Re: sysadmin qualifications (Re: apt-get vs. aptitude)
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 7:11 AM, <berenger.morel@neutralite.org> wrote:
> [...] if you think that people are free to
> give themselves the label they want, so you must accept that other are also
> free to give the labels they want.
> Long time ago, I studied the "dark side of computer sciences", and the first
> things I have learn are that you can not claim to be a hacker, or elite,
> or... If you do so, then people will name you lamer. You are a hacker if
> other people recognize you as such.
There is a difference between the three words.
Elite is something that truly elite people do not try to be. Nor do
they care if they are called such. That's the irony of "l33+".
Hacker is, again, not something you try to be. Either you hack or you
hesitate. People (like me) who tend to talk tend not to hack so much.
System administrator is actually a role that needs to be filled.
> The truth here is simple: you are not what you want, only other people can
> define who you really are.
Which I can acknowledge is relevant about "elite hackers", but I think
it's missing the point about system administrators.
If you (the general "you") own hardware that doesn't have a system
administrator, you need to fix that situation. Maybe it means you need
to step into the role.
--
Joel Rees
Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart.
Reply to: