The hacker is a very enigmatic character, which, in almost Dadaist terms, defies description. On Nettime, it has been argued that the hacker is the artist of the future, while others (usually from corporate media) see hackers as a menace to public security. For example, at regular publication gatherings, hackers have been subjected to intense security checks, even a far back as the early 1990s. In this long quote from the Complete Hacker’s Handbook it was documented at a 2600 meeting that:
Mall security personnel surrounded the hackers and demanded that they all submit to a search. Anyone who resisted was threatened with arrest. People’s names were written down, and their bags gone through. People who tried to write down badge numbers of security staff or attempted to film what was happening were further harassed. Eventually everyone was told to leave the mall or face arrest.
Emmanuel Goldstein, the editor of 2600, was outraged at the behaviour of the security staff and, using the power of the Internet to provide mass communication, alerted other people to what was going on. Eventually this information came to the attention of a local reporter who phoned the mall and spoke directly with the security director of this mall. While the reporter was taping the interview, the security director inadvertently let out the fact that the whole search and question operation was organized by the secret service. For a long time the hacker community had suspected that the secret service was organizing local law enforcement and private security to crack down on the so-called "hacker menace".185
Amongst these self-named hackers argue the difference between hackers (those who create code for interventionist purposes) and crackers (those who crack the codes of others for interventionist purposes). Whether artists or not, the refreshing part of the discussion surrounding hacktivism and art is that the notion of art is being more strongly drawn into the realm of everyday experience and the realities that impact upon social and political discourse.
On 2 May 2002, a program on the ABC titled The Hacktivists186 analysed the difference between
hackers and crackers, looking at the diversity of these groups and lack of unity between them. This program stands as an early 21st century testimony to the changing cultural climate, where the power 185 Complete Hacker’s Handbook: Chapter 3 http://www.telefonica.net/web2/vailankanni/HHB/HHB_CH03.htm
(accessed 4 February 2009).
186 A summary of the documentary can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/hacktivists/ (accessed 5 May 2002). Also
relationships in art and culture has shifted from that of the arts institution and curator to artists self promoting with celebrity like status. For example, you can book CAE and Yes Men for a workshop or lecture on Evil Twin Booking.187
McKenzie Wark is one of a number of writers to write a manifesto for hackers, and this one has been well documented in texts on the subject. In this long quote, he states that:
Whatever code we hack, be it programming language, poetic language, math or music, curves or colourings, we create the possibility of new things entering the world. Not always great things, or even good things, but new things. In art, in science, in philosophy and culture, in any production of knowledge where data can be gathered, where
information can be extracted from it, and where in that information new possibilities for the world are produced, there are hackers hacking the new out of the old. While hackers create these new worlds, we do not possess them. That which we create is mortgaged to others, and to the interests of others, to states and corporations who control the means for making worlds we alone discover. We do not own what we produce — it owns us188
This statement reinforces an understanding that the process of hacking is about creating something new from the old, hence the assertion that hackers do not break code and systems, as their ‘bad press’ would have it, they create new forms and meanings from the old. Wark goes on to comment that:
While we recognise our distinctive existence as a group, as programmers, as artists or writers or scientists or musicians, we rarely see these ways of representing ourselves as mere fragments…Geeks and freaks become what they are negatively, through their exclusion by others. Hackers are a class, but an abstract class, a class as yet to hack itself into manifest existence as itself.189
Just as other creative people in the online environment struggle to be defined, so do hackers. The labels that applied to hackers do not seem to be easily ascribed to the range of behaviours as signs of identification.
The role of the troll
Trolls online are essentially seen as troublemakers who intervene and send abusive posts to lists and
187 Evil Twin Booking http://eviltwinbooking.org/index.cfm (accessed 5 January 2009).
188 McKenzie Wark, M A Hacker Manifestohttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html (accessed 20
November 2006).
sites. Indymedia readers often have to contend with much rubbish on the site as quite often trolls make the only responses to genuine posts. At the time of the Woomera 2002 protests, there were a range of spams from trolls including threats of murder and more irrelevantly, posts of nude women. This manner of anti-social behaviour is typical of trolling. As mentioned earlier, in the example of Abraham Bigg’s Internet suicide, onlookers viewing his suicide left messages:
The Website that hosted Biggs’ Web cam, justin.tv, has deleted the video and the comments people made while viewing it. The AP spoke to someone who claimed to have viewed the suicide and reported that as Biggs lay on the bed, other viewers cracked jokes. When police officers entered the room, in addition to “OMG” responses, viewers posted “lol” and “hahahah.190
Whilst this type of activity pushes moral and ethical limits, trolls often see their behaviour as a means of contributing to social discourse. In an interview with Alex Birch, well known hacker and troll Weev comments:
Trolling is a method, a style of rhetoric and action. It can be used for constructive or destructive purposes. Some of the greatest champions of Western philosophy have implemented the troll method.191
Trolling is defined on the Anti Troll FAQ as:
Subscribing the victim to hundreds of unwanted pornographic email newsletters, and sites. Complaining to employers about non existent misdemeanours. Sending garbage emails without indication of sender. Telephone calls at dead of night. Harassing the close relatives of victims.192
It is difficult to locate exactly when the troll first appeared on the Internet but it would be fair to suggest that trolling has been around as long as the practice of ‘spamming’193 email users.
Unsolicited spam and ‘phishing’194 swindles are often also the work of trolls. However, their
190 Mark Evitt, Internet Trolls Cross the Line with the Latest Internet Suicide Pop + Politics
http://www.popandpolitics.com/2008/11/24/if-a-line-exists-on-the-internet-surely-its-been-crossed/ (accessed 2 March 2009).
191 Alex Birch Interview: Professional Hacker and Troll Weev CORRUPT.org: remaking Modern Society
http://www.corrupt.org/act/interviews/weev (accessed 24 March 2009).
192 Dave Fawthrop, Anti Troll FAQ (2002) http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/anti_troll_faq.htm (accessed 30
January 2007).
193 SPAM is a term that refers to unsolicited bulk email messages. Spamming is the act of mass posting electronic junk
mail.
194 Phishing is the process of distributing bulk email to people to get money by fraudulent means. Using fake banking
overarching role is to post open publishing lists and blogs with politically overt or unsuitable material. Trolls are adept at deceiving people about their identity by necessity, because they engage in behaviours that are unacceptable to the rest of the community. Judith Donath argues that trolling is a game about identity deception, and one that is played with the permission of most of the
players. This is because the troll attempts to pass as a legitimate member of the group, sharing their interests and concerns. Judith Donath comments that:
The newsgroup members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings and, upon judging a poster to be a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they — and the troll — understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll’s enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group.195
List members have labelled sometimes innocent and inexperienced users as trolls, not realizing that the posts were legitimate. For example, in this long quote Donath states that:
Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community. Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling — where the rate of deception is high — many honestly naive questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations. Even if the accusation is unfounded, being branded a troll is quite damaging to one’s online reputation.196
‘Flaming’ is another word to describe a type of behaviour that is seen as anti-social and destructive to an online community. The act of flaming is about being argumentative and nasty in an online conversation, and has sometimes resulted in a list member being exiled from the list community. The exclusion of list members brings into play a whole other set of issues that are embedded into online discussion — the role and responsibility of list moderation. Another aspect of unwanted or unsolicited online communications is evident in the distribution of spam. Flaming is also often used by a list member to try and defame other members of the online community, or to belittle the
discussion.
195 Donath, J., Identity and Deception. 196 Donath, J., Identity and Deception.
Trolling and flaming are often seen as obstructionist strategies, designed to confuse discussion and delay a decision or direction. This type of behaviour is similar to that of ‘filibustering’ which is a term used to describe how and action can be ‘pirated’ or when in the context of legislation, when debate continues to block the passing of the law.197 All of these behaviours are not generally
representative of net-activists but could conceivably be used as either a coordinated collaborative strategy or as a form of individual protest.
Illustration from Licklider, J.C.R. The Computer as Communications Device Science and Technology 1968
There are many terms for different types of online behaviours, and, as the Internet continues to grow there will also be new ways to name these behavioral attitudes. Mike Reed’s website Flame Warriors is testimony to this ongoing process of naming, as he requests people to contact him when new stereotypes emerge so he can document them on his site.198
197 Online Etymology Dictionary : filibuster (n.) 1587 as flibutor “pirate,” probably ultimately from Du. vrijbuiter
“freebooter,” used of pirates in the West Indies as Sp. filibustero and Fr. flibustier, either or both of which gave the word to Amer.Eng. (see freebooter). Used 1850s and ‘60s of lawless adventurers from the U.S. who tried to overthrow Central American countries. The legislative sense is first recorded c.1851, probably because obstructionist legislators “pirated” debate. Not technically restricted to U.S. Senate, but that’s where the strategy works best.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=filibuster (accessed 6 December 2008).
198 Mike Reed, Flame Warriorshttp://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/lurker.htm (accessed 20 November