

On Hacking - Richard Stallman - alecst
http://www.stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html

======
delano
_Playfully doing something difficult, whether useful or not, that is hacking._

That's one reasonable definition of hacking, but the examples he gives are
trite. Changing a single letter on the sign of a school that no one has heard
of is not interesting or notable. It's not even amusing. ("Customer Training
College" to "Customer _D_ raining College".)

He also contradicts that definition with:

 _I realized that if I could come up with a way [to eat with 6 chopsticks], it
would be a hack._ \-- That train of thought is not playful, it's pretentious.

 _He had topped my hack. Was his action, too, a hack? I think so. Is he
therefore a hacker? That depends on how much he likes to hack._ \-- So playful
or not, if you're outdoing Richard Stallman, it's not hacking.

~~~
kragen
He said he thought it was a hack in the text you quoted. Where do you get "if
you're outdoing Richard Stallman, it's not hacking."? Is that an expression of
your own opinion, or is it intended to be a restatement of something Richard
said? If so, what?

~~~
delano
That expression is my joke based on the content and context of that essay.

He's suggesting that his friend may not be a hacker simply because it depends
on "how much he likes to hack". My issue with that is two-fold: 1) it
introduces the idea that being a hacker requires some form of external
judgement and 2) it contracts his initial point that playing _is_ hacking.

That said, it's possible his friend specifically did not enjoy eating with two
sets of chopsticks in one hand.

~~~
mattrepl
This topic shouldn't be taken seriously, so I'm hesitant to post; however,
there's a precedent in opposition to your first point that external judgement
is not required. From the New Hacker's Dictionary entry for hacker:

"It is better to be described as a hacker by others than to describe oneself
that way. Hackers consider themselves something of an elite (a meritocracy
based on ability), though one to which new members are gladly welcome. There
is thus a certain ego satisfaction to be had in identifying yourself as a
hacker (but if you claim to be one and are not, you'll quickly be labeled
bogus). See also wannabee."

------
yafujifide
Having recently read "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman," Stallman comes
across as actually being less of a hacker than Feynman.

[http://web.archive.org/web/20080205071249/http://www.gorgora...](http://web.archive.org/web/20080205071249/http://www.gorgorat.com/)

Even as a kid, Feynman was quite the hacker. Fixing radios and such because it
was interesting and fun, and not caring if it was useful.

------
jisakujien
The extra pair of chopstics are communal, for picking up pieces of food and
moving them to own your bowl/plate.

The PRC (no idea about the DPRK) was campaigning for the use of these pretty
heavily around that time period as they're more sanitary and a lot of Chinese
meals are taken "family style".

At least try to comprehend the problem before coming up with a hackish
solution.

------
jgfoot
When the entire world starts using a word ("hack") in a way that you think is
wrong, at some point it is you that becomes wrong. Language works that way.

~~~
minus1
Language may work that way, but RMS is not likely to concede the point. Thus
his continuing battle over "GNU/Linux". He's a principled man, perhaps to a
fault.

------
gruseom
This is a marvelous little essay that I hadn't seen before. I think I like it
better than anything else I've read by Stallman. It communicates the spirit of
hacking in a way that is hard to do.

(I really hate the term "cracker" for security breakers though. It feels
contrived, which is maybe why nobody uses it.)

------
ewiethoff
Stallman refers to "exploring the roofs and tunnels of the MIT campus" in the
1960s and 1970s as hacking. FWIW, we used to ride on top of elevators (and
sometimes their counterweights) at RPI in the 1970s and call it hacking. So,
yes, I can relate to the article, man, whether or not hacking goes back to the
1920s or the Renaissance or ancient Greece.

------
Rod
Though I greatly admire Stallman, this essay is a bit simplistic and
disappointing. I would argue that _hacking_ precedes the age of the computer.
Those pranks mentioned by Stallman were happening at MIT in the 1920s and
1930s already. In fact, at MIT "pranks" are known as "hacks".

Well, if a "hacker" is defined as someone who attacks difficult problems for
the sake of satisfying his / her intellectual curiosity, then I would argue
that there were hackers in Ancient Greece already. Moreover, in Italy there
were hackers galore during the Renaissance. Though the term "hacker" was
created at MIT, hackers have existed for a long time. Leonardo da Vinci was a
hacker _extraordinaire_ , for instance. Let us show some respect for the
giants on whose shoulders we stand...

~~~
illume
He mentions someone from the 1300s he considers a hacker. I think he was
referring to the term Hack.

------
lgriffith
An example of a small mind producing a small result.

~~~
captainobvious
Is the parent post supposed to be self-referential?

~~~
Dilpil
If it is, then it was a nice hack.

