I do recall an interesting post making the rounds a while back about hacking Starbucks' cappuccino. The premise was this: Starbucks has tall, grande, and venti sizes posted on its menus, but if you ask for a short dry cappuccino, you save money and get a better drink.
That seems to fit the spirit of hacking a cappuccino :-)
That being said, I would agree that "Hack" may not have been the best choice of words to use to describe the article. I find it interesting that everyone here is attacking Wired's Design Of Experiment for this article. I suppose I read the article in the context that it was a spoof and found it very amusing, thinking like-minded people would as well. Perhaps a new experiment is in order... gauge readers' reactions to an article after priming them with various titles for that article. Maybe I should have titled my submission, "Ice as a Commodity" or "Common Sense Wins Again".
Secondly, what a terrible experiment. Even if you accept the premise that coldness vs corn syrup is a worthwhile tradeoff, they don't even mention how long they waited before taking the temperature measurement. A temperature vs time graph might make this article worthwhile.
And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and "hack" my morning coffee, by asking for a cappucino sans live skunk.