I am a self-motivated scientifically-minded intellectual high-school drop-out. I study or do neuroscience, biofeedback/neurofeedback, behavioral genetics, psychopharmacology, computer programming, electrical engineering, and hang-gliding. I'm interested in energy, the sociological effects and correlates of intelligence, education reform, patterns of economic and technological development, and ultimate frisbee.
I grew up in California and went to school at UC Berkeley.
I'm extremely nerdy. I hate small talk. I like talking shop. I love sharing knowledge.
I know a technologically and economically valid way to replace oil (and, eventually, all fossil fuels) as the energy source for cars. All I have to do in order to save the world from catastrophic environmental disaster is get 10 minutes of Barack Obama's attention.
I am sapiosexual and very picky. I need to be able to relate to a woman intellectually for things to work out romantically. This excludes most of the dating pool for me, so I tend to be single most of the time.
I am affectionate and cuddly. I tend to be more responsive to other people's needs than to my own. I am very honest and direct, almost to a fault.
Some people say that each person has his/her own genetically determined potential, and that our goal in life should be to realize as much of that potential as we can. I disagree: I think that our goal should be to exceed that potential as much as we can. I'm a strong believer in the (careful and informed) use of pharmacology and other mind/brain–distinction-bursting techniques for self-improvement and performance enhancement. I think that the human species is a work-in-progress with a lot to improve upon. Due to our recent rapid burst of evolution, we've got a lot of bugs in our code, and tons of room for optimization. But nowadays, our culture, technology, and environment are evolving much faster than natural or sexual selection can keep up with, and I think that one rational response is to take the same engineering capacity that created our modern environment and direct it inwards.
I also run a neurofeedback start-up based on an invention of my late grandfather's. This mostly involves electrical engineering and computer programming. I've been doing this start-up for several years, but it's currently on pause for the bitcoin thing. I was also working on a project to turn blind people into cyborgs, mostly for fun. I program and read science stuff in my spare time, as well as some time-wastey stuff like playing games and browsing OkCupid. I'm a very work-oriented person, so much of my free time I dedicate to my brain projects.
I work on an open-source program that could make you smarter. It's called Brain Workshop. Go download it. Go use it. The world can use more smart people.
So yeah. I'm really good at shortchanging myself and understating my talents. That said:
Deadpan humor; blunt honesty; explaining complex ideas interestingly, accurately, and comprehensibly; massage, of the back, foot, and hand types, but not the ego type; losing at competitive sports and/or forgetting that they're competitive; self-deprecation; under-representing myself; technology; kissing (apparently, at least; but, since I've never kissed myself, I can't be sure); creative cooking; and alternately crying and laughing at myself.
Also: human tetris. No, I'm not making some lewd reference to how sliding the long phallus into the right slot earns you the most points. I'm talking about maximizing the surface area of contact while cuddling. Geez, get your mind out of the gutter already. Sheesh. (Oh? I put your mind there? Sorry. (No, not really.))
Oh, and living in Shenzhen has taught me that I'm pretty good at feeding mosquitos.
* elfin, understands my computer more than I did,
* nerdy yet adorable
* sidelong glance... 'nough said
* smart is sexy
* oh my god why is he knowledgeable about everything (not) worth knowing?
* possesses large body of knowledge
* great tshirt collection
* if these walls had eyes, they would be jon's
* innocently condescending?
(The temporal dynamics of the approach given above would be all wrong, though; plus, it would also show when I was nervous or on caffeine. But... it's a start.)
1. Playing ultimate frisbee,
3. Coding, and/or
4. Getting to sleep early--hang-gliding trips usually involve a 7:30am departure Saturday morning and a 10:00pm return Sunday night.
I don't frequently go to parties.
If you're thinking about it, you probably should. Women initiate messages with men on here far too infrequently, and men message women far too often (and spammily). Buck the trend!
There are a few different types of people that I'm looking for. Here are a few separate and independent schemas:
(1) Locals. I spend a lot of time outside my home country. If you want to show a neophyte around town, I would be much obliged.
(2) Project-buddies. I'm interested in people who like to build or do cool neuroscience things, and like to do random electronics projects.
(3) Friends or friends-plus. I'm looking for people who are very intelligent and love science. It also helps if you're female, poly, cute, and have high openness to experience. However, the attributes listed in the first sentence are far more important, since without them, we probably won't have much to talk about. I also tend to get along well with people who know how to program, since that seems to correlate with precise thinking and communicating ability, which I value.
(4) Mate. I'm looking for someone to breed with. I'm getting to the point in my life where I'm foreseeing reproductive potential within a few years. I am very interested in meeting someone with whom I could achieve that potential. Especially in the West, I see that fewer smart people have kids, and the smart people who do have kids tend to have fewer kids, which results in most kids not being very smart. I want to atone for the sins of my peers, and to do my part to ensure that the next generation has its fair share of brilliance. If you are (a) interested in having children soon (and preferably more than 2); (b) 2 to 5 stdevs smarter than average; (c) interested in and knowledgeable about science (we have to speak the same language to get along and agree about child-raising strategy); (d) of at least average physical attractiveness; (e) someone whom I can get along with for 20+ years; and (f) either really hot and highly libidinous, or open to open relationships, or willing to consider a "marriage" based on friendship and coöperation rather than romantic and sexual attraction; then PLEASE PLEASE contact me. Don't worry about trying to be charming or cute or whatever; just send me a short message saying that you might want to have my babies, and we'll take it from there. K? K.
(5) Lovers. To be explicit (and slightly redundant), I'm also looking for smart, attractive women sleep non-procreationally. My sexytime requirements are essentially a superset of my friendship requirements, so interested individuals should re-read (4).
I enjoy traveling to new places, and my occupation (entrepreneur/small business owner) gives me a lot of freedom. If you aren't in the same city or region as I am, but think we should hang out, please tell me why you think I should come visit your country. Who knows: I just might.
I identify as poly, though I tend to be mostly monogamous in practice. (I do not identify as polyamorous, because polyamory is wrong: one should not mix Latin and Greek roots. It should be polyphilia or multiamory.) Humans are not an exclusively monogamous species, and socially imposed strictures on nonmonogamous romantic affiliations deprives us of some of the richness of human experience, or force us to lie and cheat in order to taste that richness. Nonmonogamous affiliations also add complexity and complications, such as with paternity certainty, inheritance, disease transmission, jealousy, time allocation, and resource allocation. Modern technology, like contraceptives, DNA testing, and mechanized agriculture, diminish many of the historical reasons for enforcing monogamy, and my personal disposition and life position diminish others, making polyphilic associations appear to me to be superior overall. That said, my selectivity and social opposition to polyphilia make it difficult to successfully practice. Consequently, I'd prefer to date people who themselves prefer open or poly relationships, but I'm open to date people who require monogamy if they're awesome enough. I don't cheat. If I say I'll be monogamous with someone, I am.
I am a proponent of the concept of low-stakes first dates (thanks to quagmar for the link), though I disagree with some of the linked author's more specific recommendations. I think that extensive back-and-forth email communication is both an inefficient use of time, and furthermore, it builds a lot of pressure and anxiety which can cause unnecessary awkwardness once you actually meet. I think that people should start arranging a meeting once they think that (a) the person isn't a total creep, and (b) they seem interesting enough that it would be worthwhile to invest a couple of hours (including transportation time) getting to know them. One should go on dates with low expectations and open to let things evolve however feels right.