Hacking is Good For Everyone

Please vote on the poll !

Published on March 11, 2004 By PoetPhilosopher In Personal Computing

I have come to the conclusion that I believe hacking is not only moral, but good for the consumer.

Consider the security attacks on Microsoft products over the last year - and look how they have improved their product as a result with numerous updates.

Sure there is the potential for damage, but usually it is minor, and in the end, we all benefit from more robust software. So I look up to hackers. In a way they are doing "free Quality Assurance" - and who could argue with that?

What do you think ??

Please take the following poll:

If you think hacking is good, click here.

If you think hacking is bad, click here.

Thanks for your feedback and THANKS FOR VOTING.

Comments

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 11, 2004

Fun huh ?

KarmaGirl

on Mar 11, 2004

LOL, how come one redirects to a beenie baby site?

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 11, 2004

Because you clicked the wrong one

what would I be without a twisted sense of humor.

Dynosoar

on Mar 11, 2004

I think you're sick ( in a twisted kinda strange, yet humorous way )

mittens

on Mar 11, 2004

Hacking in no way, shape or form is "moral." It's not exactly "Quality Assurance" either, though I see where you could get that.

While hackers do expose potential holes in our software, do keep in mind that these same hackers are the guys that spread viruses around the internet, causing your favorite websites to slow down immensely, or some of your favorite files to get corrupted on your personal machine. You may disagree with that, but viruses are a result of security holes, and who do you think exposes these holes?

I, personally, would be a much happier person had I not had to reinstall Windows on my friends' computers a few times every week over the last month because they, somehow, got a virus on their systems. Not to mention that during the MSBlast phase during the summer of last year, I lost a significant amount of my personal photos/e-mails that I kept on my system (even my primary back-up drive somehow got corrupted).

Viruses == hackers == suck

mittens

on Mar 11, 2004

That said, the Beanie Baby redirect was funny as hell.

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 11, 2004

>>> "viruses are a result of security holes, and who do you think exposes these holes?"

I think hackers expose them, that is why it is moral. In the end, we all benefit. Of course we must be vigilant of viruses, but would you rather we simply rely on "benevolent corporations" such as Microsoft to code their software well.

I mean... looking back how would you feel about someone in 2000 exposing the lack of security on airplanes ?? Might have been nice huh ?

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 11, 2004

Oh and PS.. Assignment is not Commutative.

One nerd joke deserves another!

hahah

messybuu

on Mar 11, 2004

I mean... looking back how would you feel about someone in 2000 exposing the lack of security on airplanes ?? Might have been nice huh ?

That's why I felt 9/11 wasn't that bad. At least now they can plug a major whole in airplane security.

BulbousHead

on Mar 11, 2004

I think hackers expose them, that is why it is moral.

This logic is somewhat circular. "Hackers detect the weakness, so the software companies can fix them, so the consumer will be protected...from attacks by hackers." It's like saying that someone breaking into your house is doing you a favor because you know what your house's vulnerabilities are now.

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 12, 2004

That's why I felt 9/11 wasn't that bad. At least now they can plug a major whole [sic] in airplane security.

But not the whole hole eh ?

Yep Messy Buu - AND.. We get the bonus of being able to legitimately reign in two rougue nations (and counting... fingers crossed).

But.. I was thinking more along the lines of a Timothy McVeigh.

PoetPhilosopher

on Mar 12, 2004

BulbousHead.

It is somewhat circular, but... I am less concerned about deterring the hackers themselves, whose actions are somewhat "harmless" (as in my example here), but rather - serious things like - fraud, identity theft, theft of intellectual property, government "secrets", etc. So... that the consumer is protected from the hackers is a bonus, that they are better protected from identity theft, is quite useful.

An analogy in meatspace - especially in crime - is sketchy. In bitspace you have a lot of unique nuances - freely replicable code for one. A stretch might be:

Pickpockets are useful, in that they encourage a local government to increase police enforcement. Police enforcement in and of itself is useful, but the effect of "petty crime" is beneficial in that it also improves policing methods - survelliance, fingerprinting, DNA, laws and courts. And in the end - this deters things like rape and murder. Which as Martha says, is a "good thing"

Anecdotally - you might think of the back-water town in Texas which has never had any significant crime other than the kids getting ahold of a six pack, where suddenly a murder occurs, and the local authorities are completely incapable of solving the crime (fumbling over the crime scene, losing evidence, etc).

I admit this is all a stretch - but I'm trying to play with your analogy.

BulbousHead

on Mar 12, 2004

I am less concerned about deterring the hackers themselves, whose actions are somewhat "harmless" (as in my example here)

Okay, but then you're using a rather limited definition of "hacker" here, such that "hacker" means "person who breaks into your computer system but doesn't really do anything THAT bad."

Melchiah

on May 12, 2004

Okay, I know this is an old post...but I just found it and have something to ad.

Yes, I agree that hackers can be a negative thing because some spread viruses, hijack your system etc. Those particular breed of hackers should be punished for what they do. That being said, I also agree that hackers offer a useful service in showing us where our software has holes. Take the recent hacker who was featured on TechTV's "The Screensavers" (I can't remember his name...Lamos or something like that...).

What he did was hack into any and every high profile company he could, root around in their system and take some private information to prove he'd been there. He would then call the company and tell them what he did, how he did it, and offer his proof. He didn't spread viruses, give away the private information he acquired, or interrupt their operations. I think they owed him for what he did because were it not for him bringing these threats to their attention, a "not so moral" hacker could have just as easily hacked their system and taken your, or my, bank account/credit card information. Unfortunately for him, the companies weren't thankful for his services. Instead they were outraged, pressed charges and he was sentenced to prison/jail. Sad.

As for people who get viruses themselves, or get stuck helping those who get them; that could be solved with education about the issue. Most of the viruses people get are delivered to them in the form of email attachments and people blindly open these attachments, oh look...a lovely infection for you. If people would read about how viruses are spread they might notice that their rate of infection significantly drops. Plain and simple, DO NOT open an attachment or file if it came from someone you do not know. In addition to that run a good virus scanner and contact your ISP about filtering out viruses on their side of the connection if they aren't doing it already.

I have followed those simple guidelines and have never been infected with a virus and I'm online every single day.

My 52 cents, because sometimes 2 cents just isn't enough.
~Melchiah

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!