10 ms·
> If you define hacking as controlling your computer hardware at the lowest level, then hacking is dead because no-one wants to write device drivers. This is a
by lsofzz 7y ago
> If you define hacking as controlling your computer hardware at the lowest level, then hacking is dead because no-one wants to write device drivers.
This is absurd. Dude, let me be clear - Just because you write Java all day long does not mean that there are hundreds if not thousands of embedded system developers who engineer (quite passionately!) the thing that powers your SSD or your wireless card or the thing that heats your home.
We often take these substrates (in this context - the firmware and device drivers etc.) for granted in the modern hardware and often fail to even acknowledge them. I am not one of them and I vehemently defend these silent heroes of our generation.
- javajosh 7y agoYou know, I had a moment where I thought "perhaps I should add a disclaimer about what 'no-one' means", but then I decided against proactive defense against a pedantic retort, assuming that HN would understand how tiring it is to qualify statements like that. Clearly I was wrong. Thousands do care. So here's what I mean: When you take the ratio of the thousands that do compared to the millions who don't, you get a number that's pretty close to zero (one tenth of a percent, back of envelope).
- lsofzz 7y ago> Thousands do care. So here's what I mean: When you take the ratio of the thousands that do compared to the millions who don't, you get a number that's pretty close to zero (one tenth of a percent, back of envelope). Fair enough.
- wccrawford 7y agoHis same argument means there were never any hackers if you compare it to the entire human race. There have always been very few "true hackers". That continues to be the case. It doesn't mean they died out, it means that nothing has changed other than that it's harder to find them using the same search terms.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]