[database_lost]

> "Source code is a version of computer software which is usually much easier to read and understand than the end version in a finished product, and could be used to reverse engineer parts of the product."

This excerpt is another example of why we need better computer literacy, starting with journalists.

[rwmj]

Why? It seems a fair description of source code for readers who would not be familiar with the term. (You could argue that many more people should be software literate given that software is taking over the world, but that's a different argument.)

[bshimmin]

It's a poor definition by itself (though it's hard to explain "source code" succinctly without also getting into terms like "compiling", all of which means very little to someone not familiar with software development - I think a significant number of lay people honestly believe we just enter zeroes and ones all day!), but the bit about reverse engineering makes more sense in the context of the very next paragraph:

> "For example, the Frostbite engine, which hackers claim to have the source code for, is a powerful game creation tool used in dozens of games, from FIFA to the Battlefield series and several recent Star Wars games from EA."

[hutzlibu]

"though it's hard to explain "source code" succinctly without also getting into terms like "compiling""

I use the term "blueprint" as in the plans of a architect for a house. While the running software, is the finished, build house.

[homarp]

if you know assembler, everything is source code... so the definition makes some sense.

Access to source code makes RE easier but you can do without ( e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26130320 )