

2600 Magazine condemns DoS attacks - alecco
http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/12037

======
M1573RMU74710N
More accurate headline: "Emmanual Goldstein (once again) gets his knickers in
a twist over someone using the word 'hacker' in a way he doesn't like...."

It's actually interesting that there's very little pretense about what the
major issue is....

While I don't think I could support something like a DoS attack, I always find
it amusing when Emmanuel feels the need to throw a hissy fit about the
"correct" use of the word hacker. I guess it's because I find it a little
hypocritical...he invariable downplays things like this (as he does in the
Press Release) by saying "anyone could have done this, it takes no skill at
all...."

The problem is he's always saying stuff like "you don't need skill to be a
hacker, you just need the hacker spirit"...the hacker spirit being a sort of
inquisitive, industrious, and mischevious nature.

2600 Magazine presents all manner of simple and no-skill-needed activities as
"hacking", so please forgive my bemusement...

It's also funny that it seems like a lot of his associates don't feel the same
way... there are occasionally embarrassed silences on Off The Hook when
Emannual goes on about how some incident he doesn't approve of "isn't
hacking".

It seems to me what Emmanual really wants to do is impose arbitrary (though
possibly agreeable) moral restrictions on what "hacking" is, and simply
changes the definition to suit that without having to admit it.

If I'm a little sarcastic, it's because I truly believe this is counter-
productive and will backfire.

Emmanuel will say "this takes no skill at all, anyone can do it".

John Q Public and Suzy Cream-cheese will think " _I_ sure as heck dunno how to
do this....it's pretty impressive to me". Meanwhile Emmanual tries to slap
down any attempt to distinguish between ethical hackers and the "blackhats".

..."Why do we need that?" he'll say..."We already have a word: 'criminals'".

Well....because there clearly is a phenomenon in need of a description
here....and "computer criminals" doesn't have quite as nice a ring and isn't
as descriptive. Nobody complains we don't need the word "pick-pocket" because
we can just call them "criminals"....

I think it's a losing battle.

Emmanual is bolstering (through implication) the opinion that "any complicated
trick is hacking"...and his assurances that this is simple are discarded by
people who consider it magical.

Meanwhile, he gives them no alternatives...it's "hackers" or nothing....so of
course they go with "hackers".

Personally, I'm happy if they just qualify it with something like "black-hat
hackers"...

Overall I'm inclined to agree that these shenanigans are likely unproductive,
not difficult to do, and hard to support ethically....still, I think it's fair
to say they fit the rather liberal rubric 2600 generally uses to judge what
constitutes "hacking" or at least what belongs in a "hacking magazine".

~~~
hugh3
I don't like the word "hacker" at all [ * ]. Trying to get people to use it
"correctly" circa 2010 is like trying to persuade everybody that "gay" should
only be used to mean "happy". You'll just waste your breath and look stupid in
the process.

[ * ] "Well why are you on Hacker News then, huh?" asks the inquisitive
reader. Hey, when I started it was called Startup News. I never liked the new
name at all.

~~~
iuhjyftgrd
Used 'correctly' it means a minicab.

It comes from a 19th century French slang for a horse for hire (hack ney)
which became hackney carriage (the British legal term for a minicab) being any
vehicle you could just hire for a trip.

Then it came to be used for freelance writers - who could be hired to write
what you wanted. Especially journalists on British newspapers where the term
'hack' comes from.

Hacker in the sense of somebody who does boring unpleasant work for hire is
considerably older than it's usage to mean somebody who tinkers with things
for fun.

~~~
stan_rogers
I think you'll find the derivation for this usage is actually _hacher_ (to
chop or hack; _hatchet_ comes from the same root borrowing), and means one who
works in an inelegant manner (hacks away at a problem until it is solved). The
British usage of _bodger_ (outside of the realm of making greenwood chairs)
would be more-or-less equivalent.

------
alexwestholm
I can't really remember a time when the hacker community wasn't trying to
distance itself from script kids. It seems like a moot point among the tech
savvy, but an uphill battle with the general public. I guess the layman's
concept is focused on effects, which almost makes the script kids more
"hackerly" than the author of the DDoS script itself... I guess this is a good
juncture to try to correct this perception.

~~~
phwd
I do believe it is important to correct it.

It depends on how you look at the words hacker and tech savvy. Tech savvy
these days is anyone with enough common sense to know their way around the
computer to accomplish tasks, it is just a matter of digging and googling now.
So everyone in this forum is "tech-savvy". So then it is not a moot point
because some assume the title of hacker when they have not even took one step
inside of bash (I have lurked in the background while I read people speak
about hacker being a flexible term that can be applied anywhere but then it
becomes one of those metaphors - He was able to put together that item as
savvy as a hacker with his tools _not a different set of meanings_ ). Hacker
is now used for every and anything so the value in the word is lost. 1337 has
become a big joke and more of a game play slang. HackerNews (change ay yc
spotlight, entrepreneurship,politics,web design freelancing,life advice, jobs,
apple, microsoft , app development etc etc.) ,Household Hacker , Hacker (the
Movie) all watered down and sometimes misused version of the original meaning.

If hackerly means using tools without needing to know the inner workings then
I guess that is one man's way to put it, because you will want to remove the
boring repetitive sections of your method and make it automated (not having to
resolve the problem every time). An other way would be to open things and
observe until it is understood how it works.

You can also think of the a graphic designer being offended every time someone
says they know web/graphic design because they got a pirated version of
Photoshop and Dreamweaver online.

Or when people "hack" in games, they are using software that exploited the
system. He (the original coder) has accomplished his task maybe even learned
something new (about the registry , about game mechanics) along the way... The
teenager on the other hand who acquired the software ends up just trying to
feel like he is better than everyone else when in fact he has unfair
advantage. No real "superiority" there.

Useless battle or not, it is a title the author prefers to keep as clean as
possible (even if that puts him in a elite set)

------
fexl
I certainly favor the market (i.e. free people) holding Paypal, Mastercard,
and Visa accountable for their policies, but I don't condone vandalism.

It seems that "Anonymous" have started on a more constructive approach, which
is laudable:

[http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-
drop.ht...](http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-drop.html)

(This link courtesy of <http://orlingrabbe.com/>, the "Dark Side of the Moon"
of web sites.)

------
nowarninglabel
So, from the latest issue of 2600, I'm led to believe that someone who cuts
"$119.95" of a web page and replaces it with "$59.95" so they can get a
discount at Best Buy is a hacker, but someone Emmanuel disagrees with is not a
hacker?

------
jacquesm
Great piece, but reading it absolutely hurt my eyes. Is there are reason why
they enjoy instigating migraine on visitors or is this meant as some kind of
obscure test if you really want to read the contents or not ?

If you highlight the text it gets marginally better.

~~~
stevelosh
<http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/>

~~~
jacquesm
I know about readability. I just don't understand why people that take the
time to write a piece like that don't take the time to make their site
readable. It is really totally counterproductive. It should not normally
require a browser add-on in order to unlock the content of a webpage for
someone with normal (or better than normal) eyesight.

~~~
tseabrooks
That's mostly a subjective determination though. I found the text to be very
readable and easy on the eyes.

------
iuguy
I hate to ask the question, but how is 2600's view of any relevance in the
modern world? 2600 Magazine always was to me a kind of basic script kiddie
magazine that couldn't even hold a candle holder, let alone a candle to some
of the e-zines like Phrack.

------
winternett
I love the way they (2600) make an attempt to disconnect themselves from the
DDOS attacks in the first part of the letter, but then admit to hosting the
material in dispute at the end of the letter. The web is so informative and
nonsensical at the same time. Makes for great cinema...

Thank goodness for Open Source software though, or we'd never hear about any
of this, because it would all be shut down even before anyone could notice. :P

------
jackolas
I find it hilarious that this is blocked by my school's filter. How dare they
denounce script kiddies and support intellectual freedom.

------
meadhikari
Is this the reason behind the "Anonymous stops dropping DDoS bombs, starts
dropping science" thing?

~~~
gloob
Unlikely. I get the impression that the channers and their friends care less
about whether or not they are "hackers" (by whatever mostly-arbitrary
definition of the word is being used this week), and more about (1) not being
arrested, and (2) making a plausible effort at being useful.

~~~
jkeel
I agree. It seems the "hacker" term is from the media still stuck in the past
and not realizing that the Internet is pretty mainstream. I think the people
that participate in Anon (since there really isn't a group) look at themselves
more as citizens of the Internet using tools available to them. I've heard
some guest on a news outlet equate the DDoS attacks as Internet sit-ins. This
concept, while not exact is probably the closest analogy I've heard of.

------
krmboya
In short, hackers build things, crackers break them.

------
J3L2404
'The assault on Wikileaks must not be overshadowed by the recent denial of
service attacks and these certainly must not be allowed to be associated with
the hacker community. This will play right into the hands of those who wish to
paint us all as threats and clamp down on freedom of speech...'

------
mkramlich
i agree with 2600's stance

