I missed this comment a few days ago, but I feel like it's worth replying to anyways: It's not about hacking, per se. It's about not using computing devices, a

I missed this comment a few days ago, but I feel like it's worth replying to anyways: It's not about hacking, per se. It's about not using computing devices, and it's about convenience for the legal system. If they allow a graphing calculator, should they allow a PDP? Is internet access the limiting factor? Can he send code on a USB key to his teacher? For a non-technical person to decide where that line is would be very difficult (as a technical person, I couldn't tell you offhand where it stops). 'No computing devices' is easy, and not unreasonable. Of course, anyone on HN will complain that the legal system needs to be aware of technology. If we get into that argument, every public representative will need to be a painter, race car driver, astronaut and programmer. Because they don't really understand <x> well enough to legislate about it.