yak
[Top] [All Lists]

[yak@collab] Re: Notes on Social Hacking

To: yak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Andrius Kulikauskas <ms@xxxxx>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 09:24:24 +0200
Message-id: <3FCC3E28.6090807@ms.lt>
Eric, Thank you for your reply!  I had to read it several times to 
decide whether there was any sarcasm (I couldn't find any!) because, 
yes, as fiction, it is all very real.  Thank you for the reference to 
Korsybski, and his phrase, and your encouragement.    (01)

I include two sections from my paper (it takes so long to write!) 
Andrius Kulikauskas, http://www.ms.lt, ms@ms.lt
-----------------------------------------------    (02)

Eric Armstrong wrote:    (03)

 > Andrius Kulikauskas wrote:
 >
 >> Why is it a fiction?
 >>
 >> It is a fiction in that recognizing the reality of the group is
 >> ultimately a matter of choice, and can be dismissed.  We forget this,
 >> and to that extent the group is "real", it is real as fiction. For
 >> example, the Soviet Union, a neighborhood, a church, a circle of
 >> friends, a family, are all "real" to the extent that we choose them to
 >> be so.
 >>
 > I don't see how anyone could object to this. I think you've
 > done a good job of defining your terms, in general. Here, you've
 > denfined "fiction" as the term for a world-view that a group
 > subscribes to.
 >
 > I really can't think of a better term for it, really. I suspect
 > that Korsybski would love that fact that "the reality we all 'know'
 > to be true" is labeled as a fiction, because that very terminology
 > helps to keep us honest in our appraisal of our beliefs.    (04)

-------------------------------------------------
Social hackers vs. Social architects
-------------------------------------------------    (05)

Social hacker, as the term is used in this paper, is a person who 
encourages activity amongst online groups, and is willing to break 
social norms in order to do so.  This term draws on the use of the word 
hacker to describe a programmer who relishes coming up with 
idiosyncratic solutions, often through creative use of trial and error. 
  The hacker approach is bottom-up, special-case, practical, piecemeal, 
nonstandard, unschooled, unexpected, solve-the-problem, 
write-efficiently, value-the-coder's-time, build-on-what-exists (or even 
what does not officially exist!), as opposed to the architect approach, 
which is top-down, general-case, theoretical, grand vision, master plan, 
unlimited resources, question-the-problem, and start-from-scratch.
Andrius: Do you think "social hacker" is a suitable term, or do you have 
a better one?    (06)

Bala: I think that is a great term    (07)

Andrius: Why?    (08)

Bala: hacker -- lights up someone who chops to me :: to many it will 
light up someone who is like a computer hacker :: one who challenges :: 
and we imagine them to be bright :: unconventional    (09)

An engineer, at his or her best, works as both an architect and a 
hacker.  The hacker side is most evident upon breaking the architect's 
norms, as in making use of undocumented functionality.  However, if laws 
and morals are thought of simply as norms, then breaking norms can turn 
into breaking laws and breaking morals.  Just as hackers define 
themselves through the behavior that makes them distinct, the media 
similarly latches onto the most sensational behavior, so that hacker has 
come to have a second meaning, a meddler who breaks into computer 
systems (hackers call the latter crackers).  In this way, the term 
social hacker has been used to describe those who lie and otherwise 
manipulate people so as to gain access to privileged information, such 
as passwords, which makes it easier to gain access into systems.  In 
this paper, we consider such behavior to be wrong.  More generally, we 
are troubled that an unchecked willingness to break social norms can 
falsely justify and encourage the manipulation of people.  We seek an 
ethics that would provide social hackers with self-checks and sound 
motivations.    (010)

Social hackers are connectors.  In "The Tipping Point", Malcolm Gladwell 
describes how the interaction of mavens, connectors, and salesmen allows 
small causes to yield large effects in society. [B]  A connector may 
participate in half a dozen groups and is active in bringing different 
people together.  Additionally, a social hacker attempts not only to 
opportunistically connect individuals, but to connect whole groups, and 
encourage their members to likewise act as connectors, extending 
everybody's reach.  In this sense, social hackers are also salesmen, 
evangelists, missionaries.  They work to reshape and restructure the 
groups for the long term.  Social hackers are also willing to break 
social norms.  However, they always run the risk of being trolls, the 
people who participate destructively in groups, usually because they 
want attention and have nothing better to do.  The best social hackers, 
much like the best hackers, are often invisible, for they work with such 
love, honesty, grace and tact, that they never actually break any norms.
Hacktivism is a related word used to describe the fusion of hacking and 
activism.  It is an electronic civil disobedience that is still finding 
itself, with tactics that range from overwhelming or defacing websites 
to posting banned material. [A]   Much of this makes sense as the tail 
end of the postmodern reaction to broadcast media and mass-produced 
consumer products, the reaction which treats any thing or truth as raw 
material for reconfiguration.  Social hackers may be harbingers of 
something new, a network society, one that gushes forth from the 
creativity of individuals, so that they create and link up their own 
local worlds, rather than flail against mass culture.    (011)

-------------------------------------------------
Social hackers live as examples
-------------------------------------------------    (012)

Social hackers are driven by the will to care.  They share a personal 
sense of mission to not only influence individuals, but to transform all 
of society, at least that which is around them, as if to turn it inside 
out.  In order to spread and deepen their reach, they look to share this 
impulse with others, and "awaken" them to behave this way.  They work 
openly so their examples might catalyze a critical mass of people who care.    (013)

In order to draw on all of their ability, and to make a way for others 
to do so, they may seek to make a living from working openly.  In 
theory, this makes wonderful sense, but in practice, it adds a personal 
urgency that pushes the social hacker to brush aside as many social 
norms as possible.    (014)

They take the attitude of entrepreneurs who are willing to do what 
others are not.  Morally, they must therefore look for the good they 
might do that others will not.  In making maximal use of minimal 
resources, they build on people working for free, or on speculation, 
instead of for pay.  They think of wealth as relationships, and offer 
team-building services that draw on their global networks.    (015)

Social hackers struggle to find a place in the business world, which 
favors closed rather than open systems.  Many key Internet services for 
the public, such as Google and YahooGroups, have Terms of Service that 
prohibit commercial use.  Of course, the large corporations can buy what 
they need.  It is the grass roots entrepreneurs who are not served.    (016)

Social hackers look at content as a way to engage others, nurture 
community, and shuttle energy from one group to another.  They need 
content that  places no restrictions on commercial use, nor taxes them 
by requiring they ask for permissions or track rights.  They are glad to 
promote the author whose material they use, but they wish to be 
efficient and rely on their own judgment. Optimal for them is a free 
trade zone of ideas.  This is why they either take and use material 
without reservation, or they labor to find and generate material in the 
public domain.    (017)

Social hackers focus on discussion groups, as opposed to bulletin 
boards, because they want to engage others, evoke responses that go 
beyond any particular concern.  For the same reasons they prefer 
unmoderated groups over moderated ones.  Also, discussion groups rely on 
email instead of the web, and therefore include people with marginal 
Internet access, which makes for a wider range of participants.    (018)

Andrius: Who do you think are great examples of social hackers?    (019)

Bala: I hardly see them Andrius -- hardly hardly -- other than me :-)    (020)

Andrius: That's why I'm asking you!    (021)

Bala: and I have been in many groups :: most don't have the stamina to 
be :: they call it a day and go back to their cocoon :: many of my ideas 
of better connecting and structure solutions come from having to adapt 
to the failures I have faced as a social hacker :: for example many in 
the Tamil community hate me.. :: many respect me too    (022)

Andrius: Like a magnet :: repulse or attract    (023)

Bala: because I didn't put up lowest common denominator :: and 2 wrongs 
don't make a right :: I deliberately challenged :: my goal was to get 
folks seriously thinking :: and I was willing to pay a high price for it 
:: most are not.    (024)

Joy Tang, Dennis Reinhardt, Neil McEvoy, Anthony Diaz, Josef 
Davies-Coates act with a vigor that goes beyond the norms, and marks 
them as social hackers.  They all happen to be entrepreneurs who seek to 
awaken people.  Joy and Dennis are addressing the global HIV/AIDS 
crisis, Neil is jumpstarting a loosely coupled federation of businesses, 
Anthony is bridging the Hispanic digital divide, Josef is saving the 
world through radical democracy.  Other connectors to study who are 
breaking new ground but in gentler ways are Jerry Michalski, Flemming 
Funch, Tom Munnecke, Shannon Clark, Denham Grey, Franz Nahrada, Lucas 
Gonzalez Santa Cruz, Scott Allen and Leon Benjamin. There are the 
bloggers, such as Doc Searls, David Weinberger, David Winer, who give of 
their prominence to act as catalysts for intergroup activity.  They do 
not need to reach out to any group, as the readers come to their blogs. 
  They might be labeled positively ornery, and to the degree they are, 
they may express that tension between the will to care, and the business 
pressure to stay interesting as public persona.  Social hacking from 
their lofty crags is more like sniping than wrestling.  Very effective. 
Ryze and Ecademy, for online business networking, are good venues for 
finding and engaging social hackers.    (025)

-- 
This message is archived at:    (026)

http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=yak&i=3FCC3E28.6090807@ms.lt    (027)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>