Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
What do you hear about hackers
They are bad, all they want to do is steal my infromation 5%
They are computer criminals 9%
They help me with my computer problems 27%
I hear nothing about it....Whats a hacker? 0%
They do wierd stuff to other peoples things 3%
They mess up my favorite tv show 1%
Didnt they bomb a country 14%
He's osama 9%
Arent they the little people who sit on my lawn? 16%

Votes: 55

 A Reader Disputes Our Wisdom

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Apr 01, 2002
[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] is known for its hard hitting, no holds barred investigative journalism. We believe that our commitment to the truth and willingness to tackle the most controversial issues sets us head and shoulders above the competition. Some people, however, dispute our accuracy and journalistic integrity. In the interest of fairness, we have decided to publish and respond to a recent critique by one "Electric Raver."

Mr. Raver feels that we unfairly categorize and negatively stereotype evil criminal hackers and that we should be more tolerant of these hell spawned vermin. Read more for his full arguement and our responses.


More stories about Technology
Building your dream PC. What the experts don't tell you.
DVD Versus VHS: The Surprising Truth
How to increase the lifespan of your PC.
Why We Need National Missile Defense
Security, Microsoft, and You
Napster, Gnutella and the file sharing revolution
LIFE? Is What You Make Of It
The Stupidity of Environmental Liberalism
Apache 2.0 - Still Not a Contender?
The Console Wars, the Dust Has Settled.
Does anybody really know what a hacker is or are we all non-informed adults??

All of us out there are scared of hackers, why are we scared? All we hear is that they hack into our computers and steal all our information about us and take all our money or that they hack into goverment and break everything...Could we be more wrong.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Surely it's entirely justified to worry about criminal hackers of the sort described in this article. I don't think we, as a society, need to tolerate malicious and destructive hacking of our nation's information infrastructure.

After reading most of the reports on this site, I have decided that non of you really did any research about hackers in general and need to be informed on the truths of hacking and the hacking life styles.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] The editors of have spent long hours researching the life and crimes of many notorious computer hackers.

1. Let me start off on what a hacker is. A hacker is some one with large amounts of computer knowledge who feels that they are restricted to information that they feel they should be alowed to have knowledge of. A hacker can also be some one who has the ability to fix annoying computer problems, which most of us today do not know how to fix these problems and have to deal with them the hard way by calling the great "tech support"

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Volume VI of the Oxford English Dictionary includes "one who uses his skill with computers to try to gain unauthorized access to computer files or networks" as a definition of hacker and shows that this usage is at least 19 years old. Curiously enough, it fails to list "one who has the ability to fix annoying computer problems" as a valid usage.

2. How a hacker is formed...Usally hackers are formed by extensive time on a computer. These are usally people that want to get there A+ certification and there MCSE. This involves lots and lots of time reading a book and hands on. This teaches the basics of the computer. once you have a basic knowledge of the computer its only your imagination that holds you back from what you can do.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Speaking as one who has been a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer since 1997, I can assure our readers that hacking is not a part of the curriculum and that MCSE holders are not at any time encouraged to describe themselves as "hackers."

There are lots of "elite" groups out there who invite people who know large amounts of information on computers into there groups and have these meetings were they exchange information. There meetings usally consit of setting up two rooms with many computers, they split the group up into two groups and the task is to see who can gain access first into each others systems. These type of people usally consist of Microsoft employess and other large computer corpertations.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] I'm a former Microsoft employee as well and I assume that Mr. Raver is refering to the capture the flag events held at defcon and other, less unsavory, gatherings. The IT professionals who participate in these activities do so in order to better understand and combat hackers and not out of any criminal intent. The activity can be considered as "going undercover" to borrow a phrase from law enforcement.

3. How to identify a "HACKER"...Hackers are usally normal looking people. You mite see them at your work fixing your companys computers or servers. You mite just be talking to one right now on how to set up your TCP/IP proctocals so you can connect to the internet.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Mr. Raver is only confirming what has been saying all along: the hacker menace is all around us and we must be ever vigilant in combatting it.

Most people give hackers the sterotypes of gothic people, people who dress in black and have chains and spikey hair. There are many reason why these people wear the clothes they wear. People who wear these clothes usally have other problems with there soical life. So they mite fall back into computers becuase they dont have any friends to hange out with. This gives them lots of time to explore a computer, put there personalitys into a computer.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Once again Mr. Raver is repeating what has already said: hackers are bitter loners who are quite rightly shunned by normal people. This makes them bitter and depraved.

The thing that most people get confused on is people who dress up in baggy pants and bright colored shirts, yet they maybe hackers but in my book they are "Ravers" people who enjoy electronic music. For you non-informed people who dont understand why they wear pacifiers, these are used when ravers are at "raves" and doing ecstasy. Ecstasy creates massive jaw clenching which may cause large amounts of pain. The pacifiers keeps them from biting up the insides of there mouths.

[editor's note, by Peter Johnson] is quite familiar with the evils inherent in electronic "music" and "raving." We have written about this threat to our youth at length. Of course the combination of ravers and hackers represents a double menace that must be eradicated at all costs.

4. Games...Games today are highly advanced and very custimizible. The fact is that the more realistic the game the better. Games are aslo more interactive, such as clans, chat rooms, and multiplayer servers. The more involed you are with a game the more tricks and trades you learn such as scripting. Scripting is a bunch of computer commands you type up to perform speacil things you ask it to. When you understand how the game works the more custimizble you may become. Scripting is used for a lot of things such as the internet, windows, and games. This may cause you to become more custimible with everything on your computer

    5. Copy Cats... Hackers make a lot of there programs availble through web sites. They use computer code to make programs that help them along there hacking...Most people who want to gain more information may download these programs to try them out. Most of them dont know how to use these "progs" incorectly causing them to get into large amounts of trouble and being stamped with a hacker lable. By doing this giving other REAL hackers out there a bad name. This creates bad publisity on hackers...

    [editor's note, by Peter Johnson] Mr. Raver seems to be complaining that inexperienced hackers are easier to catch than wary veterans. This seems obvious. Of course the extra attention the arrests of "newbie" hackers draw is bad for veteran computer criminals, but this hardly excuses the criminal behaviour of either class.

    PLEASE BE MORE INFORMED email me with questions

    [editor's note, by Peter Johnson] While we respect Mr. Raver's views, the editors of consider our coverage of this issue factual and accurate. Most of our adult readership seems to agree and we have received many supportive emails from concerned parents and law enforcement.


    Oh wow! (none / 0) (#2)
    by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 11:53:50 PM PST
    While we respect Mr. Raver's views, the editors of consider our coverage of this issue factual and accurate.

    Funny how not many here believe that.

    Most of our adult readership seems to agree

    Yet they post comments that could easily be considered ill informed and childish.

    and we have received many supportive emails from concerned parents

    Stupid parents that believe that Pokemon is the creation of the devil and are easily suckered by Pat Robertson and the Kristian KKKoalition.

    and law enforcement

    Yes, replys to stop sending us unfounded dumbass reports about hijacked hyperlinks, iMac address stealing and IP Token theft.

    Thankyou Adequacy (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by NoahVale on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 06:09:29 PM PST
    Adequacy is one of the few remaining web sites that I am comfortable letting my children view.
    I appreciate the "zero tolerance" stand that it takes on hackers.
    There's too much morally ambiguous material around that condones computer crime as "cyber culture". Once kids start reading this kind of material they inevitably get into weirder and weirder "literature" to they point that they think William S Burroughs was "cool" to shoot his wife.
    It's great that Adequacy still has the courage to stand up for decent values.

    both sides (none / 0) (#40)
    by Anonymous Reader on Wed Apr 17th, 2002 at 09:25:58 AM PST
    I really hope that you let your children read _both_ sides of the argument (but I'm sure that you do so, right?).

    I've read the other article... Please tell me... (none / 0) (#37)
    by jaiminista on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 07:17:55 PM PST
    What does bonzy buddy or Quake have to do with computer hackers´?

    Or even the trial version of flash?

    Please answer that, cau I almost fell out my chair laughing when I read that...

    I still do when I remember that...

    Question for Mr. Electronic Raver (none / 0) (#3)
    by jvance on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 01:00:05 AM PST
    Is an utter disregard for proper spelling and grammar a prerequisite for hacking? My God, man, no wonder nobody takes your opinions seriously.
    Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

    Amazing.. (none / 0) (#5)
    by DG on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 03:30:40 AM PST
    thats all you can come up with a whine about his grammar and spelling? we should be asking why anyone should take you seriously.. who cares! maybe anal retentives like you, but i digress.. good night
    © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

    On the contrary, (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by because it isnt on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 06:19:25 AM PST
    Mr Vance has pointed out the extent of the flaws in Mr Raver's argument. -- because it isn't

    Spelling (none / 0) (#16)
    by ausduck on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 09:45:17 AM PST
    I think that it is a most valid comment that these hackers tend to have poor spelling. It seems to be a very, very common problem in their messages (along with the poor use of white space). Say what you will about inconsistencies in English spelling, society has decided that we should be able to spell properly. Moreover, we have software now that checks our spelling for us. Why these supposedly computer-savvy hackers can't use spell checkers is beyond me.

    Also, why would jvance need to argue against what Mr Raver said? Peter Johnson already did that.

    Sir, (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by jvance on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 11:05:18 AM PST
    it is entirely possible that Mr. Raver has some valid points. However, I will never know, because after plowing through half of his article, I gave up. It's unreadable.
    Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

    Don't kid yourselves (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 03:09:02 AM PST
    This website habitually deletes, edits, moves or censors articles which it finds unfavorable, critical or exceedingly controversial. But by all means, tell yourselves you are the paragons of liberality. Whatever makes you feel good. It's your website, but as Abe Lincoln once said: You bullshit your friends, and I'll bullshit my friends, but let's don't bullshit each other, k?

    I don't think he said the "k?" part. That is license on my part. Something the editors will be familiar with, license.

    The design is good. 90% of the content is fawning sycophantic drivel. RobotSlave is the only writer here worth a slap in the face with a wet fish.

    Complete nonsense (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Earl Grey on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 03:10:10 PM PST
    This website habitually deletes, edits, moves or censors articles which it finds unfavorable, critical or exceedingly controversial.

    Oh, horseshit. Look, moron, if you want to post trolls and "Stephen King, Dead at 54" stories and "page-lengthening posts", then go to Slashdot with all of the rest of the pathetic, lifeless script kiddies. Yes, we editorialize that kind of crap, because unlike Rob Malda and company, we decided a long time ago that we were not going to take any crap from abusive flooders such as yourself. We are actually committed to keeping the site clean.

    The censorship accusations are libelous and border on hate crime status. If we "censor" things that are critical or unfavorable, then explain why your above post wasn't editorialized. I'll do you one better: Explain why this story was even posted. What's that? You can't? No, you sound to me like one of these buck-toothed, inbred Slashdot crapflooders who got cleaned up here at Adequacy and is pissed off about it. Too bad. Take a hike; piddle on back to Slashdot with your little tail between your legs and leave the adults alone, okay?

    here, here (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by astrix on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 09:45:09 AM PST
    here, here

    "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" --Thomas Jefferson

    Criminal redundancy. (none / 0) (#6)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 03:43:31 AM PST
    The power that be here, I mean this site's fantastic editors who are the very cream of the western civilized world, have a great and justified hatred for bad spelling.

    Unfortunately, they seem to have a greater love for redundancy : article after article, diary after diary, they keep on explaining to us, the ignorants, the naives, the misleaded ones, courageously, despite the pression and the threats, that a hacker is a criminal. Yet, very often, they write "criminal hacker".

    I conjure you, dear editors, to stop this criminal redundancy: nobody speaks of criminal thieves or criminal murderers, but just of thieves and murderers. You should not speak of criminal hackers. This just maintain a criminal confusion in our poor lost minds.

    Irony (none / 0) (#7)
    by DG on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 03:56:23 AM PST
    it's funny to me becuse, some posters whine about how there is no diffrence between a cracker and a hacker but the editors call them criminal hackers?
    is there a diffrence between a criminal hacker and a normal hacker? explain how this makes sense.. please enlighten me editors about this
    © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

    Wow (none / 0) (#8)
    by Yoshi on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 04:10:23 AM PST
    Way to illustrate the parent post's topic of redundancy with your ludid insight.

    Wow (none / 0) (#24)
    by DG on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 07:18:28 PM PST
    way to not add anything worth while.. i am merely asking the editors why they say criminal hackers if they consider hackers to be criminals already, it is pointless if they say a hacker is a criminal a hacker is a criminal and yet call them criminal hackers..
    © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

    Really? (none / 0) (#26)
    by T Reginald Gibbons on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 09:12:13 PM PST
    What did the parent post say?

    Aren't you aware.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 04:31:27 AM PST
    That the pursuit of Truth came to an end. It has been captured by the marvelous people of this site, where it is religiously kept, nourished with the ton of facts they have collected, and generously bestowed upon us to save us from the ire of the Law.

    So, you, a subscriber of this site, something you have done, I am sure, in hunger of connoissance, how dare you ask what is the difference between criminal hacker and normal hacker? Let the knowledge flow your mind, my friend. You should know by now that there is no such person as a normal hacker. And that a hacker is a criminal. That's why I am respectfully begging the proud and honest editors, owners of all truth, to stop spreading confusion speaking about "criminal hackers", because that leads to the conclusion that some hackers are not criminal.

    Criminal Hacker Vs Regular Hacker (none / 0) (#30)
    by Anonymous Reader on Wed Apr 3rd, 2002 at 03:58:54 AM PST
    The difference between them is all in their intent. Determine what they intend by their hacking and you determine if they are a criminal or not.

    I am a hacker. When I find a site that has password protection, i can't resist the challenge it presents. I download the scripts that protect the site, take them apart on my computer to see how they work and from there figure out how to bypass them. Then I return to the site and hack my way in to the protected members only area. At that point, I find the email link for the administrators of the site and using multiple anonymous remailers, I send them an email detailing step by step exactly how I bypassed their site security and what they need to do to close those backdoors I used. Then I leave the site. I dont view the private contents of it, dont download anything from the private area, dont damage the site in any way. I get in, tell the owner how i did it, and leave.

    What is my intent? 1. To test my knowlege of computers, networking, scripting, and security. 2. To provide better security to users of computers by telling site administrators how to tighten up their security after I've cracked it so that those who pay for access to the site have greater security for their information.

    Thieves pick locks to break into homes and cars every day, but nobody calls locksmiths criminals because they know how to pick locks. Why should someone who knows how to break computer security be called a criminal for what he knows?

    A vandal who learns how to hack to destroy websites is not a hacker, he is a vandal that learned how to hack, just a a thief who picks a lock to rob you is not a locksmith, just a thief that learned how to pick locks.

    BOZO was here (4.00 / 1) (#32)
    by walwyn on Wed Apr 3rd, 2002 at 03:24:32 PM PST
    I download the scripts that protect the site, take them apart on my computer to see how they work and from there figure out how to bypass them.

    This is known as 'casing the joint'.

    Then I return to the site and hack my way in to the protected members only area.

    This is known as breaking and entering.

    Thieves pick locks to break into homes and cars every day, but nobody calls locksmiths criminals because they know how to pick locks.

    Locksmiths don't go picking the locks on your home or car with the intent of leaving 'BOZO was here' notes.

    Since I forgot to mention it... (none / 0) (#33)
    by NoHatHacker on Wed Apr 3rd, 2002 at 07:43:55 PM PST
    I get paid a rather large fee for hacking into corporate servers, finding the flaws in the security, and telling them how to fix them.

    Oh my, a hacker who uses his knowlege and skills in non-criminal ways.

    It's different. (none / 0) (#9)
    by Yoshi on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 04:15:28 AM PST
    Surely when you use the moniker "murderer," there is no misapprehension as to the criminal intent of the act. However, there exists a band of criminal hackers, such as yourself, who are out to redefine the very definition of computer hackers. Thus, while you do your part to spread your own little quarrels about the 'hacker' terminology, we must do our part to remind the public to see criminal hackers for what they are: illegal, anarchist, acne-faced teenagers out to target our critical national infrastructure with their DOS attacks.

    Please... (4.00 / 1) (#11)
    by manux on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 05:30:22 AM PST
    Please, for once, write something that would be on the topic of the post you are answering to. The original poster wondered why the redactors at this site refer to "criminal hackers" while they pretend that hackers are criminal by definition. He wrote, with reason, that it was confusing about the redactors' point. Why do you keep answering always the same pre-formatted tirade, whatever the topic? Why are you labelling the poster a hacker while nothing in his post indicated any such thing? I know that articles about hackers, whatever the meaning of the word, serve here as attractors for these people, in order to keep clean the other debates, but are pointless "arguments" a good way to keep these people trapped? Well, I don't think so.

    PS: note that I did not express any opinion about the topic of the article, but only about your post. I ask in advance not to be labeled for my post without arguments.

    Here we go again. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 08:51:49 AM PST
    You are undoubtedly one of the most gifted and brilliant editors of this marvellous site. That is why your opinion is of much importance to me. I do not know why you call me a "criminal hacker", but I am sure that you have a very good reason, and that in all your kindness, you will enlighten me soon.

    The fact that you and your esteemed colleagues keep on using the locution "criminal hackers" while professing that any hacker is a criminal leads to the sad conclusion that you are confused with the word, and the very notion of hacking. If you speak of "criminal hackers", you acknowledge the existence of non-criminal hackers. Weird!

    So, to put an end to all that confusion, I humbly suggest that we call the criminal hackers "crackers", living the word "hackers" to the eventually good ones, since everybody here, editors, subscribers, anonymous readers, seems to believe such a thing finally does exist

    Oh boy (none / 0) (#18)
    by Yoshi on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 12:00:11 PM PST
    Really, you flatter me. The reason why my colleagues and I use the term "criminal hackers" is to instill the factual notion of its validity in the minds of some of the brainwashed users on this site. It's no different than those criminal hackers going around and beating the dead horse about how their illegal IMAP P.I.N.G flooding is legal.

    As for why I called you a criminal hacker, it's quite obvious really. When society has fixated on a common usage of a term, it seems as though only the ones labeled by that term protest. I don't hear anyone but the coke-snorting liberalists calling drugs legal. Likewise, I don't hear any non-felons calling murder legal. Thus, I can do nothing but assume you are yet another criminal hacker. Your Anonymous identity further aids this label, for if you were to sign up for an identity here at the The Most Controversial Site on the Internet, and prove us wrong, we could refer back to your "username."

    Oh no! I am not flattering you. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 01:02:48 PM PST
    On the contrary, I am flattered. That you accept to use your precious time and CPU cycles to respond my little posts is beyond me. And one more proof that I am not flattering you is that you really have a good reason to call me a "criminal hacker" and you did enlighten me about it.
    Now, I must thank you for having taught me one more time an important lesson, and I am sure you did it on purpose. That important lesson is that a good reason is necessary, but not sufficient, to establish the Truth in all its glory.

    I do not contest at all the definition hacker = criminal. That is why I cannot condone the use of "criminal hackers". "Criminal hackers" is confusing and let us, unaware, with a foot in the Well of Lies (giving us the false impression that there are hackers who are not criminal), and worst, is definitively a pleonasm.

    In a moment of aberration, I supposed that you and your fellow editors could be confused. I know it is not possible, and I was wrong. But I must tell you, and this will be my last post on that subject, that any further use of the pleonasm "criminal hackers" will give me at least four convictions :
    • The meaning of "hackers" is not clearly established yet, so the said hackers have a good reason (I am not forgetting the lesson I learned) to contest, whine and complain.
    • There are good hackers.
    • The editors are really confused and do not know what they are talking about.
    • This site is not a mine of truth.

    But... (none / 0) (#39)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sat Apr 13th, 2002 at 02:32:16 AM PST
    You must remember... you can't use "criminal hacker" terms like "CPU cycles" and "pleonasm", you'll just confuse them more.

    Ahem... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Peter Johnson on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 12:57:11 PM PST
    I humbly suggest that we call the criminal hackers "crackers"

    Cracker? Why not honky, peckerwood or anglo?

    It's hard to ignore the irony of a culture dedicated to white male privilege using "cracker" as a derogatory term.

    Your friend,
    Are you adequate?

    Hmm (none / 0) (#25)
    by DG on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 07:24:43 PM PST
    only if your trying to be funny.. otherwise you could tell where it came from namely safecracker, a person who breaks in safes to steal whats in them .. at least thats what i think of when i hear cracker not some stupid slang term for a white guy
    © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

    congratulations (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Peter Johnson on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 10:14:55 PM PST
    Your grasp of philology has left me speechless.
    Are you adequate?

    bleh (none / 0) (#29)
    by DG on Wed Apr 3rd, 2002 at 03:26:01 AM PST
    thanks for your rather worthless snide remark.. I'm sorry that you don't like what i write but you don't have to be an ass about it
    © 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

    Terribly sorry (none / 0) (#31)
    by Peter Johnson on Wed Apr 3rd, 2002 at 02:46:58 PM PST
    I don't suffer fools gladly. I'm trying to be more tolerant of your kind though.

    Are you adequate?

    Well... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sat Apr 13th, 2002 at 02:23:06 AM PST
    First of all, hackers don't use Denial Of Service attacks, script kiddies "crackers" do. The original definition of the hacker came from the sound the keyboard used to make when they typed on it, the soft key did not exist yet. A hacker is an explorer, they may bypass protection, but all we want is knowledge, we do nothing to damage or delete. A cracker is the type of person that takes down systems, deletes data for no reason at all, and changes entire sites content simply to be an ass. Most of the people that post on this site are mis-informed. AMD make the better processer, Linux is the better operating system, and hackers are NOT criminal. These things are FACT! Morons...

    Again? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 09:07:15 AM PST
    " is known for its hard hitting, no holds barred investigative journalism. We believe that our commitment to the truth and willingness to tackle the most controversial issues sets us head and shoulders above the competition."

    I say, yet again, where's the truth? 90% of what you people spout out is nothing but garbage. You've got hear say, you've got bits and pieces from your imagination, but I don't see any real journalism. WHERE'S THE PROOF? DO YOU HAVE ANY? Probably not... But that won't stop you from typing the first frustratingly stupid thign to come to mind. Frustrating because you people defend it as if it's actually true, when anyone with anything resembling intelligence can tell it's a load of crap.

    I say that this quote adequately describes Adequacy.Org.

    "There are few things more dangerous than stupid people in large groups"

    Hilarious (none / 0) (#22)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 04:03:26 PM PST
    Come on, do it again. Them educated know-nothings don't stand a chance against us!

    hackers and crackers (none / 0) (#27)
    by grant7 on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 10:04:54 PM PST
    hackers are by definition attempting to be moral and just... crackers are not by definition either good or evil, just like someone picking a lock may be helping you or may be breaking and entering

    hackers can be social, civil or any number of engineering disciplines... in no way is the term limited to technology, which is itself a very broad category indicative of many subjects, not a single discipline

    there are some hackers which tend toward the "dark side" - I don't want to start a discussion of why the terms "white hat" and "black hat" are inappropriate... they just are - if you have adequate suggestions for replacements, by all means please advise

    Perhaps the term 'dragon' in a martial arts community would be similar to a hacker gone bad, but the intention is not to leave anyone out of the community.

    I thought the stupid articles posted here about hackers being evil and Linux being dangerous were bad jokes. Oh, and this site is most certainly not the most controversial one online. Feel free to disagree, but that's not controversial, that's controversy... which would make this site a contender for the most confused on the 'net.

    Hackers? (none / 0) (#34)
    by Anonymous Reader on Thu Apr 4th, 2002 at 03:38:57 PM PST
    I seem to recall a certain T. Reginald Gibbons saying that a way to spot a hacker was to see how long they spend on computers.

    More than one hour a day and you might, or in Mr. "Gibbons'" mind, you are a hacker.

    I personally spend more than an hour a day on a computer. So do many people. Including the regular posters and editors of Adequacy. If you want to run a professional-looking site with good content, you aren't going to do it on an hour a day. Yet, by Adequacy's accepted definition, 99.9% of the people who go to this site and 99.9% of the people who use computers regularly should be suspected of being 'hackers.'

    I also personally play computer games. In 4 years of playing StarCraft and its Expansion Set Brood War, I have been part of the unwavering community that believes hackers are trash and basically ruin computer gaming and computers in general. It takes the fun out of everything. Wow, you can spend 2 days straight writing a program so you can cheat at a basically worthless, but fun, game.

    I have limited HTML knowledge (i.e. whenever I need to use HTML I open up a guide somewhere so I know what to do.) I know nothing else about computers, except how to run them and how to fix them if there's a minor system error.

    Whether the bad grammar and language in the article was put there by the editors or is the "hacker's" own lack of Grammar, bashing on him is not the answer. Instead of simply standing by your dogma, you should look at both sides and be respective of the opinions and ideas of others, NO matter how ridiculous they seem to you and others.

    The typical response here seems to be barely subtle "you're part of the problem" "you need to be wiped out" "I have noted your IP address and will be contacting the authorities" or the simple "You're a complete fool". If you're going to attack someone, attack the flaws in their ideas and opinions, not them personally.

    Is this your "truth"? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 12:44:04 AM PST
    I tend to be forgiving and open-minded about other people's views and opinions, however, the majority (if not all) of the articles here are written by misinformed, narrow-minded, stubborn people with a distorted view on reality, the inability to think for themselves and severe paranoia. I will not attempt to even list the number of false accusations made by the editor in this article alone, seeing as, they are countless. The smug attitude you and your readers display does not impress the image of maturity upon me, something I would expect from persons possibly in excess of twice my age. Nearly all claims made are poorly founded, if at all, and I doubt your ability of cognitive thought. You are also clearly biased in many ways, something I don't seem to remember being a good part of "investigative journalism" or a "commitment to the truth". In short, you and your readers are pitiful fools, and I mean "pitiful" literaly, I pity you for your lack of knowledge as well as your constant fear of change, as it seems. You are all still quite contemptable in my eyes, however, I would gladly debate about any of the points/counterpoints made in this topic (that is all articles dealing with hackers or computer technology) with anyone willing.

    If you wish to contact me in order to discuss these matters, email me at

    My apologies if I have offended you greatly, but with all your disscussions about "controversial issues" that sets you "head and shoulders above the competition", I should think you would be used to hard-hitting words.

    "He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice." -Albert Einstein


    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to