A new version of something existing should show clearly where it came from it. It should represent an iteration.

The original represented a celebration of technology and it's possibilities in competent and eager hands, when unconstrained. The new version is all about compromise and politics. It's political first, and only incidentally technological.

The original was short and concrete. This spans 20 pages and makes zero concrete principles.

The author misrepresents the simplicity of the original Hacker ethos as an absolutism, then moves on to show how absolutism has flaws. Shocking, eh?

I could go on, but I think my stance should be fairly obvious by now.