3 ms·
Understanding a system well enough to manipulate it in ways that the owner doesn't want seems at least in the same category of phone phreaker behavior. Which w
by Kamq 3y ago
Understanding a system well enough to manipulate it in ways that the owner doesn't want seems at least in the same category of phone phreaker behavior.
Which was also criminal behavior, but the point is that I don't think it automatically disqualifies it from the category.
- bombcar 3y agoExactly. Some criminal acts are so simple even an animal could do them - destroy something. Others are so complex or use the software against itself that they clearly are hacking; even if they remain criminal.
- jfoster 3y agoIs putting a cone on a vehicle to cause traffic jams really so complex? Perhaps the first person to do it was a bit clever, but anyone imitating it really isn't.
- Kamq 3y agoI think it depends. To compare it back to the phone phreaker example, putting up a single cone that blocks something is roughly the equivalent of cutting a phone line. That is to say, probably not hacking. But what about when you add a level of complexity and creativity? Say, putting up a series of cones that trap the car in an endless circle?
- jfoster 3y agoI don't really think the semantics matter too much. Sure, call the circle of cones a hack. The point is, it's criminal & likely causes a degree of chaos well beyond a simple prank.
- Kamq 3y agoThat did not seem to be the point of the original post that I responded to. Specifically, it seemed to imply that anything that was criminal could not be hacking. The legal status of something, seems completely orthogonal to hacking to me.
- jfoster 3y agoThat wasn't my point in the original post. Obviously overlap between those two things is possible.
- Kamq 3y agoThen I completely misread the post. In my defense I went back and re-read it, and it still looks that way. But, y'know, tone and text and all that. I could always be wrong. What was the point then?
- jfoster 3y agoThe point was that it's a stupid and harmful crime. Calling it a hack makes it sound like a clever harmless prank. The point is about the characterization of it, not about what hacks can and cannot be.