>>18
I didn't say one shoud do that. Not literally all information is interesting from a hacker's perspective. How AES works for example would be. That I have a futon in my livingroom is not. If OP ever has any hope of being a hacker, (s)he would be able to use common sense to rationalize stuff like this easily. Also, making more names (black-hat, cracker, etc.) are a bad idea. Let things stand as they are. Someone who reads your email is a stalker no more or less than someone who reads your real mail. A pickpocket is a theif just like someone who cons you on Ebay. Making up labels just because some electronic equipment was involved just gives people something new to call hackers that they don't like. Besides, you don't hear "cracker" being said on CNN. Hacker still means "criminal with a computer" to 90% of people. And it will until there's a real effort to say "criminals are criminals regardless of the means because it is the end that makes them criminals"