While I agree with the notion of the word as you're using it here being material, it's disingenuous to ignore that "hacker"—in common usage—is constantly fighti

While I agree with the notion of the word as you're using it here being material, it's disingenuous to ignore that "hacker"—in common usage—is constantly fighting with going the way of "ninja rockstar". (Is this better than going the way of "cracker"? Who knows.) It seems that as soon as a term becomes an HR draw a flood of overinflated resumes comes quickly to erase its meaning. Hacker the way you're using it is, I believe, a term bestowed upon someone by another, more universally recognized hacker. In that way, I don't think it's possible for a company to broadcast that they're "hiring hackers". By definition, you have to know who's a hacker before you can approach them. It's use in marketing for hires is thus pretty much dead on arrival.