Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

The Rise of Geekdom

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sat May 24, 2008 10:52 AM
from the news-to-nobody dept.
cynagh0st writes "In what can only be described as the biggest newsflash for the Slashdot community since Microsoft was sued: It is the age of the geek. New York Times Op-Ed columnist and author David Brooks writes a brief article that can be best summed up in the following: All your culture are belong to us. In the article proper he summarizes the rise to power and discusses a technocratic geek dominance on the social construct. He writes, '... the new technology created a range of mental playgrounds where the new geeks could display their cultural capital. The jock can shine on the football field, but the geeks can display their supple sensibilities and well-modulated emotions on their Facebook pages, blogs, text messages and Twitter feeds ... They've created a new definition of what it means to be cool, a definition that leaves out the talents of the jocks, the M.B.A.-types and the less educated ... There are now millions of educated-class types guided by geek manners and status rules.'" I'm thinking Brooks must have been AFK for the 2nd half of the 90s when this started. To be more precise, late 97 ;)
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 24 2008, @10:56AM (#23528332)
    and oil worker.

    Paper shufflers and pixel movers are beginning to get a dose of harsh reality.
    • by jorghis (1000092) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:21AM (#23528590)
      Eh, not really. You think the oil workers are getting paid the big bucks or the nerdy engineers who work for exxon? I knew several people who went to work for big oil from my school, they were all nerdy engineering types and they are all making a small fortune. It isnt the working class guys in bottom rung jobs that are making the big money at oil companies.
      • Having worked offshore in the oil industry for the last 3 years, I can tell you who's making the money. Pretty much everyone working for oil makes good money, but most of us don't make great money. The engineers don't make much more than everyone else (DPOs, riggers, ROV mechanics, etc). In fact, the only ones who pull in over 100 a year are the client reps and execs, captains (if they've been doing it for long enough), project managers, and people who put up capital. The one thing all of these guys hav
      • by c6gunner (950153) on Saturday May 24 2008, @03:01PM (#23530686)

        Eh, not really. You think the oil workers are getting paid the big bucks or the nerdy engineers who work for exxon?


        It depends where you are - supply and demand play a huge role in salaries for what would normally be considered low-end jobs. Out on the tar-sands projects in Alberta welders make $100 an hour, and most pipe-fitters rake in at least $30 an hour. The demand has exceeded supply by a huge margin, so the salaries have gone through the roof, and workers are coming in from all over the place. As a result, housing prices have skyrocketed (from less than 100k to 350k+ in the matter of a couple years), and even the local coffee shops have had to start paying their employees $15 per hour in order to compete for manpower.

        On the other hand, if you're a basic worker employed on some almost-empty oil well in Texas, chances are you're not making much cash at all. That's because the supply of workers there either meets or exceeds the demands of the oil companies.

        You want to create great opportunities for unskilled and semi-skilled labourers? Start drilling in the southern coastal waters, and open up Alaska too. It will create jobs and help the US economy recover, and reduce the amount of money being funnelled into the middle-east. Also, while it probably won't lower the price of gas for consumers, it will slow the climb. Frankly, I'm shocked that Bush hasn't been able to push through legislation to allow the exploitation of at least a few new areas.
        • by jorghis (1000092) on Saturday May 24 2008, @12:06PM (#23529124)
          Wrong, this stereotype of "companies are led by dumb frat guys" is just a combination of nerds feeling down on themselves and dumb jocks trying to convince girls they will be successfull one day.

          Here are Exxon's top five executives, only two on the list didnt work at inherintly nerdy positions at exxon and thats because they joined company later in their careers after they had transitioned to management (ie they started out as nerds):

          CEO has a degree in civil engineering, joined the company as a production engineer.
          Mark Elbers, senior vice president, has a degree in petroleum engineering and joined the company as an engineer.
          Michael Dolan, joined the company working in a research laboratory, also has many academia related positions in engineering.
          Stephen Simon, has a degree in civil engineering.
          Donald Humphries, has a degree in industrial engineering

          I could go through and list every executive working at any of these "big oil" organizations, but you get the idea. We all love to hate on executives, but generally speaking board members want somebody very smart and hardworking to run their multibillion dollar company.

          I guess there may be some areas where the guy at the top of the food chain is a sales guy who cant do algebra, but if the company has any "nerd" positions at all those are generally the people who will rise to the top.
          • Where did I ever say "Dumb frat guys"? If anything, I don't think that geeks (or geekdom) is any special.

            I wasn't particularly talking about oil, but in terms of fortune in general. Oil, tech and manufacturing company execs have background in those industries. News at 11.

            That, however, does not necessarily translate across all industries. Secondly, a background in engineering means nothing. My undergrad was in EE. I'm a management consultant working on completely unrelated stuff. Your point?
              • by Admiral Ag (829695) on Saturday May 24 2008, @05:36PM (#23531822)
                Most of the engineers at my school weren't geeks. They were empty headed people who just saw the dollar signs at the end of the degree (to be fair a portion of them were foreign students who were only interested in the money). Sure, they were smart in the sense that they could do the math and pass the exams, but few of them had ever had an original thought or understood that some things require a different kind of answer. Most regarded D&D with distaste.

                The point is that being an engineer doesn't equal being a geek. Many engineers are boring salary counters.

                The geeks I knew were in departments like film, art and philosophy. These people cared about computers and comics the way that the others cared about their salaries, cars or social status.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        People are always surprised when they find out how much coal miners (or any other type of miner) make. You really have to compare all aspects of the job though. The income of a coal miner may be comparable to that of a bottom rung engineer at Cisco or Google after accounting for bonuses, stock, etc. but consider the lifestyle also. Being a coal miner sucks. Even people who choose to work as coal miners will tell you that being a coal miner sucks. When you work in a job such as a software engineer you g
  • Aw, furrfu! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Megane (129182) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:07AM (#23528438)

    Looks like geekdom has gone mainstream now. Great. Now I gotta find something else to be. I guess otaku still has a couple of years left, though the folks over in Akihabara are probably going to end up making that mainstream too before long.

    And as for 1997, I had a Fidonet BBS back in 1993, then fixed IP DSL since early 2000.

    • if you are someone who tries to find your self-value and distinction in being different by doing stuff that majority does not, that implies a problem with your self-awareness, not what you are refusing to do.

      with your logic, one has to go evil, if the majority of people becomes good. its absurd.
      • While it does seem sad that some people should define themselves merely as 'different' at any expsnse, there are other, more legitimate reasons why the mainstream - whatever that may be - can be argued to be unappealing.

        The problem is that once something goes mainstream, the quality of the content that makes up that culture begins to decline rapidly. People interested in making money enter the game, and try to squeeze out those who are genuinely interested in making something neat. It's happened again and again as various niche cultures are thrust into the mainstream consciousness. For every real, interesting work/artist/idea there are 10 cheap knockoffs being peddled by media/retail companies.

        Music is a perfect example; every time a new genre becomes popular, imitation bands are "discovered" by all the recording companies, and they flood the market with dozens of identical-sounding bands until what was appealing about the culture is eroded by bottom-dollar competition and fear of experimentation with something that already "works".
          • "Use of computer" is hardly a culture in its own right. What I was arguing was that geek culture - what is now the lifestyle and mindset of technology, math, and science, not just their general application - may very well be overwhelmed with junk rip-offs if it becomes big enough to merit attention. If you think that geek culture is immune from this because it doesn't involve "financial aspects", brace yourself. If no one has found a way to monetize it yet (and I'm by NO means saying no one has), they will soon enough, and the big content/media/retail companies, like vultures, will follow shorty thereafter.

            In the case of mom and pops, its easy to ignore them, as they don't hold sway over powerful forces that can influence culture. Big companies looking for the Next Big Thing to exploit are another matter. It's this form of mainstream adoption that causes the signal-to-noise ratio to fall. Over time, the culture identity can be destroyed, as up-and-commers are not often introduced to the "real thing".

            It's happened to me before, and I generally don't quit; I try to find the quality amongst the garbage rather than leaving. But as time goes on, fewer and fewer people try to do their own thing, and more often they just try to imitate the emergent monocolture. In the case of music, interesting bands abandon their own style in order to match the 'norm' so that they can be more popular, and make money. I believe this is called "Selling Out". New artists do much the same thing, but maybe *their* contract requires them to produce 5 identical sounding albums.

            Not only does the new attention not contribute anything, it can actively errode the existing culture - and fast. This kind of cycle isn't usually broken until people are bored with the culture, and move on to something else.
  • I don't think so (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tubal-Cain (1289912) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:09AM (#23528456) Journal

    but the geeks can display their supple sensibilities and well-modulated emotions on their Facebook pages, blogs, text messages and Twitter feeds...
    I would call myself a geek, but I avoid using all those things like the plague. The only thing one could make a case that I use is a blog (/.).
    • by stuntmanmike (1289094) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:57AM (#23528998)
      You're dead on.

      If Holden Caulfield was the sensitive loner from the age of nerd oppression, then Harry Potter was the magical leader in the age of geek empowerment.

      Fucking Harry Potter? What does he think we are, a bunch of overgrown man-children?
    • by fyoder (857358) on Saturday May 24 2008, @01:34PM (#23529942) Homepage Journal

      but the geeks can display their supple sensibilities and well-modulated emotions on their Facebook pages, blogs, text messages and Twitter feeds...
      I would call myself a geek, but I avoid using all those things like the plague. The only thing one could make a case that I use is a blog (/.).
      You're probably an actual geek. Media services consumers are just... well, consumers. They say, "look at me, I'm on teh internet!" whereas the real geek says "Do not bother the man behind the curtain, he's busy making all this shit run".
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Wow, elitist much?

        I geek on virtual machines, I post on LiveJournal. For one, I'm one of many guys behind the curtain, for the other, I'm one of many consumers. I think most of my friends and colleagues would be -more- than happy to call me an "actual geek."

        Personally, I use these services as technology to improve efficiency, which is think is a pretty geeky reason.

        Being an introvert, I only have a few close friends, and I update them personally for the most part. They're not the target audience, really.
  • by AHumbleOpinion (546848) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:11AM (#23528476) Homepage
    They've created a new definition of what it means to be cool, a definition that leaves out the talents of the jocks, the M.B.A.-types and the less educated...

    What makes you think MBA types are not geeks? I am currently in an MBA program and let me assure you that there are plenty of geeks. When classroom discussions turn to Linux, open source, GPL, etc there is no shortage of students to provide a better overview or definition than the text book or case study is offering. There are even leaders in the FOSS community who have decided to pursue MBAs. Some geeks eventually learn that technical expertise is insufficient to make their dreams occur. That business knowledge may also be required.
    • ... there is no shortage of students to provide a better overview or definition than the text book or case study is offering

      Probably tells something about the aspiration level of the 'text book' or 'case study' (singular ?!).

      CC.
    • Geeks are hip. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hey! (33014) on Saturday May 24 2008, @12:41PM (#23529484) Homepage Journal
      Well, to be a geek you have to really, really, really be into something that most people find pointless, incomprehensible, or dull. To be a geek subculture, you have to be organized around something of that nature.

      It follows that while many MBAs may be geeks, the MBA subculture is not a geek subculture. The last time I checked, making money had fairly obvious popular appeal.

      "Cool" is in the eye of the beholder. There's another term that entered youth culture through jazz, with roots that go all the way back to Mother Africa. The word "hip" comes from a West African word "hep", mean "one who knows."

      To be cool, you have to attract the admiration of others. To be hip you must possess knowledge not available to the public at large. For example, I had a friend who'd walk into a certain restaurant on a Friday night and get immediately seated. Even if they had a line waiting, they'd see him at the back of the line and immediately usher him from to a table. That was sort of cool. But it wasn't hip. His secret was available to anybody: you just had to eat there five times a week.

      Now many years ago there used to be a restaurant in my neighborhood that opened at midnight and closed at 6:00am. It catered to an eclectic mix of insomniacs, workers leaving the night shift or going to the graveyard shift, musicians hanging out after their gigs, and vampirish denizens of the night (this was back before anybody had heard of the "goth" subculture).

      Being a regular at that place made you hip.

      I'd say the very definition of "geek" would be "hip" without being recognizably "cool" to most people. Slinging a mean soldering iron makes you hip to electronics, but cool only to your electronics geek buddies.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              Well I am finishing an MBA program at a well regarded school and your anecdotes do not match what I see in 120+ classmates and it does not match what we are taught.

              I never said it was what you were taught, I said it was what many MBAs actually do. I know why they do it because I once asked one I respected about why so many MBAs do things that increase the short-term bottom line at the expense of long-term disaster and he told me how greedy, ambitious MBAs were using the short-term results as a springboa

  • by PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:13AM (#23528500) Journal
    Being an adult geek is one thing - and your peers have generally learned to respect your choice, no matter how they may feel about it...

    But on the school yard, especially for 10-14 year olds, "geeks" still get beat up, and tortured by the "jocks" and the popular kids.

    it might be the age of the geek-y adult, but it is NOT the age of the geek-kid.
    • Absolutely.

      I was interested that TFA cited Harry Potter as a kind of geek icon. Either they didn't read the books, or they think that "geek" = "wearing eyeglasses fixed with sticky-tape". Harry Potter is always doing badly at his classes, is more interested in sports than books, and leaves all the really clever stuff to Hermione. In other words, he's pretty much the quintessential jock! If geek-kids want role models, they need to look somewhere very different.

      • by Joe Tie. (567096) on Saturday May 24 2008, @12:09PM (#23529174)
        Not only that, but after he has Hermione do his work for him he'll proceed to ignore her as anything but an androgynous tool that he'd never actually go out with.
      • I know this could strike a debate ... but Hermione is not too far from "Heroine". Yes she did come across as being a bit conceited and annoying at times, but she was still one of the protagonists in the story and quite often saved the day.

        You have valid points about Harry Potter, but I still feel that Harry Potter was a huge step forward in the world of geek protagonists. My opinion is fueled further by the fact that I just finished watching a re-run of "Saved By The Bell". Boy am I glad the days are over w
        • I know this could strike a debate ... but Hermione is not too far from "Heroine". Yes she did come across as being a bit conceited and annoying at times, but she was still one of the protagonists in the story and quite often saved the day.

          Harry isn't a geek, I agree. But Hermione is definitely a geek-girl! Frankly, I've always been a tad astonished that the Sorting Hat didn't put her into Revenclaw, but I guess her courage must have won out over her geekishness. Either that, or Harry got lucky that th

  • Age of denial (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BPPG (1181851) <bppg1986@gmail.com> on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:15AM (#23528510)
    Any jock can have a facebook, blog, or 'text message'. The real geeks are, and will always be the ones who work in the background.
  • by aredubya74 (266988) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:16AM (#23528528)
    He's a self-described liberal that cheered on our Iraq warmongering, providing the Bush administration with the kind of media cover [progressive.org] they need. His social commentary is equally misguided [rawstory.com], and as such, he's a pundit without a real audience. He's been unapologetic on his cheerleading, wishing upon a star for a 3rd party [rawstory.com] (built on the "centrism" and "bipartisanship" of Joe Lieberman and John McCain). In short, an idiot.
    • He's a self-described liberal

      Not only that, he started his diatribe out with a quote from Dr. Seuss. I think he fancies himself a geek. He should be taken outside and soundly thrashed.

      It's folks like him and Twitter that get us all in trouble.

      • He should be taken outside and soundly thrashed.

        No, that'd make you a jock. You're supposed to snicker at him, make condescending remarks about his writing and journalistic ability, point out every flaw in his reasoning (being as pedantic about it as possible), and all the while saying it with the Comic Book Guy's voice.

    • "He's a self-described liberal...."

      No. He's a conservative, albeit a moderate who feels "estranged" [newyorker.com] from the conservative movement (you'll have to search for the quote). According to the Wikipedia article on him [wikipedia.org], he "started out" as a liberal, but claims to have had a conversion moment during a debate with Milton Friedman. He worked for the conservative National Review. He was an editor for the conservative Wall Street Journal op-ed page. He was an editor for the conservative Weekly Standard.

      He's still an i

  • I don't know. To me, `nerd' has a positive connotation: he or she is a kind of homo universalis

    . A nerd is interested in almost everything and is able to grasp many different subjects on a high level.

    Geeks on the other hand are just simpletons parading around with a little amount of extra knowledge as coloured feathers in a birds ass. They do know more about a subject than the people in their environment and they want the others to know that. However, often enough they are not able to grasp the subject

    • I actually prefer "Geek".

      A nerd is interested in almost everything and is able to grasp many different subjects on a high level.

      That just seems like an "intelligent person". To me, a nerd is a person who is interested in the most esoteric, obscure, technically challenging aspects of every field -- that is, if a nerd plays videogames, they never touch Counter-Strike, they play Core Wars [corewars.org] instead. They don't just watch Star Trek, they know Klingon. They don't just play D&D, they're invariably rules lawyers [wikipedia.org].

      They also have high-pitched whiny voices, wear pocket protectors and thick glasses, are either imposs

  • by Animats (122034) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:18AM (#23528552) Homepage

    Nah. "Geekdom" used to be about doing stuff. Now it's about owning stuff. Marketing has taken over "geek" the way it took over "cool".

  • by bargainsale (1038112) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:18AM (#23528558)
    It's all words, I guess, but I'd say there's more to being a true geek than using Facebook.

    In fact, one of the real oddities of our age is that it depends hugely on high-tech and yet actual knowledge of even elementary scientific principles is still not regarded as mainstream, or part of what every person with a claim to be educated should know.

    Look at the quality of science journalism or of science-related politics - people still, on the whole think that there's no shame in being ignorant of even basic science.

    Not "Age of the Geek" by a long shot, yet.
  • by ScentCone (795499) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:19AM (#23528560)
    ... guided by geek manners ...

    Really? Which manners are those? I deal with people deep inside geek culture, and those as far away from it as possible. Some of the brightest, most articulate, well-mannered people I know are geeks. But then, that also describes some farmers I know. And some artists. On the other hand, taken as a group, the larger body of geeks with which I'm familiar also contains the biggest number of rude, snarky, grasping, deceitful, jerky, foul-mouthed louts I've ever encountered. Very bright people that don't just lack good manners, they aggressively pursue a manner and bearing that is confrontational, mean-spirited, hypocritical, often delusional and ultimately often self-destructive... even as they complain that nobody likes them. You all know who I'm talking about (or know who you are!).

    I know some very inspiring geeks. But I don't find them to be any more numerous than I do inspiring fine artists, or even inspiring landscape designers, chefs, dog trainers, or English teachers. Every demographic has some. But few demographics have as many mal-adjusted asses per capita as do the geeks. I know, since I'm one of them. This whole concept is wrong. It's not "rise of the geeks" as seen in their online public forums and playgrounds. No, this is just "re-emergence of smart people who are able to communicate in interesting ways ... and use technology to do it." The whole point is that technology is now to where you don't have to BE a geek in order to use it, and we're just seeing bright, interesting people from all walks materializing in places that USED to only include technologists.
  • Oblig. (Score:5, Funny)

    by owlnation (858981) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:19AM (#23528568)
    And for once, it's not just a meme, I really mean it when I say:

    "I, for one, welcome our new geek overlords!"
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:21AM (#23528592)
    If an article on geek culture references facebook as part of showing how superior we are then the writer doesn't really understand geek culture at all.

    All of the *real* geeks that I know either shun facebook ("Hello, privacy invasion!") or use it in some very minimalist manner. Facebook is for the masses and we geeks aren't the masses.

    One might even argue that the real geek still posts replies here as "anonymous coward" for the same reasons as they don't use facebook: slashdot doesn't need to track what I read, from computer to computer and if people don't mod up our comments, so what? We don't need to bask in the glory of being "5: Insightful" - we know our comments are :)

    I'd venture to add that if being geek-cool implies facebook, then this has potential to include more MBA-types than geek-types.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      The conept of what a "geek" actually is has been twisted by main stream culture. I've never considered myself a geek (more of a nerd) geeks tend to be people obsessed with one thing, who generally lack socail skills and are heavily indoors type people playing with warhammer or magic cards late into the night.

      Modern society tends to view a desire to learn as "geeky", I've helped a number of friends in the past with various subjects and lost track of the time that I've heard them say things like "I'm such a
  • Ah, Brooks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:22AM (#23528612) Homepage Journal

    This is the same David Brooks who coined the term 'bobo' (short for Bohemian Bourgeois), which deserves more use.

    I am not completely sure I agree with his conclusions though. In my experience, the less technical a person is, the more likely they are to use Twitter, Facebook and SMS. The third he mentioned, blogs, really transcends other categories. Since Livejournal, the barrier to entry has been very low for creating a blog - just set up an account and type - and hasn't required technical ability or even having anything interesting to say.

  • by NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:25AM (#23528636) Homepage

    ...the geeks can display their supple sensibilities and well-modulated emotions on their Facebook pages, blogs, text messages and Twitter feeds...

    I'm sorry, but "geeks," "supple," "well-modulated emotions," "Facebook," "blogs," and "Twitter" should never appear in the same sentence.
  • Not quite true. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by speroni (1258316) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:30AM (#23528696) Homepage
    While being a geek is now acceptable, it's not automatic coolness. Technical prowess has some merit and the online community is overflowing to "real life" but the pimply overly self conscious kid is still socially awkward.

    I think more to the point it has become clear that technology is a valid career path and, that being the case, the "popular" people are willing to accept it as a career path. Socially outgoing people have made geekdom popular, not the other way around.
  • by xPsi (851544) * on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:36AM (#23528750)
    The geek-nerd cool aesthetic can be modeled as a rising line of constant slope (b) with a sinusoidal oscillation whose angular frequency (w) and amplitude (d) must be determined by other socio-economic factors: a+bt+dsin(wt)


    In other words, being a geek comes in and out of fashion, but there is an overall rising trend. For example, back in my day (the 80s) movies like Real Genius, Revenge of the Nerds, and Weird Science, along with the rise in popularity of the personal computer, role playing games, etc. were all evidence for the geek empowerment movement.

    While I agree we are in a local maximum for the geek aesthetic where software engineers and programmers are like the supermodels of geek culture, the true litmus test for the Age of the Geek will be when a physics major can proudly say so at a party and not have everyone take two steps back. This has never been true, and I see no evidence of this yet.

  • by rgmoore (133276) <glandauer@charter.net> on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:37AM (#23528756) Homepage

    Sorry, but if if it's really true that "All your culture are belong to us", then it's time to remember the following sequence:

    You are on the way to destruction
    You have no chance to survive, make your time
    Ha Ha Ha Ha
  • by salveque (1221584) on Saturday May 24 2008, @01:09PM (#23529720)
    This isn't the rise of geekdom... It's the rise of pseudo-geekdom.
  • Thomas Jefferson : Geek. Made all sorts of inventions at Monticello

    Westinghouse : Geek. Invents airbrakes.

    Edison : Geek. Genuine Geek. Anyway one that could think of electrocuting an elephant to prove the superiority of his or her technology, well, that's a geek.

    Henry Ford, the Dodge Brothers, Stanley family: all geeks.

    Being a genuine geek is not about the kind of clothes you wear or what sort of a show you watch. It's about having an uncontrollable urge to express yourself by making things. Geekdome isn't even an academic thing. Machinists at WL Gore, guys that build their own cars and people that alter their own guns, those are all geeks.

    Sure, its nice to hope that some of us will get stinking rich off of something we invent, but most of the time, we're really more inventing because the curious act of exploration occupies the mind in such a way as to silence for a time the storms that otherwise lie within it.
  • by justinlee37 (993373) on Saturday May 24 2008, @01:32PM (#23529930)

    They've created a new definition of what it means to be cool, a definition that leaves out the talents of the jocks, the M.B.A.-types and the less educated...There are now millions of educated-class types guided by geek manners and status rules.

    This is such stereotyped, self-righteous, pat-myself-on-the-back bullshit. M.B.A.-types can be geeky ... business is the study of economics!

  • Who Cares? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by moore.dustin (942289) on Saturday May 24 2008, @01:38PM (#23529978)
    I am a geek/nerd. No doubt about it. My plates say "IF ELSE." I could not care less about this in any way shape or form. Our geekdom/nerddom is a result of us caring about being intelligent people, not to be up on the latest and greatest gadgets/sites. TFA is all about the 'lifestyle', but we didn't do any of that... these are traits OTHERS attributed to us and as you can see, they are pretty off base.

    Most nerds take pride in their intelligence and they should be! If that is not what is coming out of this 'rise of the geek' movement then who cares? I certainly don't. I would much rather have the influence be that society beings to respect and value intelligent people... something that was lost during generation X/Next and who knows if we can ever get it back... I have my doubts.
    • Re:Late 97? (Score:4, Informative)

      by FredMenace (835698) on Saturday May 24 2008, @11:37AM (#23528766)
      I know you're just trying to be funny, but first, he never said that. Republican spin-meisters and the so-called "liberal media" made that up. (When was the last time anyone seriously accused "the media" of being liberal, anyway?) He actually said "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet". But was this statement a fair one?

      From http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/goreinternet.htm [truthorfiction.com]:

      When he was a senator, he supported funding for NSFNet through the High Performance Computing Act that became law in 1991. He wrote guest columns for Byte magazine that reflected an appreciation of technology.
      From http://www.perkel.com/politics/gore/internet.htm [perkel.com] (referring to an article by Mountain Democrat columnist David Jacobsen):

      According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who's been called the Father of the Internet, "The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator."

      The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore's High Performance Computing Act.

      The University of Pennsylvania's Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet "would not be where it is today."

      Joseph E. Traub, a computer science professor at Columbia University, claims that Gore "was perhaps the first political leader to grasp the importance of networking the country. Could we perhaps see an end to cheap shots from politicians and pundits about inventing the Internet?"
      The same is incidentally true of some of his other seemingly far-fetched stories (which, again, are often based on mis-quotes). For instance, from the same article:

      Gore described a letter he'd received from a girl in West Tennessee while he was a congressman. Based on the girl's complaint about a poisoned well, he organized an investigation, which in turn led to other pollution sites, culminating in the expose of Love Canal. Referring to the well in Toone, Tennessee, Gore said, "That was the one you didn't hear of--but that was the one that started it all."
      This quote was quickly changed to "I was the one that started it all" by the time the media reported it, then to "I was the one who started it all" by the Republicans.

      And "Erich Segal, author of Love Story, corroborated that Gore and his Harvard roommate, Tommy Lee Jones, were indeed the models for the story's main character" [played by Ryan O'Neal].
    • Speaking for myself, the NBA players and rock stars don't hold much charm; billionaires are a different matter, but give me Sergei Brin over Prince William any day! Money is all well and good, but it won't keep your brain warm on a boring winter's evening...

    • Well, if you have more than the minimum of standards, you'll never get the girl or guy of your dreams with anything "alone".

      The kind of person who's only looking for one thing (money, looks, status) is not the kind of person I, for one, think I could be happy with. Even a genius IQ will not make the perfect partner unless it's allied with a half-decent personality!