The parent commenter has articulated the issue broadly and imprecisely but effectively. You're noting the imprecision and snagging on it. The issue is subtle. It's not a battle over the word "hacker". It's a complaint over the migrating center of gravity of a particular subculture. It bothers Eric that someone else is setting the standard for the (gag) hacktivist response to WL. Eric would like his (once relevent, always inessential) magazine to set that standard instead of teenagers from 4chan.
You can sum his "press release" up thus: "Kids these days...".
Apropos nothing: I love this particular story. It's a great litmus test. Is it important to you that the "editor" of 2600 has "condemned" "Anonymous"? Good to know.
I attempting to do a bit more than just snagging on his imprecise language. Broadly, I am trying to develop a critical theory for interpreting various social phenomena on the net.
I do agree with you, Thomas, that the battle is over a migrating center of gravity, [axis mundi] and I also view it as a litmus test. In some sense it is important that Emmanuel has condemned Anon because it clarifies the philosophical and religious issues at the heart of the debate. It is my goal to bring out these facets of internet culture for people to recognize and understand. I find it fascinating.
You can sum his "press release" up thus: "Kids these days...".
Apropos nothing: I love this particular story. It's a great litmus test. Is it important to you that the "editor" of 2600 has "condemned" "Anonymous"? Good to know.