Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

The Final Hack

Recently a young man, by all accounts a bril­liant hacker, took his own life. One of the young man’s friends wrote a beau­ti­ful eulogy. He addressed what I would call the ethics of the suicide:

Because what­ever prob­lems Aaron was fac­ing, killing him­self didn’t solve them. What­ever prob­lems Aaron was fac­ing, they will go unsolved for­ever. If he was lonely, he will never again be embraced by his friends. If he was despair­ing of the fight, he will never again rally his com­rades with bril­liant strate­gies and lead­er­ship. If he was sor­row­ing, he will never again be lifted from it. 

I’ve writ­ten before of my gen­eral thoughts about sui­cide:

I respect sui­cide as the ulti­mate act of self-determination. We should be able to decide, with­out being second-guessed, when the pain and hor­ror of exis­tence are too great to endure. But sui­cide is the ulti­mate act of self­ish­ness too, an abne­ga­tion of self­less­ness. What friends and loved ones mourn him deeply tonight, blam­ing them­selves and wish­ing they had done something—anything—to stop him? Par­ents? Sib­lings? A wife and kids? A faith­ful hound? In escap­ing his own pain, how much pain did he bequeath to peo­ple who deserved it no more than he did?

And I have known a hacker or two. A hacker is

A per­son who enjoys explor­ing the details of pro­gram­ma­ble sys­tems and how to stretch their capa­bil­i­ties, as opposed to most users, who pre­fer to learn only the min­i­mum nec­es­sary. RFC1392, the Inter­net Users’ Glos­sary, use­fully ampli­fies this as: A per­son who delights in hav­ing an inti­mate under­stand­ing of the inter­nal work­ings of a sys­tem, com­put­ers and com­puter net­works in particular.

For the hacker this aesthetic—a delight in explor­ing and exploit­ing the work­ings of sys­tems to make them do the unex­pected or do the expected better—applies not only to com­put­ers and com­puter net­works, but also to social sys­tems and phys­i­cal sys­tems, includ­ing his body and his life.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

8 Responses to “The Final Hack”

  1. Mike Engelhart says:

    I can­not imag­ine in the course of pre­trial & trial that the many many peo­ple who would have inter­acted with Aaron could not have seen him spi­ral­ing down­ward. Sep­a­rately, I won­der if the bril­liant mind that led to Red­dit, and other sites, like Hip­munk, and yes, hack­ing, is of neces­sity, or at least highly cor­re­lated to, a mind that would allow itself to destroy itself.

    • Mark Bennett says:

      I sus­pect that some of Aaron’s close friends are kick­ing them­selves today, see­ing in ret­ro­spect the signs that he was spi­ral­ing down­ward. But there’s a great spec­trum of affect between happy and dan­ger­ously depressed, and short of talk of sui­cide, few signs of depres­sion are action­able in fore­sight rather than hindsight.

      Yes, the bright­est flames often burn them­selves out. This world can be dif­fi­cult for outliers.

  2. Ric Moore says:

    The one main goal to our NuOAR pro­gram, to rem­edy the recidi­vism prob­lem, is the notion to “hack your own brain”. Some­times the old com­puter has way too many orphaned files, bad sec­tors and incor­rectly installed dri­vers. Some­times the only recourse is to com­pletely re-install fresh AFTER care­fully study­ing and iden­ti­fy­ing that which is to be kept, for backup and restore, and then your pro­ceed to wipe the hard­drive and re-install.

    The human brain is no dif­fer­ent, the way I see it, being some­what of a hacker and later find­ing myself mak­ing a bad deci­sion from bad data. Same same. I just had to admit it. THAT hap­pened as I went into ther­apy and some­one had a sign above the door that read “Your best think­ing got you here.” Talk about a take down, for some­one with an above-average IQ. Imag­ine your self stand­ing there.

    So, we DO arrive in this world as a fresh install with a very basic OS. Then we are pro­grammed by other imper­fect par­ents and imper­fect role mod­els and an imper­fect soci­ety. We are then imper­fect and virus rid­dled. just like some old com­puter still run­ning Win 95 would be. When I first arrived in prison, at the ten­der age of 50, after I was done cry­ing my eyes out, I vis­ited the in-house shrink. Scared shit­less, I asked, wav­ing all around me, “What IS this place FOR and what is it sup­posed to DO?” He just smiled and said “We’ll we’re sup­posed to take you and strip you down to your core being and rebuild you from there. But, that doesn’t hap­pen.” At least the man was hon­est. Wel­come to DOC.

    I took every­thing they had and was lucky to get into the most effec­tive pro­gram that any DOC has to offer. THEY tore me down and I still wince when I know that an inter­ven­tion just kicked in, ala Clock­work Orange. While I am grate­ful and am aware that the con­di­tion­ing kicks in, I am still in awe that some­one “loved” me enough to push my nose into it as I wasn’t smart enough to do it on my own. Even after that “ordeal” was over, it took awhile for the reboot to hap­pen. But yes, we are very much like our cre­ation, the com­puter. And, maybe we hack them, in avoid­ance of hack­ing our own brain. Once my project goes pub­lic you all might be very inter­ested in it. Being Open Source’d, all input will be wel­come. The fun part is that it isn’t only your clients that will want/need to attend. :) Ric

  3. Mike Trent says:

    Your def­i­n­i­tion of sui­cide is right on the money, but your def­i­n­i­tion of hacker seems pretty benign and san­i­tized. They don’t just “explore details” and “stretch capa­bil­i­ties.” They also com­mit cyber-trespass by explor­ing the details of sys­tems that they are not sup­posed to access. Some of them steal intel­lec­tual prop­erty and copy­righted mate­r­ial, and oth­ers invade pri­vacy by snoop­ing for per­sonal infor­ma­tion and, in some instances, mali­ciously pub­lish­ing it.

    Many hack­ers are geniuses and your def­i­n­i­tion is cor­rect in that many of them have an insa­tiable curios­ity and drive to chal­lenge lim­its that is admirable and embod­ies some of the finest qual­i­ties of the human spirit. But don’t leave the dark side out of the def­i­n­i­tion — or the eulogy.

  4. Ric Moore says:

    Mike Trent, amongst hack­ers there is the notion of “hack­ers vs crack­ers”. And while sim­i­lar, a cracker not only does the black hat stuff, as a hacker does, he or she will also steal things. Basi­cally, Mark’s def­i­n­i­tion of a “hacker” is cor­rect. Unforch, the TV news never makes the dis­tinc­tion between the hacker and the cracker. It’s always the “Hacker” mas­ter­mind arch-criminal that you hear about.

  5. Cjclawyer says:

    I thought a Cracker was some­thing different…

Leave a non-anonymous Reply