-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 08:52:15AM +0200, Shaun Dewberry(shaundat_private) wrote: > This depends on your definition of "hacking" and whether you obtained that > perception from the media or from MIT. My definition of hacker does not > involve destruction of property or harm to any person. A basic definition of > 'hacker' is an inherently curious, computer literate person, having a > special interest in computer security. What you seem to be talking about is > a computer criminal. These are two entirely different entities. Please don't > bundle hackers with criminals. I hate to do this.. This is not a direct response to you but to others on this list who have used this term in that context. "Cracker" is little more malicious than "hacker." A cracker can be someone who explores the ends of software. Cracking the copyright protection, reverse-engineering the code. Was cracking DeCSS malicious? Using cracker as a cop-out for hacker is just as bad. I avoid the use of most of those terms due to the bastardization these days. A defacer is a defacer. Being literal prevents such discussion. Regards, - -- \ | \ / White Vampire\Rem | http://gammaforce.org/ \|\| \/ whitevampireat_private | http://gammagear.com/ "Silly hacker, root is for administrators." | http://webfringe.com/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE7zIUY3+rxmnEDyl8RAizlAKDBE/NXl6wYGguauQIBI6cDB/yYCwCg3qAc g6iA6qBguVw1iLnBwygXDvY= =QSfd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Oct 17 2001 - 11:50:05 PDT