|
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:59:36 +0200
From: Patrice Riemens <[log in to unmask]>
To: CSL
Subject: 'Hacker Culture' Article
===================
Hi John,
Here is an 'original' contribution to CSL (as opposed to fwds &
announcements), as I hinted I would do.
cheers, patrice & Diiiino!
-------------------------------------
(This is the translation of an article that appeared in the French
Quarterly "Multitudes", Vol 2, No 8, March-April 2002).
(http://www.samizdat.net/multitudes)
I couldn't resist editing & expanding it a bit, and it is still far from
complete and flawless as it stands. Your criticism and feedback is
therefore most welcome and appreciated.
(NB The following text presupposes a certain amount of knowledge and
familiarity with the hacker phenomenon, beyond the usual clichis about
'bad guys tampering with *our* computers'. It also presupposes the
acceptance of the 'hacker spirit' as a habitus and frame of mind, rather
than a particular (ICT-related) activity. Hence no effort is made at
defining or explaining 'hacking'.)
Patrice Riemens
Some thoughts on the idea of 'hacker culture'.
"The Theory of 'Free Software' as the seed of a post-capitalist society
only makes sense where it is understood as the exposure of those very
contradictions of the development of productive forces which are
relevant
to the process of emancipation. It does not, however, make sense as a
discovery of a format for their deployment out of which would
automatically spring forth a better society. And it does not make sense
either as the first stage of a process that one ought to follow as if it
were a blueprint."
(8th thesis of 'Eight Theses on Liberation' - Oekonux mailing list,
2001)
(1)
As the new information and communication technologies (ICT) entered our
lives and became increasingly important in our daily activities, so did
all kinds of knowledge, working habits and ways of thinking that were
previously the exclusive domain of 'geeks' and computer experts. Even
though the vast majority of ICT users are passive consumers, a modicum
of technological know-how is more and more prevalent among
non-professionals,and these days, artists, intellectuals, and political
activists have become fairly visible as informed and even innovative actors
in what has
become known as the public domain in cyberspace.
'Hackers', also often, but inexactly referred to as 'computer pirates'
or other derogatory term, constitute without doubt the first social
movement that was intrinsic to the electronic technology that spawned our
networked society. Hackers, both through their savyness and their actions,
have hit the imagination and have been in the news right from the onset of
the 'information age', being either hyped up as bearers of an independent
and autonomous technological mastery, or demonised as potential
'cyber-terrorists' in the process. More recently they have been hailed in
certain 'alternative' intellectual and cultural circles as a
countervailing power of sorts against the increasingly oppressive
onslaught of both monopolistic ICT corporations and regulation-obsessed
governments and their experts. Transformed into role-models as effective
resistance fighters against 'the system', their garb has been assumed
with various degrees of (de)merit by a plethora of cultural and political
activists associated, closely or loosely, with the 'counter-globalisation
movement'.
Yet, whereas hackers (if we take a broad definition of the term) have
been
pioneering the opening up of electronic channels of communication in the
South, in the North, they initially were held in suspicion by those same
circles. Political militants there hesitated for a long time before
embarking into computers and the new media, which they tended to view as
'capitalist' and hence 'politically incorrect'. By the mid-nineties,
however, 'on-line activism' made rapid progress worldwide as more and
more
groups adopted the new technologies as tools of action and information
exchange. The dwindling costs of equipment and communication, the
(relative) ease of use, the reliability and security, and the many
options
that were offered by ICT were a boon to activists of all possible
denominations. All this was also a very bad surprise to the people at
the
helm of corporate and political power, as they saw a swift, substantial,
and many-pronged breakdown of their stranglehold on communication and
information taking place. For some time, it looked like as if a 'level
playing field' between hitherto dominators and dominated had come within
sight.
The Net, as a result, became not only one of the principal carriers of
political activism, but also one of its major locus and issue. Once they
had overcome their initial shock and surprise, the powers that be were
bound to react forcefully. And they did, beefing up the 'protection' of
so-called intellectual property, erecting ever higher walls around
expert
knowledge and techniques, and unlashing all-round measures of control
and
surveillance on electronic communications. But resistance against this
(re)subjugation of the networks also got organised. Almost by necessity,
more and more activists became conversant with the new technologies,
which
in the given circumstances had to be a 'hands-on' learning process. This
process saw activists turning 'techies' and 'geeks' turning activists
and
has resulted in activist circles (political, but also intellectual,
cultural, and artistic) becoming markedly, sometimes completely,
ITC-driven. However, as we will see, this does not ipso facto make them
hackers.
But it was equally within the domain of ICT itself that the exponential
expansion of both range and carrying capacity of the Internet, as well
of
that of the related technologies, and all this within an increasingly
aggressive commercial environment (2) made experts think again about the
consequences of these developments and even reconsider their methods,
opinion, and for quite a few of them, their position within the hitherto
obtaining order of things. Rejecting the 'new enclosures' that are being
imposed on the dissemination of knowledge and techniques by commercial
and/or state interests, they are exploring new avenues of developing,
spreading, and also rewarding knowledge-building that are not
exploitative
and monopolistic or even solely profit-oriented. Hence the flight taken
by
various software programs, utilities and application modalities that
have
become known under the generic name of "Linux", "Free Software", "Open
Source", and "General Public License" (3).
De prime abord, these developments suggest that given these
technological
settings and socio-economic and political circumstances, convergence was
bound to take place between the actors involved, meaning a merger
between
hackers and (political, cultural etc) activists since they were
spreading
the same message, and operated in parallel ways under similar threats.
Unfortunately, this interpretation is as unwarranted in its optimism as
it
is precipitate in its formulation. Following a line of reasoning aptly
called by the Dutch "the wish is the mother of the idea", such
interpretation is based on the assumed relation, not to say equivalence,
between individuals and groups, and between pursuits, motives, and
methods
whose affinities and linkages, even when viewed under the designation of
'new social movements', are far from evident. In fact the alleged
congruence is inherently unstable since it is contingent, and the
supposedly common positions between those two groups are often absent
altogether, and sometimes even contradictory. Whereas it would be
excessive to portray hackers and activists in terms of "never shall the
twins met", the idea, asserted by many a political activist and certain
'public intellectuals', to the effect that their coalescence is both
natural and inevitable is equally outlandish. Not only does it run
roughshod of the sensibilities of 'authentic' hackers - and it does so
unfortuitously (4) - it also misrepresents reality hence giving rise to
erroneous hypothesizes and unwarranted expectations.
"Hacker culture", a concept one often encounters these days among
networked activists, purports to represent this playful confluence
between
tech wizardry and the moral high ground. Hence, "Open Source" (see note
3
again) is fast becoming an omnibus framework and a near-universal
tool-kit
to tackle very diverse social issues, such as artistic production, law,
epistemology, education, and a few others (5), which are but remotely -
if
at all - related to the field of software research and development, and
the social environments from which it originates. There is little wrong
in
itself to this - imitation being the best of compliments - but for the
fact that it tends to obscure a sticky problem. Between hackers and
activists often looms a wide gap in approach and attitude that is just
too
critical to be easily papered away. And it is precisely this fundamental
difference that is usually being hushed up by the evangelists of what I
call the "hackers-activists bhai-bhai"(6) gospel. A good, if a
contrario,
example of a really occurring non-equivalence between political
activists
applying ICT and hackers is provided by that spurious hybrid known as
"hacktivism" (7).
The main principle at work here is the so-called "Hackers Ethic". And
its
practice is the usual, daily activity of hackers. To put it very simply,
without going deeper into its precise content, the hacker ethic runs
strikingly parallel to the formula "l'art pour l'art' (art for art's
sake). What matters here, is the realisation that, unlike activists,
hackers are focused on the pursuit of knowledge and the exercise of
curiosity for its own sake. Therefore, the obligations that derive from
the hacker ethic are perceived by genuine hackers as sovereign and not
instrumental, and always prevail above other aims or interests, whatever
these may be - and if there are any at all. This consequently makes the
hackers movement to be wary of any particular blueprint of society,
however alternative, and even adverse to embrace particular antagonism
(some hackers, and not minor ones, are for instance loath to demonise
the
Microsoft Corporation). Hence the spread of political and philosophical
opinions harboured by individual hackers, without any loss of their
feeling of identity and belonging to the 'mouvance' at large or even
their
particular group, is truly astonishing, and very unlikely to obtain
within
any other 'new social movement'. In fact, the militant defense of
individual liberties and a penchant for rather unequalitarian economic
convictions one encounters in tandem among a good many hackers has
provided for bafflement among networked political (i.e. left-leaning)
activists coming to be better acquainted with their 'natural allies'.
Yet
it is neither fortuitous nor aberrant that the Californian transmutation
of libertarianism (8) enjoys such widespread support among hackers.
The existence of such 'ideological' positions has its reflection in the
daily and usual activities of hackers, which are generally characterised
by an absence of preconceived ideas and positions. Despite the avowed
'end
of the great narratives', this is not the case with political activists,
since they do have objectives and aims that precede their actions.
Hackers, on the other hand, are usually happy with the 'mere', but
unrestricted, pursuit of knowledge, which reduces their 'political
program', if that can be so called, to the freedom of learning and
enquiry, and thus would seem to fall very much short of demands for
justice, equality, emancipation, empowerment, etc that are formulated by
political militants. Yet they seem to be content with it, and there are
(immo) good arguments to think that such a program, as limited as it may
sound, is essential, not subsequent, to the achievement of the better
society we all aspire too.
This being said, the points of convergence between the activities of
hackers and those of (political) activists are many, and they increase
by
the day. It is becoming more and more evident that both groups face the
same threats, and the same adversaries. As expert technological
knowledge
- especially of ITC - that sits outside the formally structured (and
shielded) domains of corporate or political power gets evermore vilified
in the shape of '(cyber-)terrorist' fantasies, paranoia, and finally,
repression, while at the same time this very expertise is increasingly
being mastered and put to use by the enemies of the neo-liberal 'One
Idea
System' (9), stronger, if circumstantial, links are being welded between
hackers and activists. And these linkages are likely to deepen and
endure
in the same measure as the hostility and risks both groups are likely to
encounter augment, it is worthwhile to analyze what unites as well as
what
separates them.
'Hacktivist' activities (10), well advertised by their authors, but also
gleefully reported in the mainstream media, are illustrative of the gap
that parts activists from hackers. The former usually view in
"hacktivism", which exploits the innumerable glitches and weaknesses of
ICT systems to destabilize the electronic communication supports of
'enemy
organs' (government agencies, big corporations, international financial
institutions, 'fascist' groups, etc.), as a spectacular form of
resistance
and sabotage. The latter (generally) take a much dimmer view,
considering
these activities as ineffective and futile, and moreover, in most cases,
technically inept as well(11). Such activities (or antics) endanger the
integrity of the network which hackers consider to be theirs also.
"Denial of Service" attacks, irrespective of aims and targets, amount in
their eyes to attacks on the freedom of expression, which they seem to
respect in a much more principled manner than most political activists.
The truth is, that by abetting "hacktivism", activists implicitly admit
that the net has become a mere corporate carrier, to which they have
only
a subordinate, almost clandestine, access, as opposed to be stakeholders
in, and thus sharing responsibility for it. This constitutes their
fundamental divergence with hackers, and it is not easily remediable.
Political activists are also, almost by definition, inclined to seek
maximum media exposure for their ideas and actions. Their activities,
therefore, tend to be public in all the acceptations of the term. The
range of issues that are covered by their ideals, and the variety of
means
and methods to achieve the same make they need some form of
organisation,
which is often complex, because of and not despite the fact they strive
for distribution and horizontality. The result is that even in the most
alternative of circles, an apparatus and leaders appear, whose very
informality obscures rather than prevent hierarchies from arising. This
does not suit well the practice and the ethics of hackers, which Pekka
Himanen has described as 'monastic'. The habitus may be monastic, the
behaviour of hackers may however, perhaps be more suitably paralleled
with
the 'Slashta', the Polish gentry (12). There too, we see a desire to
between equals, that is equals recognised as such beforehand, and hence
also elitist. Political activists on the other hand are much more
opportunistic when it comes to alliances and associations they engage
in.
So does the idea of "hacker culture" represent a effective way to
describe
and define certain current modes of political activism, especially when
those do have a large ICT component? In many instances where the term is
being used, to the point of having become one of the 'buzz-word du
jour',
I do not believe so. In many cases, it is the romantic appeal of what is
perceived as hacker power and prowess that leads to a superficial
adoption
of the 'hacker attitude' moniker by the cultural and political
activists,
but not of its underlying methods and values. That does not mean that
there exists an absolute incompatibility between those two groups, and
there are fortunately cases suggesting the existence of a continuum
(13).
But it should caution against a facile (and trendy) assumption of an
equivalence, and may be against the confusion-inducing use of the term
'hacker culture' itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Notes
(1) Full text (in German) at:
http://www.oekonux.de/liste/archive/msg04304.html
(2) The current 'communis opinio' about the Internet being an inherently
business- (if not profit- ;-) driven environment is quite surprising
when
one realises that it was opened only in 1992 to commercial activities,
and
that the corporate world only took very slowly to it - before
attempting
to take it over. This lag period in the mid-nineties has been described
by
Geert Lovink (a prominent media theorist and 'public intellectual' in
the
'alternative' networked culture) as "The Short Summer of the Internet".
(cf. his ineterview with Kodwo Eshun in Telepolis:
http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/co/6902/1.html and the manifesto
'Closed Networks in an Open Society':
http://world-information.org/wio/news/992003309/992016314)
(3) Despite marked, sometimes principled differences of meaning, as
between 'Free Software' and 'Open Source', these terms have been
jumbled
together here since they tend to function as one cultural phenomenon, at
least within the ambit of this paper.
On the difference between FS and OS, see: "Why 'Free Software' is better
than 'Open Source'":
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
(4) In the 'everybody is equal, but some people are more equal than
others' world of networked political activism, tension is often rife
between the 'pronouncement people' (Sheri Herndon, Indymedia-Seattle)
and
those who are taking the grunge-tasks among themselves, especially the
'techies'. Just once too often I witnessed that the devolution of the
latter to the status of 'coolies' is something of a default mode among
the
former. This would be unthinkable among true hackers.
(5) Even money has now been theorized as a potential candidate for
'open-sourceness'. More remarkably, the purely legal - if not yet tested
in courts - concept of General Public Licence has given rise to a
project
of economic-political renewal, the "GPL Society".
(check out an interview of Stefen Merten, founder of Oekonux.de, with
Joanne Richardson on (a.o.):
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-ro-0111/msg00068.htm
l)
(6) Phrased after the celebrated slogan "Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai" ('India
and China are Brothers') mouthed by Chinese Foreign Affairs supremo Xhou
Enlai (Chou-En-Lai) and Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru during
their meeting in 1953. Nine years later, both countries were at war.
(7) The term 'hacktivism' (sometimes also spelled 'hactivism') was
originally coined by the Boston-based hackers group 'Cult of the Dead
Cow"
(http://www.cultdeadcow.com)
whose tag-line read "We put the hack in activism". It was all about
using
ICT skills to thwart attacks on the liberties by powerful instances and
institutions, and if possible, to further those where they had been
curtailed, eg in undemocratically governed societies. The group had to
devote quite some efforts in defending itself of guilt by association
with
respect to latter-days manifestations of 'hacktivism', primarily in the
form of 'Distributed Denial of Services' (DoDS) attacks. (The original
rejoinder by 'Foreign Affairs Minister' 'Oxblood Ruffin' is gone now,
but
a Salon.com article touching on that subject ("To heck with hactivism")
is on: http://salon.com/tech/feature/2000/07/20/hacktivism/print.html)
(NB: yeah, the URL is correct ... proves the confusion ;-)
(8) On the meritocratic & raw capitalistic beliefs espoused by some,
especially North American, geeks, and proselytised, almost Pravda-style,
by the San Francisco magazine 'WIRED', see Richard Barbrook and Andy
Cameron, 'The Californian Ideology', on:
http://cci.wmin.ac.uk/HRC/ci/calif5.html . The merriest instance of a
hacker and 'Open Source' advocate nurturing totally 'incorrect' habits
is
Eric S. Raymond's (of "Cathedral and Bazar" fame) celebration of
fire-arms.
(9) "La pensie unique" was a term coined by Le Monde Diplomatique's
chief
editor Ignacio Ramonet to describe the neo-liberal 'TINA' (there is no
alternative) gospel and the mechanisms of its dissemination by the
corporate media. Original text at:
http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1995/01/RAMONET/1144 . English
translation (by yrs truly) at
http://www.ctheory.net/text_file.asp?pick=145
(10) I am mostly referring here to the handywork of three groups:
Ricardo
Dominguez's (et all.) 'Electronic Civil Disobedience'
(http://www.thing.net/~rdom/ecd/ecd.html), the London-based
"Electrohippies" around Paul Mobbs
(http://fraw.org.uk/ehippies/index.shtml) , and also, though in lesser
measure, "RTMark" (http://www.rtmark.com) since these groups are very
keen
to be seen in association with the networked activist 'establishment'
(however alternative...), e.g. The Zapatista movement, Indymedia, the
nettime/Next Five Minutes/thing.net/etc. constellation within the
'Internet Galaxy'. I leave outside, for convenience sake, the 'exploits'
perpetrated by various bands of 'script kiddies' whose political locus
standi appears to boil down, when asked about the same, to "Huh?"...
(entrenched opinions disclosure notice: I have *some* sympathy for
RTMark
(see especially: http://theyesmen.org), none at all for the ECD and the
Electrohippies.)
(11) The 'Hands-on Imperative', and the absolute injunction to respect
technical knowledge (and know-how in general), both essential elements
of
true 'hacker culture' make hackers feel extremely uncomfortable with the
instrumentalist approach displayed by "hacktivists" which results, in
most
case, in technical bungling.
(12) 'Athenian democracy', or 'Jeffersonian model' also spring to mind.
The boisterousness and anarchism of the 17th Century Slashta I thought
out
of personal experience (both on-line and 'IRL') more appropriate a
comparaison. For Pekka Himanen's "Hacker Ethic and the spirit of the
New
Economy" (2001, 2002) see http://www.hackersethic.org
(13) Perhaps the best instance at the moment is the tech community that
supports the Indymedia 'process'. It pairs a remarkable degree of
expertise to an extremely open and modest, 'serve the people'-type of
operation. Check out their announce & discussion archives at:
http://tech.indymedia.org/ . A very readable collection (pace the
grammar
& typos ;-) of true 'hackers spirit' reflections within the realm of
activism is provided by Ewan Henshaw-Platt (Indymedia-tech) on his own
site: http://www.anarchogeek.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Afterword:
It should be clear by now that the term 'hacker culture' as referred to
in
this text applies to its (re-)interpretation within a
well-circumscribed,
if fairly broad, social and cultural environment, that of 'alternative'
activism - ranging from 'arty-farty' cultural circles to non- or
anti-academic intellectuals, and the counter-globalisation 'movement of
movements' in general. It does not address another avatar of the concept
of 'hacker culture' that has recently entered the discussion in circles
concerned with (higher) education where it appears to be thought of as
possible and promising pedagogic objective. Suffice to say here that I
am
also extremely skeptical of this approach (as advocated by Pekka Himanen
and possibly Manuel Castells). One is not borne a hacker, and becoming
one
is surely a long process of learning and determination. But it is a
process of *self* learning that cannot be taught by others - except by
example. And it surely cannot be taught (unless, maybe, by default) as a
curriculum discipline by established educational institutions.
And definitive last word: turns now out that McKenzie Wark is
postulating
the existence of a 'hacker class'... Aaaargh... ;-)
(review of Hardt's & Negri's 'Empire' in nettime, May 29.
(http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00207.htm
l)
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
