Geekier than thou

12 Sep 2005 | § 13 Buckethead

For what it's worth, I scored pretty high on the test. I have some issues with the construction of the test, but will forego a full out analysis as that would be a bit geeky. I will note, however, that the test is a bit skewed by the emphasis on computer stuff. The fact that I work in the IT bidness had a dramatic effect on my score. That and my ability to recognize old, dead scientists and obscure chemical elements. A proper geek test would focus on mindsets as well as skillsets. And would include probing questions about geekly matters like Star Wars v. Star Trek, LoTR and velvet tiger art.

Posted by Buckethead

on Mon 12 Sep 2005 | § 13

§ 13 Comments

If I only managed to score 28

If I only managed to score 28, and GL was only slightly higher at 32, I find it very difficult to beleive that a score of 94 is even POSSIBLE...

12 Sep 2005 | 19:57 Murdoc Murdoc

Ninety-freakin' -four?! Holy

Ninety-freakin' -four?! Holy crap.

Funny thing is, for people who've never met him, Buckethead is a big dude. It's a peculiar, if not unique, marriage of brawn and geek that's yielded the modern Buckethead.

You should kick your own nerdy ass for wishing for a more thorough assessment of your nerdliness.

12 Sep 2005 | 20:00 GeekLethal

MO,

MO,
Wait til Johno takes it.

If this thing has extra innings, double overtime, and time-and-a-half on holidays, he'll get all of it as it computes his final score.

12 Sep 2005 | 20:02 GeekLethal

I suppose I shouldn't

I suppose I shouldn't complain about how my job forces me to have geekly knowledge of computers; because after all, how did I get this job anyway? There are other geek tests that I score not quite so highly on. This one emphasized my strengths (or weeknesses, depending on how you look at it.)

Also, I used to have a old style HP calculator with the reverse polish notation. That's a couple points on this test right there.

Also, if you answered "speed of light" for the question about E=MC2, you were not so much wrong as insufficiently geeky. In normal conversation, I would answer, "speed of light." But when I saw the scientific notation that approximated 300,000 km/s, I knew that was the answer.

I don't know why I knew that the first picture was Maxwell. I just do.

Aaaach.

12 Sep 2005 | 22:36 Buckethead

Rest easy, B. I scored an 88%

Works for me... I don't have Buckethead's computing power. And, thank Tanj, I did NOT NOT NOT know that first picture was Maxwell. 'cause that's just useless knowledge.

Ninety-four. Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.

Nerd.

12 Sep 2005 | 22:45 Johno

...

12 Sep 2005 | 23:00 Murdoc Murdoc

What... what?

12 Sep 2005 | 23:44 Johno

That test is clearly flawed.

That test is clearly flawed. I scored only 18%, but given that I am a woman, and that there are more varieties of geekiness than mere techno-geekiness, I think I've been grossly underestimated as a nerd.

13 Sep 2005 | 04:16 Allison Allison

Um, Actually the speed of

Um, Actually the speed of light is 2.99792458e8 m/s. They had that and 2.99792458e8 km/s (which is wrong). Hope you put down the m/s entry.

I guess you can argue the test parameters, but this one wasn't too bad.

I just didn't find any relevance to knowing my DHCP address on the present computer. If you asked me if I knew the addresses of the computers I work with I'd have said yes in general. That and the routing tables, the network DNS servers, etc.

As for the pictures of Maxwell, I'm a physicist. We had to study that historical nerd, so the picture was just there. Thought it was pretty funny though that they chose him.

13 Sep 2005 | 14:41 Nylarthotep