[jkat]

"every self-respecting geek has one"

I realize Jeff's just being...poetic, but really it's just an excuse to buy toys. Spend your money on what makes you happy. If more gadgets, or that 6th purse, or 20th pair of shoes does that, great. If you want to define [part of] yourself by your possessions, do that. But don't judge others by the lack of theirs.

[chadwickthebold]

But then people wouldn't click on his amazon referral links maybe?

[btilly]

I am not so sure.

I draw a joke distinction between a geek and a nerd like this. A geek is someone who loves technology and toys. A nerd is someone who gets utterly obsessed by a particular topic.

I usually bring this up when explaining to a fellow programmer that I'm a nerd but not a geek. Which fact I then demonstrate by pulling out my flip phone.

If they proceed to doubt that I am a nerd, I'll then offer to explain something esoteric. A good example is the differences between the Riemann integral, the Lebesgue integral, and the Generalized Riemann integral. And why if the last had been discovered earlier, we might not have needed to develop Lebesgue integration at all!

[arrrg]

Seems like irrelevant categorizing that doesn’t make much sense and isn’t very useful. Who cares what you are in terms of dumb categories like that?

[tekacs]

> Who cares what you are in terms of dumb categories like that?

Certain kinds of nerds do (though usually not geeks).

Seems like pretty handy categorising - it's come in handy already! :P

[entrode]

I believe "geek" typically describes someone obsessed with a particular topic and/or with media/games/tech/some-corner-of-popular culture. Conversely, "nerd" typically describes someone obsessed with a particular academic topic and/or with learning in general. It's a significant difference.

Though not typical, it's also worthwhile to remove the "socially awkward" connotations of the use of "nerd" and "geek" terms and ascribe those to "dork" instead. Many self-described geeks and/or nerds don't consider themselves socially handicapped and it's deleterious to society to muddle academic engagement with social impairment.

[btilly]

The categorizing is indeed irrelevant. However I find it useful as a way to explain to self-proclaimed geeks why I don't care about the things that they think geeks should care about.

If the programmers around me self-declared as nerds I would reverse the distinction. Because I don't care about the label at all. What I care about is concisely explaining why it is that you can find someone who is competent at programming who does not share a lot of the interests that they assume I should share.

[PakG1]

A nerd is someone who gets utterly obsessed by a particular topic.

I usually bring this up when explaining to a fellow programmer that I'm a nerd but not a geek.

I believe this answers your question. Being a self-proclaimed nerd, btilly clearly does, per his definition.

[derefr]

Because you can be one without the other, and people frequently assume that because you're one, it means that you're the other--and predict your actions based on that (for example, by buying you stupid geek toys when you are merely a nerd.)

[arrrg]

So, why not eschew those categories altogether and reject them outright?

It seems to me they are too, well, mushy to be really useful.

[derefr]

I don't understand what you're saying. The reason it is useful to make this distinction, is to explain to people that don't see the distinction (and thus assume that, for example, someone who likes math watches Firefly; or that someone who collects MTG cards will be able to fix their computer), that in fact there is a practical difference between the two categories, and that they should keep them in mind so as to not offend people that aren't both by assuming they have traits of a group they don't.

[mkmkmmmmm]

Do fellow programmers tend to back away slowly? :)

Both words seem to be used to describe people that like specific categories of things but are unpopular or awkward. I refuse to be labeled with either regardless of any fine distinction in meaning. To me, what you are describing is like, "no I'm a douche, not an asshole." (I think you are neither, just an analogy.)

[btilly]

Do fellow programmers tend to back away slowly? :)

I have definitely left some in utter disbelief.

Among unpopular and awkward technical types, I stand out as being both awkward, and exceptionally extroverted. It is an interesting combination, though best observed from a distance. Kind of like a train wreck.

But you have to work with what you've got. And somehow it does seem to work out for me in real life.

[pekk]

Yeah. If you need to unlock doors, then you need keys. But you don't need a flashlight all the time unless you are a security guard or something.

We might as well be talking about purses.

[cubix]

That's what I thought, until I started carrying one. Now I use it all the time for mundane tasks such as finding something that dropped under my car seat, plugging in an ethernet cable under my desk, rummaging around in the back of a closet, and so on. It really makes life easier, especially as I find my night vision isn't as good as it used to be. LED lights and Li-ion batteries last for ages, so it's hardly an inconvenience.

[dangrossman]

I find the one built into my cell phone adequate for all of that. It's brighter than the $3 filament bulb flashlights they sell at Wal-Mart, which people considered adequate for decades. I have a real flashlight (uses the same Li-Ion pack as my Bosch cordless screwdriver, 8+ hours continuous use) for something like walking at night; I don't need to carry that all the time as the phone light is plenty for all spontaneous type situations you've mentioned.

[cubix]

Well, it's nice to able to light up a room when you need to. But to each his own.