25th Anniversary of Hackers 149
theodp writes "Sharks gotta swim; bats gotta fly; hackers gotta hack. On the 25th anniversary of Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution, author Steven Levy has penned an interesting where-are-they-now follow up on the original digital revolutionaries for Wired. 'Some of my original subjects,' writes Levy, 'are now rich, famous, and powerful. They thrived in the movement's transition from insular subculture to multibillion-dollar industry, even if it meant rejecting some of the core hacker tenets. Others, unwilling or unable to adapt to a world that had discovered and exploited their passion — or else just unlucky — toiled in obscurity and fought to stave off bitterness. I also found a third group: the present-day heirs to the hacker legacy, who grew up in a world where commerce and hacking were never seen as opposing values. They are bringing their worldview into fertile new territories and, in doing so, are molding the future of the movement.' Here's hoping Google reads this and gets inspired to let Andy Hertzfeld ship whatever the hell he wants!" Glyn Moody pulls out one poignant detail from Levy's account: rms's thoughts of suicide.
25 years? (Score:5, Funny)
The Amazon link is showing a different cover than what I usually see.
Why is everyone looking at me that way?
Re:25 years? (Score:5, Funny)
How old was Angelina Jolie when she made that movie?
The Amazon link is showing a different cover than what I usually see.
Why is everyone looking at me that way?
19/20. The movie [imdb.com] was released in 1995 while Angelina Jolie [imdb.com] was released in 1975.
Re:25 years? (Score:5, Funny)
19/20. The movie [imdb.com] was released in 1995 while Angelina Jolie [imdb.com] was released in 1975.
Woman 2.0
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, 1.0 was released in 1975. But was there an open beta?
Re: (Score:2)
I'll bet her brother would know.
Re: (Score:2)
and the main hacker nerd in that one is her first husband, Eli Stone... er, Jonny Lee Miller. Though for classic Jolie you need to see Cyborg 2 with Jack Palance. For a torture test, watch them back to back, but admittedly they are a bit more easy on the eyes and sanity than my usual bad movie fare (Troll 2, Vampires vs Zombies, Ratboy, Zombie Nation, Alien From L.A. - stuff like that).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A.Jolie > N.Portman
Oh, you'll smoke a turd in Hell, naked and petrified, for saying that!
Re: (Score:1)
Lorraine Bracco, the actress who played the shrink on The Sopranos, too. Never realized that until I checked out that IMDB link just now.
Re: (Score:2)
Sweet!
Answer: OLD ENOUGH
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Amazon link is showing a different cover than what I usually see.
If I recall right that was the original cover.
Falcon
Not fair to run down the black/grey hat hackers (Score:5, Insightful)
Based on my humble experience, most of the hackers doing black and grey hat stuff like phreaking/cracking/etc. weren't doing it to "steal and destroy" (even the phreakers stealing phone service were often only motivated by the desire to be able to dial long distance BBS's that they wouldn't have otherwise been able to afford). In their own way, they too were motivated by a desire to learn and with the thrill of accomplishment (over defeating a security system, finding a way to make a system behave in a way it wasn't intended, etc.). They were as much a part of the hacker culture as the guy sitting down and figuring out a new sorting algorithm or the guy finding a way to make a mainframe do something it was never designed for (like playing a videogame). And many of these crackers and phreakers were quite talented and actually went on with successful programming careers (especially if they were lucky/good enough not to have been caught).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They were often the same people, too, e.g. Woz was both varieties of hacker (which weren't that strongly differentiated anyway).
Re:Not fair to run down the black/grey hat hackers (Score:4, Informative)
They were often the same people, too, e.g. Woz was both varieties of hacker (which weren't that strongly differentiated anyway).
That's true. Wozniac and Jobs got their start in the tech industry building and selling blue boxes. While neither one of them denies that, they generally don't make a point of bringing it up either. Of course, the devices hadn't yet been outlawed at that point.
(For you youngsters out there, a blue box was a device that allowed you to control a telco's electronic long-distance circuit switches to your advantage.)
Re: (Score:2)
They were often the same people, too, e.g. Woz was both varieties of hacker (which weren't that strongly differentiated anyway).
Actually, Woz had strong moral/ethical apprehension about the use of his blue box phone phreaking system for illicit purposes, so I wouldn't say he wasn't that much into the "cracking" side of things.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I think that was actually pretty common in the 70s/80s hacking scene, though, so Woz isn't a huge outlier. A lot of people got interested in breaking security as a sort of puzzle-solving challenge. There was of course a vague sense of triumph over The Man, and thrill of breaking into an AT&T system or whatever, but there was still an ethos of not damaging the systems you broke into, not using them for stupid things like fraud, etc.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Clearly you're one of the "new generation of hackers" (read: Hopped on teh intarwebs bandwagon in 1999 and now consider yourself an authority on geek culture).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think his point is that they weren't scamming people for millions of dollars, it's more like they were commiting petty theft. Yeah, it's wrong, and probably illegal (although there may not have been many laws about this stuff back then). But it's not 'nazi-wrong'.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is more to the problem. That someone who steals $1000 worth of phone service will get in just as much trouble for a guy who scammed people out of millions of dollars. At least for the hacking bit. Hacking really isn't in one box of evil. Some are equivalent of shoplifting and others are like bank robbery.
Re: (Score:2)
Some not even that bad. They used idle hardware that cost the same idle or in use to gain services they couldn't have paid for anyway. It's like someone who downloads a music collection they can't afford to pay for, nobody actually lost anything.
Re: (Score:2)
No you are missing the point...
Oh I can't afford it so Ill take it because I want it. Is still wrong.
If you can't afford it and you want it you have options...
1. Find a way to get more money.
2. Save your money by giving up something else you want.
3. Don't get it.
Out of those thousand files how many would have bought CDs for if you couldn't get those files. Your argument is like if you shop lift a store you should only be responsible for the at cost value of the product.
Now your argument would be better if
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I didn't miss the point. I stated that when a property crime doesn't actually cost the victim anything it is properly less serious than when it does.
It's a simple extension of the well established legal principle behind the distinction between grand theft and petty theft.
My argument, BTW is more or like if you wander into an unlocked store after hours but don't take anything you might be guilty of something but it's not theft. (In fact, it's simple trespassing).
Re:Not fair to run down the black/grey hat hackers (Score:4, Insightful)
If I take something from you, but you still have the same amount you had, have I really taken something from you? You don't have any less of it, how can you claim I harmed you? You are lumping exclusionary and non-exclusionary goods together into the same category when they are fundamentally different. If you shoplift at a store, the store has less of what you just took.
Let me tell you a little story. A beggar went into a market and bought a piece of bread. He then went to the sausage vendor's stand and held the bread over the smoke, to flavor it. The sausage vendor became irate and demanded payment for the flavor of his sausages. All the townsfolk gathered round and took sides in the ensuing argument, some thought the beggar should pay, others thought the sausage vendor was being ridiculous. Then someone had a bright idle: "Let's ask the fool!" and the whole town thought this would be a fair way to settle things: let the fool decide. The fool asked the beggar if he had any coin left, and he did, so the beggar bounced the coin on the table and said, "There. It's settled. He's paid for the flavor of your sausage with the sound of his money."
And morally, that is the most we should be obliged to pay for something that someone else is letting go to waste, or for anything we can take without there being any less of it.
Re: (Score:2)
You are still deluded by the idea that a song is "property". File sharing is NOT equivalent to shoplifing. It is NOT theft. It may be dishonest, but it isn't theft.
More, file sharing is NOT dishonest, in any way shape or form, when sharing files that properly belong in the public domain. You know, songs released prior to about 1980, or possibly even 1990. The REAL dishonesty is what's happening in Washington, and all the other capitals in the world. RIAA and company are buying representative's votes t
Re: (Score:2)
You lost me. How is a song not property? Were you strictly using "song" to mean a portable digital representation of a song, such as a MP3?
What do you mean when you say songs that "properly belong in the public domain... songs released prior to about 1980 or possible even 1990?" Under what copyright code are songs released that recently rightful in the public domain?
Re: (Score:2)
Around the turn of the century (20th century) copyright was good for about 15 years. Every bit of the additional time we see today is at the behest of the "music industry". That is, little people never would have, nor could they have, extended copyright to life of the artist plus 75 years, or any of that other nonsense.
I have zero respect for any copyright that would have expired according to law, as it existed, in the 1800's.
And, no, the money invested by the studios, etc, does not warrant extending copy
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, thanks for clarifying. Sounds like you're going all the way back to 1790 era copyright law which had an initial term of 14 years plus renewal privileges for an additional 14 years. So, even in the beginning, we gave copyright holders about 30 years of protection. In 1831, we extended that initial protection to 28 years with renewal privileges of 14 years thereafter. In 1909 we extended that renewal term from 14 years to 28 years.
Clearly you have a problem with the Copyright Act of 1976 which came into
Re: (Score:2)
>
> But it's not 'nazi-wrong'.
>
You mean 'Wall-Street' wrong !! That's IMHO a better analogy.
This Goldman Sachs guy (OK, he was only partnering with GS, but still) that made $ 3 billion while screwing various pension funds. Compare that to 'stealing' some bandwidth from a telco company. Yes, both wrong, but......
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Slow reader, are we?
Re: (Score:2)
So, to use a car analogy, they stole the car, but only to see how fast it would go?
This is one case where the car analogy doesn't work. A stolen car deprives the owner of the car, unless of course the robber forces the owner to go too. The use of a blue, or black or red, box does not deprive the phone company anything.
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong hacker movie.
And they rode out on a ferry, not a rowboat.
Tom Lehrer +1 (Score:2)
Sharks gotta swim, and bats gotta fly, I gotta love one woman till I die. To Ed or Dick or Bob She may be just a slob, But to me, well, She's my girl. In winter the bedroom is one large ice cube, And she squeezes the toothpaste from the middle of the tube. Her hairs in the sink Have driven me to drink, But she's my girl, she's my girl, she's my girl, And I love her. The girl that I lament for, The girl my money's spent for, The girl my back is bent for, The gir
Re:Tom Lehrer +1 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what the holy bastard fuck "its'" is supposed to be. Is it perhaps the possessive of the plural of an it?
Gerunds require the possessive, so the construct make sense. But not much.
If you haven't read the book... (Score:2)
Do so.
Really, I'm not going to tell you why, just do it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I could go on and on on why geeks should read that book. Or I can just tell people to do so, and if they decide to heed my advice they will likely not regret it.
Feel free to let me know if I was wrong once you read the book. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, really speaks to the large "grew up in a totalitarian society where you did what you were told by a faceless voice without question" segment of the slashdot population. Those slashdotters who grew up in north korea? Totally reading the book right now.
Re: (Score:1)
Commerce and Hacking... (Score:1)
I used to stay up late programming for fun.
Now I stay up late so that some company I don't care about can turn a profit on my services... And of course so I can afford all the cool stuff that I've grown so fond of.
It's a vicious cycle, and I could use a vacation. I can't really imagine doing anything else though...
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
I used to stay up late programming for fun as well.
Now I stay up late spending time with a girl who in response to my timid "I like role-playing games." did not respond with "You D&D dorks are pathetic." but instead she responded with "Would you like me dress up as a school girl and spank me with a ruler?"
Oh well, we all make sacrifices.
The RMS quote is very sad! (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of your opinion of the FSF and the (L)GPL, the Stallman quote is very sad!
Hey, RMS, if you're reading this, then just know that I'm glad you're here!!! Stick around, buddy! You've touched many lives in a good way.
Re:The RMS quote is very sad! (Score:4, Insightful)
"In our original interview, Stallman said, "I'm the last survivor of a dead culture. And I don't really belong in the world anymore. And in some ways I feel I ought to be dead." Now, meeting over Chinese food, he reaffirms this. "I have certainly wished I had killed myself when I was born," he says. "In terms of effect on the world, it's very good that I've lived. And so I guess, if I could go back in time and prevent my birth, I wouldn't do it. But I sure wish I hadn't had so much pain."
Unreal. Genius (and as much as I disagree with a lot of what he has to say, he is a genius) is often tortured. And arrogant.
Re:The RMS quote is very sad! (Score:5, Funny)
Genius (and as much as I disagree with a lot of what he has to say, he is a genius) is often tortured. And arrogant.
Yes, we are.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Genius (and as much as I disagree with a lot of what he has to say, he is a genius) is often tortured. And arrogant.
Yes, we are.
Hi! Well, that truly was most arrogant. My name's Bob and I'll be your torturer today.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The above post is not a troll post, stupid moderator.
Heres a troll post:
The reason RMS can't go back in time after building a time machine to kill lil' baby Stallman is because A) he'd then be forced to release the code to the masses for free and he'd also be removing the very thing he created, his massively enlarged EGO.
See, moderator, that's a troll. Or Flamebait. Either way, you suck and I hope your software never amounts to anything.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Hey, RMS, if you're reading this, then just know that I'm glad you're here!!! Stick around, buddy! You've touched many lives in a good way.
And if you redistribute that sentiment, you must also include the source code
Re:The RMS quote is very sad! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sad indeed (to the point where I feel guilty for using xemacs....). But it doesn't strike me as something that somebody would say because they haven't been appreciated enough. Rather, it sounds like he's clinically depressed. When you're that sad, it's not for a logical reason....
Re:The RMS quote is very sad! (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe Stallman is medically manic-depressive (I recall reading this somewhere). If he's not actually diagnosed he probably should be. I mean realistically I can't see what he's experienced that has been all that painful (outside of normal run of life's little tragedy's that all of us experience). He's got a reasonably comfortable life doing work that he enjoys and considers important. It's more than most of us get. The fact that he hasn't completely succeeded in freeing all software is as much attributable to the unrealistic nature of a goal as to any personal failing of his (not that he doesn't have them). He has succeeded in helping to build a thriving Free and Open Source software infrastructure with numerous standout projects used by millions of people.
Personally I think the man is a fanatic, and I don't actually like him much, but I can respect his success. I can't see how he can consider what he has accomplished as anything other than "success". He's taken on some of the biggest players in the industry and come out with his hide intact and a large and thriving community embracing varying degrees of his philosophy.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that he hasn't completely succeeded in freeing all software is as much attributable to the unrealistic nature of a goal
This.
Apart from the medical depression bit, I think he is actually upset that everybody doesn't immediately see the genius of His Way and start following His Principles, for they are perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
More than this, his philosophy has actually co-opted some of those players--IBM and Novell, for example--making them his willing allies. Maybe that is what is really getting to him--it took Linux in order to really mainstream the GPL, and all cries of "It's GNU/Linux!" are pretty much universally ignored. In his position, I think that wo
Re: (Score:2)
I think he was referring to the time in his life when he had RSI, and had to hire someone to type for him. Having a physical issue where you cannot type seems like it would be rather painful.
Re: (Score:2)
Sufficiently painful to seriously wonder if you should have ended it all? That's a bit over the top doncha think?
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly. I think he's a fanatic as well, but I never thought to call him a manic depressive or just clinically depressed. I figure, there are countless people who will continue to benefit directly or indirectly from GNU and the free software movement whilst still saying this guy is a complete paranoid nut job who wgets his google searches. He doesn't get to be a patron saint to anyone but software developers and activists who believe in free software but who probably mostly want little to do with Stallman's
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I find his definition of "success" incomprehensible if that's the case. When your only measure of success is "Everyone agrees with me and the world has remolded itself to my standards exactly", you can pretty much expect to be disappointed. Free Software is everywhere. Maybe all software isn't Free, but that's an unrealistic goal. It's not possible to live, work, and exist in the real world of business while using exclusively Free Software. That's a Hell of an accomplishment. It's something to
Re: (Score:2)
Gah! One letter typo changes the entire meaning of sentence! "It's not possible to live..." should be "It's NOW possible to live...".
RMS may be vitamin D deficient from no sunlight... (Score:2)
Many dedicated hackers don't get enough sunlight, which can cause vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D defiency, now widespread in the USA, is a seriously deadly situation, which can cause depression, schizophrenia (Hans Reiser?), cancer, heart disease, autism, and other things. Almost all indoor professionals in the USA should probably be taking 5000 IU D3 in gelcaps daily (except days when they get a lot of sun) as well as eat right to get the other co-nutrients needed for vitamin D to work optimally (a very t
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
“In terms of effect on the world, it’s very good that I’ve lived. And so I guess, if I could go back in time and prevent my birth, I wouldn’t do it. But I sure wish I hadn’t had so much pain.”
To be honest, this quote strikes me as something that a self-important emo would say. All I can think when reading it is that he's relatively well off, he's relatively well respected, and he's moaning like fuck about it. I feel a hell of a lot more sympathy for those with his tal
Is RMS really the Last Hacker? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of hackers. Maybe even millions.
I prefer the ORIGINAL definition of "Hacker" (Score:5, Insightful)
Hackers that come to mind for me aren't these people that do digital break-ins. They don't even have to apply to computers whatsoever. Dictionary.com doesn't even have the correct original definition:
1. a person or thing that hacks.
2. Slang. a person who engages in an activity without talent or skill: weekend hackers on the golf course.
3. Computer Slang.
a. a computer enthusiast.
b. a microcomputer user who attempts to gain unauthorized access to proprietary computer systems.
First there were hackers. Then there was a new subset, called "computer hackers". Now the former are known as "hardware hackers" and the latter simply as "hackers". (and with only the negative connotations)
When *I* think of "hacker", I think of MacGyver. and Scotty. and Junkyard Showdown. And in the best modern tradition, Robot Wars [wikipedia.org]. It's a real shame that I can't declare myself a "hacker" nowadays without people getting all the wrong ideas. In my book, a "hacker" is anyone that can do more with less than the average individual. I think I'd even have to call Red Green a good redneck hacker - anyone that can solve that many problems with Duct Tape has got to be a hacker.
I suspect the original definition evolved from "A person that hacks away at a problem using primitive tools not designed for the purpose, to create an acceptable and sometimes elegant solution."
First there were hackers. (Score:2)
Then there was a new subset, called "computer hackers". Now the former are known as "hardware hackers" and the latter simply as "hackers". (and with only the negative connotations)
Hack [etymonline.com] goes further back than that.
When *I* think of "hacker", I think of MacGyver. and Scotty. and Junkyard Showdown.
MacGyver yes, Scotty not so much, and Junkyard Showdown I've never heard of. However there's Harry Broderick [imdb.com].
Falcon
Beam me up Scotty!
Re: (Score:2)
hmmm have a look at this [www.ex.ua]
Basically two competing teams have limited time to throw together something from junk or parts to compete against each other. Battles like this usually give you very little idea of what you're going to be required to make until you hit the field, so you have to be skilled at making anything, from anything. That's what hacking is all about. There are several examples of tournaments like this. Some competitions allow you time to build your bot before the competition, but still all
Junkyard Showdown (Score:2)
hmmm have a look at this [www.ex.ua]
Okay.
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
Scotty not so much
ok maybe LaForge moreso... "we can try to reroute a tacheon pulse through the main deflector to..." wait, maybe not. Anyway they were hackers in theory, but in a technobabble kind of way. We rarely got to see Scotty do any hacking, but we sort of took it for granted that there was some going on.
OK how about I redeem myself with Doc Brown [wikipedia.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
OK how about I redeem myself with Doc Brown [wikipedia.org]
Yea, that's better.
I haven't done much hacking in a long tyme, years, myself. About all I do is cooking and gardening. So I've been thinking of combining electronics and gardening. Makezine [makezine.com] printed an article on using a Garduino microcontroller to garden [instructables.com]. It measures how much light and water plants get and if needed will turn on grow lights or a water pump. It's a bit late for this year though. Now what I'd do if I had a greenhouse would be to add heating,
Re: (Score:2)
That's not just the original definition so much as the correct and only definition. When someone calls a cyber criminal a hacker... they are wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I like that link.
7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations.
I think that's my favorite definition of the term. But it starts to put a negative spin on things because most would initially interpret "limitations" as limits placed to protect something. When I think "limits" in this connotation I am more thinking of the limits of what a system is capable of. Making a barcode reading pen on an Apple II for example. Expanding what's possible. Exceeding
And by extension: (Score:2)
My usage:
Originally, the term meant to someone who creates furniture with an axe.
Then, by extension, someone who can substitute skill and persistence for advanced tooling to successfully construct something of high quality and function.
GNU and Linux, not Sierra (Score:4, Insightful)
As I recall, the book had three sections:
1. Original hackers in the 60s on early mainframes and minicomputers like PDPs
2. Homebrew hardware hackers in the 70s putting together their own microcomputers
3. Sierra game programmers in the 80s writing King's Quest
When I read it, my reaction to the third section was: wha? Sierra programmers were pretty cool and the stories are neat (especially the stuff about the partying and the (unsuccessful) effort by Ken Williams to try to get one of his programmers laid) but didn't rank anywhere near the top of the "cool hackers of the world" list. It was obvious in retrospect that he should have waited until the open source hacking community really took off; GNU and Linux are the obvious third generation of hackers. Of course, hindsight is 20/20 and the book is nonetheless excellent.
Re: (Score:2)
That's true. In 1984, though, he could easily have written about the kids in their bedrooms learning how to program using their Commodores, Ataris, TIs, Apples, etc. rather than about Sierra, a commercial enterprise that turns out to be of little historical significance. While it just so happens that those kids in their bedrooms grew up to dominate the world of computing...
Re:GNU and Linux, not Sierra (Score:4, Insightful)
Sierra, a commercial enterprise that turns out to be of little historical significance
Uh, what? Sierra [wikipedia.org] reinvented the entire adventure game genre with graphics starting with "Mystery House" , in the process providing a model for how to build a gaming business from plastic bag distribution to giant company. And their Sierra On-line modem-based gaming service was one of the very first places you could play the sort of graphical multi-player games that everyone now takes for granted. Oh, and since "Hackers" was released, they invented the internet MMORPG [wikipedia.org] too. And then there's the whole saga around the IBM PCjr and King's Quest...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm aware of what Sierra accomplished, but it doesn't change the fact that all of it is of little historical significance.
When did you read it? (Score:2)
Because Sierra was considered pretty hackish, by the general public anyway, in 1984.
Re:GNU and Linux, not Sierra (Score:4, Insightful)
I have to say that that book gives me the best impression of RMS that I've ever had.
By the end of the book I found myself really disliking Ken Williams. He sounds like a real jerk. It seems like the best games made at Sierra were the result of hackers who were devoted to making the best game possible, yet Ken seemed like he was happy to produce cheap crap as long as it produced money. That only works in the short term. If there are better alternatives out there then eventually users catch on and stop buying your crap.
FWIW, King's Quest isn't mentioned in the book. The book talks about their work on the Apple II and Atari 800 computers. I don't think King's Quest ever ran on the Apple II.
RMS was one of my inspirations (Score:2)
Like open source programs in general, many people have influenced who I am today. I knew of RMS when I discovered Unix in the 80's. I greatly admired him when I read Steven Levy's "Hackers" the first time over a weekend. I do not agree with all of his ideas. But I would say society is much better off that he was here.
its as exciting now as in the 1970s (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Facebook and Twitter are lame, we had BBS's once that served much the same purpose. I'm afraid that I don't see any innovation or major improvement on that front. Web development has become an unskilled job and I'm less and less impressed with any of it.
Not even desktop applications excite me, anything worthwhile has a 6 month learning curve. I can learn a new programming language in less time and (if GUI toolkits weren't so clunky) be half way to writing my own version of whatever app interests me.
Perha
the real thing (Score:3, Interesting)
A true story about hackers and crackers that ended up in a flame war that brought down the East coast phone network. It's an amazing story from the standpoint of the phone company knowing about it from the onset. Their noob mentality was "Let's see what happens."
Boy did they find out.
sad... (Score:2)
that i thought it was about the movie...
Another era -- Gates & RMS (Score:4, Insightful)
What was interesting about the book was that it was written at a time when microcomputers were just beginning to be big business and not just geek toys. Bill Gates was seen as a geek who made it big -- sort of like Sergey Brin today -- not the "villain" that he was seen as being in the 1990s. And RMS was seen as a hopeless romantic, trying to recapture the spirit of 1970s MIT -- while Levy respected RMS, it was clear that he thought that the idea of Free Software and the GNU project were just hippie fantasies that were going nowhere.
Gates the villain, small or big (Score:2)
the "villain" that he was seen as being in the 1990s.
Gates marketeers never get tired of getting paid to whitewash his reputation, do they? Here is the whine he wrote in 1976 [blinkenlights.com]. He wasn't always big, but he was always annoying and wrong. The myth of Horatio Alger is just that a myth, and Gates was a rich kid from rich parents and rich grandparents [greenspun.com] who's mom's connections were in a lucky place at a lucky time.
Re: (Score:2)
The point isn't whether Gates is a nice guy or not; the point is how he was *perceived* at different points in time. In _Hackers_, as was common at the time, he was portrayed in a positive light. If you were around back then, it was IBM that was the "big evil" back then. Microsoft just wasn't seen that way. This isn't "whitewashing" his reputation, it is just reminding us that corporate image changes over time.
We are seeing this today with Apple and Jobs. While Apple was (at least during the last 20 years)
Gates -- annoying tech people since 1976 (Score:2)
Fuck you for pushing Microsoft whitewashing and trying to frame every company, product or service in the context of Fighting the Microsoft. Apple has its problems but you are utterly full of shit to try to claim that Apple's claim to fame is other than a company focused on providing a good user experience with (usually) quality software and (often) quality hardware.
Yes, IBM was the relatively big evil back then. It turned out to be small, very small, compared to Gates who was created by IBM as a side ef
_Hackers_ is from 1984, not the 1990s (Score:2)
Nobody is denying that during the 1990s Bill Gates and Microsoft were seen as evil monopolists. The point was this wasn't the case in the early 1980s. Microsoft was a successful company, but not a very large or high profile one -- Gates was just another successful tech guy like Jobs and Wozniak -- probably less famous, actually, as Gates was known as just the guy who wrote BASIC interpreters, rather than the more sexy design of computer systems. Again, read the book -- it gives a good feeling for the time.
Old systems don't want to go on the cart yet! (Score:2)
At this very moment, I am trying to get a CADR talking to an ITS via Chaosnet. The ITS is on the internet and has been for the past several weeks, with a few of my friends poking around at it. (BTW, I hacked the SMTP listener to only accept mail for itself, so it's mostly safe.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Bill Gates didn't even write DOS. He bought it from some guy who had written it as a clone of CP/M. That's two degrees of separation from the actual innovation. The only noteworthy thing that Gates himself actually coded was Microsoft BASIC. Just goes to show that it doesn't matter what you know, or what you do, just what you're willing to do to get where you want to go.
Bill Gates didn't even write DOS. (Score:2)
He bought it from some guy who had written it as a clone of CP/M.
Partially right. Originally Gary Kildall [wikipedia.org] starting working on DOS for the company he also started, Digital Research [wikipedia.org]. He based it on CP/M which he also programmed. However DR would not accept IBM's offer of $250,000 for all the copies of the OS IBM wanted. Instead he wanted royalties. So then IBM went to Bill Gates who bought a non-exclusive license to 86-DOS [wikipedia.org], which was based on DR's DOS.
The only noteworthy thing that Gates himself actually
Re: (Score:2)
He did invent the video game by writing DONKEYBAS!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DONKEY.BAS [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
He did one really incredible thing. He started a company, and got it to grow really, really big. That sort of success is more common now (although still very rare), but back then it was almost unheard of.
Sure, he had some great luck and cheerfully violated business law to get Microsoft to where it is. However, it never fell apart.
I've been with a software company with a truly great product that died because it handled growth badly. I can respect Gates for being able to avoid that.