Should Hackers Get Their Own Logo? 965
Ridgelift writes "Eric S. Raymond is proposing a new logo for Hackerdom. 'The Linux folks have their penguin and the
BSDers their demon.
Perl's got a camel, FSF
fans have their gnu and OSI's
got an open-source
logo. What we haven't had, historically, is an emblem that
represents the entire hacker community of which all these
groups are parts. This is a proposal that we adopt one - the glider pattern from the Game of Life.'"
Non-conformists (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's a cup, there's the hoover dam. You'll have better luck.
btw, I think it's more fitting that hackers do not have a logo, personally.
esr again? Oh no (Score:0, Insightful)
Maybe all the drone "hackers" should adopt a picture of a clown as a logo. Or a picture of esr... No wait, that's the same thing.
Pointing down? (Score:5, Insightful)
The glider should be going up, to symbolize progress.
-1, Troll; (Score:5, Insightful)
And then in three months, it'll show up on peoples' resumes. And business cards. And we'll all die a little bit.
Speaking of which, time to update my resume, this may be the key to getting my hyper-1337 job.
Why this one? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why on earth did he pick one that goes DOWN?
Why not pick one that goes up and right?
Crackers should have one that goes DOWN.
No logo (Score:4, Insightful)
Cheers, Dcobbler.
Skull and Crossbones... (Score:2, Insightful)
obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I thought they already had one.... (Score:1, Insightful)
"Hacker" is now a shibboleth (Score:4, Insightful)
The word "hacker" has become a shibboleth. It's a word that seperates people in-the-know from people who are not. Back in biblical times, a town was named "Shibboleth" which non-native people would mispronounce. If a guard or other authority wanted to know if someone was native to the town or a possible outside threat, he would have them pronounce the name of the city. If they could pronounce "Shibboleth" properly, they were in. If they couldn't, they were sent on their way.
Why the history lesson? Because the word "hacker" has gained a lot of baggage and is now a shibboleth. Once used to describe people who were true geeks who wanted to understand how things worked, it now carries the negative connotation of someone who breaks into computers.
I like the word "hacker" because true hackers understand what it means. I also think in that same vein the logo Eric's chosen is a good one, because people "in-the-know" will understand what it means. The fact that I thought the "Game of Life" referred to the Milton-Bradley game shows I still have more to learn. So now I'm reading up on the history of the actual game, which shows my desire to really learn and understand.
Which is what a "hacker" wants to do anyway...
Re:Dumb idea.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:how about a secret handshake instead? (Score:5, Insightful)
if a logo "needs colour" it wasn't designed well. If you're making a logo for something, first design it in b&w, make sure it look good, then add your colour. That way, the logo will still be effective when photocopied, faxed, or viewed by those with less than perfect colour perception.
Raise your Hand if This Fulfills an Inner Need.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Like that's gonna happen. If this does catch on, it will be plastered on every wannabe's website. It will be abused and misapplied, just as the name hacker is treated.
Perhaps hackers are unique, even among themselves? Perhaps a logo does not represent all (or most) hackers? Perhaps claiming to have a logo that represents all hackers (or hackers in general) is presumptuous?
"It's my job to think of these things."
Again, perhaps this is presumptuous? Historians (like say, of American history or what have you) don't tell us what our symbols should be. (Well, if they do no one is listening).
More importantly, hackers do not necessarily need a symbol. Hackers aren't all in the same group and they certainly are not out to advertise themselves and get people to associate an image or idea with them. I would say they probably don't care what the general populous thinks, let alone if they know what a hacker is.
Even anarchists have a logo (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure. Even anarchists have a logo, for god's sake!
Hackers are a rich subculture, and it's been that way for decades. Hackers share common life views, activities, and experiences that are different than the mainstream. So they're distinctive and weird, not unlike peace-activists, republicans, christians, motorcyclists, masons, homosexuals, etc. They've all got their logos that some wear with pride and others choose not to. But if you do choose to fly the flag, at least there's a community understanding of what it means.
One problem I see with a logo though, is that hackers tend to hate posers (since hacking is more about competence than simply attitude). And it's easier to pose with a logo.
Emergent phenomena? Hardly. (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't think so. The rules behind the simple game of Life are very easily enumerated. Every single "phenomenon" that arises is not emergent, it is clearly and totally predictable from the rules. Emergent phenomena are those that cannot be predicted. It's even better when they violate the rules that start them in motion to begin with.
Just because some things happen that are really cool when you smear a bunch of bits to "on" and start the game up, does not mean you're witnessing emergent phenomena. It just means you lack the brainpower or patience to follow the rules through and predict the outcome of your smears or shapes, before starting the game up.
This is hella-lame (Score:1, Insightful)
Besides, everyone knows that this will only be used by script-kiddies, and other talentless hacks (funny how leaving out the er in hackers gives you an antonym of it). It's no different than the jackasses bragging about the CS program at their school...but couldn't even program their VCRs. Or the dumbass that puts 30 stickers on their car, but has never even opened the hood...you get the point.
A true hacker needs only to point to ones own work...they don't need some lame logo to prove they have skills.
Re:I'm not sure this really works. (Score:5, Insightful)
However, this argument neatly sums up why you can't apply a logo to all of hackerdom, I think.
The ultimate argument against the usefulness of such a logo is that you aren't a hacker because you get recognition, you're a hacker because you enjoy hacking. If you're doing it for some other goal, you are a hacker in the sense of one who hacks, but not a hacker in the sense of one who would be most aptly described by 'hacker'.
Re:esr again? Oh no (Score:1, Insightful)
Anyone read that crap? What a fucking cock.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
.*.
..*
***
(select Code as the post type)
How about... (Score:3, Insightful)
It even symbolises some of the humour that hackers are known for.
but we do need a mark for muggs (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why this one? (Score:2, Insightful)
With that aside, yeah it'd be a fun thing to stick into a document with o's but I think its doomed to 31337ness, at least as a public symbol. Now, if he had kept it private and just used it to sign documents, that would be cool.
Like the totally 1337 peace sign? All your base... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure. Even anarchists have a logo, for god's sake!
Are we talking about the "peace sign"? If we do get a logo, it will become trendy, probably in a way worse than all-your-base and "profit!" and the like and then...
One problem I see with a logo though, is that hackers tend to hate posers (since hacking is more about competence than simply attitude). And it's easier to pose with a logo.
Exactly. It will become like 1337 speak -- something that people who think they're on the inside often use, something posers flaunt.
Penguings and Devils aren't about some obscure, fleeting concept as a movement or culture. They belong to some useful pieces of software. They're different than the obscure concept ESR wants to give a visual brand to.
(Although I'll hand it to him, if there was anything that'd do it, that'd be it.)
Re:how about a secret handshake instead? (Score:5, Insightful)
This rule can be broken and has in fact been broken many times in the past. Before you brake it, you need to know your audience and the channels that you reach them.
Example: Google [google.com]. When you photocopy it, what you get is just the word in a not-very-exciting font (besides colors, the 3D effect and the shadows can vanish too). But since the Google logo will be seen almost exclusively through color monitors, that's no problem.
Bascially, that's the old way of designing logos, like Paul Rand [dlsdesign.com] did it. This school of logo creation also means that a logo can have no direction (think arrows), because it would look strange when you print it on both sides of a truck and it inevitably points backwards on one side.
Anyway, to close my post: There might be rules for logos, but these rules are moving. And Logos that work only in color might be ok today.
Re:dyslexic hackers UNTIE! (Score:5, Insightful)
Which makes me wonder why ESS picked that particular direction/orientation. Surely the choice was not politically motivated, since the arrow points to the right (lower-right, yes, but definitely not left as one might expect). Then again, you might say the vertical element sort of leans left, so that would be appropriate.
Seriously, I'm still not sure about the whole logo idea. On one hand, I really don't care -- those that like it should feel free to use it and, in time, it may garner some respect. If not, those who embraced it will be ridiculed for an appropriate length of time and intensity. On the other hand, it sucks because, well, because it's a logo. And a contrived one, specifically chosen to try to be cool, which is, of course, as un-cool as you can get. If a logo for the hacker community just sort of happened accidentally, as the result of some odd, unexpected, unifying event or meme, it might stick. But I think a contrived logo, even with a reference as cool as John Conway built in, is unlikely to catch on.
But, on the bright side, R'ing TFA led me to this funny hacker FAQ [plethora.net] that I hadn't seen before. Very accurate, if a bit too condescending. Regardless, my boss is getting a copy of this right now -- not that he really needs is, but he'll laugh for sure and maybe learn a little.
Creation of logos (Score:3, Insightful)
"It's my job to think of these things."
I can't think of a worse way for a group of people such as hackers usually are to pick a logo. Sure, Anarchists have a symbol, but i doubt it was dreamed up by the self apointed "Anarchist Historian" who ran the idea past a few focus groups before prclaiming it to the community.
What exactly does a penguin have to do with Linux? Or a cammel with Perl? Donkeys and elephants with Democrats and Republicans? No think tank sat down and analyzed what would be the most symbolic logo to represent those things. Some guy thought it was cool and used it, and other people agreed and went along. Symbols really _should_ be groupthink, not personthinkandgroupgoesalongwithit.
If hackers really want a symbol, a real symbol will fall out of the collective. If they want to promote such a process then there should be some kind of forum where hackers can suggest all kinds of symbols that they think would be cool as a method of priming the pump. Instead of then voting on said symbols, everyone should then sit back and see which survive best in the enviroment.
The best symbols are the ones that survive competition with other symbols, not ones that are created with the intent of being "meaningful." A committee could come up with a more "meaningfull" symbol than the Darwin Fish, but the Darwin Fish is what you see plastered on cars all over the place.
Maybe the glider would survive best in such a process, but the arrogance of the way in which it was proposed really annoys me.
The glider: it's hackerdom itself (Score:2, Insightful)
However, it's not an emblem for all the hackers, and that's the beauty of it. Only those who want to gang up and work as a team should adopt this emblem.
Individual hackers won't feel the need to use logos. In the Game of Life individual cells die anyway.
The glider represents the effort of hackers that work as a team with the same objective. Remember, the previous cells of a glider also die as the glider moves forward (just as old hackers 'retire'), but the point is that new cells are created (new hackers joining in), in a cycle that makes an entity move forward (hackerdom itself if you will). Can't think of a better choice.
Re:dyslexic hackers UNTIE! (Score:1, Insightful)
I guess pointing to the left would be to close to meaning gun control....
Re:Pixels you said? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why don't we carve (Score:2, Insightful)
Here's a stab at it in SVG (Score:3, Insightful)
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd
<svg width="64.0" height="64.0">
<g fill="none" stroke="#808080" stroke-width="1">
<rect x="0.5" y="0.5" width="63" height="63"
<rect x="0.5" y="21.5" width="63" height="21"
<rect x="21.5" y="0.5" width="21" height="63"
</g>
<g fill="#000000">
<circle cx="11" cy="53" r="9"
<circle cx="32" cy="11" r="9"
<circle cx="32" cy="53" r="9"
<circle cx="53" cy="32" r="9"
<circle cx="53" cy="53" r="9"
</g>
</svg>
I don't know about this clubby attitude. (Score:2, Insightful)
Hackers don't travel in herds that can be easily labeled or logo'd. The moment some will decide to slip under the proposed abstract banner, will be the same they will be derided for being posers by others who refuse to wear the designer tag. Who will be correct? Neither, and the purpose of the logo (to categorize and unite under) will have failed.
Only one response appears to be appropriate, and it was first declared [blogspot.com] by an earlier 'hack'er. In addition, other witticisms can be found here [groucho-marx.com].
= 9J =
Non-hackers will not see what it is (Score:2, Insightful)
This logo is better than others, but the Linux penguin had success because:
- he's cute (*)
- everybody knows what a penguin is,
- I can buy a toy which is like this penguin
- nobody cares that a penguin has in reality absolutely nothing to do with OS science.
(*) Drawing is important; I suppose ESR chose something so simple to draw because he's not a good drawer - I would do the same thing in his place, but I do not claim to give a common symbol to millions of people.
Having said that, the idea of a common drawing to identify yourself as a geek or nerd is a good one. It could percolate into the common knowledge. I'm hoping only that script-kiddies won't put it on every defacement...
Ironic effect (Score:2, Insightful)
As such, it makes a good filter - anybody who uses this logo is clearly a moron, and therefore you know to avoid them and ignore whatever they say.
ESR's jab at free software (Score:3, Insightful)
(We used to call these works ``free software'', but this confused too many people who weren't sure exactly what ``free'' was supposed to mean. Most of us, by at least a 2:1 ratio according to web content analysis, now prefer the term ``open-source'' software).
(*eye's roll*)
Not just NO but "Hell NO!" (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a BAD idea. I have a hard enough time trying to get people to make a mental distinction between "good hackers" and "bad hackers". Cracker doesn't really make it easier and now ESR wants to use what I assume will be a brand-recognizable like logo?
Count me out, brother!
You know what's sad? (Score:5, Insightful)
What makes you think the same won't happen with the logo. I can just see the same steps happening:
1. A couple of script kiddies, who don't even understand what those downloaded rootkits do, start placing the logo on defaced websites and such. Or placing it all over some warez sites, in between porn popups and l33t text.
2. A few retarded and clueless journalists clamp on the "hacking is evil, and this is the logo of these evil people" idea. You know, writing an article about a _real_ hacker won't rake in the readers. It's just a guy working long shifts to make some complicated program. Not many people want to read about that. Whereas doom and gloom journalism about these evil 'hackers', who'll bring our cyber-civilization to its knees, those sell.
3. Your average PHB clamps onto the journalists' definition. It's easier him to understand stuff like "wow, these guys are motivated by evil goals" than "whoa, someone actually likes computers and spends his/her free time learning and experimenting".
So anyway, think about it this way. Would you tell a random client nowadays that you're a hacker, or that you sympathize with hackers? Want to be that they'll instantly understand "cyber-terrorist" by that? You can try to educate them all you want, they'll just fall back to the definition that the media feeds them.
Now take the logo. Do you have any doubt that in a couple of years wearing that logo on a t-shirt will have the same effect? And what do you think will happen after the company loses a few contracts because the client saw you wearing that evil symbol? I can just see it banned at work.
Cute ideas (Score:3, Insightful)