Definition argument here, look for the break for my on-topic comments…
As a developer, I dislike that definition. Whenever a developer talks about ‘hacking’ some code, it’s nearly always pejorative in context: ‘It’s an ugly hack, but it works. Technically. Don’t ask me to revisit it again, though.’ There are ‘hack-a-thons’ where a group of coders get together to try and make something interesting.
I suppose the definition depends on the object of the sentence. ‘Hack’ is a verb. If you use it to refer to something you did to code, then yes, the definition fits ‘They hacked together a script to read all decklists and attach names to them.’ is an accurate statement. The other definition is something you do to security systems, and that definition doesn’t fit. ‘They hacked netrunnerdb.com to get access to private decklists’ is not an accurate statement or use of the word ‘hacked’, in a purely technical sense of the word.
We can chalk it up to English being really bad at specific meanings and using the same word for different meanings.
As to why I’m being pedantic? I dunno, it feels like it’s part of my industry’s jargon is being misused. Shrug. Also it’s easier to argue meaning of words than to properly convey how I feel about this occurrence
Yes and no. Security was a secondary concern to ease of sharing decklists with others. (From an outside viewpoint.) I don’t feel this script bypassed any security of NRDB. That doesn’t mean I endorse it, of course… I don’t feel it was looked at as a security feature at all, instead being viewed as a Quality of Life improvement. Before, you couldn’t share decklists without specifically publishing them. Now, you can poke a hole into your account and allow NRDB to show people your list if they give the appropriate deck ID number. (The main reason I feel this wasn’t looked at as a security feature? You still can’t look at decklists of people who don’t have that box checked. The security wasn’t broken.)
I’m honestly pretty sure that if NRDB didn’t show name of author along with the list and the ID number wasn’t sequential (someone else noted that a salt should be used), that this scraping would actually be viewed as a net positive, because it would more easily facilitate deck analytics. The issue is using it to associate decklists with specific names, which is Not Good.