I am a student in art school, but I work in a machine learning research lab. I talk to hip people half the day, and nerds the other half. I hope (at least in part) that I've managed to pick up a little of both dialects.
I think that the point about speaking the written word is an excellent one. My nerd socialization as a young adult came almost entirely in text. I became used to the way that punctuation, flow, phrase length, and formatting communicated. Particularly when writing comments or IMing, it is fantastically important to be able to convey tone. If I'm sarcastic and you can't tell, I may ruin the conversation. When I'm talking about computer science, I end up using those skills more than the usual nonverbal cues.
I'd also make a point about eye-contact: it's really hard to think while making eye contact. When a "fan" talks, they let the eyes wander so that they can think. When listening, they focus the gaze to prevent internal dialogue from getting in the way of hearing.
In the end, there aren't really that many differences between them; there is more variation from person to person then there is from subject to subject. Certainly the greatest difference I notice is one of passion; the good artists and the good engineers share a passion for what they do, and it's easy (for me) to talk to passionate people --- polite or no, passion is infectious and soon I don't care a whit about turn-taking or eye contact. The students who lack passion --- who are in engineering for the money or art because it's "easy" are the ones that make small talk.
I can't speak for the original poster, but I have taken both art and computer science classes. From what I have seen the eye contact issue is definitely a real force. Also I've noticed minor differences in body language, particularly hand movements when talking. It is hard to explain, as I am not a particularly talented people observer, but I have noticed that art students do talk with their hands in a different way than computer science students do.
When we make a joke, we don't do a little laugh in the middle of a word to signal that it's funny; we inhale and exhale a very fast, short breath at the end of the sentence, rather like a suppressed beginning of a laugh, or a kind of a gasp.
We're actually pronouncing the :-) at the end of the sentence.
I worked at company where everyone in IT was called engineer/geek/nerd/hacker and everyone else was called a mortal. We even had mailing lists with these names. It always made me chuckle.
"Our body language is also different from mundanes. We tend to not use eye contact nearly as often; when we do, it often signifies that it's the other person's turn to speak now. This is opposite of everyone else. In mundania, it's breaking eye contact that signals turn-taking, not making eye contact. She demonstrated this on
DDB; breaking eye contact and turning slightly away, and he felt insulted. On the other hand, his sudden staring at her eyes made her feel like a professor had just said "justify yourself NOW". Mutual "rudeness"; mixed signals."
I find this to be really true. Amazing I never noticed it before, but I often find eye contact dynamics to be a little bit awkward when talking to a non-geek, and I think this explains why.
Good call—I completely missed the date and thought it was recent.
Pretty much everything that comes up when you google the name is about this, so it doesn't look like anything came of this, which is a shame. Also, it being 1999, I'm guessing the only videos that may exist would be sitting on someone's shelf somewhere (if they weren't taped over or thrown out...). :(
Any Minicon 1999 organizers or attendees in the house?
Their loss, really. Someone who's in the habit of speaking in complex sentences with formal diction can usually, with a bit of extra effort, talk like a normal person. It's harder to go the other way.
I wonder if these differences in communication help to explain why some people are better than others at learning new languages (written/spoken, not programming languages).
If nothing else, I can use it as an excuse to explain why I have so much more difficulty learning to understand spoken Norwegian compared to being able to read it. :)
While normal people talk to other people, geeks generate sociolinguistic expressions to communicate with all the kinds of information processing entities, possibly cyborgs, robots, or something. If the communicative pattern of normal people is human-centered, that of geeks is (over-)generalized to all intelligent beings. Yes, I'm overgeneralizing here.
While reading this, I couldn't help but think of one thing: Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons. While I'm certain that the creators were drawing from existing characteristics, I wonder how much has been reabsorbed and amplified as a common foundation for speaking with other fen.
It isn't clear from the article but based on the newsgroup name this talk was part of a sci-fi convention. Should we assume that HN readers share language characteristics (and maybe cultural interests) with sci-fi fans?
I would think so, but maybe there's self-selection bias involved.
While there is commonality, I have to say from experience Sci-Fi geeks and Computer Geeks are very different. Yes one interest overlaps the other but I find the "geek essence" (yes I just coined that) to be different.
I know lot’s of really dumb geeks that are into sci-fi because they can’t function in society. I also know several highly intelligent people who simply don’t want to function in society and happen to like sci-fi. It can be difficult for outsiders to separate these groups, especially because the less intelligent geeks try and mask their faults. It's something like the Bulb problem where it's hard to tell if someone is actually highly intelligent or just acts differently than you do.
There is still a shared context among the geek community. I think Equilibrium was the most emotionally moving movie I have ever seen yet I have little interest in seeing it again, others just like the gun play and will watch it constantly. But, such distinctions are only relevant once you have seen the movie. Stepping back a few years and Blade Runner has the same dichotomy of people who like and or obsess over the movie and those who simply reacted strongly to it. (Now add Dune, Enders Game, Stranger in a Strange Land, etc.)
PS: The number of times you have seen each of the Star Wars films is probably a good metric for this. (Not to insult Star Wars.)
Does anyone else crave direct, honest, borderline offensive observations about themselves? People tend to be so darn polite that sometimes I feel like I never actually know what people think of me. Maybe it's because I was home schooled and for a long time I was socially awkward and didn't realize when I was doing or saying something weird or stupid. Now as an adult I prefer people to just tell me what they think about what I'm saying or doing.
But seriously, some of the best insights on my personality and the way I interact with other people have come from my wife. Usually when she's pissed off, but at least it's accurate and honest.
I too am married, and maybe it's that exposure to pure, loving honesty about myself that has opened my eyes to how rarely people really give you good feedback about yourself.
I didn't see any reason to see it as a cartoonish stereotype. It looked like honest reporting based on observation. In addition, from what I have seen it is very accurate.
I think that the point about speaking the written word is an excellent one. My nerd socialization as a young adult came almost entirely in text. I became used to the way that punctuation, flow, phrase length, and formatting communicated. Particularly when writing comments or IMing, it is fantastically important to be able to convey tone. If I'm sarcastic and you can't tell, I may ruin the conversation. When I'm talking about computer science, I end up using those skills more than the usual nonverbal cues.
I'd also make a point about eye-contact: it's really hard to think while making eye contact. When a "fan" talks, they let the eyes wander so that they can think. When listening, they focus the gaze to prevent internal dialogue from getting in the way of hearing.
Or maybe we're just awkward. Hard to say.