When we think of the people who make our lives miserable by hacking into computers, or spreading malicious viruses, most of us imagine an unpopular teenage boy, brilliant but geeky, venting his frustrations* from the safety of a suburban bedroom.

Actually, these stereotypes are just that — stereotypes — according to Sarah Gordon, an expert in computer viruses and security technology, and a Senior Research Fellow with Symantec Security Response. Since 1992, Gordon has studied the psychology of virus writers.

“A hacker or a virus writer is just as likely to be the guy next door to you,” she says, “or the kid at the checkout line bagging your groceries. Your average hacker is not necessarily some Goth type dressed entirely in black and sporting a nose ring: she may very well be a 50-year-old female”.

The virus writers Gordon has come to know have varied backgrounds; while predominately male, some are female. Some are solidly academic, while others are athletic.

Many have friendship with members of the opposite sex, good relationships with their parents and families; most are popular with their peers. They don’t spend all their time in the basement. One virus writer volunteers in his local library, working with elderly people. One of them is a poet and a musician, another is an electrical engineer, and others work for a university quantum physics department.

Hackers and virus writers are actually very different, distinct populations. “Hackers tend to have a more thorough knowledge of systems and a more highly developed skill set,” Gordon says, “whereas virus writers generally take a shallower approach to what they’re doing.” Hackers tend to have a much deeper knowledge of individual applications and are still regarded as being somewhat “sexy” in today’s counterculture, while virus writing is looked down upon, mostly for its random damage and lack of required skill.

*venting his frustrations – getting rid of feelings of anger or resentment.

Neil Anderson. Active skills for reading: Book 4.
Thomson/Heinle, 2002, p. 17 (with adaptations).

When we think of the people who make our lives miserable by hacking into computers, or spreading malicious viruses, most of us imagine an unpopular teenage boy, brilliant but geeky, venting his frustrations* from the safety of a suburban bedroom.

Actually, these stereotypes are just that — stereotypes — according to Sarah Gordon, an expert in computer viruses and security technology, and a Senior Research Fellow with Symantec Security Response. Since 1992, Gordon has studied the psychology of virus writers.

“A hacker or a virus writer is just as likely to be the guy next door to you,” she says, “or the kid at the checkout line bagging your groceries. Your average hacker is not necessarily some Goth type dressed entirely in black and sporting a nose ring: she may very well be a 50-year-old female”.

The virus writers Gordon has come to know have varied backgrounds; while predominately male, some are female. Some are solidly academic, while others are athletic.

Many have friendship with members of the opposite sex, good relationships with their parents and families; most are popular with their peers. They don’t spend all their time in the basement. One virus writer volunteers in his local library, working with elderly people. One of them is a poet and a musician, another is an electrical engineer, and others work for a university quantum physics department.

Hackers and virus writers are actually very different, distinct populations. “Hackers tend to have a more thorough knowledge of systems and a more highly developed skill set,” Gordon says, “whereas virus writers generally take a shallower approach to what they’re doing.” Hackers tend to have a much deeper knowledge of individual applications and are still regarded as being somewhat “sexy” in today’s counterculture, while virus writing is looked down upon, mostly for its random damage and lack of required skill.

*venting his frustrations – getting rid of feelings of anger or resentment.

Neil Anderson. Active skills for reading: Book 4.
Thomson/Heinle, 2002, p. 17 (with adaptations).

When we think of the people who make our lives miserable by hacking into computers, or spreading malicious viruses, most of us imagine an unpopular teenage boy, brilliant but geeky, venting his frustrations* from the safety of a suburban bedroom.

Actually, these stereotypes are just that — stereotypes — according to Sarah Gordon, an expert in computer viruses and security technology, and a Senior Research Fellow with Symantec Security Response. Since 1992, Gordon has studied the psychology of virus writers.

“A hacker or a virus writer is just as likely to be the guy next door to you,” she says, “or the kid at the checkout line bagging your groceries. Your average hacker is not necessarily some Goth type dressed entirely in black and sporting a nose ring: she may very well be a 50-year-old female”.

The virus writers Gordon has come to know have varied backgrounds; while predominately male, some are female. Some are solidly academic, while others are athletic.

Many have friendship with members of the opposite sex, good relationships with their parents and families; most are popular with their peers. They don’t spend all their time in the basement. One virus writer volunteers in his local library, working with elderly people. One of them is a poet and a musician, another is an electrical engineer, and others work for a university quantum physics department.

Hackers and virus writers are actually very different, distinct populations. “Hackers tend to have a more thorough knowledge of systems and a more highly developed skill set,” Gordon says, “whereas virus writers generally take a shallower approach to what they’re doing.” Hackers tend to have a much deeper knowledge of individual applications and are still regarded as being somewhat “sexy” in today’s counterculture, while virus writing is looked down upon, mostly for its random damage and lack of required skill.

*venting his frustrations – getting rid of feelings of anger or resentment.

Neil Anderson. Active skills for reading: Book 4.
Thomson/Heinle, 2002, p. 17 (with adaptations).

When we think of the people who make our lives miserable by hacking into computers, or spreading malicious viruses, most of us imagine an unpopular teenage boy, brilliant but geeky, venting his frustrations* from the safety of a suburban bedroom.

Actually, these stereotypes are just that — stereotypes — according to Sarah Gordon, an expert in computer viruses and security technology, and a Senior Research Fellow with Symantec Security Response. Since 1992, Gordon has studied the psychology of virus writers.

“A hacker or a virus writer is just as likely to be the guy next door to you,” she says, “or the kid at the checkout line bagging your groceries. Your average hacker is not necessarily some Goth type dressed entirely in black and sporting a nose ring: she may very well be a 50-year-old female”.

The virus writers Gordon has come to know have varied backgrounds; while predominately male, some are female. Some are solidly academic, while others are athletic.

Many have friendship with members of the opposite sex, good relationships with their parents and families; most are popular with their peers. They don’t spend all their time in the basement. One virus writer volunteers in his local library, working with elderly people. One of them is a poet and a musician, another is an electrical engineer, and others work for a university quantum physics department.

Hackers and virus writers are actually very different, distinct populations. “Hackers tend to have a more thorough knowledge of systems and a more highly developed skill set,” Gordon says, “whereas virus writers generally take a shallower approach to what they’re doing.” Hackers tend to have a much deeper knowledge of individual applications and are still regarded as being somewhat “sexy” in today’s counterculture, while virus writing is looked down upon, mostly for its random damage and lack of required skill.

*venting his frustrations – getting rid of feelings of anger or resentment.

Neil Anderson. Active skills for reading: Book 4.
Thomson/Heinle, 2002, p. 17 (with adaptations).

When we think of the people who make our lives miserable by hacking into computers, or spreading malicious viruses, most of us imagine an unpopular teenage boy, brilliant but geeky, venting his frustrations* from the safety of a suburban bedroom.

Actually, these stereotypes are just that — stereotypes — according to Sarah Gordon, an expert in computer viruses and security technology, and a Senior Research Fellow with Symantec Security Response. Since 1992, Gordon has studied the psychology of virus writers.

“A hacker or a virus writer is just as likely to be the guy next door to you,” she says, “or the kid at the checkout line bagging your groceries. Your average hacker is not necessarily some Goth type dressed entirely in black and sporting a nose ring: she may very well be a 50-year-old female”.

The virus writers Gordon has come to know have varied backgrounds; while predominately male, some are female. Some are solidly academic, while others are athletic.

Many have friendship with members of the opposite sex, good relationships with their parents and families; most are popular with their peers. They don’t spend all their time in the basement. One virus writer volunteers in his local library, working with elderly people. One of them is a poet and a musician, another is an electrical engineer, and others work for a university quantum physics department.

Hackers and virus writers are actually very different, distinct populations. “Hackers tend to have a more thorough knowledge of systems and a more highly developed skill set,” Gordon says, “whereas virus writers generally take a shallower approach to what they’re doing.” Hackers tend to have a much deeper knowledge of individual applications and are still regarded as being somewhat “sexy” in today’s counterculture, while virus writing is looked down upon, mostly for its random damage and lack of required skill.

*venting his frustrations – getting rid of feelings of anger or resentment.

Neil Anderson. Active skills for reading: Book 4.
Thomson/Heinle, 2002, p. 17 (with adaptations).

Sendo a informação um bem que agrega valor a uma empresa ou a um indivíduo, é preciso fazer uso de recursos de tecnologia da informação de maneira apropriada, ou seja, é preciso utilizar ferramentas, sistemas ou outros meios que façam das informações um diferencial competitivo.

Além disso, é necessário buscar soluções que tragam bons resultados, mas que tenham o menor custo possível. A questão é que não existe fórmula mágica para se determinar como utilizar da melhor maneira as informações.

Tudo depende da cultura, do mercado, do segmento e de outros aspectos de uma empresa. As escolhas precisam ser bem feitas. Do contrário, gastos desnecessários ou, ainda, perda de desempenho podem ocorrer. Por exemplo, se uma empresa renova sua base de computadores comprando máquinas com processadores velozes, muita memória e placa de vídeo 3D para serem utilizadas por empregados que apenas precisam acessar a Internet ou trabalhar com pacotes de escritório, a companhia faz gastos desnecessários.

Comprar máquinas de boa qualidade não significa comprar as mais caras, mas aquelas que possuam os recursos necessários. Por outro lado, imagine que uma empresa tenha compre computadores com vídeo integrado à placa-mãe e monitor de 15 polegadas para profissionais que trabalham com Autocad. Para estes, o ideal é comprar computadores que suportem aplicações pesadas e um monitor de, pelo menos, 17 polegadas. Máquinas mais baratas certamente conseguiriam rodar o Autocad, porém com lentidão, e o monitor com área de visão menor daria mais trabalho aos profissionais. Nesse caso, a aquisição das máquinas tem reflexo direto no desempenho dos empregados. Por isso, é preciso saber quais as necessidades de cada usuário.

Emerson Alecrim. Internet: <www.infowester.com> (com adaptações).

Sendo a informação um bem que agrega valor a uma empresa ou a um indivíduo, é preciso fazer uso de recursos de tecnologia da informação de maneira apropriada, ou seja, é preciso utilizar ferramentas, sistemas ou outros meios que façam das informações um diferencial competitivo.

Além disso, é necessário buscar soluções que tragam bons resultados, mas que tenham o menor custo possível. A questão é que não existe fórmula mágica para se determinar como utilizar da melhor maneira as informações.

Tudo depende da cultura, do mercado, do segmento e de outros aspectos de uma empresa. As escolhas precisam ser bem feitas. Do contrário, gastos desnecessários ou, ainda, perda de desempenho podem ocorrer. Por exemplo, se uma empresa renova sua base de computadores comprando máquinas com processadores velozes, muita memória e placa de vídeo 3D para serem utilizadas por empregados que apenas precisam acessar a Internet ou trabalhar com pacotes de escritório, a companhia faz gastos desnecessários.

Comprar máquinas de boa qualidade não significa comprar as mais caras, mas aquelas que possuam os recursos necessários. Por outro lado, imagine que uma empresa tenha compre computadores com vídeo integrado à placa-mãe e monitor de 15 polegadas para profissionais que trabalham com Autocad. Para estes, o ideal é comprar computadores que suportem aplicações pesadas e um monitor de, pelo menos, 17 polegadas. Máquinas mais baratas certamente conseguiriam rodar o Autocad, porém com lentidão, e o monitor com área de visão menor daria mais trabalho aos profissionais. Nesse caso, a aquisição das máquinas tem reflexo direto no desempenho dos empregados. Por isso, é preciso saber quais as necessidades de cada usuário.

Emerson Alecrim. Internet: <www.infowester.com> (com adaptações).