<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hacking is not a Dirty Word</title>
	<atom:link href="http://neverletdown.net/2010/07/hacking-is-not-a-dirty-word/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://neverletdown.net/2010/07/hacking-is-not-a-dirty-word/</link>
	<description>by Michael Keeling</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 18:51:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Keeling</title>
		<link>http://neverletdown.net/2010/07/hacking-is-not-a-dirty-word/#comment-437</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Keeling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:41:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neverletdown.net/?p=358#comment-437</guid>
		<description>In my mind, for a long time anyway, there is a very strong, negative connotation to &quot;hacking&quot; something.  The idea of a &quot;hack&quot; is probably my biggest influencer, someone who consistently creates and sells intentionally low quality content, a person who whores out their talents for cold hard cash at the sacrifice of professional integrity.  This is further backed by the idea of a &quot;quick and dirty hack&quot; created in code.  This very statement bluntly acknowledges that you are not spending the time to do it right and the result will soil the code base.  Only a hack would do such a thing, right?

Aaron, I think you&#039;ve captured the essence of what I was struggling with quite well in your comment.  Just like the term &quot;software engineering,&quot; the definition for &quot;hacking&quot; changes based on context and might mean different things to different people at different times.  The main point is that it&#039;s wrong to think of &quot;hacking&quot; and &quot;hacks&quot; as being the same thing.

As an engineer, the romanticized hacker persona, the person who goes home one weekend and cranks out a pile of amazing code that &quot;just works&quot; but nobody understands, makes me nervous.  But once I realized there are guard rails in place that help prevent this sort of unpredictable, super human behavior (and actually helps to make predictable, super human teams) - one example coming from agile software development processes - hacking becomes something far more positive.

Now, hacking to me is all about action and responsibility.  It doesn&#039;t really matter what context you put it in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In my mind, for a long time anyway, there is a very strong, negative connotation to &#8220;hacking&#8221; something.  The idea of a &#8220;hack&#8221; is probably my biggest influencer, someone who consistently creates and sells intentionally low quality content, a person who whores out their talents for cold hard cash at the sacrifice of professional integrity.  This is further backed by the idea of a &#8220;quick and dirty hack&#8221; created in code.  This very statement bluntly acknowledges that you are not spending the time to do it right and the result will soil the code base.  Only a hack would do such a thing, right?</p>
<p>Aaron, I think you&#8217;ve captured the essence of what I was struggling with quite well in your comment.  Just like the term &#8220;software engineering,&#8221; the definition for &#8220;hacking&#8221; changes based on context and might mean different things to different people at different times.  The main point is that it&#8217;s wrong to think of &#8220;hacking&#8221; and &#8220;hacks&#8221; as being the same thing.</p>
<p>As an engineer, the romanticized hacker persona, the person who goes home one weekend and cranks out a pile of amazing code that &#8220;just works&#8221; but nobody understands, makes me nervous.  But once I realized there are guard rails in place that help prevent this sort of unpredictable, super human behavior (and actually helps to make predictable, super human teams) &#8211; one example coming from agile software development processes &#8211; hacking becomes something far more positive.</p>
<p>Now, hacking to me is all about action and responsibility.  It doesn&#8217;t really matter what context you put it in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://neverletdown.net/2010/07/hacking-is-not-a-dirty-word/#comment-436</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 17:57:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neverletdown.net/?p=358#comment-436</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m still not sure what you mean by &quot;hacking&quot; - before or after. Is hacking exploration/experimentation? Or programming quickly? Is it agile software development?

&quot;Hacking&quot; is, to me, a very ambiguous term. It means nothing until whoever says it gives some context or meaning. &quot;I just hacked this together really quick&quot; &quot;He&#039;s hacking my computer&quot; &quot;He&#039;s a great hacker&quot; &quot;Open source needs more hackers&quot;

I think, at the broadest level, hacking means using technology to do something with surprising ease. Hackers - as in Hackers and Painters - have this amazing ability to express themselves in code - it just flows and it seems very easy. Hacking - as in script-kiddie, black-hat/white-hat - is about bypassing cyber-security barriers with surprising ease. Hacking - as in life hacking, brain hacks - is using tricks or technology to make self-improvement, or productivity, or learning easy. Hacking - as in hacking it together, quick and dirty - is sacrificing quality (readability, cohesion, tests, edge cases, ux...) to make writing a program surprisingly easy.

Old-school style hackers are a little of the first and last definition. They are very productive and know a ton about a system, but also have a willingness to write some code that nobody else will be able to follow, but which takes advantage of this and that side-effect to Just Work. Hacking on an open source project just means programming; the etymology comes from open source&#039;s past and it appeals to people enough that it hasn&#039;t gone away.

I guess I would say that &quot;hacking&quot; /is/ a dirty word. Not because &quot;hacking&quot; is bad - each definition certainly has a time when it is useful - but because &quot;hacking&quot; has so many different meanings that it&#039;s not clear what you&#039;re trying to say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m still not sure what you mean by &#8220;hacking&#8221; &#8211; before or after. Is hacking exploration/experimentation? Or programming quickly? Is it agile software development?</p>
<p>&#8220;Hacking&#8221; is, to me, a very ambiguous term. It means nothing until whoever says it gives some context or meaning. &#8220;I just hacked this together really quick&#8221; &#8220;He&#8217;s hacking my computer&#8221; &#8220;He&#8217;s a great hacker&#8221; &#8220;Open source needs more hackers&#8221;</p>
<p>I think, at the broadest level, hacking means using technology to do something with surprising ease. Hackers &#8211; as in Hackers and Painters &#8211; have this amazing ability to express themselves in code &#8211; it just flows and it seems very easy. Hacking &#8211; as in script-kiddie, black-hat/white-hat &#8211; is about bypassing cyber-security barriers with surprising ease. Hacking &#8211; as in life hacking, brain hacks &#8211; is using tricks or technology to make self-improvement, or productivity, or learning easy. Hacking &#8211; as in hacking it together, quick and dirty &#8211; is sacrificing quality (readability, cohesion, tests, edge cases, ux&#8230;) to make writing a program surprisingly easy.</p>
<p>Old-school style hackers are a little of the first and last definition. They are very productive and know a ton about a system, but also have a willingness to write some code that nobody else will be able to follow, but which takes advantage of this and that side-effect to Just Work. Hacking on an open source project just means programming; the etymology comes from open source&#8217;s past and it appeals to people enough that it hasn&#8217;t gone away.</p>
<p>I guess I would say that &#8220;hacking&#8221; /is/ a dirty word. Not because &#8220;hacking&#8221; is bad &#8211; each definition certainly has a time when it is useful &#8211; but because &#8220;hacking&#8221; has so many different meanings that it&#8217;s not clear what you&#8217;re trying to say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

