[dropit_sphere]

> No one cares if you enjoy programming or computers as long as you act relatively 'normal'. It's not that nerds care about intelligence more than popularity (trust me most aren't) it's just that the nerds have already lost the popularity race by being socially awkward individuals that can't hold a conversation about any topics other than very specific subjects to save their life.

This passage makes me think you missed the points of the essay.

PG isn't saying "people hate people who enjoy computers and want to shove them into lockers." Rather, he's saying that status competition in middle/high school is a brutal Darwinian struggle, and those who have anything stopping them from optimizing solely for status, will lose the race.

Your comment about awkwardness/inability to hold a conversation doesn't strike true either. Rather, I felt like no one else could hold a conversation. Time has born this out; many of my nerd friends have gone on to people/verbal professions, and I'm one of the more gregarious developers you'll meet. I played a lot of sports and so had substantial intercourse with my school's popular crowd---I would not list "conversation" as one of their strengths.

Now, one caveat here: The idea that "nerds are just awkward weirdos" isn't entirely without base. I think there are two types of people who get labeled as "weird" --- actually-messed-up people, and also people who are interested in something out-of-context. The trouble with school is that, because your actions don't affect the world, it's impossible to distinguish between the two---like how you couldn't tell Einstein from the Time Cube guy (https://timecube.2enp.com/) if you couldn't do experiments.

[gridlockd]

> Your comment about awkwardness/inability to hold a conversation doesn't strike true either. Rather, I felt like no one else could hold a conversation.

If you believe the problem is with "everyone else", the problem really is with you. Nerds generally struggle with holding conversations without constantly sending "out-group" signals while failing to send "in-group" signals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yN2H3--1aw

Unlike in this satirical clip, I don't think it's possible to fake being "a normal guy". However, in my experience, it's possible to build rapport by being respectful and signaling that you get where the other person is coming from. Avoid being intellectually dominating. That way, you'll be perceived as "that okay smart guy" instead of "that fucking nerd".

Even if you don't care about being popular, learning how to read people is an extremely important skill, especially if you're somewhere on the autism spectrum. Just approach it as another nerd subject (human psychology).

[etripe]

> If you believe the problem is with "everyone else", the problem really is with you.

The problem with aphorisms like these is they lack nuance. I don't mind it as a general guideline, because it stimulates people to ask themselves whether they're the asshole - a good inroad to introspection that in many is sorely lacking. Likewise, in the context of nerds, it probably applies more often than not.

However, there are situations where the others are the problem: racism, mysoginy, homophobia, unjust laws, macho culture, historical social control exerted by the church, etc. It isn't always true that because behaviour is present in the majority, said behaviour is actually without fault. There is at times a thin line between belonging and herd mentality, and between seeking group harmony and conformity for conformity's sake.

[wolfgke]

> I don't mind it as a general guideline, because it stimulates people to ask themselves whether they're the asshole - a good inroad to introspection that in many is sorely lacking. Likewise, in the context of nerds, it probably applies more often than not.

Lacking social skills is something completely different than being an asshole.

[etripe]

I meant it more like "am I at fault/in the wrong here?". It doesn't literally have to be assholeish behaviour.