How has the definition of “hacker” changed over the last 25 years?
SL: The original term was upbeat. The MIT people adopted it for computer wizards who took systems to the limit. It was a badge of pride, but it became associated with vandals and thieves. There was a lot of consternation in the mid-’70s when the word became synonymous with a destructive element. I never thought that was something to spend a lot of time worrying about, though. The original definition was still lurking there. The movement always went forward, and the people who were inclined to be hackers — the ones who had the “hacker gene” — they just kept on. More recently, the positive version of “hacker” has made a big comeback. I’m happy to see that. You mentioned a “hacker gene.” Is there a connection across hacker generations? Does the book tap into that? SL: There definitely is. It’s been so gratifying to hear people say the book changed their lives. Other times, I’ll be reading a biography or an article about someone prominent in the computer world, and they’ll mention “Hacke
