"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
Yes, please don't try to hack into it.


What does it do then? Don't say its as simple as "it logs trains"

Surely one cracks into networks, and a programmer hacks away at code?

Nick

"Robin Mayes" wrote in message
...
Yes, please don't try to hack into it.

Nick Evans wrote:
Surely one cracks into networks, and a programmer hacks away at code?

Nick

That was the original definition but the press (for some reason)
started using the term hacker instead of cracker and then 5 years ago
the newspaper definition became what was used in GCSE exams. So: No,
not anymore

wrote:
Nick Evans wrote:
Surely one cracks into networks, and a programmer hacks away at code?

That was the original definition but the press (for some reason)
started using the term hacker instead of cracker and then 5 years ago
the newspaper definition became what was used in GCSE exams. So: No,
not anymore

Read 'Hackers' by Stephen Levy (written in 1984) for the story of the
'hacking era'

On 15 Apr 2005 wrote:

Nick Evans wrote:

Surely one cracks into networks, and a programmer hacks away at code?

That was the original definition but the press (for some reason) started
using the term hacker instead of cracker and then 5 years ago the
newspaper definition became what was used in GCSE exams. So: No, not
anymore

Ahem. Some hackers still hack on code. It's just that there are now two
kinds of hackers, with the crhacker being the only type the unwashed
masses are aware of. Ironically, i don't think that sort refer to
themselves as hackers; they probably use some term with more digits in it.

And come on, the argument from authority is a bad enough fallacy to begin
with, but GCSE syllabuses? Or was it an attempt to not quite commit a
fallacy by using a not very authoritative authority?

tom

--
Vive la chimie, en particulier, et la connaissance en general. -- Herve This