No-one’s asked Polly yet. Maybe she wants a Hacker…
You never know.
Joe Random, Bill H. and bdgr, thanks for putting my mind at ease. I now know that it’s alright to refer to the Romani as gypsies. After all, the mass media has always used the word “gypsy” that way.
Gee Bill, I might take that personally. I’m no bigwig, but I handle a lot of security issues and deal with a lot of real experts in the field, and a lot of them use cracker. None of them are rabid about the issue like Derleth. They just use it and don’t make an issue of it. I amused and saddened to see another thread highjacked by this silliness, even though my use agrees with Derleth’s. I think if Derleth wants to correct other people, he should become an expert, give good advice, and then people will follow suit with him naturally. His browbeating semantics in the face of overwhelming evidence against his position is pointless.
This is a flawed analogy, bordering on a straw man. You’re talking about a racial epithet, a situation in which courtesy (or political correctness) dictates a change in popular use. Popular use defines what the word gypsy means, but political correctness dictates that the word not be used in the first place. That’s not what we’re talking about regarding hacker/cracker. Derleth may claim to be a (good guy) hacker and be offended at being characterized as what he (and I) calls a cracker, but that hardly raises to the level of a racial epithet. Even if it did, it would argue against using the term in polite society but not changing its meaning.
The meaning of words is defined by popular use, and I think that use is clear in the case of the word hacker. That doesn’t mean that people cannot use the hacker/cracker distinction in situations where it’s meaningful and when speaking to an audience that understands what they mean. In that case, it’s jargon where the words are used differently than their popular meaning within a certain group. However, this doesn’t give that group a basis for screaming that everyone else is wrong. As far as word meanings go (at least outside the ivory tower) the masses are never wrong. Words mean what the preponderance of people think they mean.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled hijack in the hope that it will die and leave the OP some space to get answered.
My sentiments exactly. Problem is, we’re dealing with a high tech Don Quixote here.
micco, I don’t see a significant difference. Romani are offended if I call them “gypsies”, I and Derleth are offended if you call crackers “hackers”. If nothing else, you could refrain from that usage because you know it offends Derleth, exactly as I don’t say “gypsy” to avoid offending Kal, even though it is the commonly used term.
I think I should get off her first
Did I say anything about the media? Back then the media hardly knew what a hacker was, or that you could even break into a computer over a phoneline. This was pre-war games(the movie) and the media couldnt care less about it. I’m talking a about popular usage amongst hackers and computer people both.
I’m offended by the word “the”, and I prefer that you do not use it in threads where I post…
You’re using a bad analogy. Sure, Romani don’t like being called “gypsies”, but crackers don’t mind being called “hackers”. Your analogy is backward, and thus flawed.
And throwing in the whole “gypsy” thing looks like a transparent attempt to load the words “hacker” and “cracker” with the same type of emotional baggage as a racial slur, and that’s just ridiculous.
Just because you identify as a hacker, and consequently don’t like the fact that “hacker” has both positive and negative definitions (according to Webster), doesn’t mean that anyone should change their usage just to appease you.
I guess it’s just IMO then. I’m offended if you call me Bob, but that doesn’t make me a “protected class” as far as political correctness or justify a change in language to avoid offending me. I understand rules of politeness and when talking to someone like Derleth who makes the distinction, I use the terms he prefers (I use them anyway in this case). Maybe I’m insensitive but I don’t see the media’s use of the word hacker as a general term rising to the level of offensiveness that a racial epithet does.
The people who make the hacker/cracker distinction can make the case that it would be beneficial for everyone to use it because it’s more precise (providing a distinction instead of lumping two groups together), but their claims of historical accuracy are wrong and they don’t really have a basis for forcing this level of precision on other groups that don’t need it. If you really must make a racial analogy, perhaps a more accurate comparison would be if the Cherokee and Comanche tribes found the term “Native American” offensive because it lumped them together. Though even in that case, I would have more sensitivity to someone’s choice of racial distinction than I do for the silly semantics of the hacker/cracker debate.
Yes, some of the people who make the hacker/cracker distinction would prefer that you do the same. I also know people who would prefer that you use crimson/rose/scarlet to distinguish shades of red. They can do that if they want, but it doesn’t make me wrong when I call something red.
Understand, I use the terms in the same way Derleth does and I’m not saying he’s wrong. I’m simply saying that it seems pointless to me for him to throw this grenade into every conversation where the word hacker is used. It hijacks the real issue of the OP and accomplishes nothing except inciting people like me to post this silly back-and-forth yet again. I guess I should learn and not take Derleth’s bait.
micco wrote
Ain’t that the truth. I’ll try to stop, for this post at least.
<scribbling in notbook>
So if I want to be REALLY offensive, I should call Southern white hackers “cracker-ass crackers”
</scribbling in notebook>
Got it, thanks!
Just to throw more fuel on the fire: “Hacker” as a good programmer came from MIT, and those people refuse to acknowledge other meanings. Hey, it’s an MIT thing. At 4 of the 5 colleges I have worked at over the last 30+ years, “hacker” meant a lousy programmer. Cf. “Hack writer”.
MIT doesn’t control the English language. Use the term however you fell like.
How’s this for a solution: We call all of the folks who break into or vandalize systems for fun “dweebs”. This is consistent both with the common useage of the word, and the usage of hackers. But certainly, we shouldn’t be complimenting the dweebs, as we would be if we called them “hackers”.
I’d just like to point out that I don’t. I’m a wannabe, slowly working my way up towards munchkin.
I’m with Chronos. Dweebs it is.
For justwannano: if you’re running a Windows web server, shut it down Sunday. If you’re not, don’t worry.
I say we call people who redefine words that have been around for 30 years or so that they can apply them to themselves “Toaster Ovens”…As long as we are just changing the meanings of words on a whim.
Anybody can call them “Crackers” or “dweebs” or any number of other names. I have no problem with that.
I do have a problem with people trying to “correct” me for my usage of a word which is and always has been accepted as correct usage by virtually everyone who matters.
Shoot, I said I was going to try to stop arguing didn’t I? Well, I’d cancel this post, but I’ve already hit submit.