Thanks so much for publishing your “essential guide” to the top 10 girl geeks. I’m really glad that you’ve thought to use your reach in the industry to further the public’s knowledge of the women who have changed the world in geeky ways. It’s great to know that you have the integrity to write such a thoughtful and well-researched piece, and that you have accorded girl geeks the respect that they deserve. Mark my words, you will reap what you’ve sown with this particular article.

I know you’re getting all sorts of flack for ranking Lisa Simpson higher on the list than Marie Curie, but really, isn’t it obvious how much more important Lisa Simpson’s contributions to the fields of science and technology are? Marie Curie’s Nobel prizes are no match for a fictional 8-year-old.

And then there are the inclusions of Daryl Hannah and Paris Hilton on the list. I think your reasons for including these women are completely misunderstood! Sure, they aren’t really geeks, but Darryl plays one on TV, and Paris does, after all, play video games. That’s pretty good for a GIRL.

It sure is a good thing that you pulled our attention away from the Ada Lovelaces and Grace Hoppers of the world. Those women were just plain SCARY smart and we don’t really want to glorify that kind of behaviour.

I am expectantly waiting for your “essential guide” to the top male geeks. I can’t wait to watch Einstein, Galileo, and Copernicus go head to head with Keanu “Neo” Reeves and Weird Al “White & Nerdy” Yankovic. Too bad people like Berners-Lee or Tesla won’t make the list, but hey, them’s the breaks.

Way to go CNET. Your journalistic skills have awed us all.

2 thoughts on “Dear CNET

  1. According to Google:

    Paris Hilton: 2,740,000
    Lisa Simpson: 2,690,000
    Marie Curie: 2,040,000
    Daryl Hannah: 1,520,000

    Seems like I may have fingued out thier methodolgy

  2. I would rank this woman ahead of Daryl Hannah

    “Scientific American 50: Research Leader of the Year

    Angela Belcher
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    This eclectic investigator draws inspiration from nature’s genius for building things at the nanoscale
    The crux of nanotechnology is the problem of self-assembly, getting uncooperative atoms to link and align themselves up in precise ways. We know it can be done, of course: life persists by turning molecules into complex biological machinery. How fitting, then, that one of today’s most creative materials scientists, Angela Belcher of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has turned to nature for assistance. Belcher has pioneered the use of custom-evolved viruses in synthesizing nano-scale wires and arrays, fusing different research disciplines into something uniquely her own.
    … She decided that she would teach nature to work with the rest of the list. “The aim is to work our way through the whole periodic table and be able to design materials of all kinds in a controlled way. My biggest goal is to have a DNA sequence that can code for the synthesis of any useful material,” she told MIT’s Technology Review….”

    I would also rank her ahead of Lisa Simpson, but when Lisa grows up…watch out.

Comments are closed.