Helpful chart explains the difference between "good" hacking and "bad" hacking

Illustration for article titled Helpful chart explains the difference between good hacking and bad hacking

Hacking is a noble pursuit — it's what tinkerers do to create cool new machines and innovate. But the media is obsessed with using the word "hacker" interchangeably with "criminal." That's why IEEE Spectrum magazine has created this helpful chart (click to enlarge), in which they try to separate out the good hacks from the bad. See if you can guess which ones are good and which are bad . . . answers are on the interactive chart at IEEE, where you can check the boxes to show only good hacks, bad ones, or neutral.


I don't think LulzSec and Anonymous belong entirely in the bad category, but I guess there's no place on this chart for chaotic neutral.

Find out which hacks are good and bad via the chart on IEEE Spectrum

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



Look, I hate Palin as much as the next ordinary person, but why exactly does that rank on the "harmless" side of things? Perhaps someone could explain to me why Lulzsec stuff is considered "simple"... they hacked military and corporate sites that aren't exactly pushovers, and yet Sony's breach gets place in the innovative section why? Because it was a big deal?

Who made this chart, did they get paid to make it, and are they also weathermen in their spare time? Because they're the only people who get paid for being wrong most of the time.