Are hackers heroes?

No, hackers in general are not heroes though they (or I should say we) seem to have huge egos and would like to think they are heroes. There's nothing heroic about jail breaking phones and tablets. There's nothing about being a hacker that is in itself heroic. There are however a number of hackers whose work is based on idealistic beliefs and/or for what they believe is for the good of the public and what they do could be considered heroic and so they may be labelled heroes but are hackers heroes? No. I don't like the the fact that someone would try to say they're heroes and the fact that this article landed on the front page here smacks of hacker egotism. Are doctors, school teachers, stock brokers, entrepreneurs, or barbers heroes? Of course not! You could certainly twist your reasoning like a pretzel to argue they are but the truth is these are just people and not all people are heroic and your profession doesn't make you a hero. There are doctors who are in it for the money and there are doctors who want to make a difference. Neither type is heroic in and of itself. To simply go against the grain, question the status quo, and work against the current state of things is not necessarily heroic.

Hackers are not heroes. Certain individuals out there are heroes. They aren't all hackers. They're people from all walks of life and professions, at varying skill levels who do something at great risk, who often sacrifice something, and do something for the good of one or many people. The term hero can be very subjective and I am not comfortable labeling a group of people or even a subset of a group of people as heroes. The fact that someone wrote an article like this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Hackers, you're not heroes. Only heroes are heroes.

Hacker are not heroes as a rule, no sterotype is. A hacker and were talking non-tabloid version of the term I presume are people who question the anwears as much as the initial question and have the tenacity to seek out those answears to the questions nobody else bothers to ask.

A hero is somebody who goes further than others even imagined, it is always a label bestowed upon somebody by others. Hacker is a mindset and when it is bestowed by others is generaly refering to some electronic vandalism.

Using a bic pen to perform a trachyotomy so somebody can breath, that would be a hero hacker if such a definition was needed.

This discussion is framed very weirdly, almost to the extent of meaninglessness because the language is so imprecise. Asking "is hacking good" is like asking "is evolution good for people when it produces everything from terrible worms that blind people by living and eating their eyes to fantastic bacteria that allows us to digest all kinds of crazy foods?"

Systems always have weaknesses and systems always change. Sometimes we improve the weaknesses for fun or profit or usefulness, sometimes we attack them for fun or profit or malice.

Confront and Conceal is an odd choice given the other three titles. There is only one or two chapters in C&C that are relevant and they add very little to the debate other than providing some "ripped from the headlines" context. The reviewer should have gone with "This Machine Kills Secrets."

Yes, we are. "Crackers", on the other hand...