First and foremost, as a disclaimer of general intent and for the sake of truer interpretation, I would like to note that by no means, under no circumstance and according to no reading of a hacker definition I would consider myself pertinent to the hacker community - and the appalling fact is, after reading Eric S. Raymond's Hacker-HowTo, I would never fancy to.
As a second note, I do believe there's something quite inherently wrong with the concept of classification as ostensibly perceived by sir Raymond - as it would seem the notion of being a hacker is taken with outermost seriousness as sir Raymond goes to great lengths to set hackers apart from crackers (somewhat understandably, though being a cracker can not essentially, signify conflicts of person's features with those described as quintessential for styling oneself a hacker), posers and other types of wannabes. The aforementioned differentiation reeks of great artificiality and certain immaturity (very typical for members of musical subculture groups and the likes of them).
The opposition to what general audience perceives to be hackers wasn't introduced very maturely either - they say that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and many instances are known when public's interpretation of the term or what's considered to be correct has bended original terms to public's will - numerous grammatical changes were officially accepted, for instance. So remorse and indignation are quite futile, it's either gradual bending of general perception towards the desired essence (much like "geeks" social adaptation) or relinquishment of the term altogether - it's not essentially about the term anyway, it's what one does and how one behaves.
On the whole the tone of the document is alarmingly discouraging - hackers movement started out as fun, slightly anarchical, defying rules and authorities and the whole HowTo is saturated with indirect imperatives (should, has to), indications of vast responsibilities ("moral duty...") and calls for extreme loyalty ("(especially other hackers)", "it must be interesting and/or useful to other hackers") - it's hard for me personally to envision how real enthusiasm and love for freedom (which are a part of hacker "requirements") correlate with the above.
Another subjective deficiency of the document is the excess hostility (not even a condescension!) of its author towards Windows Users (the advice to format C drive) crackers (see insults in FAQ) - who ARE potential material for the hacker community, only, perhaps, are not mature enough yet (as Raymond states, many start as young as 15 or even in a more tender teenage). It's not that cracker inclinations are not be be discouraged - it's just the tone sir Raymond chooses does not give him much credit (though, perhaps, due to his past accomplishments he doesn't feel he needs more).
Furthermore, the hierarchy and climbing up that hierarchy to attain the great goal of being considered a hacker feels somewhat contrived and artificial, and, sadly, not entirely believable - it seems to rather serve the purpose of hacker community rather than helping a newcomer climb the ladder - it's hard to comprehend that mundane duties as maintenance and secondary activities, such as composing FAQs are indeed respected as highly as sir Raymond claims they are.
As for positive features, the document does, indeed inform people one what a renowned hacker perceives essential to be considered a full-fledged part of a hacker community. It does, to some degree, introduce the hackers' viewpoint on being a hacker. Another positive comment is that the document is ever changing and it's author does admit his own delusions and/or mistakes ("Java is not good for beginners") and the non-stopping evolution of the term and its environment (changing tech knowledge requirements). Sir Raymond provides good links to additional educational materials and mostly worthy explanations of their worth or of some of his statements (the right left-right brain parts involvement to justify the proposed extracurricular activities for hackers). Also, he does indeed provide quite clear guidelines to those who would either like to start their serious advancement through the world of computers or to those who'd like to fulfill Raymond's notion of hackerdom.
All in all, the document may indeed be informative in the respect of how hackers (or, at least, one of their most influential advocates), perceive themselves as opposed to the notion upheld by the media, but as for it's style and tone... it's indeed questionable whether a person, having read it, would want to associate himself with the hacker society at all.
0 comments:
Post a Comment