Helpful Chart Explains The Difference Between "good" Hacking And "bad" Hacking

Hacking is a noble pursuit — it's what tinkerers do to create cool new machines and innovate. But the media is obsessed with using the word "hacker" interchangeably with "criminal." That's why IEEE Spectrum magazine has created this helpful chart (click to enlarge), in which they try to separate out the good hacks from the bad. See if you can guess which ones are good and which are bad . . . answers are on the interactive chart at IEEE, where you can check the boxes to show only good hacks, bad ones, or neutral.

I don't think LulzSec and Anonymous belong entirely in the bad category, but I guess there's no place on this chart for chaotic neutral.

Find out which hacks are good and bad via the chart on IEEE Spectrum


    Gotta love em dissing Lulzsec

      And here was I thinking lulz were responsible for the Sony data breach...

        I think they're keeping that seperate from Lulzsec because most of what they did after that was simple DDOS stuff.

        I thought lulz did a separate hack, after PSN came back online?

      I think I read that graph differently with lulzsec still being mid-high impact despite their methods.

    Except those are all bad hacks, with exception to like three. It's a pretty poor example, despite it's noble intention.

    A better chart would include non-computer hacks, like the original remote train track switcher, immunisation research, traffic light planning, international timetable plannings, and well, anything that gets a system to work in a previously unintentional way(such as, say, using a phone line to transmit an electrical signal at high rates that can be interpreted by electronic devices to transport data across oceans).

    It saddens me that people don't understand that almost all of modern technology has been developed with the hacker mentality. Though, these are the people who decide what "popular" music is, and look where that is.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now