Wow, there are people who actually read past the first line? Shiny! I recently cleaned out a bunch of kruft that had accumulated here, so you're stuck with the typical vacuous few sentences for now. The real issue is that anything that would go here is redundant in view of the other information on the profile, or would be obvious from a few minutes of discussion. Be that as it may, here are a few things you might want to know:
* I am among the most laid back people you will ever meet. This is not always a good thing.
* My religious views are roughly described as modern Orthodox.
* My political views are roughly described as Libertarian. This categorization is rougher than that of my religious views.
* My social views are roughly described as, "What do you Care What Other People Think?"
...more will go here if anything else of utility and relevance occurs to me.
I am clearly not creative, quite disinteresting, and likely to bore you.
(b) Best movie of all time: The Empire Strikes Back. From there, in order: Return of the Jedi, Star Wars: A New Hope, Indiana Jones and the Last crusade, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Game, ...
(c) I don't really care much about music. The only group I really follow is the Capitol Steps, although I also listen to a little J-Pop, Tom Lehrer, and other weird music. (Has anybody heard of the Klein Four Group?)
(d) As a college student, the primary factor in my choice of food is price. This means most of my meals are pasta, cheese, and frozen vegetables. I do, however, appreciate well made food, and I bake occasionally.
(2) Duct tape. Duct tape is like the force; it holds the universe together, it binds the universe. And it has a light side and a dark side.
(3) WD-40. If something is broken either it can be fixed using duct tape and WD-40, or you should get rid of it. If it moves and it shouldn't, use duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, use WD-40.
(4) Plastic bags. Because occasionally you need that air- (or at least water-) tight seal.
(5) and (6) are irrelevant (ie, I couldn't think of anything off the top of my head and will probably change this later...)
Go Russell's Paradox.
Of course, there is no paradox if we think of "private"ness as being measurable on the continuum under the usual metric (or an interval of the continuum if you believe privateness to be compact and connected), and we take "most" to mean the supremum instead of the maximum. In that case, the statement merely asserts that the set of things I'm willing to admit here contains no maximizer of the function mapping things to their privateness value. Of course, this assumes that the things I'm willing to admit here forms a set, but neither you nor I wants to get into category theory over this question.
*Your random number generator produced 17...
*You have some advice for me regarding grad schools...