It's common for words to get assigned different definitions even within a general topic. It doesn't do any good to cry "foul", unless you are in editorial control of some very influential content outlet. For instance sometimes journalistic associations or the government will issue decrees on usage of controversial words.

I don't think the NY Times or the US government is going to follow your suggested guideline anytime soon. Do a "define: hacker" lookup in Google, and you will see the article uses the term "hacker" correctly according to today's parlance. And the same author and publication could also use "hacker" in terms of your preferred definition in an article on a different subject and still be widely understood.