7 ms·

How to Become a Hacker (2001)

69 points by jeremynixon 12y ago

longlivegnu 12y ago
this is really really old. I enjoyed reading the CaTB book a lot. Unfortunately ESR appears to sometimes be very rude in his opinion of others :/
- yitchelle 12y ago
  Rude may not be the right wording here. I would put it as passionate or strong beliefs. Sort of in the same vein as RMS.
  - numbsafari 12y ago
    Having met both in person, I think "rude" is rather quite apt in both cases. You can be passionate and principled and not a jerk, or a murderer, or a scoundrel, or even rude.
    - yitchelle 12y ago
      Well, you are correct. I stand corrected. Thanks for providing some insight into both of their personality.
tabrischen 12y ago
I remember reading this about 10 years ago, feeling old now.
tomc1985 12y ago
These are the real hackers
jwise0 12y ago
I always thought that this article read more like "How to become Eric S. Raymond". There's a lot in here that is really pretty painful to read 14 years on; in particular, I find the argument that you have to start off by using a Unix in order to become a proficient hacker to be particularly disingenuous. The general aspect that I dislike is the idea that there is only one kind of hacker -- the kind that fits into Eric S. Raymond's "the hacker culture". For instance, he gives the monoculture that all hackers speak English; but just a few weeks ago, we saw an article on HN about the old microcomputers of the Soviet Bloc (I wish I could find the link now). And, perhaps, maybe my all-time favorite hacks were executed by demosceners who spoke little-to-no English. Are these people not hackers? I don't think you'd find anyone who could argue that, but they are not part of Eric S. Raymond's monoculture. The great essay that I have always wanted to read about How to Become a Hacker would be answering the question of how to find joy in the minutiae, and how to put all the little pieces together to make the most interesting things. But this essay is not that.
- yzzxy 12y ago
  Yes, the jargon file and this article are mired in specifics that are probably bad. I also don't think the weirdness the jargon file gets into near the end regarding personality archetypes is very valid, interesting or useful, and it has always felt a little creepy to me. But I would say the core principles mentioned at the top of this article are pretty valid: 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. That seems to capture the hacker spirit pretty well.
  - adlpz 12y ago
    Even more, I would say that several of the later points are very much valid still too. I'm still one of those people that believe that hacking does in fact relate to computers and electronics (!), so I think that learning to program, knowing HTML, being fluent in Unix and the ways of contributing mentioned in the article are still perfectly relevant as of today. I do agree with jwise0, though, in that the phrasing and some details are way too specific to the author's own experience.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    One problem with these 5 "core principles" is that they apply just as well to tax accounting. It's the places where ESR writes things that don't apply to contracts law or mechanical engineering where he goes off the rails, which is a telling problem with the essay.
- Myk267 12y ago
  > I always thought that this article read more like "How to become Eric S. Raymond". That seems like quite the coincidence given that Eric S. Raymond is the author of the article itself. Maybe there's something to that. > For instance, he gives the monoculture that all hackers speak English No. He doesn't give anything. He suggests that learning English is useful because the internet and hacker culture are dominated by it. > But this essay is not that. The scope of the document is clearly stated under the "Why This Document?" header.
- 12y ago
halayli 12y ago
learn how to learn and you have to be naturally curious. The rest follows. This to me(subjectively) defines a hacker. Rarely do you reach dead ends when you know how to learn.
davidw 12y ago
> Trying to learn to hack on a Microsoft Windows machine or under any other closed-source system is like trying to learn to dance while wearing a body cast. > Under Mac OS X it's possible, but only part of the system is open source — you're likely to hit a lot of walls, and you have to be careful not to develop the bad habit of depending on Apple's proprietary code. If you concentrate on the Unix under the hood you can learn some useful things. I think this is still relevant. The best hackers I have known are people who understand things pretty much from top to bottom, and having the source code, and rights to use it are invaluable for that. If you want to create a business, maybe Mac OS or Windows might be better for you (I get by with Linux just fine though), but if you want to be a "hacker" in the sense of having a thorough understanding of your whole computing environment, then you should probably be using Linux or BSD.
- Delmania 12y ago
  I'd disagree with this. While OS X and Windows are not as transparent as linux, there are enough resources on both that a hacker that wants can go deep on them. In the Windows ecosystem, Mark Russinovich (creator of Sysinternals) and Charles Petzgold readily spring to mind as people who fit the definition of hacker.
  - ultramancool 12y ago
    The biggest difference is that if you run Windows, you have to be willing to crack open IDA and read some assembly to really get a view of how your system is doing something sometimes. The main reason I keep a Windows box around is because so many Windows devs seem to think that security through obscurity works and that no one is willing to patch their binaries. Big mistake.
atrilla 12y ago
Simply put: be curious. As far as I know, the first hackers built train models (http://tmrc.mit.edu/ http://tmrc.mit.edu/). Research, make stuff, learn.
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  The first hackers probably made fire and flint hand-axes.
  - doodpants 12y ago
    The first hackers, instead of eating every piece of algae they encountered, probably tried sticking two or three pieces of algae together, and then used those clumps to propel themselves towards areas with larger concentrations of algae.
    - towelguy 12y ago
      And of course, there's an emacs command to do that.
philh 12y ago
Note that ESR uses a stricter definition of hacker than is usually accepted on HN. On HN, anyone who can write code is free to call themselves a hacker. But that doesn't mean you have the mindset. And to the extent that the hacker community still exists in the sense of this document, it doesn't mean you're a part of that. I've complained about this before, it's something of a pet peeve of mine. I don't describe myself as a hacker. (But also a weaker definition in several ways. Hacking in the ESR sense doesn't have to have anything to do with computers. This is in the jargon file, I'm a little surprised that the HOWTO doesn't say anything about it.)
- dhimes 12y ago
  Actually, on HN the definition pg has endorsed for hacker is as a synonym for 'tinkerer' (not his word). It's not necessarily about code, but it is about the mindset of curiosity + adventurous.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    But then you have startups recruiting "rockstar hackers", sites that teach you how to become a "hacker" by leraning the newest hip JS framework of this week, and of course, the abominations like the term "growth hacking". Spirit of hacking, as per pg's definition or the hacker culture, is still strong on HN, but the word hacker itself seems to devaluate quickly. Just like every other term that becomes fashionable, I guess.
ta75757 12y ago
I don't know. I personally have a mild dislike of self-applied labels like this. "You know what punkers don't do? Call themselves punkers."
- GuiA 12y ago
  Yep. Just like "activist", "entrepreneur", "intellectual", "genius", and so many others, "hacker" is a word without meaning when applied to oneself.
  - philh 12y ago
    The article does say that you shouldn't apply it to yourself. It permits you to accept the label when others apply it to you.
edem 12y ago
I read this essay 7 years ago and it was a revelation for me. I started coding right away and 1 year later I had a job as a programmer. This is a must read for all programmers imho.
larrywright 12y ago
This essay is far from perfect. That said, when I first read this I was a Windows user and primarily a Windows desktop application developer, but I'd started to explore what was outside the Microsoft ecosystem by playing with things like Perl and Linux. Reading this document, along with the (far, far better) book The Pragmatic Programmer, helped open my eyes to the world beyond Microsoft. All this to say: despite the negative comments here, this is worth your time to read.
ilamparithi 12y ago
This is where I found PG's essays for the first time.
vezzy-fnord 12y ago
One of my main beefs with ESR has always been his extremely hostile views on infosec hackers, or as he pejoratively calls them "warez d00dz". The technical proficiency of infosec hackers can be remarkably high, particularly since it requires knowledge in all layers of the stack. To say that someone like Michal Zalewski is not a hacker, is absolutely foolish. But, according to ESR, if you're more concerned with "breaking" things than "building" them, you're just a juvenile who's gonna get to five to ten in the slammer after realizing you're not too bright. Under this definition, a person with sophisticated reverse engineering and exploit development skills is not a hacker, but someone who bootstraps Rails on a free Unix, is. I also disagree that not using your real name is for losers, but that one is pretty controversial.
- crpatino 12y ago
  > I also disagree that not using your real name is for losers, but that one is pretty controversial. It was a more innocent world, back then. I do not go to any measurable lengths to hide my actual name, but I would rather not volunteer it to the social engineering underworld either.
0xCMP 12y ago
When I read this the first time I printed it out and read it over and over again. It guided me to start my efforts to download linux and learn to program in the 5 languages he mentioned. I took the "learn programming in 10 years" to heart. It's made me a programmer. The flaws people are talking about in the article, I think, are true but irrelevant because the spirit of the article will still guide people such as me. His "how to ask questions" article is another great one.
crdr88 12y ago
I loved the part when he mentioned money, sex and social status as distractions...This is such a claustrophobic way of thinking about the stereotypical hacker.
slashnull 12y ago
Eric S. Raymond gave meaning to my life.

69 points by jeremynixon 12y ago

this is really really old. I enjoyed reading the CaTB book a lot. Unfortunately ESR appears to sometimes be very rude in his opinion of others :/

yitchelle 12y ago
Rude may not be the right wording here. I would put it as passionate or strong beliefs. Sort of in the same vein as RMS.
- numbsafari 12y ago
  Having met both in person, I think "rude" is rather quite apt in both cases. You can be passionate and principled and not a jerk, or a murderer, or a scoundrel, or even rude.
  - yitchelle 12y ago
    Well, you are correct. I stand corrected. Thanks for providing some insight into both of their personality.

tabrischen 12y ago

I remember reading this about 10 years ago, feeling old now.

tomc1985 12y ago

These are the real hackers

jwise0 12y ago

I always thought that this article read more like "How to become Eric S. Raymond". There's a lot in here that is really pretty painful to read 14 years on; in particular, I find the argument that you have to start off by using a Unix in order to become a proficient hacker to be particularly disingenuous. The general aspect that I dislike is the idea that there is only one kind of hacker -- the kind that fits into Eric S. Raymond's "the hacker culture". For instance, he gives the monoculture that all hackers speak English; but just a few weeks ago, we saw an article on HN about the old microcomputers of the Soviet Bloc (I wish I could find the link now). And, perhaps, maybe my all-time favorite hacks were executed by demosceners who spoke little-to-no English. Are these people not hackers? I don't think you'd find anyone who could argue that, but they are not part of Eric S. Raymond's monoculture. The great essay that I have always wanted to read about How to Become a Hacker would be answering the question of how to find joy in the minutiae, and how to put all the little pieces together to make the most interesting things. But this essay is not that.

yzzxy 12y ago
Yes, the jargon file and this article are mired in specifics that are probably bad. I also don't think the weirdness the jargon file gets into near the end regarding personality archetypes is very valid, interesting or useful, and it has always felt a little creepy to me. But I would say the core principles mentioned at the top of this article are pretty valid: 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. That seems to capture the hacker spirit pretty well.
- adlpz 12y ago
  Even more, I would say that several of the later points are very much valid still too. I'm still one of those people that believe that hacking does in fact relate to computers and electronics (!), so I think that learning to program, knowing HTML, being fluent in Unix and the ways of contributing mentioned in the article are still perfectly relevant as of today. I do agree with jwise0, though, in that the phrasing and some details are way too specific to the author's own experience.
- tptacek 12y ago
  One problem with these 5 "core principles" is that they apply just as well to tax accounting. It's the places where ESR writes things that don't apply to contracts law or mechanical engineering where he goes off the rails, which is a telling problem with the essay.
Myk267 12y ago
> I always thought that this article read more like "How to become Eric S. Raymond". That seems like quite the coincidence given that Eric S. Raymond is the author of the article itself. Maybe there's something to that. > For instance, he gives the monoculture that all hackers speak English No. He doesn't give anything. He suggests that learning English is useful because the internet and hacker culture are dominated by it. > But this essay is not that. The scope of the document is clearly stated under the "Why This Document?" header.
12y ago

halayli 12y ago

learn how to learn and you have to be naturally curious. The rest follows. This to me(subjectively) defines a hacker. Rarely do you reach dead ends when you know how to learn.

davidw 12y ago

> Trying to learn to hack on a Microsoft Windows machine or under any other closed-source system is like trying to learn to dance while wearing a body cast. > Under Mac OS X it's possible, but only part of the system is open source — you're likely to hit a lot of walls, and you have to be careful not to develop the bad habit of depending on Apple's proprietary code. If you concentrate on the Unix under the hood you can learn some useful things. I think this is still relevant. The best hackers I have known are people who understand things pretty much from top to bottom, and having the source code, and rights to use it are invaluable for that. If you want to create a business, maybe Mac OS or Windows might be better for you (I get by with Linux just fine though), but if you want to be a "hacker" in the sense of having a thorough understanding of your whole computing environment, then you should probably be using Linux or BSD.

Delmania 12y ago
I'd disagree with this. While OS X and Windows are not as transparent as linux, there are enough resources on both that a hacker that wants can go deep on them. In the Windows ecosystem, Mark Russinovich (creator of Sysinternals) and Charles Petzgold readily spring to mind as people who fit the definition of hacker.
- ultramancool 12y ago
  The biggest difference is that if you run Windows, you have to be willing to crack open IDA and read some assembly to really get a view of how your system is doing something sometimes. The main reason I keep a Windows box around is because so many Windows devs seem to think that security through obscurity works and that no one is willing to patch their binaries. Big mistake.

atrilla 12y ago

Simply put: be curious. As far as I know, the first hackers built train models (http://tmrc.mit.edu/ http://tmrc.mit.edu/). Research, make stuff, learn.

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
The first hackers probably made fire and flint hand-axes.
- doodpants 12y ago
  The first hackers, instead of eating every piece of algae they encountered, probably tried sticking two or three pieces of algae together, and then used those clumps to propel themselves towards areas with larger concentrations of algae.
  - towelguy 12y ago
    And of course, there's an emacs command to do that.

philh 12y ago

Note that ESR uses a stricter definition of hacker than is usually accepted on HN. On HN, anyone who can write code is free to call themselves a hacker. But that doesn't mean you have the mindset. And to the extent that the hacker community still exists in the sense of this document, it doesn't mean you're a part of that. I've complained about this before, it's something of a pet peeve of mine. I don't describe myself as a hacker. (But also a weaker definition in several ways. Hacking in the ESR sense doesn't have to have anything to do with computers. This is in the jargon file, I'm a little surprised that the HOWTO doesn't say anything about it.)

dhimes 12y ago
Actually, on HN the definition pg has endorsed for hacker is as a synonym for 'tinkerer' (not his word). It's not necessarily about code, but it is about the mindset of curiosity + adventurous.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  But then you have startups recruiting "rockstar hackers", sites that teach you how to become a "hacker" by leraning the newest hip JS framework of this week, and of course, the abominations like the term "growth hacking". Spirit of hacking, as per pg's definition or the hacker culture, is still strong on HN, but the word hacker itself seems to devaluate quickly. Just like every other term that becomes fashionable, I guess.

ta75757 12y ago

I don't know. I personally have a mild dislike of self-applied labels like this. "You know what punkers don't do? Call themselves punkers."

GuiA 12y ago
Yep. Just like "activist", "entrepreneur", "intellectual", "genius", and so many others, "hacker" is a word without meaning when applied to oneself.
- philh 12y ago
  The article does say that you shouldn't apply it to yourself. It permits you to accept the label when others apply it to you.

edem 12y ago

I read this essay 7 years ago and it was a revelation for me. I started coding right away and 1 year later I had a job as a programmer. This is a must read for all programmers imho.

larrywright 12y ago

This essay is far from perfect. That said, when I first read this I was a Windows user and primarily a Windows desktop application developer, but I'd started to explore what was outside the Microsoft ecosystem by playing with things like Perl and Linux. Reading this document, along with the (far, far better) book The Pragmatic Programmer, helped open my eyes to the world beyond Microsoft. All this to say: despite the negative comments here, this is worth your time to read.

ilamparithi 12y ago

This is where I found PG's essays for the first time.

vezzy-fnord 12y ago

One of my main beefs with ESR has always been his extremely hostile views on infosec hackers, or as he pejoratively calls them "warez d00dz". The technical proficiency of infosec hackers can be remarkably high, particularly since it requires knowledge in all layers of the stack. To say that someone like Michal Zalewski is not a hacker, is absolutely foolish. But, according to ESR, if you're more concerned with "breaking" things than "building" them, you're just a juvenile who's gonna get to five to ten in the slammer after realizing you're not too bright. Under this definition, a person with sophisticated reverse engineering and exploit development skills is not a hacker, but someone who bootstraps Rails on a free Unix, is. I also disagree that not using your real name is for losers, but that one is pretty controversial.

crpatino 12y ago
> I also disagree that not using your real name is for losers, but that one is pretty controversial. It was a more innocent world, back then. I do not go to any measurable lengths to hide my actual name, but I would rather not volunteer it to the social engineering underworld either.

0xCMP 12y ago

When I read this the first time I printed it out and read it over and over again. It guided me to start my efforts to download linux and learn to program in the 5 languages he mentioned. I took the "learn programming in 10 years" to heart. It's made me a programmer. The flaws people are talking about in the article, I think, are true but irrelevant because the spirit of the article will still guide people such as me. His "how to ask questions" article is another great one.

crdr88 12y ago

I loved the part when he mentioned money, sex and social status as distractions...This is such a claustrophobic way of thinking about the stereotypical hacker.

slashnull 12y ago

Eric S. Raymond gave meaning to my life.