Slashdot Mirror
The Rise and Fall of the Geek
chilled writes "Tom Steinberg has posted this guest editorial on The Register bemoaning the decline of the Geek. He suggests that geeks in their alignment against for example RIP and Microsoft are losing their voice. I think he's right but the emergence of a common set of goals should be recognised as a very good thing. The geeks amongst us should use this commonality to rise up and use our voice for progress and not petty squabbling."
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
Unlike other groups, geeks (i still
hate the term) are defined by
intellegance, reason, and the scientific method.
While other groups will always contain members
that will hold mad, bad and obviously wrong
beliefs not matter what, a geek will always
change beliefs based on evidence and a solid
reasoned argument based on axioms they share.
If most geeks are in argeement in belief of something its probably because its (if
not true) at least as close to true as we can
get in the limit current knowledge.
I agree with alot of the ideals the common Slashdotter will but I am by no means Liberal. I am for smaller government. I am for people helping themselves and not taking a few bucks out of my wallet every paycheck which is what a government aid program is. I AM for free speech. I am against using P2P to steal (Napster) and using P2P for what it's meant (sharing files that are not copyrighted), but I am against the RIAA making it hard to exercise my fair use rights. I am against the MPAA telling me if I live in another country that I can't buy a DVD their and have it play in my player. I am against them telling me I can't make a fansite on the web celbrating and promoting my favorite TV show. I am FOR the constitution including the second amendment. I am against cameras in public places unless they are controlled by tourists. I am against using technology to ticket someone automagically because they were speeding because thier kid was hurt. I am against the idiot laws that are making clerks card (and possibly swiping a mag stripe on my license) everyone when they want to buy a beer (even though I am OBVIOUSLY over 21). I am FOR everything this country, as a whole, stands for. I am in AGREEMENT with Bush on the war on terrorism, but in disagreement with the need for these STUPID laws/rules regarding things like laptops being used during takeoff, GPS's not allowed at all, cellphones not allowed unless at gate, ILLEGAL search and seizures and other stupid stuff like that. I am FOR studying things LOGICALLY and using the results of that study to guide actions. Let's study the effects of these devices on a aircrafts Avionics. Have there ever been studies done or is this just so the airlines satisfy some stupid notion like that once you get on that plane THEY are your BOSS (instead of treating you like a human being when your not being an asshole). I am a geek. I use Windows, Linux, AIX, Solaris and whatever else I need to do to make a few bucks. Sue me because I don't agree that Microsoft is a monopoly, but I hate them because their os's are unstable and they assume that I don't know what I am doing (not because they are the most popular right now). So kiss my shiny metal ass if I don't fit your damn image for a geek. I am a GEEK and proud of it. Who's next?
Gorkman
When I read the title to the parent in this thread, I thought to myself, "I can't believe this crap got modded up." Upon further reflection, there is something of a point to be made.
/. can be reduced to the following, IMHO:
/.
> High school kids coming out with MCSE's, places
> you can get a CCNA quick, or A+ certification
> that just seems like a joke to any old-school
> type. These people are the "new geek chic" and
> they're anything but.
After having RTFA, the Standard editorial giving rise to this item on
"Geeks are now a special interest lobbying group, whereas before they were a cultural phenomenon."
To me, this accounts for the coalescing of what had been a cultural phenomenon around a sort of common themes and political aspirations. There is an established culture. It is primarily anti-capitalist in economics and pro-libertarian vis-a-vis individual rights.
Summarizing the geek culture in general terms of course does not sweep every individual into lockstep with those ideas, but the broad cultural trends are undeniably there. We all know which way the wind blows on
As far as the geek chic thing goes, I don't see it as a cultural phenomenon. People look for opportunity and "e" anything seemed like the land of milk and honey for a while. That is going through a natural (and welcome) correction right now through typical economic feedback loops. Hopefully, the wheat will be separated from the chaff. Unfortunately, there are lots of human and political costs that result from the upheaval of a boom/bust cycle like we just had. Sorry if you got laid off, but many IT jobs just shouldn't have existed in the last several years.
The prior poster bemoans certifications as diluting the geek culture that predated and gave rise to what he/she/it termed "geek chic." Let me Cliff Claven that for a minute, too:
Certification is useful as a specialized population of knowledge workers grows -- personal contact no longer serves to differentiate dedication to a craft. Certification provides a rough proxy to the dedication aspect (i.e. "I am willing to spend beaucoup bucks on cram courses and tests") but it does not dictate that one with a certification is qualified for pouring piss out of boots.
In many respects, even a four year college education falls into this category -- you need to have it, but it doesn't mean you can do anything after you get it. It is a exclusionary qualification -- if you don't have it, you're fucked. If you do have it, you have doors opened.
In a general reply to your post, I think your underlying assumption is wrong: geek chic never existed. It was all about the money and trying to avoid looking like a poseur. On the bright side, the reversal of IT's economic fortunes may slow some of the changes you bemoan. Unfortunately, I don't see that genie ever going back into the bottle.
As for myself, when I stopped seeing fat guys with beards, suspenders, and flannel shirts at trade shows, I knew the sharks were in the water and something more pure and carefree had been lost. I'll miss it.
guac-foo.
Lots of petrified grits
Damn, where's my mod points when I need them - this is the best argument against DRM I've ever seen. When DRM takes hold - no more experimenting, no more progress. We are done.
Imagine if DRM existing in the 1960s, or even the 1980s - the Internet would not exist. People would never have been able to build the little pieces needed to form the net (Almost every protocol was originally just a "hack". DNS was a shortcut so you didn't have to remember IPs, telnet was a shortcut so you could control a machine remotely, the web browser was a shortcut to locating information anywhere.)
That's why there's no differing in arguing against this. We don't exist without it. It'd be like having different opinions about whether we should allow oxygen in our atmosphere. "Well gee, maybe if they give us a bunch of money, we can give in on that oxygen requirement."
DRM turns us all into slaves.
I really don't want to start a flame war here, but I'll risk it.
I think this is the same with other issues. When it comes to disliking Microsoft, in my opinion, there is no middle ground here either. I'll explain why.
Geeks, by my definition and that of the parent poster, are about doing what they want to with their own equipment. We like to play with technical gear in a fashion that suits us. This is why I agree that DRM is bad.
Microsoft, to a lesser extent than DRM (for now?), has generally proven themselves to want to control your system, as opposed to an OS like Linux or *BSD. From EULA swapping, silently re-enabling auto-update, forcing IE to visit microsoft.com and report an id number (from what I'm told of early versions of 98), and restrictions on what you can and cannot do with their products, I think it's obvious. This is not as clean-cut of an argument as that of geeks vs. DRM, but I think it makes sense.
In my experience, there are no technically-literate arguments for Microsoft (in its entirety) simply because to anyone who knows their history, what they've attempted to do and what they have done, it seems obvious that it's impossible to find Microsoft innocent.
I would love any response to this so long as it isn't a troll. Respect my view, and prove me wrong by logic, or agree with me and state why.
~Dalcius
Rome wasn't burnt in a day.