Geek Confessions & Blasphemies

1. I've not seen a single episode of The Walking Dead, and will probably not ever.

2. I like the 1990 remake of Night of the Living Dead much, much more than the original.

3. The Star Trek reboot was great, and I look forward to Star Trek Into Darkness. I grew up watching TNG and DS9, and I've been going back through TNG on Netflix periodically for about a year. I love the shows, but I just really enjoyed the reboot.

4. I have never been particularly unpopular, and don't get the awkward nerd stereotype. Even when I was picked on in middle school, it was by a kid who had fewer friends than I did.

5. I don't like the vast majority of Linux; Linus Torvalds is over-rated. This isn't saying that I don't respect his ideals. I just think that Linux will never be the OS for everyone, though the Android flavor is catching on in the touch-screen market.

6. I don't like Google, as a company. I like a lot of what they've done, but they're really not very different from any other large international business. They just seem to have better control over their own image than most.

Demyx wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

The key to realize, of course, is that Buffy is far and away the worst, blandest, least interesting character in the Buffy-verse. All the Scoobies are more interesting, all the big bads are more interesting, most of the background fill wandering the streets are more interesting. I think Buffy-minus-Buffy would be fantastic.

This is absolutely the truth. A large part of why the 6th and 7th seasons were not great was the heavy focus on Buffy at the expense of the supporting cast.

It's one of several reasons why I prefer Angel the series as Angel turned out better as a main character. I wouldn't have expected that given that I didn't care for Angel at all when he was on Buffy, but it turns out that Angel is a fine character when he's not just there to be a prop for Buffy. Go figure.

Is preferring Angel the Series to BtVS a geek confession?

Also, the Mayor is the greatest big bad for sure.

This + The Mayor stuff actually got me thinking about how they handled Faith as a character, despite the fact that Eliza Dushku hams it in and just...gah. She feels like she never grew beyond high school stage plays.

Yet despite her terrible performance, I really cared about her because of how her character interacted with the mayor, the fact that the mayor very clearly cared about Faith, and how Angel sought to try and redeem her. It's amazing how a truly flawed character can result in such interesting relationships.

So what's Buffy's flaw? Well, she's headstrong because that's a thing protagonists tend to be, and...um....she's not so good at school I guess. Er...and um...bad taste in men? That's a thing they laugh about, right?

Keithustus wrote:

Lord of the Rings, both novels and films, are CRAP. Thank you, J.R.R. for almost singlehandedly creating a whole genre, introducing dozens of tropes like monster names, etc. into popular culture, but why is your writing itself so amateurish and bad?

...maybe, maybe, let's see where this goes...

Keithustus wrote:

For good writing in fantasy, stick to the folks who perfected Tolkein's feeble attempts at narrative these settings, like Terry Goodkimd, David Eddings, etc.

...and there goes credibility.

ccesarano wrote:

So what's Buffy's flaw?

She's a whiny, self-centred, entitled, egotistical, snobbish, self-righteous, holier-than-thou prig?

Sorry; was that a rhetorical question?

Originally, Buffy's flaw was that she wanted to be "normal" instead of being the Slayer.

The problem is that this arc kind of culminates when she needs to

Spoiler:

kill Angel to save the world.

After that she doesn't seem to have much conflict between normal life and slaying. In fact, as the series goes on, she seems to prefer slaying to any sort of normal life.

Rhydius wrote:

5. I don't like the vast majority of Linux; Linus Torvalds is over-rated. This isn't saying that I don't respect his ideals. I just think that Linux will never be the OS for everyone, though the Android flavor is catching on in the touch-screen market.

I'd wager that two thirds of the websites you visited today are running on Linux.

ccesarano wrote:

So what's Buffy's flaw? Well, she's headstrong because that's a thing protagonists tend to be, and...um....she's not so good at school I guess. Er...and um...bad taste in men? That's a thing they laugh about, right?

Tannhausered, but Buffy's flaw (imo) is that she's very self-centered.

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

So what's Buffy's flaw?

She's a whiny, self-centred, entitled, egotistical, snobbish, self-righteous, holier-than-thou prig?

Sorry; was that a rhetorical question?

Stengah wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

So what's Buffy's flaw? Well, she's headstrong because that's a thing protagonists tend to be, and...um....she's not so good at school I guess. Er...and um...bad taste in men? That's a thing they laugh about, right?

Tannhausered, but Buffy's flaw (imo) is that she's very self-centered.

Heh, I'm guessing Whedon didn't go for that intentionally, but was trying to represent your "average girl in her shoes" bullsh*t.

Which I never bought. I don't know a single person that would be granted supernatural powers and abilities and think "Y'know what? I just wish I could be a cheerleader like all the other girls..."

Perhaps this is one of the reasons Cordelia's character growth in Angel is a Hell of a lot more potent than anything Buffy goes through (up until season three which is absolutely terrible).

Buffy's even more self centered in seasons 4-7. Some of it's justified, a lot of it is just her being sh*tty to her friends.

ccesarano wrote:

Which I never bought. I don't know a single person that would be granted supernatural powers and abilities and think "Y'know what? I just wish I could be a cheerleader like all the other girls..."

I have to disagree here, considering that the supernatural powers really weren't fun for her most of the time, and she didn't really have a choice about risking her life in all sorts of terrifying ways.

The speech at the end of the first season about "I'm sixteen years old, and I don't want to die," is probably her most sympathetic moment ever and sums up what her character arc was supposed to be (and pretty much was in the first couple of seasons).

Demyx wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

Which I never bought. I don't know a single person that would be granted supernatural powers and abilities and think "Y'know what? I just wish I could be a cheerleader like all the other girls..."

I have to disagree here, considering that the supernatural powers really weren't fun for her most of the time, and she didn't really have a choice about risking her life in all sorts of terrifying ways.

The speech at the end of the first season about "I'm sixteen years old, and I don't want to die," is probably her most sympathetic moment ever and sums up what her character arc was supposed to be (and pretty much was in the first couple of seasons).

That's my take, her only angsting about her powers was over the fact that they also represented a fate she wasn't too happy about--an inevitable violent death at a young age. That part, I always bought.

I actually think her problem in later seasons is that the writing crew wasn't interested in doing much more than making her a bitch, and SMG was too bored to play her any other way.

Stengah wrote:

Buffy's even more self centered in seasons 4-7. Some of it's justified, a lot of it is just her being sh*tty to her friends.

It's an interesting thought; was Buffy intended as a look at what happens when somebody non-heroic gets forced into the hero's role? She resents the hell out of her abilities because they eliminate some choice in her life, but instead of accepting it and working with her circumstances and growing, she plays the victim and wallows in self-pity (which she then uses to excuse her poor behaviour and questionable choices). She's very much not a hero, she just plays one on TV. So to speak.

I wonder how much the writers intended that to happen.

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

So what's Buffy's flaw?

She's a whiny, self-centred, entitled, egotistical, snobbish, self-righteous, holier-than-thou prig?

Sorry; was that a rhetorical question?

This is actually summed up in a line in the show. One of my favorite episodes. Conversations with Dead People, written by Drew Goddard (of Cabin in the Woods fame). Season 7, episode 7.

"You have a superiority complex. And you have an inferiority complex about it. Kudos."

mudbunny wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

I really don't understand the geek hatred for Big Bang Theory. This is apparently now blasphemy.

I know those guys. Or, rather, I know the real world incarnations of those guys. That's why it's funny to me. Of course they're all exaggerated caricatures. That's because it's a sitcom. There are very few sitcoms that aren't chock full of exaggerated caricatures. I guess, to me, all the hate and... well, butt-hurted-ness seems like folks that can't stop feeling like everybody is still making fun of them.

I wonder if fora for dysfunctional families hate sitcoms?

As someone who spent 6 1/2 years getting a PhD in chemistry...the people in BBT *do* exist, and in some cases, the characters are not that far removed from people I *actually* know.

BBT started while I was in grad school for polymer engineering... I almost checked the labs for cameras... that show was so dead on in the first few seasons it was scary. If you don't like it don't watch it.

That brings up another thought. Why do people watch shows and then complain? If you don't like it don't watch and don't go online and talk about it!

I liked the last 2 matrix movies also.

I liked the ending to ME3

I like the "crappy" explosions and guns movies a lot.

Linux is a pain in the bum (programmed using it for 4 years so I can say I know what I'm talking about) Windows is just easier.

I like popular anime like Naruto and One Piece and don't like the obscure stuff.

Nerds know a lot about a lot of things and geeks know everything about one thing. That is the proper definition... deal with it. (Nerds are better. <- see the period?)

No matter what they claim thermometers 100 years ago were not accurate enough for the global warming claims made by everyone... so whoop di freaking do.... it may be getting warmer but until digital thermometers were widespread and accurate there is no point in doing data comparisons. (Not enough people had the accurate version of analog thermometers let alone know how to use them to get an accurate global picture.)

I like guns and shooting stuff and hiking and camping and outdoors in general.

On the issue of The Big Bang Theory - A lot of my own feelings are summed up in this post just better than I could ever share them.

I don't like Star Trek, it's not that I hate it but I just find it boring. Give me Stargate SG:1 anyday of the week.

manta173 wrote:

No matter what they claim thermometers 100 years ago were not accurate enough for the global warming claims made by everyone... so whoop di freaking do.... it may be getting warmer but until digital thermometers were widespread and accurate there is no point in doing data comparisons. (Not enough people had the accurate version of analog thermometers let alone know how to use them to get an accurate global picture.

I'm tempted to write this off as an excellent example of Poe's law, but instead, read some of these. Believe it or not, they're using slightly more scientific methods to determine what the temperature was in the past.

onewild wrote:

On the issue of The Big Bang Theory - A lot of my own feelings are summed up in this post just better than I could ever share them.

That is by far the most eloquent explaination of why someone doesn't like TBBT...and it's exactly how I feel about the show

athros wrote:
onewild wrote:

On the issue of The Big Bang Theory - A lot of my own feelings are summed up in this post just better than I could ever share them.

That is by far the most eloquent explaination of why someone doesn't like TBBT...and it's exactly how I feel about the show

I think that article boils down to he doesn't like the show because it makes him uncomfortable for personal reasons. His deconstruction of the show is demonstrably wrong. He's cherry picking bits that are not representative of the whole. In fact I'd say the show has moved a great distance from being about nerrrrrrrrrrrds to dealing with interpersonal relations of people who happen to be geeks. The fact that the comedy comes from characters and not set-up jokes is actually a huge compliment and points to the sterength of the actors and their roles.

Stengah wrote:
manta173 wrote:

No matter what they claim thermometers 100 years ago were not accurate enough for the global warming claims made by everyone... so whoop di freaking do.... it may be getting warmer but until digital thermometers were widespread and accurate there is no point in doing data comparisons. (Not enough people had the accurate version of analog thermometers let alone know how to use them to get an accurate global picture.

I'm tempted to write this off as an excellent example of Poe's law, but instead, read some of these. Believe it or not, they're using slightly more scientific methods to determine what the temperature was in the past.

Debate is for another place... but it's simple math if you have 100 people doing the recording versus 10,000 then you will get a different number.

manta173 wrote:
Stengah wrote:
manta173 wrote:

No matter what they claim thermometers 100 years ago were not accurate enough for the global warming claims made by everyone... so whoop di freaking do.... it may be getting warmer but until digital thermometers were widespread and accurate there is no point in doing data comparisons. (Not enough people had the accurate version of analog thermometers let alone know how to use them to get an accurate global picture.

I'm tempted to write this off as an excellent example of Poe's law, but instead, read some of these. Believe it or not, they're using slightly more scientific methods to determine what the temperature was in the past.

Debate is for another place... but it's simple math if you have 100 people doing the recording versus 10,000 then you will get a different number.

And if climate scientists were basing their conclusions entirely on 100-year-old temperature recordings, that might be a cause for concern. Thankfully, there are a lot of other methods for determining historical temperatures.

Nate Silver is a witch.

manta173 wrote:
Stengah wrote:
manta173 wrote:

No matter what they claim thermometers 100 years ago were not accurate enough for the global warming claims made by everyone... so whoop di freaking do.... it may be getting warmer but until digital thermometers were widespread and accurate there is no point in doing data comparisons. (Not enough people had the accurate version of analog thermometers let alone know how to use them to get an accurate global picture.

I'm tempted to write this off as an excellent example of Poe's law, but instead, read some of these. Believe it or not, they're using slightly more scientific methods to determine what the temperature was in the past.

Debate is for another place... but it's simple math if you have 100 people doing the recording versus 10,000 then you will get a different number.

You, um, have no idea how climate science is done, do you?

MrAndrewJ wrote:
mudbunny wrote:

Daft Punk I find merely meh. Apart from a couple of their songs that stand out, the rest all blur together as one giant sameness, kinda like Nickleback.

You should see what their Discovery album looks like in DJ'ing software. It's all one giant sameness, kinda like Nickelback.

They are still not as bad as Fatboy Slim.

grobstein wrote:

I like geeky things, but I hate anything that feels like it's consciously aimed at a "geek" demographic.

This is kind of in line with what I came to say.

I don't watch television.
"OMG, did you see that latest Geek TV NBCBSPN show?"
No. I didn't. I was doing things.

We're all dancing around a lie.
Several multi-national multibillion dollar media conglomerates can make a profit catering to an alleged subculture during their prime time slots. It's no longer a subculture.

Most of it no longer resembles what it's pretending to be. It starts to look every bit as stupid as ten million kids showing naval piercings through flannel shirts, adoring a radio station that plays only ten songs in constant rotation, and calling that swill an 'alternative' to some other swill. I almost wouldn't care except that it's time to remove "geek" and "nerd" from entirely from the conversation.

Mine at this point isn't so much things I hate, just things I'm freaking tired of:

1) Steampunk
2) Zombies
3) Cthulhu
4) Batman
5) Browncoats

I have not seen any of the Star Trek tv shows, just a few of the movies. The fandom is enough to drive me away.
I enjoyed the reboot and will watch the latest movie when it releases.

I tried to install Linux about 10 years ago, fried my laptop and decided Wintel was good enough for me.

Angel IS better than Buffy, so happy we got that cleared.

I love Google and everything they touch automatically becomes blessed with bacon-flavored chocolate.
I would KILL to work there.

lostlobster wrote:
athros wrote:
onewild wrote:

On the issue of The Big Bang Theory - A lot of my own feelings are summed up in this post just better than I could ever share them.

That is by far the most eloquent explaination of why someone doesn't like TBBT...and it's exactly how I feel about the show

I think that article boils down to he doesn't like the show because it makes him uncomfortable for personal reasons. His deconstruction of the show is demonstrably wrong. He's cherry picking bits that are not representative of the whole. In fact I'd say the show has moved a great distance from being about nerrrrrrrrrrrds to dealing with interpersonal relations of people who happen to be geeks. The fact that the comedy comes from characters and not set-up jokes is actually a huge compliment and points to the sterength of the actors and their roles.

Yeah the author of that article really doesn't understand the show at all, sure BBT takes the piss with regards to nerd culture sometimes, but Penny is absolutely not the only POV character, and she and the other muggles get a fair bit of flak themselves. Leonard always seemed to be the audience avatar of the show to me, and I think the show treats the character (and the other core geeks) with respect and an even hand.

The author also completely misinterpreted the Jeff Winger quote in their article. Jeff wasn't being supportive of Abed, he was being manipulative to score points with the group.

I tend to hate people who like what I like. I cannot stand people who actually enjoy steampunk art and style (actual steampunk fashioned things, not "hey yo lookit my cogs and goggles, yo!" people, though I find them insufferable, too). Fighting game enthusiasts are generally terrible human beings until proven otherwise. People who study mythology and various religious stuff are pretty flighty and a little loopy. The list does go on, but yeah. I am not a self-hating geek because I think I am in fact pretty neato. But I find it weird that every time I get into some new hobby or fandom, all I can do is wonder if there is something wrong with me or the people around me.

I've never seen Dr. Who. Any of it. Except some clips and stuff people forward to me. I apparently dress like the tenth Doctor and share some of his mannerisms, so people think I am some sort of weird meta-fan. I get annoyed at them deeply.

Also, to this -

MrAndrewJ wrote:

We're all dancing around a lie.
Several multi-national multibillion dollar media conglomerates can make a profit catering to an alleged subculture during their prime time slots. It's no longer a subculture.

Most of it no longer resembles what it's pretending to be. It starts to look every bit as stupid as ten million kids showing naval piercings through flannel shirts, adoring a radio station that plays only ten songs in constant rotation, and calling that swill an 'alternative' to some other swill. I almost wouldn't care except that it's time to remove "geek" and "nerd" from entirely from the conversation.

I usually think this exact sort of thing 95% of the time. I am constantly annoyed by the insincere way in which companies attempt to establish some sort of cred or empathy on this level. I think 95% of us feel this 100% of the time. Other times, though, I wonder if it just feels this way because many geeks/nerds tend to walk around in their geek/nerd bubbles or echo chambers. Not to say that you have only nerd friends, but it's entirely possible that when so many of your friends and interests go one way, it's easy to feel like there's this overwhelming (and dubiously credible) trend. The trend is certainly there - commerce and advertising have certainly become littered with companies who have decreed that they're our one and only buddy - but sometimes I wonder if it's really as bad as we feel.

Tanglebones wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:
hbi2k wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

Justin Bieber is not the worst thing in the world. I really don't understand how the hatred for him is stronger than it was for N*Sync or Backstreet Boys.

I think that with the distance of years you may be forgetting just how strong the backlash against N Sync and the Backstreet Boys actually was. I remember it as being quite comparable to today's Bieber hate.

Given that Marky Mark and Donnie Walberg are chasing Oscars, Emmys, and Golden Globes, I figure that some day Bieber or those One Direction kids will be as well.

Justin Timberlake's developed into a guy with a seemingly great sense of humor and had his part in an oscar-domianting movie, too.

I enjoyed a bunch of seasons of "Enterprise" (latest Star Trek series)

I'm watching Equilibrium again, and I'm realizing something:

This movie is kinda dumb.

The acting is bland, the "gun kata" stuff is silly, and the whole premise is weaksauce.

Uh, just now, huh? I thought the movie was either cleverly ironic or completely silly when I first watched it. Having the melee gun extensions come out was a special laugh moment.