<p>Part of the tension over hacking can probably be explained by the recent MIT police log, which is published in The Tech and can be found here: Police</a> Log - The Tech. Dozens of laptops have been stolen around the campus. This past summer, a grad student was arrested by campus police after having broken into a supply closet in one of the plasma physics labs. In the report, the student claimed the break-in was just part of a "hack". But what sort of hack would require a student to break into a supply area containing equipment and components worth thousands of dollars? I never found a follow-up to that story, but I do think this kind of incident illustrates the issue. </p>
<p>I believe that MIT should maintain and preserve its traditions, including hacking. My daughter has participated in at least one hack (that I know of) and she designed an admissions poster for MIT's 2012 early admits with a quirky hacking theme. But at the same time, I can also understand the dilemma facing the administration.</p>
<p>CalAlum: There is a code of ethical hacker conduct that is widely known in the MIT community and publicly accessible (it's in every year's edition of How to Get Around MIT, on display in the Stata Center, and probably some other places as well). Student advocates have encouraged administrators and campus police to refer to it when trying to figure out whether someone is hacking or pretending to have been hacking to avoid trouble. Stealing laptops is pretty clearly against this code, as it prohibits stealing.</p>
<p>"The organized students almost exclusively represent demographics that are often associated with hacking, and I wonder if other issues are just a side project."</p>
<p>Which demographics are often associated with hacking?</p>
<p>Fresh tension is brewing on dining. The Tech writes today at <a href="http://tech.mit.edu/V129/N4/blueribbon.html%5B/url%5D">http://tech.mit.edu/V129/N4/blueribbon.html</a> that the administration "kept under wraps" consultant report and directed the consultant to revise it before delivery to the Blue Ribbon Committee. Members of the Undergraduate Association Senate and Executive Board "were concerned about a lack of transparency after a student saw a copy of the independent consultants report to the committee on the desk of an administrator before most members of the Blue Ribbon Dining Committee were notified about the reports completion." The Senate scheduled an "emergency meeting" to discuss the issue.</p>
<p>Again we see the theme of "lack of transparency" along with alleged behind-the-scenes finagling by the administration. </p>
[quote]
Professor Arthur P. Mattuck, who attended the meeting, wrote in an e-mail that "whats in the science core, who teaches it, and who decides these things [is at] the heart of the controversy." He noted that many faculty were asking, "Is change being proposed just for the sake of change, or is something seriously wrong that needs fixing?"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As I see it, the administration is doing a remarkably inept job of communicating and building consensus around its views of these issues. And part of that problem involves trying to "fix" things that aren't broken.</p>
<p>Do you mean East Campus the dorm, or the east campus dorms, composed of EC, Senior Haus, Random, and sometimes Bexley? Because there are certainly hackers that don't live in East Campus, and there are definitely hackers that don't live on the east side.</p>
<p>The workings of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Dining strike me as similar to the back rooms of Washington DC, involving manipulated consultant reports, leaks, and protests. If nothing else, this is a good opportunity for MIT students to learn about real world politics.</p>