Except all this has in common with the original post is the word 'hack'. Actually what you've posted is quite clearly against what the original post is about.
> There is another group of people who loudly call themselves hackers, but aren't. These are people (mainly adolescent males) who get a kick out of breaking into computers and phreaking the phone system. Real hackers call these people ‘crackers’ and want nothing to do with them. Real hackers mostly think crackers are lazy, irresponsible, and not very bright, and object that being able to break security doesn't make you a hacker any more than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer. Unfortunately, many journalists and writers have been fooled into using the word ‘hacker’ to describe crackers; this irritates real hackers no end.
I suspect this is a cultural thing. Here in Germany, most journalists and writers use the term "hacker" for both, the constructive and destructive parts. For example, the Chaos Communication Congress is described by media as "hacker congress" even though it has a wide scope where presentations about breaking into systems are just a minor part of it.
oh, for sure. Hacker I think has a much more broad meaning than JUST security. I don't think security should be excluded from it though as the How to be a Hacker article promotes.
> There is another group of people who loudly call themselves hackers, but aren't. These are people (mainly adolescent males) who get a kick out of breaking into computers and phreaking the phone system. Real hackers call these people ‘crackers’ and want nothing to do with them. Real hackers mostly think crackers are lazy, irresponsible, and not very bright, and object that being able to break security doesn't make you a hacker any more than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer. Unfortunately, many journalists and writers have been fooled into using the word ‘hacker’ to describe crackers; this irritates real hackers no end.