group of organisations all of
sufficient size.

------
edw519
_The rules as they are intended or commonly perceived, and the actual rules
("reality")._

As I read this, I couldn't stop thinking of one of my favorite quotes, which
succinctly describes the essence of hacking:

"Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them."
- Albert Einstein

~~~
messel
Thanks Ed, surprising I never came across that quote before but it helps put
an argument I've been trying to work through together better. It's obscure
but: A subject within a system can't possibly have knowledge of all states
within the same system, only an external perspective can see the true state of
all things.

It's related to self perception, and maybe the limits of what we can
understand about our universe.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
You should read about Godel's incompleteness theorem, if you haven't already.

~~~
mkramlich
and then read this brilliant book, perfect for hackers:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel,_Escher,_Bach>

------
10ren
It's very true that when you understand something that others don't - and see
(more of) the underlying reality - you can do things that appear to be magic,
not only to them but also to you. Unfortunately, as the deeper reality becomes
more widely understood, it becomes the "commonly perceived" reality. And the
magic goes away.

It's tough having to keep on finding the next impossible thing to do.

 _What had he done with his life, thought Louis Wu. He'd made no fundamental
scientific discoveries, overthrown no governments, started no major
religions._

------
coffeemug
To [mis]quote the Heart Sutra, "form is emptiness and emptiness is form." I've
played with this a huge deal, and as far as I can tell the "true" reality
really has no rules (and I've searched a lot). What we're really hacking is
our own, and other people's minds. So the "perceived" rules are how everyone
thinks everyone else's mind thinks, and the "real" rules is how everyone
else's mind actually thinks.

What is wealth generation, but hacking people's minds to perceive something as
valuable? Do Facebook, or Oracle, or even the internal combustion engine
really have any "intrinsic" value?

There is no objective reality, I don't think. Just the inter-subjective. I
still haven't figured out how to apply this knowledge to gain anything I
perceive to be valuable, though...

~~~
futuremint
Seems to me that value is just a perception, like any other perception. You
can choose to perceive value or not. I think the startup phase titled,
"Educating the Market" is a euphemism for, "Persuading other people to agree
with you."

In the end when dealing person to person, (or business to consumer, b2b, its
the same thing) its all just persuasion. Just persuading someone to give you
money for something you've persuaded them gives them value. And if you're
persuasive enough, they'll agree that it is valuable, convince themselves
accordingly and be happy.

Its much more apparent when you convince yourself that you really need very
few things in life to get by, and that most of what it takes comes from inside
yourself (except for food, water & shelter).

~~~
messel
It is easiest to convince others of the value of your product or service when
they profit from your creation. Saving folks time and effort with efficiency
is a driving force behind entrepreneurship.

As we pair down our own necessities we discover the core of our needs, and
this discovery can help us share great value with others. Inspiring others has
been a driving concern of mine, but I realized this only after quieting down
the buzz of my own selfish needs.

Wonderful shared experiences and memories have become much more valuable to
me.

~~~
jwhite
pair -> pare

------
caffeine
I can't believe nobody's mentioned The Matrix yet ... this is _precisely_ the
film's whole point.

In particular, that the most interesting system to which these ideas apply is
your own mind. "Free your mind, Neo."

So, then, spirituality, meditation, prayer, rituals, shamans, placebo effect,
etc. = humanity's mind-lisp macros, passed down through the ages?

~~~
petermarks
Agreed. I thought the most spine tingling part of the trilogy was at the end
of the second movie when Neo uses his powers in the real world. This is
reminiscent of my own hacking experience, albiet far less dramatic, where
successfully gaming the rules of one system gave me a whole new perspective
and level of confidence to manipulate another system. It helps to broaden your
horizons, so long as you eventually hone in on one thing and give it all you
got.

------
greendestiny
I've often thought about this in the context of fiction. It seems that the
hero in stories often wins because he out 'realities' the bad guy. I try to
apply this to how I think about problem solving - but I find the hardest thing
integrating all the wonderful knowledge I have and reality. When I knew a lot
less I found it easier just see the reality, but I have so many more tools at
my disposal now. Experience seems to help.

~~~
messel
In the context of fiction, a good friend of mine (Eli) and myself both greatly
enjoy rpg elements of breaking game systems in novel ways. There's a rush of
levity when the whole thing comes apart. Maybe it's more rules lawyering than
breaking per say, but identifying the essential flaws of a system is just as
honest as recognizing it's strengths.

------
scorpioxy
This is a well written article. Thanks PB.

I often try to use similar logic to describe what I do as a programmer. I
don't "fix" computers, I don't "write" code; I try to solve problems using the
computer as a tool.

Most people don't understand...

~~~
pbhjpbhj
How often have you used the computer as a blunt force (striking something) or
as a construction item (eg in a wall). You solve problems by writing code for
the computer to run. Is the computer really a tool or is it simply a device
for controlling tools? If the outputs are not connected to other devices the
computer does no useful work.

------
seiji
Hulu has the entire episode: <http://www.hulu.com/watch/25146/dilbert-the-
knack>

It's always good to see other people appreciating the critically underrated
Dilbert series.

------
yason
Beautifully said! While I encourage you to read the relatively short text
yourself, here's the summary:

Hacking first requires a system -- any system -- with some perceived rules.
Then we need a hacker: someone who keeps looking for the truth and finds the
actual rules the system operates on. While the hacker can just stop there
having broken the illusion, sometimes he will "use his discoveries to hack the
system, to transform the world". Playing by the actual rules instead of the
perceived rules is initially what is called a hack.

------
asmosoinio
Good article, but something bothered me:

Hackers or crackers? In the first paragraphs, he seems to assume
hacker=cracker. I always thought there was a clear distinction between the
two, at least among hackers. Am I wrong?

*"... these hackers are discovering the actual rules of the computer systems (e.g. buffer overflows), and using them to circumvent the intended rules of the system (typically access controls)."

~~~
mhansen
The distinction is irrelevant to the article

~~~
asmosoinio
I know. The article brought this to my mind and I was wondering what people
here think. It's the "hacker news", after all.

~~~
buugs
He clearly shows that breaking into computer systems is called hacking in the
media, and explains why the term hacking is in technical terms correct in this
situation.

------
kwamenum86
Excellent. I have never read any of PB's writing before but that was an
excellent primer for startup school. Can't wait until the 24th!

