Message-ID: <c1ae70ac0511140853k2e9a7286k27c8d070aeed5885@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon Nov 14 16:53:26 2005
From: ajones1 at gmail.com (Adam Jones)
Subject: Enough's enough...

On 11/14/05, James Eaton-Lee <james.mailing@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 01:02 +0000, n3td3v wrote:
> > Yet another fuckwit basing their opinion on someone they don't know.
> > If it wasn't for me you wouldn't have an internet to sent your packets
> > on right now. You take people at face value instead of getting to know
> > them first.
>
> Oh no, guys! He's following through on his threats and taking the
> internet down, one page at a time! By tomorrow there'll be nothing left!
>
> "The web site you are trying to access has exceeded its allocated data
> transfer. Visit our help area for more
> information." (http://www.geocities.com/n3td3v/home/hackerstoday.html)
>
> (Quick, to the batcave, Robin - better get your 'corporate backing' at
> yahoo to up your geocities bandwidth allowance!)
>
> > Read my research paper on Hackers Today and you might learn something.
>
> I tried, but I can't - where would I buy a printed copy from?

That's ok, here is a quick synopsis/review of it for you:

The paper "Hackers Today" discusses the nature of "current-generation"
hackers. It details the supposed methods and motivations of this group
as portrayed by someone who seems to desperately seek inclusion. In it
hackers are portrayed as elite internet cowboys, mostly working alone
and funded through illicit gains from their hacking, phishing, and
corporate espionage endeavors.

The paper seems to lack the flow and structure of other similar works,
from which it obviously lifts all of its ideas. The tone and language
of that paper varies in the level of technical reference, but is
generally seems to appeal more towards a PHB than anyone who would
want real information. From the negative classification of "security
experts" who are evidently differentiated from real hackers by the
fact that they take "their opinions from books and websites they've
read" as opposed to hackers that "grew up infront of computers due to
social problems in life" some rather obvious statements about the
writer can probably be inferred.

Taken as a whole "Hackers Today" fails to provide any real level of
useful resource. Its use of unreferenced generalizations and
stereotypes ensures that it can not be taken on any level of technical
merit. The lack of a simple organization and structure ensure that it
is not useful as a subject overview for the less technically-minded.

Hopefully that helped you James, and at least with this you can avoid
wasting the fifteen minutes it would take to sort through the poor
structure to find what is being said here. You'd think someone who
"use(s) computers as an escape from real life troubles that affect
them" would know a little bit more about writing a formal paper.

To n3td3v:
I am sure that you will find something at fault with the text,
grammar, or structure of my email. It is an unqualified but probably
safe statistic that 1/2 of all criticisms of spelling or grammar
posted on the internet will contain similar errors. The point is that
if you are going to take the time to write a paper, then publish it,
and ask people to read it, you should be sure to get everything about
it right. Had you described what was written as a collection of notes
and thoughts it would be read as such, but what you posted fails as
both research and a paper.

But that is not what you are really at here, is it?

-Adam

Powered by blists - more mailing lists