Sometimes hacking and cracking coexist. Examples include the reverse engineering of CSS (DVD encryption), figuring out how to jailbreak an iPhone, and even more questionable acts like writing a virus to innoculate systems against other viruses. These cracks required technical proficiency, real thought and good, old-fashioned effort.

Sometimes cracking is just mindless. I'm guessing most people here don't respect that. Had the book been a series of "...and then I paid this dude $N and he handed me a new passport", I don't think it would have hit the front page.

I've always considered "hacking" relating to making a system do something it wasn't intended to do. You have to know the system well enough and be creative enough to go beyond its perceived limitations. I get a kick out of being creative; others get a kick out of having power over something. In either case, the real thrill is feeling alive and not feeling like a mindless robot.

It is funny we're having this conversation, considering Jason Calacanis's open letter, "Why I hired a felon" relating to one of his employees at Mahalo: http://calacanis.com/2009/03/05/why-i-employed-a-felon/

I've always felt that 'cracking' was a form of hacking. [Stallman]{http://www.stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html} among others, considers hacking to mean exploring the limits of what is possible, in a spirit of playful cleverness. This includes 'cracking' as well as FOSS, and startups and whatnot.

It can be, but it isn't always, and if you go by the numbers then most cracking is not hacking. Running a script does not include playful cleverness.

Stallman also considers clever use of chopsticks a 'hack'; mileage varies on that one.