Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

writingruxandrabio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 505 posts

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#301

Post by faeriechangling »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #300
faeriechangling wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, and much more importantly, that a diagnosis is useful in improving someone’s situation. Show me the actual proof of this. For something so at the core of modern clinical practice, the utility of diagnosis itself is taken for granted rather than actually proven.

I don't think you actually understand modern clinical practice. We are surely better than where we were at in the middle ages with leaches and stuff, but there is still a lot of practice and experimentation to see what works and what doesn't, just evidence without hard proof. > the utility of diagnosis itself is taken for granted rather than actually proven. Given the topic of autism, I'm not sure if you are trying t…

>We are surely better than where we were at in the middle ages with leaches and stuff, but there is still a lot of practice and experimentation to see what works and what doesn't, just evidence without hard proof.

Here's a question for you. When is the last time mental health outcomes improved in a way which could not simply be the result of reporting differences?

I would say the last time was around the year 2000, when suicide and drug addiction were at all time lows. Every single chance since then, on aggregate, has been useless and the entire field of mental health has completely failed to produce any evidence it has advance an inch this millennium which is absolutely fucking scandalous. I don't know how much oncology improved in the same period of time. Also if you include reported mental health data, people report WORSE mental health now than they did in the past.

Given that, I see pretty much zero reason why the status quo today does a lick to improve people mental health better than the status quo back then. I am just dead stupidly sceptical of diagnosis (at least beyond 2000/DSM-IV levels) as being a source of mental health because not only is it not proven people don't even attempt to prove this.

When the DSM-V was released, the director of the NIMH started the RDOC for research which was nominally supposed to do studies based less on categories like "autism" and more on underlying biological phenomenon, trashed the idea of symptom based diagnosis pointing out it has largely been depreciated elsewhere in medicine, and suggested we might have to get rid of the words schizophrenia and depression because they were confusing things. I think about such things occasionally and wonder if the entire diagnostic nosology we have is basically a fatally flawed system.

So my essential objection is, why medicalise people's identities if there's no evidence it's improving people's outcomes?

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#302

Post by woopwoop »

megadal wrote: post #255
woopwoop wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says there is a "strong anti-correlation" between being a weird nerd and being pleasant to be around socially. This may be true, but it is not my experience that there is a strong anti-correlation between being an exceptional mathematician and being pleasant to be around socially. Despite the stereotype, in my experience the best mathematicians are not the ones who stare at their shoes when you talk to them.

From the article: > There is a strong anti-correlation between these interests ( that of course does not mean there is no one who is good at both. )

My point is not merely that there exist socially competent people who advance science at the highest level, but that I reject the claim that this is an anti-correlation. I do not think that scientific genius and social grace are anti-correlated, or antithetical.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#303

Post by paulmd »

alistairSH wrote: post #277
rustyboy wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, given it is a spectrum, what's at the other end of "really" autisitc (if that's even the right word) or does that just go from 0 being "normal" to 1 being that "really"?

The problem with this line of labeling is there are multiple possible “spectrums”. I’m not sure what the best visualization would be… Like a starburst, with the center being normal, and all possible disorders going away (except they can be combined, so this isn’t perfect either). But, if you’re asking about the typical autistic inability to communicate with others, then yeah, 0-1 works as well as any. Just don’t take…

simply imagine a person as a unitary data cube (all dimensions between (0,1)) with all personality traits and disorders expressed as dimensions

… the question is, do you have the right embeddings? ;)

(/s, mostly)

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#304

Post by shadowgovt »

klysm wrote: post #270
shadowgovt wrote: post #194

Good article, but I would probably have stopped at "Nobody should give any weight to the opinions of people still using Twitter in this day and age."

Stopping reading something because of one sentence you disagree with doesn't exactly resonate with your stance.

Not reading it, I would have stopped at writing it. The author's impetus for writing it was apparently a response to Twitter comments, and that's half a step above writing a hot take in response to YouTube comments in terms of worthiness of the data source.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#305

Post by wnc3141 »

doug_durham wrote: post #107
idiotsecant wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the weird nerd is rarely a good people manager. As useful as they might be as an individual contributor when property channeled, they can easily be a -10x contributor when you put them in charge of people.

I disagree. A "weird nerd" is much better in leadership than a socially adept careerist to parachutes in to get a bump on their resume. To build good products you need to care. A "weird nerd" is more likely to care.

care, yes but caring about the right things in product is a process of discipline and organizational/ market knowledge. Its not hard to imagine pursuing the most interesting qualities at the cost of core functionality. (hypothetical - such as insisting that the buttons on my cable box have the touch of a mechanical keyboard)

edit: to be fair, it is extremely necessary to have both voices at the table challenging one another

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#307

Post by abracadaniel »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #223
sneed_chucker wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, to me your comment also speaks to the increasing degree to which we medicalize personality traits. I'm sure your diagnosis is legitimate, but also I'm inferring from your comment that you are married and gainfully employed; so it sounds like you're able to build and maintain relationships, as well hold conversations with strangers or non-close acquaintances when necessary. In years past would any professional h…

This reads kind of like “my parents hit me when I was younger and I turned out fine” though o highly doubt it’s your intention. Just because things seemingly turned out OK doesn’t mean the treatment was appropriate. In the same way, just because someone manages to “get by” doesn’t mean they don’t need to be diagnosed. It’s just making their life needlessly more difficult whereas they could yave more resources that re…

The anti-diagnosis attitude is surprising on a site like this. Everyone could do better with a better understanding of their own mind, whether it meets the criteria of a disorder or not. And with any kind of better understanding we need more and better categorizations.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#308

Post by shrimp_emoji »

ianbicking wrote: post #4

There's definitely been a move to demand individuals be good at everything... old stereotypes of the nerd brought a lot of negatives, but they were also apologetic, acknowledging the trade off, that paying attention deeply to one thing does lead to being worse at other things. The exact stereotype differed by domain... the performer who is a diva, the self destructive author, the manic artist... each with a hint of n…

MBAs wanna justify less staff so everyone has to be good at and do more things now. :D Be a dev and tech support and business relations and...

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#309

Post by galfarragem »

ianbicking wrote: post #4

There's definitely been a move to demand individuals be good at everything... old stereotypes of the nerd brought a lot of negatives, but they were also apologetic, acknowledging the trade off, that paying attention deeply to one thing does lead to being worse at other things. The exact stereotype differed by domain... the performer who is a diva, the self destructive author, the manic artist... each with a hint of n…

> I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself

I suspect most of us here are... At least in some degree.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#310

Post by glitchc »

Analemma_ wrote: post #274
glitchc wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's fine for most weird nerds. Being cordial and respecting of knowledge is all that's needed in the workplace. Most wns wouldn't make good friendship material either. Their opinions and tastes have a wide range from normal to rather eclectic. But without these people you will never be able to deliver the next new search paradigm. That's how they bring value and that's why the employer hires them. They also te…

> And that's fine for most weird nerds. Being cordial and respecting of knowledge is all that's needed in the workplace. Well, no it isn't. That was the point of the top comment in the chain: the commenter worked for Weird Nerd, found them insufferable, told everyone they were insufferable and that working for them sucked, and as a result the Weird Nerd's career has tanked because no one new will work with them. Ther…

I will maintain that being insufferable is largely orthogonal to being a Weird Nerd. You can be an obnoxious blowhard who is also largely insufferable. Most wns keep to themselves and don't seek out the limelight.

> that working for them sucked, and as a result the Weird Nerd's career has tanked because no one new will work with them.

We don't know for a fact that that's what killed their career. That's just the op's impression having worked with the person. The real truth is often muddy. And of course we've all met people who are extremely insufferable to their subordinates and peers but manage upwards very well and go on to very fruitful careers.

Post reply on HN