[Hpr] Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 18

Patrick Dailey pdailey03 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 20 12:11:58 PDT 2013


Good stuff, guys.
On Mar 20, 2013 3:00 PM, <hpr-request at hackerpublicradio.org> wrote:

> Send Hpr mailing list submissions to
>         hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         hpr-request at hackerpublicradio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         hpr-owner at hackerpublicradio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Hpr digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 16 (Matthew K)
>    2. Re: Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17 (lostnbronx)
>    3. Re: Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17 (Dude-man from Dudmanovi.cz)
>    4. Re: Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17 (Matthew K)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matthew K <littlecodemonkey at gmail.com>
> To: hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:44:20 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Hpr] Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 16
> Make this a Mumble chat and I'd like to join in on the round table.
>
> Matt
>
> On 03/20/2013 04:23 AM, Patrick Dailey wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to see epicanus and lostnbronx collaborate and do a podcast
> > episode on the topic of "what is a hacker?"
> >
> > If only there were a network to air such a show on.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: lostnbronx <lostnbronx at gmail.com>
> To: hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:31:07 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Hpr] Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17
> pokey wrote:
>
> > I'd like to see epicanus and lostnbronx collaborate and do a podcast
> > episode on the topic of "what is a hacker?"
>
> Personally, I don't care how a person self-identifies.  I have no idea
> what a "real" hacker is, and I don't care to define it.  The act of
> labeling is, by its very nature, destructive, because it MUST exclude
> all those things not perceived as being part of the group.  Amazing
> stuff gets lost this way, no matter how inclusive a group wishes to
> be.
>
> There are almost certainly listeners of HPR (likely a lot of them) who
> never contribute because they do not think they have anything
> interesting to say.  Certainly, the people on this list will
> understand how tragic that is, but some listeners simply don't see
> themselves as "hackers", and therefore think their own experiences and
> interests don't count as potential HPR content.  Never mind the fact
> that they are fans of the show, which means THEY have an interest in
> this stuff -- somehow they're still on the outside, looking in.  Is
> this a function of the labels we use?  Is it the nature of content
> consumption?  Is it simply human nature?
>
> Qualifying what a "hacker" is...well, that's a VERY "hacky" thing to
> do, actually, and, on the one hand, I really applaud the effort.  On
> the other, all labels come at a cost.  The cost of exclusion --
> unintentional and undesired though it is -- will always be IMPOSSIBLE
> to assess, since we will never know who we lost, and who we could have
> heard from, save for their fear of rejection or the self-censoring
> aspect of labeled expression.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Dude-man from Dudmanovi.cz" <hpr at dudmanovi.cz>
> To: hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 19:00:12 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Hpr] Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17
> Here here, spot on :)
> On 03/20/13 18:31, lostnbronx wrote:
>
>> pokey wrote:
>>
>>  I'd like to see epicanus and lostnbronx collaborate and do a podcast
>>> episode on the topic of "what is a hacker?"
>>>
>> Personally, I don't care how a person self-identifies.  I have no idea
>> what a "real" hacker is, and I don't care to define it.  The act of
>> labeling is, by its very nature, destructive, because it MUST exclude
>> all those things not perceived as being part of the group.  Amazing
>> stuff gets lost this way, no matter how inclusive a group wishes to
>> be.
>>
>> There are almost certainly listeners of HPR (likely a lot of them) who
>> never contribute because they do not think they have anything
>> interesting to say.  Certainly, the people on this list will
>> understand how tragic that is, but some listeners simply don't see
>> themselves as "hackers", and therefore think their own experiences and
>> interests don't count as potential HPR content.  Never mind the fact
>> that they are fans of the show, which means THEY have an interest in
>> this stuff -- somehow they're still on the outside, looking in.  Is
>> this a function of the labels we use?  Is it the nature of content
>> consumption?  Is it simply human nature?
>>
>> Qualifying what a "hacker" is...well, that's a VERY "hacky" thing to
>> do, actually, and, on the one hand, I really applaud the effort.  On
>> the other, all labels come at a cost.  The cost of exclusion --
>> unintentional and undesired though it is -- will always be IMPOSSIBLE
>> to assess, since we will never know who we lost, and who we could have
>> heard from, save for their fear of rejection or the self-censoring
>> aspect of labeled expression.
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Hpr mailing list
>> Hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
>> http://hackerpublicradio.org/**mailman/listinfo/hpr_**
>> hackerpublicradio.org<http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matthew K <littlecodemonkey at gmail.com>
> To: hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:27:15 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Hpr] Hpr Digest, Vol 54, Issue 17
> Labels work for the most part though. We attempt to classify every
> living thing on this earth into a kingdom, phylum, class, order, family,
> genius, and species. We attempt classify every type of astral body,
> chemical element, state of matter, etc. Not any of them fit everything
> exactly, but for the most part the labels work. I think it's silly to
> think as a society we can't classify a hacker.
>
> Any group, when specialized enough tries to break out of the labels
> placed on it. It often happens when a smaller group within the label
> doesn't want to be grouped with another smaller group. It doesn't really
> mean much though. I'm sure the nature loving hippe wiccans do not want
> to be grouped with goat slaughtering satanists, but they are with the
> label of pagan. I'm sure that white collar criminals don't want to be
> grouped with murderers and rapists, but they are with the label of
> felon. As such makers, hobbists, and engineers are grouped with a darker
> group of illicit criminals into the label hackers.
>
> I believe a hacker is someone who has an insatable thirst for knowledge
> on a detailed subject, the desire to figure out how certain things work,
> and the need to create or modify these things in new or unique ways.
>
> It is why I wouldn't consider the script kiddie a hacker, but although
> while I may not agree with what they do, I would consider some black
> hats hackers. As long as they are doing something interesting, unique,
> new, and messing with things I would consider them hackers. Machinists,
> woodworkers, boatbuilders are not necessarily hackers, but they could
> be. It depends on how they do what they do. To me, being a hacker is a
> state of mind; it is a mentality.
>
>
> Matt
>
>
> On 03/20/2013 11:31 AM, lostnbronx wrote:
> > Personally, I don't care how a person self-identifies.  I have no idea
> > what a "real" hacker is, and I don't care to define it.  The act of
> > labeling is, by its very nature, destructive, because it MUST exclude
> > all those things not perceived as being part of the group.  Amazing
> > stuff gets lost this way, no matter how inclusive a group wishes to
> > be.
> >
> > There are almost certainly listeners of HPR (likely a lot of them) who
> > never contribute because they do not think they have anything
> > interesting to say.  Certainly, the people on this list will
> > understand how tragic that is, but some listeners simply don't see
> > themselves as "hackers", and therefore think their own experiences and
> > interests don't count as potential HPR content.  Never mind the fact
> > that they are fans of the show, which means THEY have an interest in
> > this stuff -- somehow they're still on the outside, looking in.  Is
> > this a function of the labels we use?  Is it the nature of content
> > consumption?  Is it simply human nature?
> >
> > Qualifying what a "hacker" is...well, that's a VERY "hacky" thing to
> > do, actually, and, on the one hand, I really applaud the effort.  On
> > the other, all labels come at a cost.  The cost of exclusion --
> > unintentional and undesired though it is -- will always be IMPOSSIBLE
> > to assess, since we will never know who we lost, and who we could have
> > heard from, save for their fear of rejection or the self-censoring
> > aspect of labeled expression.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Hpr mailing list
> > Hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> > http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hpr mailing list
> Hpr at hackerpublicradio.org
> http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hackerpublicradio.org/pipermail/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org/attachments/20130320/de8df0b8/attachment-0006.html>


More information about the Hpr mailing list