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

31–40 of 505 posts

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#31

Post by BowBun »

makeitdouble wrote: post #11

I didn't fully understand what the author meant by "Weird Nerd", and this bit was the key for me: > Weird Nerds (I called them autistics, but people really hated that) And I totally get why they're trying to come up with a word that markets better, and yes many people react negatively to "autist" or calling someone "on the spectrum". At the same time, man prominent people are making public their diagnostics and asser…

I think you're circling some valid points, but realistically I don't think this happens in the current climate. There's a couple of forces at play - a) it's a medical issue that people are really passionate about b) there's an ironic (or not, at times) subculture of calling oneself 'autistic' when it's just exhibiting an interest and c) there's still no 100% accurate test, not everyone will want to out themselves, etc. So the shroud of mystery + confusion persists for the vast majority outside of those that advocate and speak out.

I think it's a good thing to come up with some other term to refer to these extrinsically motivated nerds that don't really care for typical social constructs but bring immense value to a bunch of types of work. That way whether they identify or are diagnosed as autistic isn't necessarily the important piece, more the result of their person.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#32

Post by the_snooze »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #14
Yossarrian22 wrote: post #5

The author is missing a crucial pressure that pushes against weird nerds, the people that have to work underneath them. I’ve had to answer to a Weird Nerd when I was starting out in my field, it was the worst fucking experience of my life, and I’ve spent the years since warning people away from that person, their career and their contributions to their field have stagnated due to all the people like me that they burn…

Many weird nerds are on the spectrum and require very good people managers above them to mitigate their quirks, and should never go into people management themselves. The industry has really changed though. It is much easier to hire social well adapted people who can code at all than to hire a bunch of people with social problems who can code really good. The former is scalable at least, the latter breaks down as no…

Any non-trivial engineering or research is a team effort. It's good to have a mix of perspectives and temperaments in a team to keep poeple creative and honest. But the team ultimately has to cohere in order to deliver. That's really the core job of a manager: to create an environment where people can work together meaningfully and direct it to productive ends.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#33

Post by Yossarrian22 »

icodemuch wrote: post #23
Yossarrian22 wrote: post #5

The author is missing a crucial pressure that pushes against weird nerds, the people that have to work underneath them. I’ve had to answer to a Weird Nerd when I was starting out in my field, it was the worst fucking experience of my life, and I’ve spent the years since warning people away from that person, their career and their contributions to their field have stagnated due to all the people like me that they burn…

I read the article as acknowledging this pressure by arguing that Weird Nerds should not be forced into people management positions. Without the workplace pressure on Weird Nerds to become people managers, would they still manage people? Maybe not. I can’t speak for academia, but in tech companies I’ve worked at I’ve seen a marked improvement in management when there’s a tech track for engineer advancement such that…

Even if you’re not doing performance reviews there’s still a need for directing people technically when the work exceeds what one person(even a 10xer(if such a thing really exists), and that’s where you need some minimum amount of EQ

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#34

Post by slillibri »

makeitdouble wrote: post #11

I didn't fully understand what the author meant by "Weird Nerd", and this bit was the key for me: > Weird Nerds (I called them autistics, but people really hated that) And I totally get why they're trying to come up with a word that markets better, and yes many people react negatively to "autist" or calling someone "on the spectrum". At the same time, man prominent people are making public their diagnostics and asser…

I react negatively to "autist" because it's not a good description. "ist" is usually used for something people do, or more to the point something they choose to do, see cyclist, artist, etc.

Also, "on the spectrum" is used today much like "depression" was used in the '90s. It's a catch all excuse used at the expense of people actually suffering the disorder. Much like sometimes you are just sad, I would wager many people who claim to be "on the spectrum" are just assholes.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#35

Post by swayvil »

Speaking as a weird nerd (wn)

A wn is disconnected from society. This gives him the power to think and act independently. The non-wn can't do that.

(And, being disconnected like that, the wn is oblivious to a million social hints and cues. He is blind that way)

It isn't voluntary, being a wn. It's an artifact of habitual, excessive concentration, or something.

The non-wn's state is involuntary too.

Both are products of nature/society/habit/etc. Both trapped in their respective shape.

I suppose some of us are not trapped like that. There might even be a way to escape it. To make that habit-shape into something conscious and voluntary.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#36

Post by woopwoop »

I've met a handful of people who have won at least one of the top prizes in mathematics, i.e. a Fields medal, Abel prize, or Wolf Prize. I would describe none of them as "weird nerds", and I don't think any of them are autistic. I chafe pretty hard at the suggestion here that one has to be socially ill-adjusted to advance scientific knowledge at the highest level.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#37

Post by makeitdouble »

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…

The line you draw between "weirdness" and "neurodivergence" is interesting.

Would neurodivergence have to be native (so, not grown "naturally") and at which point does weirdness fit on the spectrum ?

Recently I think people are more receptive to lower degrees of neurodivergence. I see it the same way people understand that you have a gradation between having difficulties climbing stairs and not being able to walk. We could probably have it more in the open that many are not full blown clinically diagnosed ASD patients, and I wouldn't see it as an issue to have "false positives" of diversity lumped into neurodivergence if it was destigmatized.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#38

Post by orwin »

doublerabbit wrote: post #28
idiotsecant wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we both know the kind of That Guy we're talking about and a conversation isn't going to change things.

Okay, moot. But in that case why keep them active in group? Why tolerate it in the first place. Maybe I'm just to compassionate.

Not gp, but because they aren't so unpleasant they're intolerable. But i definitely know one person i won't play a game with once my current campaign is over, and another i won't have as a player, ever. For two different reasons. The first might overall be a nice player to have if you manage to canalise him, he play his character well as long as the NPC he interact with isn't a female, then he becomes incredibly weird. I thought he was playing that part too, but since we have a female player at the table it became painfully obvious its not (and it became worse, weirdly). The second one is actually pleasant to be around most of the time, just very tiring. I had a player with the same energy level before and it's exhausting. I'd love having her as a DM however.

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#39

Post by godelski »

At the root of it is a lot of "yes man" behavior, and I don't think it's just academia. But I think academia has a stronger history and stereotype of allowing people to be weird.

It's essentially the bureaucrats taking over. Putting metrics on things that can't be measured well and treating those as if they're the answer. Saying "good enough" or "something is better than nothing" when they don't apply. Because it's easier to deal with that than the chaos and uncertainty of innovation.

I think this is also something silicon valley lost. We definitely stopped dreaming. Stopped building the future we wanted and instead just started doing work. There's been a lot of stagnation. It's not just about making things smaller

Re: The Weird Nerd comes with trade-offs

#40

Post by throw46365 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #11

I didn't fully understand what the author meant by "Weird Nerd", and this bit was the key for me: > Weird Nerds (I called them autistics, but people really hated that) And I totally get why they're trying to come up with a word that markets better, and yes many people react negatively to "autist" or calling someone "on the spectrum". At the same time, man prominent people are making public their diagnostics and asser…

I am pretty certain I am a Weird Nerd.

I have good reasons to consider myself neurodivergent (and others do consider me such). There are definite divergences that have caused me problems. I have what people consider "superpowers" and what people consider "difficulties".

Not certain I am autistic. Might have been considered mild or (the then-termed) "high functioning" as a kid in the 80s.

But on the other hand, I don't think it's necessarily wrong to put me in the same broad category as autistic people, because I have the same issues in the context of the article -- with being conventionally "ambitionless", having relatively little grasp of (or instinct for) power games etc., and needing the kind of support that others often do.

That category needs a name. (In the UK we'd traditionally go for "boffin", which is broadly a term of affection, but it's a little harder to spot a boffin these days because of casual clothing at the office)

Post reply on HN