Every little computer nerd wants to become cool enough to boast the label “hacker,” before they even know what the word means. Everyone who’s ever chased the title has a different definition, a slight difference in the talent and deeds they think it entails, but the definition is always a pure distillation of what someone wants out of computers. In his book “Hackers, Heroes of the Computer Revolution” Steven Levy outlines his ideals of the “True Hacker” in his Hacker Ethos:

1. Access to Computers – and anything which might teach you something about the way the world works- should be unlimited and total. Always Yeild to the Hands-On Imperative!
2. All Information should be free
3. Mistrust Authority – Promote Decentralization
4. Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position
5. You can create art and beauty on a computer
6. Computers can change your life for the better

To be honest, I love this list. It exemplifies everything I’ve ever loved about using computers, the freedom, the collective experience, the creative power. But this is just a list of ideals. My issue with Levy’s definition of True Hacker is discordant with the example he presents: that of the MIT Tech Model Railroad Club (TMRC). While the TMRC hackers come close, they fight for machine access against all institution, let in people of (almost) all walks, and are some of the first to explore truly creative applications of the massive mathematical marvels they programmed, but they don’t quite check every item on the list, and the MIT hackers add a few unsavory ones of their own.

The MIT Hacking circle as portrayed in the book aren’t really strong examples of points 2 or 6.

2. All information should be free.

To be fair, Levy’s presentation of the TMRC doesn’t demonstrate any cases in which a hacker withheld information from others, there is definitely no evidence of hackers being forthcoming with the knowledge they gained. Everyone in Hacker Culture was expected to figure things out themselves. While previous work was available to everyone for editing, hackers invented the label “loser” to assign to people who didn’t succeed (which, again, they had to on their own).

Hackers are adept at taking information from the corporate overlords who lock it behind closed doors, but they don’t pass the information on to anyone who isn’t a member of the hacker personality cult. Bobby Kotok trolls his friends with an “exotic” phone number that he pranks them into believing is the Pentagon.

6. Computers can change your life for the better.

My personal opinions on this statement aside, Levy doesn’t really back this up. While most of the projects undertaken do advance computing as a field, I wouldn’t say any of this work is “life-changing.” The closest these systems come is some work within the field of AI. While it would be hypocritical of me to criticize people for pursuing problems that are interesting or advancing computers for their own sake, it is weird for Levy to present the paragons of his hacker ethos without a single example of computers changing anyone’s life for the better.

Proposed rule 7: Non-hackers have no rights

It seems everyone who opposes the hackers is fair game for pranks and vengeance of varying degrees. Some poor member of the IBM priesthood was convinced the computer had exploded on his watch, Bill Bennett’s workshop became the hacker’s personal toolbox, and not every tool returned in one piece. But opposing the Hackers wasn’t necessary to earn punishment. It seems the MIT hacker lifestyle did damage to anyone who committed the crime of being ignorant of “the system,” the best example being how Kotok pranked his friends with a faked “exotic” telephone number.

I love Levy’s Hacker Ethos, I prize every one of those ideals and I think a True Hacker would as well, but the story Levy tells is not the story of the Hacker Ethos at work, but a perverse version.