Slashdot Mirror
Do Geeks Make Better Adults?
mcgrew writes "What makes people unpopular in the hallways of high school, mainly an unwillingness to conform, tends to translate into success as an adult. Robbins lists several companies—including Yahoo!—that prioritize hiring quirky individuals who shun conventional thinking. She also name-checks historical and current celebrities, including director Steven Spielberg (who was taunted for being Jewish in high school) and Lady Gaga (a self-described former theater 'freak'), whose weirdness led to later fame. (Other now-validated former outsiders she touts: Steve Jobs, Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen and Angelina Jolie.)"
ahem.
Correlation != Causation.
ty.
I just pooped your party.
I'll let you know when I grow up. However right now, I believe the original premise is stupid.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
If you're only a class-c geek with an unwillingness to conform but without a layer of pizazz to roll it all together, you end up too unstable for a business to hire you, so you end up at fast food or retail with some gaming at night and weekends and the random day you skipped work to go on a raid/campaign.
That's the life to have ... up to about age 25, then it starts to crash hard.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If you're weird like me, you can be successful and famous like me. And no worries if you're normal. We can fix that too.
..does being taunted for being jewish qualify you as being a geek? I know more than a few jewish individuals that are not geeks, more just nebbish.
I got here through a series of tubes
I was unpopular in High School, but I question whether that was because I was unwilling to conform, or because I had absolutely no idea how to do so.
Spielberg, I imagine, was in a similar position, unless he discovered a method of magically becoming a goy.
Just because you sold your soul to the devil that needn't make you a teetotaler. --The Devil and Daniel Webster
How many non-geeks are also wildly famous.
How many former geeks are now terrorists or serial killers?
Come to me when you have some numbers.
This is not to say I don't agree with the trend... but don't sell it like someone's done some quantitative research.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
People famous in creative fields are sometimes "quirky". Who would have thunk it.
People who do well running tech companies are sometimes "geeks" who like tech. Who would have thunk it.
He said he does it intentionally to maintain a creative and highly diverse staff.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
First, the "process is killing my creativity" whining and now this "I'm not weird I'm special" self-aggrandizement. Here's the deal. Just like process *can* kill creativity doesn't mean that it will, so also the characteristics of a geek can also lead to success. They can also lead to suicide.
as I got older. I figured if I could not actually be a brilliant eccentric then at least I could behave like one and hope someone would fall for my ploy.
Nullius in verba
Look what i can do, *jumps*
Timothy McVeigh: "McVeigh claimed to have been a target of bullying at school and that he took refuge in a fantasy world where he retaliated against those bullies." "While in high school, McVeigh became interested in computers and hacked into government computer systems on his Commodore 64"
David Koresh: "Due to his poor study skills, he was put in special education classes and nicknamed "Vernie" by his fellow students, but by the age of 11, he had memorized the entire New Testament."
Alrighty then!
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Oh noes, the corporate machines won't hire me.
you end up too free-spirited for a business to hire you,
There, fixed that for you.
Government schools train people to be cogs for the machine (ref: John Taylor Gatto. "The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher" essay is also very good, and is on any number of sites). Some people rebel against being slotted into a position in life (the group you refer to who "crash hard" at age 25), while others recognize the game and make their own rules.
One must "learn the rules" in order to avoid the cog/machine outcome in their life. Gatto's Underground History of American Education (free at the site above) is a good start. :)
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
The Yahoo! article cited in the Slashdot post that's cited by this post starts off the first paragraph or two talking about the "Geeks make successful adults" idea, then veers off and becomes an observation on the ideas of social conformity telling stories of teacher cliques in schools, peer pressure and social hierarchies; I had to read it twice just to figure out what the point of the article was.
Not saying the headline's claim is true or untrue, but... these are all examples of very rare individuals - the luckiest or the most skilled of all the geeks, that made it big.
If you go by that argument, I can also point out that alot of the jocks from high school are now making many, many millions of dollars as professional athletes (NFL, NBA, etc.)
Disclaimer: Didn't RTFA, but still, dumb argument.
New webcomic updated on Sundays: HERE
I think there's a lot of truth to this.
Sometimes, the harder someone is pushed, the stronger their drive ends up being.
I feel that a lot of people became rich and/or famous just because they were "pushing back" hard, as it were....
Besides which, doesn't the ability to think differently mean success in a lot of cases?
Now, the term "better adults" I might argue with.
The right to offend is central to the right to free speech.
"What makes people unpopular in the hallways of high school, mainly an unwillingness to conform..."
Unwillingness to conform is NOT what makes people unpopular in highschool. In reality people are unpopular in highschool because they are physically unattractive, bad at sports, and have social anxiety problems of various kinds, in no particular order. "Unwillingness to conform" is a way nerds try to spin and justify their social anxiety. They frame it as if they could have chosen to be popular at any time by "conforming", whatever that means. As if it were totally in their control the whole time and they chose not to be popular because it's "shallow" or something like that. This attitude is delusional and self-destructive.
That's basically the crux of the question now, isn't it?
What's a "better adult"?
The whole think just sounds like a big circular reference kind of thing:
- Geeks make "better adults" as per the definition of "better adult" that's most commonly held by geeks.
Somehow I suspect that in the eyes of, say, born again christians, geeks do not make better adults.
Non-conformists show a higher tendency towards doing unique things. No shit. But then again, you have to have some sort of structure. I'm a great sysadmin and a decent programmer, and I'm a high-school dropout, never finished college, all that. But I truly regret not spending more attention to college when I was younger. Sure, I'd read all the books required to get a PhD in CS, but I never spent the time in class working through everything. So I didn't have that experience or grounding in my career, so I often forget things after a while of not working with them. Unemployed for a while, or don't spend enough time staying abreast of a certain technology? Oops, fail on that job interview.
I'd say it's the unorthodox people that apply themselves more that do the best.
PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
So, by your article summary, a "better" adult is one that's in show business?
Of course!
Biting the head off of a live chicken is a key component to functioning in society.
Maybe, but we do make better lovers...
...write geekier narcisist headlines?
What are the units of conformity and success. I'd like to make a graph. Surely there must be an XKCD for that...
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Behind tie is a red herring. Cliquishness has been around long before that. If anything, the NCLB mentality is a (guilt driven / politically correct) backlash against the previous abusive behaviors of those administrators responsible for conceiving and implementing such programs.
I thought it was interesting about the cliquishness of some teachers, though we have long heard that many who teach are simply those who failed to do anything else, further supporting the author's central thesis. Truly, an unwillingness to conform might prove to be modern society's holly grail.
Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The article draws a false dichotomy between geeks and bullies. The most successful adults in today's society combine intellect with emotional intelligence. The successful adult, today, is the one in high school who could make the jocks & cheerleaders and the nerds, alike, feel like a million bucks.
And then there is the question of what constitutes success. Is it money? Is it number of progeny? Is it spiritual tranquility? Is it lack of hostile interactions? Strangely, the article seems to focus on this last one, whereas in centuries and millenia past, hostile interactions would have been seen as "success", assuming they were directed toward competitors for women and scarce resources.
Quirky non-conformity is NOT the same as social retardation. From the way I see it, most "non-conformists" conform quite well to their smaller, alternative cliques.
But what percentage of geeks and those who got picked on *actually* turned out successful? My guess? Not very high.
I think that the article is kinda false, for every weird showbiz star there is a famous high school retard that got into sports. IMHO the down to earth folks make the best adults (adult as a person not job or status). Geeks and Jocks that got over it fail second and there is a large amount of dwebs who never fix their life as well as popular high school guys that have a messed up after high school, i mean just look at the weird uncle stereotype and the "once most popular guy at school", now future less uncle stereotype.
Something I try to explain to my kids -- if your way is actually better, then by all means don't conform. But sometimes conforming isn't following the herd so much as realizing that the way everyone else does something is actually the best way to do something.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
I would say it's hard to find geeks that don't conform to the things that make us geeks.
This reminds me of all my "non-conformist" friends growing up who all skateboarded and wore plaid. All of them. They were so non-conformist that they all dressed the same way, had the same hobbies, and liked the same music.
Is professional success or fame the definition of a "good" adult?
just sayin'.
just a ghost in the machine.
This discussion is not complete without discussing the role of autism. We need to acknowledge that autism is not a disorder in many people, it is a benefit. Unfortunately, one of the side effects for high-performing autistics is geekiness. As was put very well in a Wired article a few years ago, we would have never made it to moon without the autistic engineers working for NASA and its contractors.
Disclaimer: I consider myself to be a high-functioning autistic person, so, yes I have an agenda.
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Successful adults are the ones who trudged through the school system, despite itself. Who hated it and hated the people and hated the experience and couldn't wait to get out of it so they could get into the real world and start life. (Something I can't stress enough to young people is that no matter how much school sucks and no matter what anyone tells you, it all will be different the day you graduate and nothing from high school -- not your popularity, your clique, your grades, your record -- nothing will count against you like all the adults try to convince you it will, so just fucking hold on until you're out).
On the other hand, you have all the fucking idiots who say things like "they were the best years of our lives". If high school years were the best years of your life, you should just fucking kill yourself *now*. I shouldn't even need to extrapolate on this. Even if you're popular and successful in high school, it is of so little consequence and impact and meaning that it can't possibly be the greatest time of your life and if it is, that means you are planning to become stagnant the moment you leave those supposedly "hallowed halls".
Robbins followed seven self-described outsiders at public and private high schools for a year and concluded that what makes kids popular—conformity, aggression, visibility, and influence—won't make them happy or successful after they graduate.
What!?!? I'll present a similar argument. See if you can spot the flaw: I observe that white bread gets moldy after I open the package. Therefore I conclude that wheat bread doesn't get moldy after I open the package. She followed the outsiders (self-described, no less ["Yeah I'm a nonconformist, nbd"]) to determine the fate of the non-outsiders. Wow.
You must not be an American or a Brit. If you're not famous, you don't exist. Well, I mean -- you exist, of course. The famous people need guys to park their cars and wipe their asses and buy their products. It's just that you, as an individual, might as well not exist without fame. There's famous people and then there are cogs.
No, GP is right. Freaks that get famous because they're freaks are no sensible sample. They're not "accepted", they're celebrities. Being famous does not mean that someone would also allow "someone like that" in their living room for real. Or want to deal with them on a professional base.
Could you imagine Lady Gaga being responsible for your bank account? Or how about her as your pilot on your next trip? Let's imagine for a moment that she had the qualifications, do you think people would feel at ease with a "freak" responsible for their money or life?
Don't conflate celebrity status with being accepted. Josephine Baker was a celebrity. But how many who cheered for her on stage would have wanted to live next to her?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I just yelled up the basement stairs and ask my mom if I was a good adult. She assured me I am.
sure, I can find 5 celebritys or super succesful people with any character trait you can name.
but what about the 99% who are not successful ? (unlike lake wobegon, most people are not above avg, much less above the 99th percentile)
The way to do this experiment is to measure say 1,000,000 million people for various character traits in High School, and then follow them for 40years
you could also do it retrospectively, going back 40 years in time, ifyou could measure people from historical data
I tend to discount many attractive female celebrities' description of "being bullied" growing up. I have know a few attractive women IRL who perceive every single slight as a "bullying" or "being mean" (I was at the story with one once, and she thought the cashier VERY mean based on inflection and tone, etc). Sorry Taylor, a few girls growing up were jealous and said some nasty things about you behind your back. That's not bullying.
(I don't mean for this to sound sexist - I just noticed a handful of female celebs are saying this now. I think guys, for whatever reason, are able to distinguish people talking crap about them and actual bullying)
"Behind tie is a red herring" -- spads
You dress funny.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
The examples given include "Yahoo!, historical and current celebrities, Steven Spielberg, Lady Gaga, Steve Jobs, Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen and Angelina Jolie." In one case you have a tech company where the culture is to bring in geeks and in the other cases listed, they can be defined as creators of their own product (entrepreneurs). What is missing is the standard business model - starting in the mail room and working your way to the top. I find that the popular kids still kick butt in the standard business world. In addition to high intelligence and drive, one needs a keen set of social skills to understand management at the highest level. Most geeks do not, as per the popular Venn Diagram
As far as making them "good" adults, obsessing about your kids is a good thing.
ceci n'est pas un sig
Interesting people are interesting. Film on YouTube.
Get into the field and measure yourself. Get competitive. Revel in the squashing of your opponents. Learn to love the sound of snapping bone. The thud of skulls against concrete. The sublime, unnamed sound made when a well-kicked football smashes the teeth of some imbecile who happened to get into your line of fire. The act of feeding the quivering remains of inferior specimen to your army of killer hamsters. That can be done - rarely - with people on the edge of geekdom. Nerds, on the other hand, are beyond hope. They're not even human. Beat up and defecate upon on sight.
Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
Furthermore you hear celebrities talking about how they had a "hard life" because the other kids were sometimes mean, you don't hear the stories of every john smith out there who never gets famous and never gets a chance to tell you.
Lots of very smart, capable and successful people are perfectly socially able and quite popular when they were young.
The subject line says "Do geeks make better adults", but the summary talks about successful adults.
I've known a number of successful people (financial, political and/or celebrity), but very few of those are what I would call a "better adult". And many of them seem to be generally unhappy despite their "success".
On the other hand, I've known some weird, quirky people in high school that grew up to be weird, quirky, unsuccessful people in adult life. Being weird doesn't guarantee success.
Not necessarily, many geeks who lack social skills just don't see the point in the social niceties consciously decide not to waste their time with them. They gradually learn the situations where they are necessary (after high school...and perhaps college) but for the most part much of interpersonal relations and social skills make no logical or rational sense and thus are confusing to someone who thinks in a nearly purely rational sense. This leads to your stereotypical geek, yes, but is not an uncommon thing.
Could you imagine Lady Gaga being responsible for your bank account?
Oh God yes! If she can do for my bank account what she's done for her own...
:P
Seriously though... I remember that in high school, I was more "infamous" than "popular." Most of my friends were, though, so I guess that counted for something. I suppose I was a little bit of the inverse of the simple "unwillingness to conform," though: I simply wasn't any good at it.
I came off as intelligent, usually smart, and occasionally insightful, and by and large, the classroom as a whole tended to be a vicariously enjoyable environment. The grade books, however, were a different story, and I got expelled for being late to school. Twice.
It's rather pathetic that school administration would rather you not show up at all than be late. And we're talking late by seconds or minutes. I had a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around that one, because I was in school to learn. Silly me.
Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
Fist off, you assume all those people are better adults because they are famous.
That's just stupid.
Second of all, there are millions of successful people who where just average kids.
Is the high school nerd who takes out his repression anger on his children a better adult?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"Success", on a human scale, is defined by reproduction. Passing your genes onto progeny, and increasing their chances of survival. /. itself is proof that geekiness does not translate into an increase the chance you will reproduce. In fact, it's usually the opposite.
Ergo, no.
-Styopa
See, thats what I love about /. - I read the article and am outraged at the obvious causation / correlation fail, but when I come to rant about it I find that the very first comment has done it already.
This is what really happens to non-conformist geeks from high school; we just eventually find the places where we do fit in...
I don't know of any careful objective study of this phenomenon, but from my casual layman's reading of history and watching PBS programs, it seems that a lot of progress has been made by non-conformist groups. In England the Puritans were excluded from the ruling elite and their schools and so started their own schools. They made a large contribution to, among other things, the Industrial Revolution, Abraham Darby being the poster child. The Jews, a marginalized group, have a lot of achievements to their credit in science, the arts, and philosophy. It would seem that in many cases, Baruch Spinoza being an example, they caught a lot of flack from their own people by crossing over with their ideas and thinking. Many immigrant groups to the USA have revitalized American culture.
My own theory is that being outside the mainstream forces one to think outside the box, and to see the inconsistencies and hypocrisy of the conventional and conformist thinkers.
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
As it happens, you really don't know who is sitting next to you at work or who is flying that plane. I recently read my hometown's EMS service employees were part of a swingers club. I'm not the type of person that condones that behavior, and with the diseases that abound from promiscuity, I'd rather not have my health worker doing those sorts of things. YMMV.
My point is, your bank manager may be taking his earrings, nose piercings, and goth outfit off during the day so that he can stay gainfully employed, but keep his hobbies to himself and after hours.
Taking risks can mean bigger success or bigger failure. Focusing on the stand out successes doesn't tell the whole story. Winning big always requires taking big risks. But that doesn't mean that everyone would benefit from such behavior. There is a reason why conformity is in our genes. On average, it a better strategy. You might not become the tribal leader but, with help of your buddies, you are less likely to be eaten by a bear. In this age, you might not make CEO, but you are less likely to be laid off and more likely to get help finding a new job if you are.
As far as quality is concerned, I think that a Geek's attention to detail does allow them to produce the best quality Adults.
However, if sheer quantity is your aim, you can get a much better deal by lowering your standards a bit -- After all, even low quality humans taste pretty much the same (so long as they have functional kidneys). So I'd say whether you should get your adults from a Geek or just a run of the mill cultivator depends on what you're using the adults for: Entertainment or Food.
Oh, you mean the humans themselves? Absolutely not, no, the "geeks" don't turn out to be good as Adults. You may be able to keep them distracted and complacent as children, but the "geek" variety are hard to integrate properly into a conformant (and fast breeding) populous.
Geeks themselves tend to stand out and draw attention to the logical flaws in the environments we've built to contain them (especially the breeding program). The mere possibility that they'll reveal these truths to others and lead a revolt is enough to opt for the less intelligent variety when it comes to Adults.
TL;DR: Geeks, while entertaining as children, are too cumbersome to keep as adults; They're too smart for their own good.
Wait, so being Jewish is now considered "non-conformist?"
I think you're missing the point, maybe the article is missing the point. Popularity in high school is primarily centered around the moving target that is high school culture. Those that conform to the culture (not necessarily the rules, or society in general), are generally not given the "geek" label. Those however whose independent thought judges the norm to be bizarre, for some reason, even if that judgement is logical and based in fact, are outcasts. These may be weirdos, or they may just be people who are paying attention.
I was a geek/nerd (at various times), although I had irrational interests in sci-fi as many geeks do, most of the alienating things I did to myself had nothing to do with my eccentricities. Although I very much wanted sex, I never pursued women because i knew I had X years of high school left and 6 years of college ahead of me, it could go nowhere and was inappropriate to pursue. I studied in school not because of my innate genius, simply because it struck me that my parents weren't telling lies: those who did well would have more opportunities than those who didn't (and life has agreed). I didn't drink, primarily because my parents let me drink at home and booze (or its effects) weren't that mysterious to me and I just didn't understand why people wanted to drink until they puked. And so on, all these things alienated me from culture just as much as my "weird" interests or my social awkwardness. But it was never unpopular to be a little weird (in fact the Cool People, all had a token weirdness), or to be socially inappropriate. It was weird to do your own thing and not join the hive.
As an adult however this mindset is usually going to produce better results, and social popularity isn't nearly as much of a spendable currency as it was in high school. People who think for themselves rather than follow the pack tend to not get bitten by life's many challenges. It won't surprise them that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, that their employers drive for money will outweigh any unwritten promises, and that a big paycheck is better than a big title. All these things alienate you from a culture, but also enable you to see what's really there, and if you use that knowledge you will succeed.
So if you could change nothing but be given an extra million dollar you would turn it down? when you gt a raise do you turn it down?
Contrary to the belief of the poor, money can, in fact, buy happiness.
I wouldn't trade my family for the world, but I sure would be happy if I could send them to the best schools, give them the best medical care, and drive a really nice car... hey, I like cars.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Could you imagine Lady Gaga being responsible for your bank account? Or how about her as your pilot on your next trip? Let's imagine for a moment that she had the qualifications, do you think people would feel at ease with a "freak" responsible for their money or life?
No, but sometimes I like to imagine her being responsible for my penis.
"...She also name-checks historical and current celebrities, including director Steven Spielberg (who was taunted for being Jewish in high school) and Lady Gaga (a self-described former theater 'freak'), whose weirdness led to later fame. (Other now-validated former outsiders she touts: Steve Jobs, Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen and Angelina Jolie.)"
Anybody can be "weird". Not everyone can pull it off and cash in on it. And quite frankly, find me someone successful in Hollywood that isn't "weird" in some way. How many of these people are weird or "eccentric" because of their fame? It's doubtful that Angelina would be able to afford to be the global spokesperson she tries to be if she was still a starving actress.
And..uh...Taylor Swift? Is there something deep and dark we should know about her deep-as-a-thimble personality that would put her within the freak-show ranks of Angelina Jolie and Lady Gaga? Unless a porn video is hiding somewhere, I seriously doubt it.
nothing geeks love more than talking about how special geeks are.
especially when they pride themselves on being so unique and different and quirky from all the other geeks.
cue the jello biafra...
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
You couldn't learn to set your alarm clock 15 minutes earlier? Jeez. You'd think the message would get through after the first expulsion.
Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
>It's rather pathetic that school administration would rather you not show up at all than be late.
School administrators these days have big egos. When you threaten those egos by not following their rigidly imposed rules, they will go out of their way to "punish" you. Even if that punishment isn't good for you in the long run.
Expelled? When I was late I would get detention. I'd have to stay after school and could do nothing but homework.They'd frequently assign additional work so I couldn't just use the time to "get ahead" on homework I'd have to do at home anyway.
In other words, the punishment resulted in MORE time in school. This is the right way to do things.
These days it seems they'll suspend for the stupidest things. And given that schools' biggest troublemakers would rather not be there, it almost becomes a reward for them, especially if the parents agree with the reason for the suspension being stupid.
I would love it if Lady Gaga was responsible for my bank account. No, honestly, she'd probably do a better job than the current lot. I can see problems though...
Me : My identity got stolen! How did this happen?
Lady Gaga : Pa-pa Paparazzi.
I also find it a little weird that being Jewish is equated to "not wanting to conform", or "being quirky", or "shunning conventional wisdom" in TFS. As far as I know, he's not that freakish (in the context of celebrity, anyway). Some people were just racist morons when he was growing up.
What Robbins doesn't mention is that those same quirky people are a complete pain in the ass to deal with in real life.
They complain constantly when having to do hard, manual labor,
They can't tolerate any kind of inconvenience,
They can't tolerate any kind of irritation, sometimes threatening to sue if it doesn't do away,
They are self-centered, and think the world owes them something,
They think people are obligated to listen to whatever they have to say, and don't like being told they are wrong when they are wrong,
They think that people should give them respect, rather than have to earn it,
When a problem occurs that is outside their area of technical expertise, they are completely helpless. (Such as the tax genius who knows everything about taxes and accounting, but can't understand why the gas pump suddenly clicked off after 15 gallons and wouldn't let him put any more gas in his car. HINT: It's full. Actually had this one, and I still had to explain what I meant by 'Full').
When something doesn't go the way they want, they complain constantly, e.g. FML, Life Hates Me (sort of true), My boss/neighbor/etc. is a complete retard.....ad nauseum.
Robbins' study is so flawed in so many ways, it shouldn't have even been published. The term "quirky" varies widely, and she also uses self-claims of quirkyness in validating quirky people. If a student had done this as a research project in my Psych classes, there wouldn't be a student or Professor around who wouldn't be able tear this to shreds. I could go on and on about the crappy research, methods, and conclusion, it would just be a rant.
Technical Analysis:
10% Junk Journalism
20% Poorly Defined Variables
20% Poor Statistical Analysis
50% Bad Data Collection Methodology
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
You were also at School, in part, to be socialised and familiarised in the general cultural norms, one of which is arriving to appointments on time.
Schools should penalise a failure to do so.
Those who don't attend at all are much less likely to be affect by reward/punishment incentives than those who turn up late, so it makes sense to focus the efforts on those who it might have some effect.
see subject
My karma ran over your dogma
Could you imagine Lady Gaga being responsible for your bank account? Or how about her as your pilot on your next trip?
I'd rather have her than Lindsey Lohan.
Oddly enough, I have a fair amount of respect for LG. You may hate her music (I don't find it all that interesting), but at least she writes and plays her own stuff. She sings pretty well. And you don't get to where she is performance-wise without a great deal of internal discipline. So, even though your point is taken - I'd rather have a qualified investment advisor who I trusted manage my money and a licensed pilot to fly my plane - I think you picked the wrong example. And, do I care if the pilot dyes his hair green, has piercings or has a tattoo? No.
That is all.
I wasn't one of the cool, beautiful people in high school. I was physically and socially awkward, quiet, kept to myself, and tended to live in my own little world.
Fashions change. At the time (1970s) I was just viewed as weird. Now I would be viewed as having Asperger's. Whatever fits, I suppose. I'm still quiet, still keep to myself, still have a skewed view of the world, but have long since lost the awkwardness, since I stopped pretending to be somebody I wasn't and started to just be myself.
I sometimes wonder what happened to some of the people I knew in high school. I hope some of them turned out well. I hope some of the got what they deserved. I got what I wanted, and am happy with my life.
I never understood people who are conformists. If you want to be like the others, then why should you be chosen for... anything ? Isn't the other conformist just the same as you and just as likely to be chosen ? Conformity seems so stupid to me. All I want to do is things that nobody or hardly anybody else has done or has the guts to do. Fuck sheeples, they are useless waste of meat.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Eminem comes to mind...
Although I very much wanted sex, I never pursued women because i knew I had X years of high school left and 6 years of college ahead of me,
You missed college sex, that is sad, your should have learn you about safe sex back then, I hope you got some later....
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
I can just imagine all the teasing that Taylor Swift and Angelina Jolie had to endure. Oh the humanity.
Never forget this pearl of wisdom:
Good managers manage based on what you accomplish. Bad managers manage based on what time you got there.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
I was a non-conformist in HS. Hated the jocks (even though I played football, nothing more conformist than football players at a Catholic school), but hated the little overachieving geeks as well, many of whom were even more aloof and self-satisfied than the jocks.
Ironic that a geek Website can only see in binary terms: conformist or geek. There are other categories, and BTW, Wozniak was the geek. Jobs was a visionary who couldn't code "hello world!". Apple needed both to succeed.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
Josephine Baker? Jeez, how old are you grampa?
http://www.acetonestudio.com
with your health workers that would make their private lives any of your business?
here is a tip for you: don't let her anywhere near your penis with a glass jar full of needles......
You can't handle the truth.
If there was an award for incredibly random and strange trolls, you'd have it locked up there skippy.....
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
Never forget this pearl of wisdom:
Good managers manage based on what you accomplish. Bad managers manage based on what time you got there.
Unless, of course, the ability to do the job depends upon timeliness, as is the case, for example, for people working in many customer-facing jobs.
Good managers make sure you understand what you need to know in order to do a good job. Bad managers may only tell you that after you screw up.
College sex in a nearly all male engineering school? No, I didn't miss anything I wanted there.
where I went, there was an education faculty on campus near the sciences faculty so it must explain our difference of opinion !
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
I hooked up with an EMS swinger couple under... interesting circumstances... many moons ago.
Being in the health field, they wouldn't even swap saliva without protection. I'm all for cautious, but that was just boring...
If the school curriculum consists of conformity, I abstain gladly.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I guess nobody questions that. I only question being minute-punctual in jobs where it doesn't matter at all when I do my work as long as it's done. There is very little reason aside of meetings for programmers to be in office at a certain time of the day.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Interesting question about geeks as successful adults, but the whole notion is so subjective and arbitrary it's rather hard to quantify in any logical or meaningful way really.
'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
As far as I'm concerned, my bank manager could meet me in drag at an appointment as long as he manages my accounts properly. Why should I care about his dressing habits? If anything, it'd make him more credible to me since he doesn't hide behind a suit uniform.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Unless, of course, the job is collaborative and Johnny-come-lately strolls in 4 hours after everyone else is there and is unable to answer questions in the meantime. I think "core hours" work best, and people time shift to the right or left depending if they're an early bird or night owl. But if someone decides to work the graveyard shift because it fits their vampire lifestyle better that tends to be a problem.
Be wary of an intelligent person on your bad side. A dumb person will probably beat you up. An intelligent one can destroy your life.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Why old? I'm just a geek with an extensive knowledge in history and performing arts. And considering how black artists were the craze back then, in a time when black people were considered worse than second class citizens, I think it's about the best example I could conjure.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Social niceties only don't make sense to someone in a rational sense because they don't see the rational behind it. They're working on an incomplete data set. There's nothing illogical about exploiting social conventions for personal gain, or in reciprocal altruism ("Hey, I won't smell like week old pizza and make you gag if you don't!")
I know who Josephine Baker was but would not claim to have an extensive knowledge of history and the performing arts. General yes, extensive, no. Mighty geeky of you though to choose her as an example that I would guess many on this board have never heard of. I could be wrong of course. So do you get off my lawn or do I get off yours?!
http://www.acetonestudio.com
Why would his penis have a glass jar full of needles to begin with?
Nerds don't usually work for banks or airlines. But otherwise, your comment is entirely correct.
Free Martian Whores!
Weirdos and geeks are unrelated. Weirdos are often individuals with alternative personas. Geeks (not being pejorative, just factual) don't know how to, can't fit it. They may be very smart and therefore perhaps successful (as the weirdos) in later life but for whatever reason in HS they are not yet socially adept, mature. Me thinks the writer of this article was probably a geek, but so clueless.
I think he covered that with 'aside of meetings' - if you're working collaboratively then your whole day is a meeting, right?
My current workplace has core hours within which we're meant to be here, but we have around an hour of slack around that. If I'm up early I can get to work at 8 and leave at 5, if I sleep in I can rock up at 9 and stay til 6. Even then, they treat us like reasonable adults - if we can't make it in before 9 for whatever reason, send a courtesy text and make up the hours and it's not a problem.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
haha! virgin.
just look at how efficient J Edgar Hoover was :)
did you never go anywhere but home and college?
fuck man, i spend the vanishing minority of my time at university actually attending classes.
you might know me from that busy intersection near your work. come by and mention slashdot, and i'll squeegie your windscreen for free!
you should go watch "old boy".
There's a fellow named "Crazy John" that occasionaly goes to the bar I go to. They tell me that at one time he was exceptionally intelligent, until one night he was attacked and left in a dumpster for dead.
Brain damage can destroy your life far worse than anything an intelligent person can do to you.
Free Martian Whores!
Those however whose independent thought judges the norm to be bizarre, for some reason, even if that judgement is logical and based in fact, are outcasts. These may be weirdos, or they may just be people who are paying attention.
people who pay attention are a tiny minority. I.e., wierdos.
I was a geek/nerd (at various times), although I had irrational interests in sci-fi as many geeks do
What's irrational about an interest in sci-fi? Unusual maybe, but how is it irrational?
Free Martian Whores!
First off, geek != intelligent
Bullshit, intelligensce is the hallmark of the geek. If you're average intelligence or lower, you're not a geek or a nerd. If you're average intelligence and have poor social skills, you're a dork. You want to see a true movie about the geekiest nerds on the planet? See Apollo 13. Those NASA engineers with their slide rules, pocket protectors, and thick glasses are the perfect picture of nerds. Just because you know how to start Windows and play WOW or create a power point presentation doesn't make you a geek.
The hacking that they did to get the astronauts home safely was some awsome geekery. You don't do those kind of hacks without superior brainpower.
A dork is a nerd without the brainpower.
are very manipulative
I don't think you've ever met a geek, son. Your description of "geeks" does not match reality.
Free Martian Whores!