Well here's my first impression after giving the article a quick read-through on my lunch break: We all know I can't do math. I am not enthralled by science, although I have respect for the people who are. I am still a giant sized geek.

Weird that an article about Star Wars of all things by an author I have a great deal of respect for would take such an unexpected left turn and so narrowly define what goes into being a geek. And also discludes those who analyze media in terms of text and story. What about literature geeks?

Anyway, more on that later, and like I say I think I'm missing some of the finer points, but it was just a hasty read-through.

I think he is making a semi-valid point about how mass audiences take their media as a distraction and try not to actively think about it though. It's the geeks who question things and look at any given text critically and ask "HOW was that done" and "WHY was it done?" etc. So I'll give him that, but I think he's putting too much emphasis on the science and technology aspects.