A couple of weeks ago there was a post here about the difference between crackers and hackers, which prompted a little debate. I found it interesting because of the way in which the term "hacker" has been distorted over the years. Richard Stallman (2002), a self-confessed hacker described the practise as

It is hard to write a simple definition of something as varied as hacking, but I think what these activities have in common is playfulness, cleverness, and exploration. Thus, hacking means exploring the limits of what is possible, in a spirit of playful cleverness. Activities that display playful cleverness have "hack value".
Copyright (C) 2002 Richard Stallman

So for Stallman, hacking is not limited to software and is not regarded as an activity with any kind of illegal or immoral intent. As in inherently, some might say inflexibly moral man, he would find the idea of being associated with crackers abhorrent. Which brings me to my point. I am a Gnu/Linux user. There are lots of variants of the Gnu/Linux distribution (I will come to that later) but they all have one thing in common - that there were created with the hacker ethic, the love of being playful with a medium. Thanks to these hackers, Stallman and Linus Torvalds in particular - I have an Operating system that I need never pay for and can pass on to friends and family for as much or as little as I wish to charge.

In other words, the software actually feels like its mine. Once I downloaded it I can do what I want with it, providing that I respect the rights of others to do the same. That's a pretty good feeling. I don't have to worry about violating EULAs, I don't have to worry about being so-called "pirate". Best of all I don't have to stick my hand in my pocket every time I want a new piece of software.

So am I some sort of super nerd whiz-kid? Nope. I rarely go near the command line. I don't know or care anything about programming. I'm just an average computer user. I've found that in the last couple of years that while there are still a lot of things that only windows can do (for now) for the most part, the GNOME desktop is a lot nicer to work with and a damn sight easier than the Windows desktop. Yep, it's easier. I kid ye not. I find that downloading software is also easier. There's a few ways to do it but (most of them graphical) but I just open a command line and type sudo aptitude install (name of software) and that's it. It does not ask me where I want it installed, it does not ask me if I want a shortcut, there's no wizard to faff about with, it just installs it and I'm done in one line of text. And that's a really simple command. Type it a few times and you'll never forget it. Getting rid of software is just the same, only its "remove" and not "install". It's great!

Now does that mean that "Linux" is better than windows? See that's subjective. It is for me but there are luxuries that I miss out on. Office is still the best Office suite out there. Photoshop is better than anything on the Gnu/Linux side. But Gnu/Linux will catch up and in the meantime, you don't have to pay out of the arse to get the alternatives. And you can pass them on to your friends without breaking the law! ...well the EULA, anyway.

What do I use? Ubuntu! http://www.ubuntu.com/

There are others, but to my mind, it's the best out there at the moment. Your mileage may vary of course.

But I am getting off the point. The point is that without hackers, I would not have an OS. I would be running windows, I would have paid for windows, but it would hardly be mine. So if for nothing else, I feel hackers and their culture are worth defending.

So there you go, 685 words of self indulgent toss. Not bad!