5 ms·

Possibly the best thing ever said on the topic of this essay is from the infamous Dabblers and Blowhards post: ---- I blame Eric Raymond and to a lesser exten

Possibly the best thing ever said on the topic of this essay is from the infamous Dabblers and Blowhards post: ---- I blame Eric Raymond and to a lesser extent Dave Winer for bringing this kind of schlock writing onto the Internet. Raymond is the original perpetrator of the "what is a hacker?" essay, in which you quickly begin to understand that a hacker is someone who resembles Eric Raymond. [...] The whole genre reminds me of the the wooly business books one comes across at airports ("Management secrets of Gengis Khan", the "Lexus and the Olive Tree") that milk a bad analogy for two hundred pages to arrive at the conclusion that people just like the author are pretty great.

mindcrime 14y ago
I blame Eric Raymond and to a lesser extent Dave Winer for bringing this kind of schlock writing onto the Internet. Raymond is the original perpetrator of the "what is a hacker?" essay, in which you quickly begin to understand that a hacker is someone who resembles Eric Raymond Sounds like a pretty weak criticism to me. We all reflect our own biases and opinions in our writings, surely? If pg wrote "how to be a hacker" wouldn't you wind up with something suggesting that hackers should be like pg? If rtm wrote "how to be a hacker" do you think it wouldn't wind up reflecting a bias towards his mindsets and attitudes? If onan_barbarian wrote "how to be a hacker" would it not create an argument for hackers being much like onan_barbarian? If esr's essay is factually incorrect or misleading or damaging in some fashion, then I'd encourage anyone to criticize it for that, rather than just slamming the man for writing it.
- onan_barbarian 14y ago
  I suspect you're missing his point, possibly wilfully. Regardless of whether you agree with it or not, his criticism is that the content of the "how to be a hacker" essay in question is almost nothing more than thinly veiled self-description.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    I suspect you're missing his point No, I get the point, I just saying he's wrong.
    - soperj 14y ago
      I don't think he's wrong, really he should have titled it "How to be me" not "how to be a hacker" if that's what he was going to do.
      - PakG1 14y ago
        Isn't *that" the point he was trying to make?
- Confusion 14y ago
  It's perfectly possible to write from your experience, while consciously trying to generalize, keeping an eye out for biases. As a (self proclaimed) figurehead of a movement, you may even be expected to do so. Esr has certainly not done that, which most clearly shows in the 'points for style' section of his essay. I'm into martial arts myself, but suggesting that as a 'point for style' is ludicrous. Combine it with an incentive to go 'pistol shooting' and I actually think it is offensive.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    It sounds like you're picking nits to me. You're talking about two points, in what is hardly the core of the essay, and using that to justify a broad criticism of the whole essay? Look, I disagree with esr on more than a few things myself. But this essay strikes me as a fairly reasonable introduction to a number of activities and mindsets that a would-be hacker would want to cultivate. And it's not like he is saying "This is the only route to becoming a hacker". I also don't understand your thing about finding the reference to pistol shooting "offensive". I can understand if you're an anti-gunner or whatever and don't like guns, but the simple facts are that millions of people enjoy going to the range and shooting their pistols. We're talking about something that is legal (with some caveats), safe, fun, and has positive personal benefits... it's not like he suggested going out and watching kiddie-porn or stealing food from starving children.
rhizome 14y ago
Nietzsche said the meaning of a thing is a function of power rather than truth. If someone had written something better and with similar exposure, people would give that assessment more authority. Books and essays like "Management secrets of Gengis Khan" are an attempt at invoking this kind of power, that the writer is both knowledgeable enough and the topic is relevant enough to the times in which it appears to hold sway in some way (if only for book sales, natch). If nobody cares who the "Gengis Khan" author is and their way of describing what they're talking about reaches enough people to operate a (sub-) cultural transformation, then the words will therefore have little meaning in the practical sense. To be sure, writers write from their own subjectivity. This cannot be avoided, so to critique something as having too much of the author in it is a little beyond the pale (pace Derrida). The last century-plus of philosophy and critical exercise have taught us that objectivity doesn't exist (irony intentional); there will always be hints of the writer's mind, biases, and so on. So of course the Jargon File is going to have ESR's fingerprints all over it. We can talk about how the JF's corpus is weak and riddled with a particular subjectivity, but the simple facts are that it's accessible, easy to digest, and an early description of many, many concepts of the subcultures affiliated with computers. It acquires authority this way, regardless of followers-on and critiques. It's the same problem the Bible and other major religious texts have, but it's also germane to the scope of things like operational best practices, equity allocation, and any other topic where there are schools of thought. The critique raised here is simply another front in a battle between schools. Steven Levy articulated an infinitely more detailed description of hackers, but that has a concomitant inaccessiblity (length), but in my mind equally valid. At the end of the day, we may as well be talking about what band is the most Rock.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  At the end of the day, we may as well be talking about what band is the most Rock. Well that's easy: Mötley Crüe.
godfried 14y ago
I take it you haven't read Business Secrets of the Pharaohs?
cpressey 14y ago
What I don't like about the title is that it assumes that the reader is not already a hacker, and that the reader aspires to become a hacker. (Not in a strong way, but presumably if I have no desire to transition from non-hacker to hacker, there's no reason for me to read something called "How to Become a Hacker".) I think it relates to your point, because another way to say this is that it's presented in an obnoxiously (to me) self-help-book-esque fashion. If it was called "The Workings of a Hacker's World" or some such, I'd find it less grating. I assume this is the Dabblers and Blowhards post to which you refer: http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm ... thanks, I'll give it a read.
nsomaru 14y ago
I take issue with you, Sir. This post has changed my life. I'm so happy I read it. Before reading it I had a fancy idea from "Hollywood" as to what a hacker was, coupled with a strong interest in computers. I could never understand just "how" people did things with computers that actually made them work -- commanded them. This essay gave me a view into that world. Sure, you can argue that if a person gives an opinion of what it means to be "X", then he superimposes his own idea of "X" upon the abstract "X", as it were. But I believe that that abstract "X" doesn't exist (in and of itself), and all we have are labels ("hacker") which lend a solidity to something that is inherently fluid. Even if there is such a concrete abstract that we all understand and agree on (Plato's 'perfect form', if you will), in the bottom of your heart (and logically, for that matter), you must acknowledge that the abstract "hacker" is far superior than any of the forms you and I can conceive (name drop here if you wish). All we can manage are ghosts and reflections of that, sometimes beautiful, but inherently incomplete. I thank Mr Raymond for this gem in particular: The Hacker Attitude 1. The world is full of fascinating problems waiting to be solved. 2. No problem should ever have to be solved twice. 3. Boredom and drudgery are evil. 4. Freedom is good. 5. Attitude is no substitute for competence. Which enlightened my twelve year old mind in a manner that I fear is no longer possible. I read this back when I was 12 in 2000. It got me into programming, made me learn to use Linux. That Zen Koan at the beginning is something that has grown with me over the years, it took me a long time to see how loaded those six lines are; therein truly lies the means to mastery of any path. I will never forget the feeling of realising that my partitioning command had failed and now I had no access to my windows machine (and thus, the internet and anybody that could help me). Luckily, I had printed out the Gentoo manual (I was obsessed with apparent speed increases that could be achieved by compiling everything for your own arch) and I managed to get a dial up connection (yes, we still had dial-up in South Africa in 2000 :) working and some basic text-based browsing to continue the mission. ah.

mindcrime 14y ago

I blame Eric Raymond and to a lesser extent Dave Winer for bringing this kind of schlock writing onto the Internet. Raymond is the original perpetrator of the "what is a hacker?" essay, in which you quickly begin to understand that a hacker is someone who resembles Eric Raymond Sounds like a pretty weak criticism to me. We all reflect our own biases and opinions in our writings, surely? If pg wrote "how to be a hacker" wouldn't you wind up with something suggesting that hackers should be like pg? If rtm wrote "how to be a hacker" do you think it wouldn't wind up reflecting a bias towards his mindsets and attitudes? If onan_barbarian wrote "how to be a hacker" would it not create an argument for hackers being much like onan_barbarian? If esr's essay is factually incorrect or misleading or damaging in some fashion, then I'd encourage anyone to criticize it for that, rather than just slamming the man for writing it.

onan_barbarian 14y ago
I suspect you're missing his point, possibly wilfully. Regardless of whether you agree with it or not, his criticism is that the content of the "how to be a hacker" essay in question is almost nothing more than thinly veiled self-description.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  I suspect you're missing his point No, I get the point, I just saying he's wrong.
  - soperj 14y ago
    I don't think he's wrong, really he should have titled it "How to be me" not "how to be a hacker" if that's what he was going to do.
    - PakG1 14y ago
      Isn't *that" the point he was trying to make?
Confusion 14y ago
It's perfectly possible to write from your experience, while consciously trying to generalize, keeping an eye out for biases. As a (self proclaimed) figurehead of a movement, you may even be expected to do so. Esr has certainly not done that, which most clearly shows in the 'points for style' section of his essay. I'm into martial arts myself, but suggesting that as a 'point for style' is ludicrous. Combine it with an incentive to go 'pistol shooting' and I actually think it is offensive.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  It sounds like you're picking nits to me. You're talking about two points, in what is hardly the core of the essay, and using that to justify a broad criticism of the whole essay? Look, I disagree with esr on more than a few things myself. But this essay strikes me as a fairly reasonable introduction to a number of activities and mindsets that a would-be hacker would want to cultivate. And it's not like he is saying "This is the only route to becoming a hacker". I also don't understand your thing about finding the reference to pistol shooting "offensive". I can understand if you're an anti-gunner or whatever and don't like guns, but the simple facts are that millions of people enjoy going to the range and shooting their pistols. We're talking about something that is legal (with some caveats), safe, fun, and has positive personal benefits... it's not like he suggested going out and watching kiddie-porn or stealing food from starving children.

rhizome 14y ago

Nietzsche said the meaning of a thing is a function of power rather than truth. If someone had written something better and with similar exposure, people would give that assessment more authority. Books and essays like "Management secrets of Gengis Khan" are an attempt at invoking this kind of power, that the writer is both knowledgeable enough and the topic is relevant enough to the times in which it appears to hold sway in some way (if only for book sales, natch). If nobody cares who the "Gengis Khan" author is and their way of describing what they're talking about reaches enough people to operate a (sub-) cultural transformation, then the words will therefore have little meaning in the practical sense. To be sure, writers write from their own subjectivity. This cannot be avoided, so to critique something as having too much of the author in it is a little beyond the pale (pace Derrida). The last century-plus of philosophy and critical exercise have taught us that objectivity doesn't exist (irony intentional); there will always be hints of the writer's mind, biases, and so on. So of course the Jargon File is going to have ESR's fingerprints all over it. We can talk about how the JF's corpus is weak and riddled with a particular subjectivity, but the simple facts are that it's accessible, easy to digest, and an early description of many, many concepts of the subcultures affiliated with computers. It acquires authority this way, regardless of followers-on and critiques. It's the same problem the Bible and other major religious texts have, but it's also germane to the scope of things like operational best practices, equity allocation, and any other topic where there are schools of thought. The critique raised here is simply another front in a battle between schools. Steven Levy articulated an infinitely more detailed description of hackers, but that has a concomitant inaccessiblity (length), but in my mind equally valid. At the end of the day, we may as well be talking about what band is the most Rock.

mindcrime 14y ago
At the end of the day, we may as well be talking about what band is the most Rock. Well that's easy: Mötley Crüe.

godfried 14y ago

I take it you haven't read Business Secrets of the Pharaohs?

cpressey 14y ago

What I don't like about the title is that it assumes that the reader is not already a hacker, and that the reader aspires to become a hacker. (Not in a strong way, but presumably if I have no desire to transition from non-hacker to hacker, there's no reason for me to read something called "How to Become a Hacker".) I think it relates to your point, because another way to say this is that it's presented in an obnoxiously (to me) self-help-book-esque fashion. If it was called "The Workings of a Hacker's World" or some such, I'd find it less grating. I assume this is the Dabblers and Blowhards post to which you refer: http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm ... thanks, I'll give it a read.

nsomaru 14y ago

I take issue with you, Sir. This post has changed my life. I'm so happy I read it. Before reading it I had a fancy idea from "Hollywood" as to what a hacker was, coupled with a strong interest in computers. I could never understand just "how" people did things with computers that actually made them work -- commanded them. This essay gave me a view into that world. Sure, you can argue that if a person gives an opinion of what it means to be "X", then he superimposes his own idea of "X" upon the abstract "X", as it were. But I believe that that abstract "X" doesn't exist (in and of itself), and all we have are labels ("hacker") which lend a solidity to something that is inherently fluid. Even if there is such a concrete abstract that we all understand and agree on (Plato's 'perfect form', if you will), in the bottom of your heart (and logically, for that matter), you must acknowledge that the abstract "hacker" is far superior than any of the forms you and I can conceive (name drop here if you wish). All we can manage are ghosts and reflections of that, sometimes beautiful, but inherently incomplete. I thank Mr Raymond for this gem in particular: The Hacker Attitude 1. The world is full of fascinating problems waiting to be solved. 2. No problem should ever have to be solved twice. 3. Boredom and drudgery are evil. 4. Freedom is good. 5. Attitude is no substitute for competence. Which enlightened my twelve year old mind in a manner that I fear is no longer possible. I read this back when I was 12 in 2000. It got me into programming, made me learn to use Linux. That Zen Koan at the beginning is something that has grown with me over the years, it took me a long time to see how loaded those six lines are; therein truly lies the means to mastery of any path. I will never forget the feeling of realising that my partitioning command had failed and now I had no access to my windows machine (and thus, the internet and anybody that could help me). Luckily, I had printed out the Gentoo manual (I was obsessed with apparent speed increases that could be achieved by compiling everything for your own arch) and I managed to get a dial up connection (yes, we still had dial-up in South Africa in 2000 :) working and some basic text-based browsing to continue the mission. ah.