Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Aleksdev 662 days ago
This whole thing comes off as very “edgy”. We just like to tinker with things. It’s really not that deep for most of us.
3 comments

Phrack's tendency toward the edgy sentiment aside, I sort of understand it. Sort of.

I grew up in the era of BBSs, microcomputers giving way to full desktops in the US and payphones we're still slightly interesting. though phreaking was sadly in its final days. I also had (and have) severe social anxiety, but had no idea what that was at the time. I just knew I did not understand the world or people much at all, seeing them as sloppy systems that seemed to operate without any predictable set of rules aside from maybe self-preservation and immediate gratification.

So when I started taking apart computers, futzing with software and seeing what made the beige boxes tick, I found I could understand those with far more clarity. I also found other people like me in the message boards and a local library. Naturally, this became my world, because I knew how to navigate it better than people who had little interest in using a computer for anything beyond homework or accounting.

It really felt like there was this whole reality that sat on top of the "common" reality and I had ascended to it with some silly notion of secret knowledge. You can image how addicting that would feel to someone who does not do well social and felt very, very outcast as a kid.

I guess the difference between myself and a lot of Phrack authors, whom I still very much respect for laying the paving stones that I got to walk on, is that as I got older, I dealt with my anxiety and found that my genuine curiosity was more of an asset to enriching myself than a key to the door of some secret counter-culture. Hacking, colloquially speaking, went mainstream and sort of left me in the dust, having become impossible for any one person to keep up with the flood of new methods, exploits, etc as the Internet exploded and suddenly everyone had computers in some form or another.

I moved on, more or less. Yes, I still tinker, as a hobby and a form of therapy, but mostly with old computers and industrial machines, since that's part of my adult career, but I miss that feeling of being part of some counter-culture-like group, whether it was real or not.

I can totally see where it would be hard to let go of that. Heck, I'd post that some of the Phrack authors have no business letting go of it since they helped define that whole world and need to keep it alive. I say let them be edgy. I have trouble with that, myself, but I respect it.

Sorry, this turned into a "Hacker Perspective" 2600 article, I guess.

I really liked reading your comment.

Somewhat related. I used to think, if I get really good at some thing, people will respect or admire me more. So I do my utmost best to be excellent at what I do.

I found out that getting respect or admiration works differently. When you are very good in one area, you come across as geeky/nerdy. That fills nicely a respected stereotype in film, where the geek finds the missing piece for saving the world. But in the real world, most people don't care.

Also I more recently found out that if you show you are trying really hard, that comes across as feeling very unsure about yourself.

So about the article, understanding how the world works. The author clearly has understanding about financial markets. He knows a lot about security weaknesses and how to exploit them. It is all knowledge available on the web after all, if you spend a lot of nights studying it, it starts to click.

The world is so much more than that though. For me, it is mostly how you interact with it, and the best interactions are with people. At work, at home, on HN.

Why do I work? I make something, I fix a problem, I discuss what is important, it makes somebody happy because it aligns with their goal. Be it a colleague who wants their design reviewed, a customer who has a problem with your product, or a manager who wants a new feature.

> I just knew I did not understand the world or people much at all, seeing them as sloppy systems that seemed to operate without any predictable set of rules aside from maybe self-preservation and immediate gratification.

That's a fascinating view.

In fact, I'd say most FOSS GUIs from the 90s and early 00s make a lot more sense if you see them as having the hidden/bonus goal of repelling this "world of people." I just remember using something like Dynebolic for the first time, (or, much later, Popcorn Time) and having the feeling I'd just found a sparkling piece of amethyst among so many clods of dirt. Hackers always seemed to me way too curious and lazy to shovel dirt in their spare time; basic resentment/elitism toward society so cleanly explain so many parts of FOSS, everything from the amount of time it's taken to get a decent multi-screen configuration GUI to that old error message, "You don't exist. Go away!"

Digression-- I remember reading an interview of someone who wrote one of the APIs to get multi-screen video working in Linux. They'd written about how they realized that what they'd wrote would be generally useful and therefore needed a GUI. But they didn't have expertise in GUI design nor any interest in maintaining one. So they set down and explicitly wrote a terrible GUI with the goal of making it so bad it'd be less helpful than just using the command line, thus forcing someone else to take on the task of replacing the awful GUI.

Does anyone remember what that was? The visual metaphor was something to do with playing cards. Anyhow, I'd love to see that GUI!

xorg.conf or xrandr might be along the right lines.
Could very well be Xinerama: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinerama
Thoughtful and insightful reflection, thanks for sharing. I think that interplay between personal sense-making, personal strengths and the addictive/rewarding aspects of belonging to a specialized/esoteric community are a very common combination driving the creation of new narratives, new factions/interest and, ultimately, all kinds of change in general… for better or for worse, usually only time and intervening chance can tell. It’s cool how meaningful it is to the participants, and also cool when you can zoom out and connect it to the experiences of others across space and time.
This is also what drives people into cults: not fitting into normal social environments, finding some esoteric community where suddenly there is a fit.
> Hacking, colloquially speaking, went mainstream

I disagree. What went mainstream is a pale imitation of what hacking originally was.

I petition a 1337 Laureate nomination if such nomination exist.
Are you Phrack by chance?
Different kinds of hackers then, I suppose.
phrack has always had this kind of article. i'm sure if you grep for "A hacker is" or "the hacker ethos" you'll get a hit for every phrack issue going back to the 80s.
The people in those past articles weren't crypto startup CEOs, or startup CEOs at all most of the time.
Only thing I fail to understand is why a hacker needs to know where to buy estrogen… I can more easily take the idea of hacker knowing how to cook Molotov cocktails.
This is only an example of the type of thing a hacker would do- a hacker is willing to solve problems on their own on their own even if it requires methods that are illegal, dangerous, or complex.

A lot of people throw their hands up and give up when they need an expensive medication they can't get prescribed but in general you can often buy them overseas, grey market, make them yourself, etc.

Replying to awooooo who was flagged dead:

> They want it, but it's not a necessity.

What a person "needs" is complex and individual. Unless you are their doctor or are paying for it, your opinion of what medications a person needs is irrelevant- it is absolutely none of your business.

This nit-picking is in no way central to my point as it was a general statement about hacker culture ethos not any particular person or medication, so why did you post it? With only two comments so far - It appears you joined HN just to share anti-trans bigotry? That isn't okay. This is not a "hate forum" - accepting people that are different is a fundamental aspect of hacker and HN culture.

@awooooo - nonsense, you have people minding their own business and being themselves, and you don't approve so you are insulting them, and trying to say they need to hide who they are or be different. That is just plain old bigotry. Being trans doesn't hurt of affect other women in any way.

I'm willing to bet you are different in some way that isn't acceptable to others, so you feel the need to hide it out of fear, or hoping for acceptance. It's true of most people, and the fact that people need to hide themselves is awful.. and what you are contributing to here.

I'm not trans but I am neurodivergent in a way that I can't hide, and was bullied and attacked for being different a lot of my life. Bigots that only know of one way people can be different would call me "queer" when they cornered me in the school hallway in groups to try to hurt me. Luckily for me, I'm a strong guy, and even being in groups they usually had a worse time of it than I did. I understand what that is like, and don't wish it on anyone. I want a world where people can mind their own business as themselves without hiding and without awful people trying to shame or attack them.

Estradiol valerate (which is what the article actually names) seems to be used for a wide variety of female reproductive health issues, especially when (as the article suggests) it's compounded with other drugs. It's also used by transgender people as a hormone therapy. A hacker might live in a place where gender-affirming healthcare is illegal or unavailable, or where female reproductive healthcare in general is difficult or expensive to obtain.

Reproductive healthcare is much more broadly useful than Molotov cocktails.

It's hard to say what the motivation for the estrogen is but it's a case study in pharma-bro-ing type hobbies which is fine. Life extension nootropics and such. It could be a menopausal woman juicing up. It could also be a biological male who identifies as a female, which was big tech's engineering solution as far as how to get more women in tech (turns out, innovative solution, it's easier to retrofit male programmers as females than it is to convince your average woman to sit alone in a cubicle all day fighting against a pedantic and buggy compudah) - don't announce that at google, however, or you'll be punted out next day and end up needing to settle it for a few million.
The article didn’t articulate why or how these were used and you somehow turned it into a big tech transgender conspiracy.

Get some help before it’s too late, cooker.

There have been hypotheses that a significant number of trans women (i.e. biological men who identify as women) are actually on the autism spectrum. Considering natural tendency of autistic people to prefer isolated activities and puzzles, there may be a correlation between hackers and trans women.
As with any novel phenomena, especially in sociology, it is very hard to provide tangible evidence for anything. If you demand nobody speaks of anything of sort without hard evidence, rarely anything would ever be said.
> If you demand nobody speaks of anything of sort without hard evidence, rarely anything would ever be said.

Eh, that is some bullshit, but there is evidence though. I edited my comment to provide it, instead of asking you to do so.

it is very hard not to observe said tendency, though really I was hoping that it was just that programmers always been rich enough to undergo transition. is this still true, though, perhaps now you can be jobless and still somehow apply for transition? depending on GPS coordinates, of course, but possible here and there.

this mentioning of potential trans-paraphernalia in an article calling to all hackers is a little misleading (imho), biased perhaps, or even influential. it is a statement i guess.

back in our teen hacker days we heard stories of ppl building molotovs, credit card scammers, eavesdropping equipment, lock-pick etc. but biohacking and female hormonal medicine in particular has definitely not been on the list (that much) if memory serves right... and my bet is that Phrack back-archive can confirm it.

perhaps it is a logical to see a change in popular understanding what hackers can find, or do, or are defined by. curiosity and daring courage to intrude is one thing, we can all agree.

perhaps also we may agree that hacking one's body is still hacking, as social engineering IS considered hacking.

Might also depend on how you define "hacker". Most people don't know the true meaning of the word, and should be using "cracker" instead.
Even if this is true, it need not be either-or. Saying that they are 'actually' autistic seems to imply that you do not believe that they are 'actually' trans.
It doesn’t seem that way with a charitable reading.
For what it's worth, I didn't mean "actually" in an either-or sense, but more in an unexpected-correlation sense. I tend to avoid ontological discussions on this topic.

English is not my native language, I sometimes miss the subtleties.

My bad, I'm sorry
What’s with this ‘biological men’ stuff? How would you define that and what about chromosomal abnormalities like XXY or XYY people? If I have Jacob’s syndrome and a penis am I biologically male or something else entirely? Explain.

If you just want to have silly ideas about trans people, that’s fine because I’m done arguing with people over that. It’s a huge waste of time to get that interested in another person’s genitals but you do you. However if you’re going to use something as silly as ‘biological male’ you have to support that.

> If I have Jacob’s syndrome and a penis am I biologically male

Yes, of course. It's a condition that only affects males.

A few years ago I freaked out the Reddit moderators on a sub called /r/bodymods , which was, ostensibly, about modifying your body, when I asked about the feasibility of doing ones own liposuction.

I'm not saying that's a good or bad idea from a medical perspective, but I certainly was off-put by their hypocrisy at shutting me down and their myopic definition of "body mods" which apparently to them was just poking holes in their face.

Unless you think/say/repeat the same things as everyone else on a subreddit you get downvoted and shadowbanned. It has the most aggressive and militant groupthink culture I've seen anywhere, which makes it pretty useless for trying to learn new things or share new ideas.

If you have any type of niche hobby for example, and someone finds a new and better way of doing something, they will pretty much universally be attacked and censored.

And somehow, it’s still less toxic than stackoverflow.
That part is definitely not aimed at every reader, but it is appropriately used to highlight how some might circumvent the lengthy legal processes involved in getting estrogen. Moreover, it points to the possible need for them to compound it themselves which in turn makes them a hacker.
They may be hacking their own body to a binary that's different from their source code
I see you have only met a narrow subset of hackers.
why not both?