> This is a matter of regional vocabulary, and the local cultural expectations that go with it. This slow realization made me give up calling people out on cal

> This is a matter of regional vocabulary, and the local cultural expectations that go with it. This slow realization made me give up calling people out on calling themselves hackers. It used to be that a hacker was someone who was particularly adept at finding clever ways to misuse, change or exploit something. http://hacks.mit.edu/ http://hacks.mit.edu/ and http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html were the canonical references. Hacks were contrasted with engineering -- both constructive creative output, but one involved detailed in-the-field knowledge while the other was a more principled approach. 'Street smarts' vs 'book smarts' if you will. Both were needed for a successful enterprise. Calling oneself a hacker was equivalent to giving yourself a nickname -- socially awkward and decreasing the likelihood the moniker would stick. Now 'hacking' is synonymous with prototyping, or even more esoteric types of development (what the hell is 'hacking education' supposed to mean?). This isn't entirely untrue as quick prototypes often contain "awful, we shouldn't be doing this" kinds of code. However, they do tend to lack the righteous "awful, we shouldn't be doing this but damn is that awesome" code tradition calls for. Like you said, definitions change and the only thing that matters is if your idea is communicated; ultimately you have to go with the flow...