The Max Headroom TV Hack
atlasobscura.com
atlasobscura.com
I'm the guy who did the AMA.
I don't think the guy who interviewed me from Atlas Obscura disclosed that he was from Atlas Obscura.. I thought he was some kid doing a high school paper or something. :) Meh. Oh well.
Anyway, he didn't get some of his terminology correct. I've directed him to how he can clean it up, however.
..."Churnalism" is spot-on.
In the months and years after the party in LaGrange, J and K, and I, only crossed paths maybe 2, possibly three times. THis would have been between 1987 and 1993. I didn't know them directly. I sat next to J once at a Denny's in either Aurora (Fox Valley Mall) or in Burr Ridge. The second or third time was at a place in Downers Grove called Omegas. All were late-night get togethers, impromptu, informal.
(Edit: added "in the months and years after the party in LaGrange" for clarity sake.)
As this is an article about hacks, then I'll also point out that Max Headroom played the role of a "computer-generated television journalist", but there was nothing computer-generated about him at all... it was all prosthetics and makeup: even the "computer graphics" in the background were hand-drawn!
I always found that reaction to be bizarre too. I wonder if some people see journalists and know that if they play up a character then their chances of being on the news goes way up. I think that explains a lot of the 'man on the street' perspectives we see in TV news. It becomes a game of one-upmanship to entertain the watcher and "get famous."
I'm no psychologist, but I can well imagine that someone could feel considerable cognitive dissonance if an institution that they had considerable trust in was unexpectedly and obviously subverted like this.
TIL.
Also, see my handle.
Special effects were done manually until quite recently. Independence Day was probably the last big budget film to use models. Now it's all computer generated.
Independence Day was probably the last
big budget film to use models. Now it's
all computer generated.
Also many, many movies still use practical models in addition to CG. It's just that now movies can blend both techniques to use whatever is most appropriate for a given shot. What is rare now are movies that use no CG at all.. even things like Mad Max which are touted for their practical effects utilize a TON of CG work.
I think there is an interesting feedback in that (not the first person to say it), you see accounts of scientists and engineers who grew up on sci-fi like Star Trek inspired to ask "Why can't we have that?".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(character)#Produ...
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/headroom-hacker
It also details other TV intrusions as well.
I also find it a bit strange that Atlas Obscura is even posting this, being that its modus operandi is stated as being "the definitive guide to the world's wondrous and curious places." Signal intrusion or the 80s aren't much of a "place" no matter how curious they are.
That's blatantly incorrect. For example, the movie War Games (pretty mainstream, with Matthew Broderick) is from 1983.
You are correct. Like I said -- There's some issues with accuracy in this guy's article, unfortunately.
By 1987, people were well aware of what hackers were. Not so much the details, but, the basic concept at least, was well known.
I'd say the term entered the public vocabulary by about 1982, with War Games.
Truth be told, hacking even garnered some of its own vocabulary from War Games. That's precisely where the "war"- prefix of different discplines comes from, first wardialing, then wardriving. I'm sure there will be more. I'd love to see warfaxing catch on..that's an untapped goldmine of fun. :) I'm trying to think of what such programs were called (programs that searched a given block of lines within a given prefix for any modems set to auto-answer) before War Games. "Hunters", I think.
Cheeseball plot aside, as a movie, War Games is, in retrospect a surprisingly accurate portrayl of hacking at the time. The discovery process was slow, laborious, time-consuming, and produced craploads of paper. It was also done by the marginally social, quietly, in relative isolation from others, not as a group, or as the public team sport it is now.
The gear Broderick's character was using, even -- By 1982, a box like a toggle driven IMSAI 8080 with an 8" floppy drive and a monochrome monitor would have essentially been throw-away, garbage-quality gear.
High-quality systems are superfluous these days, but, for the longest time, most hacking, including back then, was done predominantly on discarded, semi-obsolete, well-worn gear, just as depicted in the film.
That was because I had used the word in the positive sense: hobbyist, tinkerer.
The hacker-versus-cracker quibble was already festering.
Well, technically this happens all the time with website hacks and what not. The problem is that the "culture" of hacking is a lot like taggers. Its an attempt to promote your group or brand. Its childish bragging.
While the Headroom hack was childish as well, it was also completely absurdist and didn't promote anything. I think its rare to see something like this where the hackers aren't pushing some agenda or self-promoting. From an aesthetic perspective it was pretty impressive. It really sells the idea of being creepy and mysterious.
As a nerdy Chicago tween at that time, this stuff was legendary. These guys became heroes on all the local BBS's and in the local geekdom. Man, I miss those days.
I agree, I got to thinking about it and there really isn't anything in the way of "hacks" anymore that isn't pushing an (often absurd) agenda (like "Anonymous"). It's sort of a shame that everyone has to push an agenda, but I guess that's nothing new. There was really a cool aura to the Max Headroom broadcast that you don't ever really see in other "hacks."
That being said, I think it would be cool to have a HackThisSignal (maybe like HackThisSite?) where you might encourage people to pull off more things like the Max Headroom intrusion in a more controlled manner. It kind of ruins a little bit of the aesthetic, not being totally unexpected, but I think it would be a cool way to show off this sort of gag and learn more about Microwave/RF systems without necessarily being on the wrong side of the law.
Nowadays you could probably get some attention, both positive and negative, from defacing the website of a huge company. Maybe if you got "Facebook" to show up as "Fuckbook" for thousands of users for 10-15 minutes or something. Otherwise, there are so many websites and we are so accustomed to having access to a sort of mass communication that the rarity and impact is diminished.
I remember being a kid in the 80's and a teen in the 90's and even then, I was blown away when I learned what public access TV was. The idea that you could actually get on TV!! as a normal person and run a show seemed insane. TV was that thing that talked at you. There were 13 channels for us frugal or less well-off families and there were maybe 50 or 60 for our luckier friends. Other than that, it was something out of reach.
We played with camcorders and tape decks, playing at being radio DJs or TV personalities but the idea of something like a Shoutcast station in the late 90's or a Youtube channel in the 2000's would have fried my tiny brain as a hyperactive, creative little kid.
So not only was someone subverting the technical systems of a big company but they were doing it to TV. At least to me, that was one of those larger than life things that took place elsewhere and the rest of us just watched. Co-opting a TV broadcast was like getting the policeman's mythical "master key" or sneaking into the White House.
The submission rate is almost exponential. Also goes to show how easy it is to churn out interesting articles by digging into the HN archives and picking up forgotten stories.
Considering how quickly stuff gets recycled on other sites, I'd say this is a pretty good track record.
I get bothered by it regularly. I don't mind HN talking about it, because the people here are a bit different than the average joe, but...Over the last 3-4 years, i've been approached by three or four different filmmakers, some with fairly serious pedigrees, who were looking to adapt the AMA into a screenplay or documentary. I don't think its right to do that, for a variety of reasons, so I've politely declined. I did one podcast a few years ago that lasted like 3 hours, and just declined another podcast (Reddit's "Upvoted" series) a week or so ago.
Part of why I'm not too hot on talking about the whole Headroom thing is that invariably, people end up accusing me of being Max. Bleh. The guy who did the Vice/Motherboard article at one point even threatened to do as much. Didn't speak with him for months after that little stunt.
Once was amusing and intriguing. If it happened all the time, I'd get annoyed. Especially if they continued to interrupt Dr. Who.
http://www.macdougallelect.com/bio.html
I remember because I think he want to WPI.
Edit: more here: http://www.skepticfiles.org/cowtext/100/captmidn.htm
Kinda like people have picked up the activities, ignore the goals, and are "cargo cult"-ing it into the ground.
Like you have a million schoolkids writing dirty limericks on the bathroom walls for every real-life "Turk 182".
I mean, considering:
1) The video cuts out -precisely- at the point in Dr. Who where the guy says "A massive electric shock -- he must have died instantly!" ...probably accidental, but just perfect..lol
2) The block of shows on WTTW (Channel 11) on Sunday night were often very, very avant-garde in content. To be able to take it to an entirely higher level like that, against the backdrop of already weird stuff...thats just priceless..
3) The fact that the public was split between those who found it hilarious, and those who found it frightening... what more could you ask for?
As a hack, with all its warts and confusion, it's a triple axle quadruple salcow kind of performance. :)
BTW, speaking of weird -- I've been asked on occasion, how weird. Check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBgEjyn8ArM
This is "The Shivering Man". There was a show that aired late nights on Channel 11 at the time, called Image Union.. Image Union was sort of a showcase for short subject amateur/experimental/avant-garde films and videos. It was on the air about maybe half an hour or an hour after Doctor Who every sunday night, and usually ended the scheduled broadcast day.
One of the films that aired on Image Union around that time (1987-1989 or so) was "The Shivering Man". Here, you've got a ballet dancer in a red dress jumping around guy covered in talcum powder having a conniption fit/seizure, followed up by a fat bald guy in a chair who, uh, suggestively..sprinkles.. when the chair is shaken..lol..
Tame by internet standards, but totally WTF-worthy by late 80's Chicago public television standards. By running this sort of stuff, they were all but inviting a visit from Max, if you ask me. Weird attracts weird.
Later, maybe - on my rooted tablet, with adblock etc..