[omnicognate]

Clearly barely anyone here has read far enough into this article to even know what he means by "Nerd Culture". I don't really agree with it, but he makes a specific claim and does so eloquently and emotively. It would be more interesting to discuss that claim than to respond to the title, as most here are doing.

Briefly, he's saying that the explosion in information availability has resulted in a form of hyper-aestheticism he associates with "hipsters", based on an idea that individuals with particularly "good taste" could sort through it all and popularise the good stuff, followed, after that failed and hipsterism came to be seen as unoriginal and conformist, by a surrender to corporate media franchises and manufactured culture, which he associates with "nerds". He claims this too is now failing and bleakly attempts to guess what might come next.

I think it's a huge oversimplification and I don't think "nerd" is a good term to use for what he's describing, but it's entertaining and would be fun to discuss if HN were capable of that.

[viridian]

Author's quite the judgmental bastard with a strange definition of nerd, but yeah most people ITT are just riffing on the title. It's a bit too prosaic to expect most people to read it in full though, but you get the gist after the first minute or so.

That said I get the reason for the title, "Hipster watches as the consoooomers meets the same fate his people did many moons ago" is far less catchy.

[auggierose]

Hahaha, I read the article first for some reason (I usually don't), but was then expecting exactly that: everybody discussing the title, not the article itself.

I should probably always read the article first, if I don't find the title interesting enough to do that, then reading the comments is probably just a waste of time as well.

Yes, his definition of nerd is unusual, but I like it ;-)

[drewcoo]

Fortunately it doesn't take much reading to figure out that this joker redefines words however he likes.

Therefore, he is an elbow macaroni, and I refuse to read the work of elbow macaroni.

[antisthenes]

> I think it's a huge oversimplification and I don't think "nerd" is a good term to use for what he's describing, but it's entertaining and would be fun to discuss if HN were capable of that.

So you yourself acknowledge it's a bad article and the author plays fast and loose with common terms, yet somehow HN is to blame?

> would be fun to discuss if HN were capable of that.

It sure would be, but could we pick a more sophisticated baseline than a multi-page rant about Marvel movies (who are almost universally understood to be pretty bad by adults, and are targeted at a less discerning demographic, e.g. 15-19 male)

> he makes a specific claim and does so eloquently and emotively.

Brevity is the sister of talent. If one has a point to make, it should be made prior to the halfway point of their diatribe. That's the least they could do just out of basic respect to their audience, unless they're just Twitter-shouting into the void.