Hacking disrupts systems and distributes free software to algorithmically reshape the material world.

Building on this heritage, we argue that hacking code/spaces – manipulating for subversion rather than inoperability – represents a key moment of transgressive power within modern society. Coleman refers to hacking as “a site where craft and craftiness converge” (2016, p. 161), also understood as a clever and non-obvious solution to problem-solving especially related to gaining access to resources (often digital). The term comes from computing and Levy’s (1984) characterisation of hackers as prioritising open information, deconstructing systems and community sharing. Central to this definition and actual practice is that the motivation for hacking is not necessarily a political project that easily conforms to offline activism or resistance. Despite this apolitical bent, Coleman argues that hackers’ actions are transgressive in that they represent cooperative projects that “experiment in the making of a social commonwealth; it is there where the hard work of freedom is practiced” (2013, p. 210). This produces a “particular geography of resistance” (Coleman, 2014, p. 393), such as the decentralised network used by the hacker group Anonymous that coalesces around various projects driven by emotive energy (e.g., exposure of a gang rape) via available cracks in computing systems (lax password security and low-cost distribution). According to Coleman this structures resistance so that short-term power is achievable for brief durations, while long-term dominance by any single group or person is virtually impossible. ... In this way, the multitudinal ‘nature’ of Anonymous precludes its subjection to either aspirational figures working internally, or external figure. (2014, pp. 393–394) In other words, hacking can temporarily subvert or redirect attention, resources or rules by exploiting cracks in computer systems to achieve short-term goals. The selection of these goals, however, need not be driven by desire for democratic process, inclusivity or avoiding harm, making outcomes quite uneven and even potentially injurious to individuals only peripherally connected to the ostensible aim of an action. Importantly for this paper, these analyses of hacking emphasise the ethos and organisation of this practice rather than the technology, suggesting that hacking extends beyond the manipulation of computers. For example, Garrett (2013) calls the practice of urban explorers “place hacking” (see also Dodge & Kitchin, 2006). This kind of hacking also prioritises information-sharing and community and focuses on understanding how systems – in this case the built environment of cities – fit together and how one gains access to parts that are normally closed off (Garrett, 2013). While the motivations behind hacking can be diverse – exploration, personal satisfaction, reputational enhancement, etc. – its continued and expanded use echoes long-standing social practices (DeBord, 1995; Lefebvre, 1968). Moreover, while urban explorers primarily see their motives as apolitical, the transgressive nature of them imbues them with politics because they allow one to “rethink not just one’s own identity but also the relationship between power and urban space” (Garrett, 2013, p. 8). Thus, to hack is to transgress and thereby actuate a moment of power relative to the larger capitalist structures in which we live. Even when hacking – be it creating free software, accessing and distributing incriminating materials, drifting through a city or playful mischief – is not deemed overtly political by its practitioners, the transgressive power and ethical concerns remain. Given its transgressive power, the practices and ethics of code/space hacking of the economy and everyday life becomes of fundamental interest. Like other hackers, code/space hackers seek to understand how systems function (in this case how the material world and code are combined via algorithms) in order to access restricted spaces of direct interest or benefit for them. Whereas computer hackers might use scripts to search for unsecured computer ports and space hackers might hop a fence to enter an abandoned factory, code/space hackers alternatively use digital and material elements to access the opportunities and offerings of the hybrid spaces of our economy and everyday lives.