++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
                       HACKER ENGLISH
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


I spend a lot of time talking to people who speak English as
a second or third language and I  have  come  to  appreciate
many  aspects of the exchange. Firstly, word choice is often
unlikely, evocative, and even meaningful in a sort  of  his-
torical  sense.  Last  summer I was locked inside a bathroom
overnight in Paris (long story ...) and when  the  locksmith
finally arrived in the morning he declared that the lock had
``gained independence'' from the doorknob. On a bus in  Ger-
many some weeks later, the driver explained delays by noting
that the highways were  undergoing  a  series  of  ``repara-
tions.''  Translation is not simply between equivalent words
and compatible syntaxes, but between  entire  cultural  con-
texts  and  values;  revolution, mass humiliation, all these
deep psycho-cultural trauma pass through language in  trans-
lation.

     But  most  of the time I appreciate the absence of lan-
guage more than  its  revealing  usage.  Conversations  tend
towards  long  silences, thoughts are whittled down to their
most terse and precise expression,  facial  expressions  and
eye  contact  replace nuanced speech to communicate the sub-
jective measures of comfort, anxiety, trust, confidence, &c.
There's  little  use in correcting a mistaken conjugation if
the verbs and nouns are close enough, and  you  realize  how
little  must  be  said once there's such a high cost in con-
certed effort to accomplish any spoken communication.

     The sincerity with which I approach malformed  attempts
to  communicate through partially-learned languages is by no
means universal. ``Errors'' of diction and syntax--in  sneer
quotes  because  you'd  need  to  be in the French political
establishment to support a  top-down  linguistic  decree  of
correctness--are mocked in the most malicious and xenophobic
forms of exclusion. And even one step  below  this  explicit
malice,  the  more-  or less-predictable mistranslations are
fodder for the full gamut of supercilious humor  from  slap-
stick  (see ``Engrish'') to the most subtle of irony (``Lan-
guage Log'').

     Back in America, the  thoughtless,  throw-away  use  of
language  is  devastating.  My  first stop after five months
abroad is an impromptu high school reunion at a  collegetown
bar and no quantity of neither booze nor banter can reassure
me that my former classmates are on their way to  actualized
or  even  contented  lives. I had just about forgotten about
the existence of basketball, but its  role  here  is  to  do
nothing  but  exist, to be a coherent referent that provides
comfort in its perpetual recounting and  stable  reconstruc-
tion,  instead  of  the  uncertainty  outside  of its narrow



                             -2-


confines. Smalltalk depends upon and confirms an agreed-upon
ordering  of the world, while the loneliness and decontextu-
alization of solo travel evidence the  provincial,  existen-
tial,  fraud of this order. It might seem that going through
childhood and adolescence together would open up deep, effi-
cient  lines  of communication but instead we grasp to mass-
media icons and simulations, reinforcing in gesture and tone
the  lie  that  there's nothing more to say. Conversation is
littered with the noise of a mass culture that has lost  any
personal  meaning, yet through the noise I manage two excep-
tional and moving exchanges with old friends about  betrayal
and  the  musical expression. Lack of shared language, then,
is not making communication difficult so much as making  the
difficulty  of communication apparent. If I had expected the
change  of  place  and  language  alone  to  enable   deeper
exchanges, I was bound to be disappointed.

     In fact, language difference is only one obstruction to
communication, and meaning is not predictably attenuated  by
obstructions.  A  letter that takes weeks to deliver, spotty
cell phone reception, a limited text messaging plan, all  of
these  barriers  force us to consider what is most important
and to increase the contrast and clarity  of  what  we  say.
Speaking  through  an imperfect channel of communication--as
all channels are--opens up new possibilities and even allows
for  their  explicit  design.  A  precursor  to  Twitter was
designed to coordinate micro-level resistance  at  the  sham
conventions  of the Republican as well as Democratic parties
in 2004, and Twitter in  its  pairing  of  extreme  message-
length  restrictions with massive, mobile distribution still
finds uses by revolutionaries capitalizing on  its  peculiar
constraints.  Poets long ago preempted information theorists
in use of terseness and structured data  to  guarantee  data
integrity through the unreliable medium of oral culture, and
in their constrained medium the poets embedded  the  deepest
known  packets of emotional transmission. Today in Kansas, a
middle-aged woman is caring for an ailing neighbor a  couple
hundred  miles  away  with whom an affinity was developed by
adding captions to pictures of cats on a website called  ``I
Can Has Cheezburger''; the woman's son is a prodigious engi-
neer who reports that  the  most  sophisticated  information
company  in  the world conducts its frank internal discourse
similarly through image captions on an in-house ``meme  gen-
erator.''

     Companies  like  Facebook would love to design the next
instance of communication media as some fixed-form, central-
ized,  ad-supported, virtual shopping mall network where all
correspondence is routed through the company and all  activ-
ity  subject to arbitrary approval of corporate whim/policy.
Even notwithstanding the egregious misuses of power (kicking
off  labor organizers, turning over activists to the police,
&c) and the single point of failure (just one lonely node of
the  network  for  a  malicious  power-broker to block), the



                             -3-


entire premise of the online ``social network'' is based  on
the  deliberately  constructed  lie  of  private  space, the
premise that all exchange is simply  between  you  and  your
``friends,''  as  if  Facebook or Google or anyone were able
somehow to stop photos or  messages  sent  through  them  to
200-odd  acquaintances from leaving this network. These com-
panies want you open to the world at your most intimate  and
unguarded  (to  track desires, pitch goods and services) and
are  indifferent  to  any  resultant  vulnerability,  be  it
social,  political,  or  professional.  Treated  as a public
broadcasting mechanism, then, these websites dictate  narrow
usages, terms, and conditions and could be seen as a massive
regression from the open Internet  (or  even  early  portals
like GeoCities) in nearly every regard (ie. by rigidly stan-
dardizing the form of all content, removing for example even
the  most  basic ability to define hyperlinks). Social Media
Co make private claim to a canonical interface for  mediated
inter-personal  communication,  which  they then deceptively
and deliberately push more public than  we  expect.  Coupled
with  a  monotonous, modernist, design, the sum is a cynical
and distressing vision for the future.

     There's a mass movement working to subvert, regain con-
trol over, and reinvent corporate mass media, ``social'' and
otherwise. Maybe it's less ``movement''  than  old-fashioned
coalition:  academics representing new computer science pro-
grams; nihilistic  info-anarchists;  cipherpunks;  bloggers;
d.i.y.  communitarians;  libertarians  and  lefties;  ``free
software'' programmers; the hive brain; ...

     From this creative hodgepodge come a  long  listing  of
viable  alternatives:  the  core  software infrastructure on
which  the  Internet  (including  the  corporate   Internet)
depends;  Wikipedia,  taken  both  as incredible resource as
well as a massively successful public network of  collabora-
tive  knowledge building; tools for making, aggregating, and
filtering blogs, community portals, fora, chatrooms, mailing
lists;  and  a  full  suite  of  protocol  and software that
deliver strong encryption, perhaps the only responsible pre-
condition  for  translation of a private sphere to a digital
network.

     All of these cells, not quite  splinters,  hardly  even
internally  consistent, came from around the world last week
to gather at the Chaos Communication Camp  in  an  abandoned
military base some 70km outside of Berlin, and here is where
through broken English, hackers (I use this term to  messily
encompass the aforementioned contradictory impulses) config-
ure their own cell network, wire  in  a  link  to  the  free
Internet,  pitch  tents  into  temporary  villages, and come
together around the idea of radically decentered control  of
modern  techno-communication  infrastructure.  And so in the
context of good-enough English exchanges to  realize  common
communication  interests,  I  was  puzzled and amused by the



                             -4-


preponderance of a particular t-shirt  at  this  conference.
The  shirt,  black  with  blocky white text reading ALL YOUR
BASE ARE BELONG TO US, quotes from the now-infamous  botched
translation  of the intro scene to an old Sega game from the
Japanese into this unfortunate English. But while  the  gen-
eral  level  of  English spoken by most attendees was excel-
lent, and certainly good enough  for  sharing  projects  and
building  solidarity,  English  skills were not so good that
such t-shirt diction deserved a dismissive chuckle of  supe-
riority.  It's  not  even  clear to me that many wearing the
shirt even understood what was ``wrong'' with the  sentence!
One  explanation  is that the phrase occupies such a notable
place in video game/hacker history that it is understood and
appreciated  as a ``fail'' even without a deep understanding
of why that is, and even if such linguistic kludges will  be
earnestly  used and excused while wearing the shirt. Or per-
haps the meaning of the shirt is irrelevant and  it's  about
some abstract group affiliation or vague, implied, affinity.

     The  final  explanation for the shirt, which by the way
is my personal preference, is that the abnormal  diction  on
the t-shirt is beside the point but that the text still car-
ries the weight of meaning. It is a hacker conference, after
all,  and  so there's a real possibility that the underlying
message of victory and domination, encoded into Japanese  in
1989,  has  survived two linguistic degradations and over 22
years to find an unlikely resonance here in the appropriated
hangars  of an East German military base denominated by per-
haps a not-so-broken English. As a hacker dictum, then,  ALL
YOUR  BASE  ARE BELONG TO US: when it comes to the future of
media and communication infrastructure, we can only hope so.

     --R.M.O., Berlin, August 2011