On Mar 13, 2014, at 12:46 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:45 AM, James R Cutler <james.cutler@consultant.com> wrote:
And Bill documents yet another redefinition. Prior to that time, at MIT a "hacker" produced a novel variation of technology using it in ways not previously envisioned but not necessarily unlawful.
Mating two different generations of telephone keysets or reducing a complex rack mount filter to a single small circuit board with an FET or two are just a couple of examples. One was just a "hack", the other an "elegant hack". We just called
Hi James,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the time "hacker" emerged as a word distinct from "hack" it already carried implications of mischief and disregard for the rules in addition to the original implication of creatively solving a technical challenge. Is that mistaken?
Regards, Bill Herrin
Bill, Mistaken? Yes. As of early 1960’s - See history of WTBS, Ralph Zaorski, Dick Gruen, Alan Kent, and many others - The then current usage of “hacker” was simply one who produced a “hack” - an unusual or unexpected design or configuration or action which either did the same old thing done more simply/elegantly or which did something new or unexpected altogether. Putting an Western Electric power plant on an Automatic Electric step-by-step for the East Campus telephone switch was one of my “hacks”. James R. Cutler - james.cutler@consultant.com PGP keys at http://pgp.mit.edu