[imc]

My main problem with this essay is the idea that the 'nerd' is a "few steps ahead" already.

I think this stems from pg's confusion of intellect (which he notes is not scalar but discusses it as if it is anyway) with 'nerdiness'. The nerd is no better (or generally, even that much smarter - many of the non-marginalised people will grow up to be just as bright and successful), they are simply marginalised for being different. And they have not created a judgement free utopia within their own circles either; their social constructs are every bit as abusive and oppressive to those who are different as the ones that marginalise them.

Nerds were never better, or smarter. They just weren't given the same opportunities to be as cruel.

The true evidence against the 'nerd' being superior is the society that they/we have created where we are in the majority. Look at the technology industry and look at how we all are desperate to conform. Look at the people who are different to what we consider normal/cool/popular and look at how we treat them.

As pg notes, people lash out/oppress/marginalise when they are insecure in their position. Perhaps people should try to truly understand how that has shaped the technology culture we have today.

[nahname]

I wonder if some of us are turning tech startups into the high school we never had.

[michaelochurch]

I wonder if some of us are turning tech startups into the high school we never had.

Insightful.

I'd take this comparison further. The depiction of high school in the media is that the popular kids ("jocks") bully the nerds. In reality, the jocks and the popular kids and the bullies are mostly disjoint sets. Jocks work too hard at their athletic pursuits to also work their way into the popular crowd. Popular kids aren't really interested in bullying the people at the bottom; they'd rather not associate with them at all. They're indifferent.

It's usually mid-range kids trying to become popular who are the worst bullies. It rarely actually works that way for them, but that doesn't prevent them from doing it.

In the VC-funded startup world, the VCs are the popular kids. They don't intentionally bully women or older programmers or non-conformists or non-Kool-Aid-drinkers. They just don't care. The bullies are the ex-nerds, promoted into startup middle management, who think they're going to be going to be skiing with Peter Thiel in a year (but, in the mean time, they have to beat "the team" into making this deadline). Of course, they're almost always wrong. The popular kids in the VC-funded world tacitly accept the cruelty and cultural failure, but they're not the ones actually doing it.

[didgeoridoo]

This definitely matches my high school experience. The "jocks" were basically the nerds of the physical realm. There was a distinct male/female difference, though.

On male side, the jocks were respected by the popular kids (because the girls loved them), and feared by the bullies (because of their physical size).

On the female side, however, the jocks ended up creating their own little isolated world, much like the female nerds. Now that I think of it, this may have been because female athleticism doesn't bestow the same social standing — men don't prize female strength & size, and female bullies don't operate by physical strength (they're much more... psychological).

Fortunately, there isn't this same gender dynamic in the real world. Right?

[spiritplumber]

One interesting thing is that physical ability has nothing to do with it unless it's associated with a popular sport.

In HS, I made a bit of money doing construction on the weekend (it beat waiting tables) for a year -- needlessly to say I bulked up a lot. Still couldn't play soccer worth a damn, though, and this was in Italy so soccer is a huge deal.

I went from "kid who it is safe to bully" to "kid who beat the shit out of three older kids in full view of half the school after they keyed his scooter", but it didn't make me any more popular. It did get idiots to leave me alone, though.

The principal was pretty awesome about the whole thing -- he saw the whole thing go down, had everyone involved get into his office, yelled at the other three kids for provoking me, and after sending them home and telling me to come in, actually congratulated me on my victory. Only got a disciplinary note in that trimester's report card for this, no suspension or anything.

[jiggy2011]

I think that Jocks get a free pass into the popular set, so they don't have to work their way in. In fact a person's measure of popularity might be defined by their proximity to the Jocks. It might work the same way for VCs.

[calcsam]

pg's crucial insight here is that life gets easier for nerds as rewards are tied to accomplishments rather than mere popularity.

So the more trendy a tech startup is, the more likely it is to fall into this trap.

[courtf]

I came to a similar conclusion based on my school experiences, and my experiences in the tech industry. This sort of assumed mental superiority among nerds is just tiring, and what's worse, often undeserved. I agree with most of this essay on its face, particularly about the idleness of high school and its similarity to prison, but the correlation between nerdiness and intelligence is just that.

Everyone in the tech industry is so proud of whatever nerdiness they engage in that the word has lost its prior meaning within our little bubble. And what have the nerds done once they've been given some control over the workplace? Exactly the same types of exclusionary, prejudiced bs that they supposedly suffered for in high school. Most of the offices I've worked in have had such infantile political mechanics that I often wonder if I wouldn't be better off as a dental floss tycoon.

[jiggy2011]

This is true, from my recollection there were plenty of nerds who weren't particularly smart. Their nerdy activities consisted of fairly mundane things like memorising endless Star Wars trivia. They were probably the people who received the worst social stigma, because the smart nerds would also bully them for being dumb.