The article argues that most hackers are hackers because their parents were wealthy. At some point you must accept that this argument is no longer applies for s

The article argues that most hackers are hackers because their parents were wealthy. At some point you must accept that this argument is no longer applies for some generation of hackers and those that follow it. I submit that 10 years ago, economics no longer played a role in whether some one could afford a computer. Your point could apply to any generation of hackers because it's analogous to "what if some parents didn't let their children use a computer until they were 12?" or "what if some parents didn't allow their children to install a python interpreter?" Also, you should consider that in 2000 nearly all school children had access to school computers.