It’s times like this when I curse my graphical ineptitude, because a nice infographic might actually make more sense here – so if any artistic designer types are reading and fancy helping? Basically what I want to plot out is the ‘hacking continuum’ that seems to have evolved over the last 50 years. Incidentally, a continuum is defined by Wikipedia as ‘anything that goes through a gradual transition from one condition, to a different condition, without any abrupt changes’ and a dialect continuum is also appropriate: ‘the transition of one language to another through a series of speech variations’.
Because what I’m interested in is the way in which the term ‘hacking’ has changed since it was original brought into use, and also how the variety of uses seem to reside on a moral spectrum ranging from the positive to the negative.
The history of the word ‘hacking’
The term ‘hacking’ came out of the MIT Tech Model Railroad Club and Artificial Intelligence Labs. And it is commonly defined as exploring the details of programmable systems, having an intimate knowledge of the internal workings of a system, and was used to describe looking at programs and reducing the code to the most efficient implementation, for example. If we put that on the far left of the spectrum as the origination of the term, then you can put next to it the likes of modern ‘hackdays’ where programmers and developers get together to work out new solutions and mash-ups of various software for a particular cause – whether that’s to improve healthcare, create new music services or anything else. And hackdays are being run by all sorts of companies ranging from small groups to Google to encourage more people to use APIs and other tools to create new things or improve existing ones.
Ethical hacking and comedy:
In the middle would be all sorts of hacking activities that belong in more of a grey area. The idea of ‘hacking ethics’ surfaced fairly early in the era of home computing and home internet access, and generally focused on the ideas that all information should be free, access to computers should be unlimited, and that it’s OK to break in and look around, but don’t wreck anything or steal.
When you’re dealing with as loose and amorphous a term as ‘hackers’ or ‘hacking’ which refers to so many individuals and groups around the world which all operate independently, it’s easy to see how many people and activities don’t fall into the ethical definition, but there’s certainly enough awareness and acceptance of the principles.
Then alongside it could be the ‘harmless’ comedy hacking of organisations and businesses amongst others for some tomfoolery. For instance, hacking into a large media site to proclaim ‘Tupac is alive‘, rather than accessing user or advertiser data. Although it’s certainly not going in and out without changing anything, there’s seemingly no motive beyond amusement (assuming that it isn’t a cover-up for other activity). Or using such activity as a way to alert complacent companies into updating their security measures by embarrassing them (without compromising user data)
Political hacking:
Then there’s the idea of politically-motivated hacking. And this probably has two levels of acceptance by most people. The first is when it’s directed against a foreign regime with which we generally disapprove, in which case we can broadly accept it. The second is when it’s directed against our regime, in which case even if we disapprove of the establishment, we’re probably less approving as suddenly people are attacking us.
Criminal hacking:
Now we’re into the realms of breaking in for financial gain, at which point most of us become disapproving, unless the scheme shows particular ingenuity against a faceless corporation, in which case some will have similar admiration as they have for any criminal lawbreaking with flair.
What’s particular interesting here is that there’s still a range of responses. For instance, in mobile phone hacking, it seems we have a greater tolerance for a media company to illegally hack into celebrity phones and email accounts than if they do the same to ‘normal’ people.
And I’ve put the hacking of a major media site in the comedy category (see Tupac is Alive, above), but then put hacking by a major media site of individuals into the criminal category.
Where do your perceptions come from?
The last area that I want to explore more is how your perspective of all the different implications of the word ‘hacking’ may have been shaped. If you’re in the tech world, you’re likely to be used to the double meaning, and the regular examples of talented hackers of systems then being hired by large tech companies for their skills, or applying the same term to areas like lifehacking to improve your general lifestyle, or bodyhacking to describe more efficient use of a healthy diet and gym time.
How does that change if you don’t like or love technology and computers?
How does that change it your account is one leaked by a hacking group?
How does that change if instead of reading blogs and social networks, you only see mainstream media reports?
Taking this forward:
I’m really fascinated by the cultural side of hacking, and the way in which it’s changed for those within the hacking community (both white hat and black hat), those technology people outside the community, and those completely outside the digital world to all intents and purposes.
I’d definitely be interested in artistic help in making this come to life, but also anyone with an interest in the subject, particularly those who might have expertise in language, psychology, or hacking itself…
Recommended reading:
If you’re interested in the history of hacking and hacker culture etc, then I strongly recommend the following books:
The Hacker Crackdown: Law and Disorder on the Electronic Frontier by Bruce Sterling.
The Cuckoo’s Egg by Clifford Stoll.
