Difference between classic hackers and today's crackers

[vittyvirus]

This is not written by me (it's written by Carey Bloodworth):

I should point out the difference between a classic Hacker, and today's cracker, which many idiots and newbies call 'hackers'. A classic Hacker was a computer on legs. They almost thought in binary. They were the ones that could code for 24 hours straight. They were the ones who drank Jolt cola. (Not that there was actually Jolt back then, but....) These guys were the source of phrases like: "It's a real hack" (meaning it's a real beaut of a piece of code) and "It's a kludge" (meaning a disgustingly ugly piece of code that works, but isn't 'elegant', it just simply works for all the wrong reasons), and "It's a quick hack" (meaning a piece of code that works but was thrown together very quickly.) They were the ones that were the 'midnight Hackers', back in the 70's when doors to mainframe computer rooms at universities were left unlocked and some students took the opportunity to literally spend all night exploring what a computer was and how to do things. These were the guys who developed networking, BBSs, virtual reality, and many of the things taken for granted today. They learned for the sheer joy of learning and pushing the boundaries of what was and was not possible. The Hackers _were_ the computer revolution.

A cracker is somebody who has the goal of doing deliberate damage. They may have similar skills, but a Hacker would generally only cause damage by accident. Crackers are scum, and it irks me immensely to hear them called 'hackers'.)

[Damon16b]

Thats interesting, while I agree with it for the most part what Carey calls a 'cracker' i would just call a black hat hacker. but yes I totally agree that its those people who give the rest of us a bad name, which sucks! cause hacking is really a lot of fun! :) its great to sit down with the 'brotherhood' on a weekend and just see what you can make something do! whether it be software or hardware. but sadly today being a 'classic hacker' isn't that easy as most universities lock the doors to their mainframes haha. I think its still very possible to be a 'modern classic hacker' though, they would be the people who sit down and tinker with things (hardware and software) purely for fun and to push the boundaries of innovation without malicious intent :) but thats just me haha

[Kacey]

Damon said it well. What Carey calls a "classic hacker" I would call a white-hat. A "cracker"is a black-hat. Carey seems to know what he's writing about.

[Typhlosion]

Because being just another Perl hacker would mean breaking into the CIA through beautifully constructed and obfuscated code :P

[vittyvirus]

Damon said it well. What Carey calls a "classic hacker" I would call a white-hat. A "cracker"is a black-hat. Carey seems to know what he's writing about.

Well, 'white-hat' hackers are more known to be kinda like 'security professionals'. They don't do it just for fun, they're well paid. They're also courses like CISSP etc.

Probably 'Gray-hat' hacker or 'red-hat' hacker is the correct word...

[Rallo]

Away from computers and technology, a 'hack' is simply a trick or method of some-what cheating the system to do something in an easier or different manner.. To make something do something it's not designed for; to cheat the system.
It actually annoys me when people relate that to computer revolution; a damn lot of work went into creating the technology we have today. For someone to say it all started as a 'hack' is almost an insult to all those involved in the advancement of computers of the years; it's directly saying these people simply cheated the system and didn't actually do anything astonishing. Now before anyone debates the whole "oh but that's what OPs quote says, it's given a bad name to 'hacking' now", the definition I put forward dates back to well before any real kind of technology was even theorized; it's not something that's gained a different meaning in recent years.

On the side of 'crackers' or 'hackers', well this argument clashes with the meaning stated above too. You see, 'hacking' directly means to make something perform in a way it isn't designed to. Making a computer perform in a way it isn't designed to, no matter if it's for good or bad, is hacking. That's simply the plain, original definition of the word.

Now, despite all the above, I do see what the quote OP mentions is trying to say.. The word 'hacker' has such a negative ring to it these days, when in reality it's a neutral word alone. A 'hack' can be for good or for bad; there's 'hacks' (life-hacks as an example) which purely benefit yourself while not effecting anyone or anything else. Unless specified otherwise or information is provided for an opinion to be made, the word 'hack' should not be assumed as a negative.

[vittyvirus]

Perspective.

To me, hacking is simply tinkering.