4 ms·

So, non mainstream stuff still isn't mainstream?

by lupire 4y ago

bawolff 4y ago
But was it actually not mainstream back in the day? Or even if not mainstream, your average user was still highly likely to encounter it, well going about their mainstream day which isn't true anymore.
- fknorangesite 4y ago
  I think you might be overestimating the pervasiveness of hacker culture - even now, never mind ~25 years ago.
  - SiempreViernes 4y ago
    Look to Hackers (1995) for an proxy of how well hacker culture was understood at the time. Pretty sure the sports in Space Jam (1996) got a more accurate representation than hacking got in Hackers.
    - naniwaduni 4y ago
      I mean sports is ... very mainstream.
    - int_19h 4y ago
      The curious thing about Hackers is that, while the technical side of hacking was obviously not even wrong, the culture and ethos got a much better exposure. I mean, it actually had the Hacker Manifesto read out loud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvK7V7U5Mck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvK7V7U5Mck
      - bawolff 4y ago
        I would even argue the technical side was better than most modern movies/tv shows (not counting mr robot). Anything looks realistic compared to ncis style 2 people 1 keyboard, lets unplug the monitor when things get hairy.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  I struggle to see how that's a bad thing. Most people don't need to be coincidentally picking up bomb-making information.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    Ahh.. and this is where it gets fun. You are automatically assuming that you know better how a given person should spend their time. Person might be fascinated by how a given formation absolutely hates being squeezed. You see a bomb, but he sees a rare material property. How do you decide ( and who does decide ) what information is 'sanitary' enough for the public to handle? I thought we were supposed to be our own arbiters? Or is it just imaginary freedom on increasingly more restrictive guardrails? I genuinely dislike the current trend. I personally played with all sorts of chemicals in my dad's garage ( he was a mechanic ) and these days my interest would be at best seen with suspicion.
    - ethanbond 4y ago
      No one (in this thread at least) is suggesting that information shouldn’t be available to people who are seeking it.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        <<I struggle to see how that's a bad thing. Most people don't need to be coincidentally picking up bomb-making information. I might be misreading this, but to me this sentence reads as 'this information does not belong anywhere where normal people roam'. It is possible that "shoulnd't be available" is making me read it this way.
        ethanbond 4y ago
        Are you familiar with the word “coincidentally?” Not trying to be rude.
        A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
- watwut 4y ago
  First, it was not mainstream. Second, I run into literal nazi propaganda randomly and into literal behading videos with one search (after random find suggested it exists). I also randomly run into write up a out how to steal cars and how to put spyware into someone else's phone. None of that stuff is hard to find. It is just that mainstreami mainstream is not interested and it would be absurd to blame them.
- spookie 4y ago
  I believe you're right. In part, I blame the shift of the internet's target audience. It had a serious pull of that fringe of society in the early days. Nonetheless, content sanitization has become more and more prevalent. It's disturbing to think, of the influence of social bubbles, and algorithmic driven content proliferation. How much of this mix of content moderation + appealing to a bigger audience affects our own thoughts/opinions. I understand that a lot of it should be sanitized. But this thought is terrifying.
- jrochkind1 4y ago
  phrack was definitely not mainstream. It felt like getting let in on a secret when you found out about it and figured out where to get it. Back in the day. This was before the web (or the web before google searchability of it), and before most people had heard about the internet. There was a brief period at the dawn of the web when things were both more accessible and wilder, it's true. It was in retrospect a transitionary period.

So, non mainstream stuff still isn't mainstream?

by lupire 4y ago

So, non mainstream stuff still isn't mainstream?

But was it actually not mainstream back in the day? Or even if not mainstream, your average user was still highly likely to encounter it, well going about their mainstream day which isn't true anymore.

fknorangesite 4y ago
I think you might be overestimating the pervasiveness of hacker culture - even now, never mind ~25 years ago.
- SiempreViernes 4y ago
  Look to Hackers (1995) for an proxy of how well hacker culture was understood at the time. Pretty sure the sports in Space Jam (1996) got a more accurate representation than hacking got in Hackers.
  - naniwaduni 4y ago
    I mean sports is ... very mainstream.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    The curious thing about Hackers is that, while the technical side of hacking was obviously not even wrong, the culture and ethos got a much better exposure. I mean, it actually had the Hacker Manifesto read out loud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvK7V7U5Mck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvK7V7U5Mck
    - bawolff 4y ago
      I would even argue the technical side was better than most modern movies/tv shows (not counting mr robot). Anything looks realistic compared to ncis style 2 people 1 keyboard, lets unplug the monitor when things get hairy.
ethanbond 4y ago
I struggle to see how that's a bad thing. Most people don't need to be coincidentally picking up bomb-making information.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  Ahh.. and this is where it gets fun. You are automatically assuming that you know better how a given person should spend their time. Person might be fascinated by how a given formation absolutely hates being squeezed. You see a bomb, but he sees a rare material property. How do you decide ( and who does decide ) what information is 'sanitary' enough for the public to handle? I thought we were supposed to be our own arbiters? Or is it just imaginary freedom on increasingly more restrictive guardrails? I genuinely dislike the current trend. I personally played with all sorts of chemicals in my dad's garage ( he was a mechanic ) and these days my interest would be at best seen with suspicion.
  - ethanbond 4y ago
    No one (in this thread at least) is suggesting that information shouldn’t be available to people who are seeking it.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      <<I struggle to see how that's a bad thing. Most people don't need to be coincidentally picking up bomb-making information. I might be misreading this, but to me this sentence reads as 'this information does not belong anywhere where normal people roam'. It is possible that "shoulnd't be available" is making me read it this way.
      - ethanbond 4y ago
        Are you familiar with the word “coincidentally?” Not trying to be rude.
        A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
watwut 4y ago
First, it was not mainstream. Second, I run into literal nazi propaganda randomly and into literal behading videos with one search (after random find suggested it exists). I also randomly run into write up a out how to steal cars and how to put spyware into someone else's phone. None of that stuff is hard to find. It is just that mainstreami mainstream is not interested and it would be absurd to blame them.
spookie 4y ago
I believe you're right. In part, I blame the shift of the internet's target audience. It had a serious pull of that fringe of society in the early days. Nonetheless, content sanitization has become more and more prevalent. It's disturbing to think, of the influence of social bubbles, and algorithmic driven content proliferation. How much of this mix of content moderation + appealing to a bigger audience affects our own thoughts/opinions. I understand that a lot of it should be sanitized. But this thought is terrifying.
jrochkind1 4y ago
phrack was definitely not mainstream. It felt like getting let in on a secret when you found out about it and figured out where to get it. Back in the day. This was before the web (or the web before google searchability of it), and before most people had heard about the internet. There was a brief period at the dawn of the web when things were both more accessible and wilder, it's true. It was in retrospect a transitionary period.