« Travyon Martin, muscular without a shirt | Main | George Zimmerman's mother is Peruvian »

March 25, 2012

Comments

Aristotle says that fiction is more important than history because history tell us what is and fiction tells us what could be. Nevertheless, real history is not unimportant.

The real life Zuckerberg has the same good-looking but not stunning Chinese-American girlfriend he was dating before he started Facebook.

What the movie did not show is that Zuckerberg had a girlfriend during the all the events depicted and they're still together today.

Where's the second half of this post?

"Eduardo’s hot Asian groupie girlfriend attempts to burn down his apartment because he didn’t give her enough attention."


That was more because she viewed him as a low status beta male. Greedy status obsessed dragon ladies tolerate beta but only when the cash and prestige is rolling in.

"Zuckerberg is portrayed as a bitter nerd."

Was he bitter in college?

I don't know anything about Zuckerberg's life because I never found him to be interesting enough to be worth reading about (unlike Steve Jobs), but from TV appearances Zuckerberg seems fairly stable, if boring.

If he wasn't bitter, then this is another liberal arts grad stereotype against STEM students as being mentally or emotionally unbalanced.

In fact, it is the liberal arts graduates who, per statistical data from the GSS, are more likely to report having had some sort of treatment for psychiatric disorders, not STEM guys.

Another reason the liberal arts departments need to be defunded and their professors sent to the unemployment lines, as if another reason were necessary.

is that the entire post?

i feel like you left me hanging.

And your point is?

Asians and Whites are two sides of the same coin.

Asian girls, due to their culture and their intelligence, give more importance to the ability to provide of a man than White girls.

But between a very ugly rich man and a very poor handsome man, they will make the same decision Whites would do.

Stop dreaming, ugly nerds! :o

And I've noticed in my travels that Japanese and Chinese girls, due to economic prosperity and working females, have become more and more like Ashley, Brooke and Samantha.

The mass medias, global companies and the Internet also play a big role in the globalization of sexual standards.

Asian girls see everyday tall and handsome Western men and women on television or in posters in the street. They perfectly know the difference between a handsome Western man and a Western ugly nerd.

"That was more because she viewed him as a low status beta male. Greedy status obsessed dragon ladies tolerate beta but only when the cash and prestige is rolling in."

If the male has cash and prestige, then by definition he's not beta.

It seems like you left something out here.

I think Zuckerberg is portrayed as bitter asshole because it gives the movie greater dramatic tension. So maybe the real lesson is not to write a screenplay about stable, emotionally resilient bourgeoisie working hard to attain their goals.

"The message is that Asian girls like nerdy white computer geniuses, and they like them even better if they are Jewish. For people watching the movie who are too colorblind to get the message, Eduardo Saverin makes the observation out loud."

Eduardo's observation, which if I'm not mistaken represents the real-life situation at Harvard,* was that Asian girls were attracted to Jewish guys, period. It wasn't just restricted to nerdy computer geeks. Note also the other scenes in which entire busloads of hot girls, mostly non-Asian for that matter, travel to Harvard frat parties.

What I believe to be the point being made is that merely being a Harvard student makes a man a very desirable catch, and therefore that when Erica** dumped Mark at the beginning it not only motivated him to start Facebook but also established that he must be a complete Beta loser beyond all hope of redemption.

* = and just about everywhere else
** = a fictional character

"travel to Harvard frat parties"

There are "finals clubs" but no frats at Harvard. Did the movie really show frat parties occurring on the Harvard campus?

Could Zuckerberg beat up George Zimmerman? Do shirtless Zuckerberg pictures exist on the Internet? Would we want them to?

@nebbish -
You are right, the parties to which the girls traveled were at clubs, not at frats _per se_.

“Stop dreaming, ugly nerds!”

Not all (even most) nerds are ugly; girls reject nerds because they have low social status, and girls are driven by status. Asian girls like successful men because for Asians that equals status.

“because it gives the movie greater dramatic tension.”

True but it’s still a choice. My favorite parts of the movie were about the entrepreneurial process and the story of Facebook itself.

usually when you see a very wealthy man like zuckerberg -- a guy who could conceivably land much hotter babes by simply flashing displays of his power -- with a plain jane girlfriend, the good bet is that the guy doesn't have the stamina, charisma (aka game), and/or experience to deal with the greater demands of better looking women or golddiggers, which he must be on the lookout for. they make a subconscious calculation that it's just an easier life enjoying the undivided attention of a grateful girl than the drama of a hot chick.

"Eduardo’s hot Asian groupie girlfriend attempts to burn down his apartment because he didn’t give her enough attention."

Not quite. The girlfriend (Christy, a fictional character) tries to burn a necktie that she had been planning to give Eduardo. She isn't trying to burn down the apartment, though she's oblivious to the possibility that the fire might spread.

By the way, the casting of this movie created a bit of racial controversy. Some people claimed it was racially insensitive to cast Max Minghella, who is of mixed white and Chinese ancestry, as an Indian, Divya Narenda. Another, somewhat less contentious issue involved the white actor Andrew Garfield playing Eduardo Saverin, who is Brazilian.

I didn't know much about Zuckerberg before I watched the movie, but something about the portrayal of him in the movie struck me as false. To hold together something that grew at the clip that Facebook did you have to have some level (arguably a high level) of social intelligence. You have to be able to read the desires of potential users, navigate investor relations, keep technical people motivated, deal with competition, strained business partner relations and lawsuits. I just can't believe that Zuck could be as socially inept as he was portrayed in the movie and still manage to stay in control of Facebook during its incredible growth.

I think that just as some nerds want to believe that all the "pretty people" are dumb, a lot of the "pretty people" want to believe that anyone smart in technology must be socially inept. The Social Network was a movie tailor made to reinforce that perception.

"Not all (even most) nerds are ugly; girls reject nerds because they have low social status, and girls are driven by status. Asian girls like successful men because for Asians that equals status."

What then equals status for sub-Asian girls? Penis size? Asian girls are genetically programmed to like nerds because Asian girls are more highly evolved, and thus select for high IQ and family stability, rather than primitive traits like muscles and testosterone.

"what this movie shows is how liberal arts majors—the kind of people who become screenplay writers and movie directors and actors—think of people like Zuckerberg"

Keen observation. This is the group that is targeted for the movie. STEM nerds will see it by default. 20 somethings that use facebook a lot like to know that no matter how rich and successful nerds become, the fact that they didn't get laid as much in their teens and 20s means it wasn't worth it.

I don't think it matters that the girl doesn't exist in real life. She is a stand in for all the girls that rejected Zuckerberg most of his life. Not showing the Asian GF a lot isn't a huge deal either, she is not very good looking and while she got with him before facebook she must have sensed he was capable of that as a Harvard genius.

Also note that Eduardo is portrayed as a halfway mutant. He dresses well and is socially accepted more then Zuck. He is into business rather then tech.

What's interesting is the different business strategies the two endorse. Eduardo stays in NYC for his IB internship rather then go to the valley. He also wants to cash in early on in the sites life. I think he recognizes that as a guy with ok looks and social skills an IB salary and modest success are enough to land girls. He doesn't want to take a lot of chances, like having the napster guy fuck up his reputation. Zuckerberg, as a loser, knows its billionaire or bust for him being a success.

"they make a subconscious calculation that it's just an easier life enjoying the undivided attention of a grateful girl than the drama of a hot chick."

I think what we'll find with Zuck is he will be reasonably faithful with a few indiscretions here and there that he is hopefully clever enough to keep on the down low. He would be smart to sign up for one of those really high end escort services.

"Asian girls like successful men because for Asians that equals status."

Asian men aren't all that buff, manly, or alpha. And to be crude, they have smaller dicks. Even nerdy white guys seem alpha by contrast.

Asian women also have higher IQ (ability to choose providers over gina tingles) and if they are from the poor countries providers are really high status.

Until recently they also had no understanding of feminism.

"Could Zuckerberg beat up George Zimmerman?"

Yes. Zuckerberg would DESTROY zimmerman because he has less muscle to slow him down, more height, 60 points more IQ, more g loaded reaction time, and more fear of zimmerman's oversized physique. How humiliating it would be for Zimmerman to get beat up by a Jewish nerdy billionaire, right after getting beat up by a skinny kid, and getting verbally beat up by the skinny president. Zimmerman is the world's biggest loser.


Or, he could just be gay. Anybody else's gaydar get triggered by photos of Zuckerberg?

"And I've noticed in my travels that Japanese and Chinese girls, due to economic prosperity and working females, have become more and more like Ashley, Brooke and Samantha." - Alex


Yes the world is descending into matriarchy.

http://www.coalpha.org/Post-Game-Culture-td6256108.html

Black and Latin men are the future of the male gender. These races have evolved for female mating preferences; height, athleticism, violent temper, dancing skill, basically traits that make civilization sexy, sexy, sexy, but often poor and primitive.

A few things.

The writer Aaron Sorkin (A FEW GOOD MEN, WEST WING) fabricated Zuckerberg's motive for creating Facebook. It recalled an episode from the short-lived Sorkin-created show SPORTS NIGHT where someone asks, "why'd you do it?" And the character replies, "For the same reason men attempt to do anything great: to impress a woman."

While there's more than an element of truth to that, Sorkin and Hollywood wanted to cash in on a brand, so they imposed this story onto the rise of Facebook, in the process portraying Zuckerberg as a misogynist (his Face-mash(?) site did not focus, as the movie suggests, exclusively on women. He did the same thing to guys on campus).

As for busing in the girls, it's something director David Fincher has addressed because people said it was untrue. He said "it definitely happens, though the girls might not be in this kind of shape."

Where are you guys getting this stuff that Zuckerberg wasn't bitter? The part about him creating a website to judge the attractiveness of Harvard's female student body is absolutely true. Moreover men are driven to succeed for the purposes of securing a mate. In nature males display and females choose.

tburgmuller,

Social intelligence comes in a lot of ways. When I was a professional poker player I had to do a lot of the things you listed, but I was a nerd. I understood social interaction in a logical actions oriented framework (what do I have to do to get this person to bet). That's only one kind of interaction.

Facebook is a rules based interaction environment. It works great for a guy like Zuckerberg. Rather then many kinds of "friends" you either are or aren't a friend.

Lots of nerds can be very social in rules based social environments. Have you ever seen people in a D&D group interact. They are very social. They are very social because a rules based social interaction system is in place to guide them towards being social.

"Asian girls are genetically programmed to like nerds because Asian girls are more highly evolved, and thus select for high IQ and family stability, rather than primitive traits like muscles and testosterone." - Ee

This may be true for FOB and first generation Asian American girls but it's becoming less and less common. You only need to ask Asian guys how miserable the dating scene is for them. That signals to me that it's more about culture than race. Which is why I don't believe south/east asians will take over America. Once the hordes of new immigrants stop arriving they will descend into the same cultural trap as white kids. Video games and alpha cock riding will replace calculus and female chastity.

"Where are you guys getting this stuff that Zuckerberg wasn't bitter? The part about him creating a website to judge the attractiveness of Harvard's female student body is absolutely true. Moreover men are driven to succeed for the purposes of securing a mate."

What's the point of having a mate if she only likes you for your success? That's why zuckerberg stayed with the same girl he had when he was poor. He's smart enough to understand the purpose of relationships.

And no one becomes that successful to impress a woman or for any other extrinsic award. You do it for the intrinsic love of the work.

And in general high IQ people have lower sex drives so are not as obsessed with attracting mates as you guys are.

"Another, somewhat less contentious issue involved the white actor Andrew Garfield playing Eduardo Saverin, who is Brazilian."

WTF is that supposed to mean? Saverin's a Jew.

"Black and Latin men are the future of the male gender. These races have evolved for female mating preferences; height, athleticism, violent temper, dancing skill, basically traits that make civilization sexy, sexy, sexy, but often poor and primitive."

Height is not a primitive trait. Humans got progressively taller as we evolved from monkeys, and blacks are not taller, they're actually about half an inch shorter than whites, but much more muscular.

I saw this blog entry when it hadn't updated yet and I was going to say "And?" or "So?" It wasn't very conclusive or insightful, with just the first part. Now that the second part has been added, I'd say it is saying something.

“What then equals status for sub-Asian girls?”

Being alpha, being cool(i.e. smoothly following the correct social cues of the group), not repelling her friends by talking about Star Trek or computer programming, following fashion, being athletic.


asdf,

Starting a company is about as far as you can get from a rules based environment. You have to invent the rules as you go, and that probably takes quite a bit of social skill.

Some commentators here have pretty warped views of the mating game. I mean, Zuckerberg's only chance to keep his Asian med-school girlfriend loyal was to become a billionaire? Eduardo "only" needed to land an IB job (oh, what's that pay? Just 350k a year) to attract women?

I'm fairly nerdy, on the short side of average for a white guy (5'9"), work in a seriously unsexy field -- my only 'alpha-ness' comes from having been a college athlete (albeit in a sport nobody cares about), and, at 25, remaining a serious gym rat, when most other guys are content to balloon into pleated khakis with 40 inch waists. I'm currently engaged, and before I met her, I never had too much trouble with women.

Is this sexual status rat race only applicable to certain places like LA, NYC, DC? If it's that bad, why live there?

"blacks are not taller, they're actually about half an inch shorter than whites, but much more muscular"

More muscular, really? That's news to me.

"Is this sexual status rat race only applicable to certain places like LA, NYC, DC? If it's that bad, why live there?"

It indeed is worse in some cities. New York in particular, because due to the financial services industry being so large the city's packed with alpha males working in i-banking, BIGLAW, hedge funds, and so on. Washington's public sector draws in alphas from around the country. As a result, ordinary men in either city face huge competition for women. I'm not so sure about Los Angeles.

Where you are, assuming "RTP" means Research Triangle Park, the big technology sector draws in men that, for the most part, are not particularly alpha, so the competition for women isn't as bad.

"Black and Latin men are the future of the male gender. These races have evolved for female mating preferences; height, athleticism, violent temper, dancing skill, basically traits that make civilization sexy, sexy, sexy, but often poor and primitive."

Some of that undoubtedly applies to blacks, but mestizos? Mestizos are short and often overweight. There are almost no mestizos in the NBA and NFL, and few in MLB. Central American countries don't bring home many gold and silver medals in the Olympics. And they don't have the superficial charm of black men. They strike me as dopey and humorless.

Alpha males compete for alpha females and beta males compete for beta females (ie unattractive females).

The problem is is that beta females think they deserve alpha males as well. Only the smart ones realize they will never do better then a beta and learn to settle.

Ee,

Zucks girlfriend went for him when he was a brilliant Harvard student with a genuis level IQ. I.E. right when he was on the cusp of greatness. She bought low, knowing his star would probably rise and she would be priced out later in life.

Does the same girl go for him in high school. Probably not.

The ratio of people claiming their work is intrinsically enjoyable to people who actually do is extremely high. Mostly we just do it for the money, which indirectely means the women. Computer programmers generally don't enjoy it. People enjoy things like being out in the sun all day.

asdfreply,

I had to make up rules as I went in poker, but I had systems for it. Zuck probably had systems too, as well as people to help him. The important part of my comment is that facebook itself is a nerd based social interaction mechanism. People think its crazy for a nerd to run a social networking company, but they don't realize nerds have lots of social insight but its of a certain variety.

Matt in RTP,

More info needed.

""The message is that Asian girls like nerdy white computer geniuses, and they like them even better if they are Jewish.""

A Korean girl surprised me lately, she's Jewish.
Then a week later I saw a almost all Korean Synagogue on the news.

”Asian men aren't all that buff, manly, or alpha.”

Which is why Asian women reject them at a higher rate that would be expected considering they are from the same stock.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Stranger_%28Kipling%29

Zuckerberg himself said he created Facebook not to get girls, but rather because he "like[s] building things".

That is a common motivation among
entrepreneurs, especially male nerd entrepreneurs. Perhaps this explains why he stayed with his girlfriend; he rather puts his energy and time on his creation Facebook.

NYC and DC have tough competition for women, to a large extent because of the feminist entitled women that are attracted to those cities. NYC's financial alphas make it tougher there to compete; DC doesn't have that issue to deal with but I'm not familiar with DC as much. DC is notorious for its cunty women, not surprising since there are so many lawyers there.

However, let's say you're an early-mid 30's single male like myself. where do you meet single women around your age or a little younger than you? You're pretty much relegated to the same cities that HAVE these women, like NYC, DC, etc. In flyover country they are married earlier.

One thing I've learned in the last few years is the quality of women you date is very related to the social network you have. Women are much more likely to give you a shot if they share something or somebody in common with you. That's why moving to a new city could be a disaster - no social network.

Matt, being a college athlete does give a guy status, even if it's a lower profile sport. Most sports have women's teams too so there are automatic social networks there. And athletes kind of hang out across teams also. I'd imagine at my Ivy very few athletes had that much trouble getting a girlfriend.

"Matt in RTP,

More info needed."

asdf, I can deadlift 530 pounds. If that isn't alpha, I don't know what is!

Like I said, I am fairly nerdy (I'm an engineer and I post on Half Sigma...) and while I am no lady-killer, I think I did pretty well for myself. Before meeting my fiancee (through online dating, so take that as you will), I found my previous girlfriends either in college classes or through friends of friends, not at bars or clubs or through ridiculous pick-up artist contrivances like 'day gaming'.

The only alpha thing about me is my weight routine. But then again, I was never competing for, uh, alpha women, I suppose -- mostly nerdy accountants, engineers, bookish English majors working in the library...not aspiring Carrie Bradshaws with a closet full of Blahniks and dreams of a 6'3" Harvard-educated private equity 'bro' with perfectly tousled blond hair and chiseled, tanned cheeks from summering at Martha's Vineyard.

You can find such girls, especially if you live in flyover country, and if you are willing to place your trust in a higher power, namely the blue-haired, busybody dowagers of your local church/synagogue/mosque. Not for everyone, but religion does have its purpose...online dating can also work, but it's much more hit and miss.

Victarion,

Its not a surprise that men have a desire to build things, building things has a correlation with getting chicks. Believe it or not men aren't really to reproduce, they are driven to do pleasurable things. It just so happens that we've evolved to make the things that cause reproduction pleasurable.

Matt in RTP,

Nothing about your post is surprising. You are good looking, if short. Your profession wouldn't be high class in any big time city, but in flyover country where everyone is a poor loser you probably look good by comparison. Most people would rather stay in flyover for this reason, but good jobs are rare there.

Also, you describe these girls as not particularly good catches. So you've got a well put together guy with a strong relative income that is in great shape who can land non-attractive females with relative ease. Especially if he is willing to do so in the context of dating and commitment. Where would you put yourself relative to your area, especially in a commitment context? A seven/eight? Easily an eight if you expect to make six figures. The fact that you can snag a bunch of fives, sixes, and sevens makes sense, its pretty much exactly what Roissy describes on his sight (hypergamy ranges from one point in rural religious communities to 3+ points in urban coastal cities).

"if you are willing to place your trust in a higher power, namely the blue-haired, busybody dowagers of your local church/synagogue/mosque"

Not sure about the mosque, but I suspect that the synagogue is a much iffier prospect than the church if one is not Orthodox. Even in the South (where I grew up), Reform and Conservative Jews rarely attend synagogue unless they are elderly or are married and have kids in religious school. I suspect the only effect of joining up for a single person might be lighter pockets because of the hefty dues. But maybe a few people have tried this and experienced some success.

"You can find such girls, especially if you live in flyover country, and if you are willing to place your trust in a higher power".


Church attendance is now majority female with a heavy bent towards single mothers. Church leaders basically want guys or "beta chumps" to take these women in but men aren't having it. Everything has become feminized including religion. I'm not surprised men are escaping their lives with video games. They're desperate for male oriented bonding since women poisoned the workplace with their presence and destroyed male only social clubs. Now everything is about princess 24/7. Goodbye America.

>"blacks are not taller, they're actually about half an inch shorter than whites, but much more muscular"

Black men have about the same height, mass, and body composition (fat to muscle ratio) as white men. Whence comes this view of them as being massively muscled?

>"Is this sexual status rat race only applicable to certain places like LA, NYC, DC?"

That's my impression. But the "game boys" tend to think that they have uncovered some universal law of male/female relations.

Now we need to know -- is RTP (i.e., Research Triangle Park in North Carolina) flyover country? Half Sigma should weigh in on this. It is 'coastal' but not elite like DC, NYC, LA. Is anything outside of DC/LA/NYC/SF considered flyover country?

Regarding testosterone: as I understand it, average testosterone levels in men are pretty much the same for all races. It also doesn't make much of a difference in physical or behavioral whether a particular man is higher or lower than average. Just about the only time it can be significant is if a man's level is substantially below average, and this is easily treated.

Why are you so quick to assume that zuckerberg was a "beta" or "loser", the real guy I mean not the movie character?

He is at least average height wise, in reasonable shape physically , not facially ugly and was also captain of his school's fencing team and could speak a bunch of different languages , quote the classics etc.

Seems more like he was just a general high achiever and his programming skills were an extension of that.

I think he built facemash more likely because it was an interesting idea or "because he could" rather than because he was bitter about anything, it's not like he's the first guy to compare women's looks on a scale. He just applied a simple mathematical model to it.

In fact it could be argued that in IQ terms building facebook was one of his lesser accomplishments. I imagine that early versions of facebook were somewhat similar to sites I built at around 16 years old when I was learning to program PHP. Of course my target audience was my nerdy friends and a handful of people I knew online rather than Zuckerberg's contacts with the rich and influential at Harvard.

Regards his girlfriend, I'd fuck her. Anyway I'm sure he knows she is far less likely to cheat on him than some superhot model who wants as many rich and famous bedpost notches as possible. It's not like he couldn't get the best hookers money can buy if he got the urge to bang supermodel type pussy on the side.

Was he successful with women before he got admission to Harvard? I don't know if there's any evidence one way or the other, of course most guys basically have no clue about women until they turn 21 at least.

"To hold together something that grew at the clip that Facebook did you have to have some level (arguably a high level) of social intelligence. You have to be able to read the desires of potential users, navigate investor relations, keep technical people motivated, deal with competition, strained business partner relations and lawsuits."

Zuck also studied psychology as well as computer science.

Besides apparently he still drives a 5 year old Acura rather than having a collection of ferraris so it's clear that his tastes are different.
That's fine, it just means he is in better company with Warren Buffet than with Donald Trump.

[HS: I think that Zuckerberg was nerdy, but not the total loser asshole portrayed in the movie. For some reason, people who aren't good at traditional alpha sports like football baseball or basketball take well to fencing. And the value of going to a good private school like Phillips Exeter Academy is that they have sports like that for nerdy kids to participate in.]

I want to make a quick comment about your wording in response to Jon that people who take to fencing or other sports that are not the Big 3/4. There's seems to be some kind of attraction toward such type of sports, not because of inability to play well to the alpha sports. Athletic is Athletic, unless you want to argue somehow the athletic talent requirement to be a good fencer or any other sports (which tends to be individual) cannot translate to the alpha sports. I think it more about natural inclination to set interests that comes with the personality rather than because just sucking at football.

asdf, I want to point out something about a lot of nerds. Many really do love it. I'm sure you seen those types somewhere. My sense Zuckerberg is probably one of those types. He didn't sell not because he thoughts things in business terms that he can get more or that he needs to be a billionaire or bust to keep a 4.5 (conquer the world just to be able to keep a 4.5, if that's so, why even bother?). He kept it because he views/ed that Facebook is his baby. That can be interpreted as such in the movie and I won't be surprised that's how he is in real life. That's why he drives a 5 year old Acura and lives in a humble home based more on commute than style. If you seen the leaked Facebook Zuckerberg Pics, lives awfully normal daily life.

He is not chasing fame and want to impress a woman, he just likes making stuff. A lot of nerds seems to have that tick, it is why if you hang enough around them you find a good sub-section seem to put energy into making a fencing robot (I have a MIT friend doing that right now)than go out into the sun. It just happens one of the stuff he made turn out to make a couple of billion bucks.

Eduado is the more typical and what most people would do if they saw an idea they were probably just trying out and seeing it go much better than just about anyone can imagine: cash out and cash out now.

I'm not sure if fencing is an 'alpha' sport or not since I have never participated but I think being the captain of a fencing team makes you less likely to be a 'beta'. At least in the way I would define it.

Of course Zuckerberg has nerdy tendencies but it would be interesting to imagine how he would have turned out had he grown up in a more 'prole' background. Whether he would have turned his hand to something else that made him appear more alpha or whether he would have been the weird kid.

In my limited experience with private schools it does seem that they specialize in extracting more 'alpha' characteristics for nerdy kids.

For example at my public school there was one kid who was very good at science and also did science related things for a hobby. In our school he was given a 5 minute slot to speak in front of the school about what he had done while everyone giggled at the nerd, then the head teacher went on to praise the football team.

I imagine in a private school the kid would have been encouraged to go to real science conventions intended for gifted children where he would have had a chance to give hour long presentations and hone his public speaking skills. Also he would have been given the opportunity to meet and speak with giants of the science profession.

Dreamer,

Of course. People want lots of different things in life. Most people get expensive cars to get respect, not because german engineering makes them horny. Billionaires running the biggest company in the world don't need expensive cars to get respect. IBers do.

We shouldn't interpret Zuck or Jobs disinterest in ostentatious personal consumption to mean they aren't after many of the same things we all are. Just that they have different stratagies for getting it.

I also think its worth noting here that people don't necessarily make logical decisions to maximize poon. They are simply programmed to do things that are pleasent. Sex is pleasent, so they do it. Because of evolution, things that are pleasent are often things that get poon (if they weren't you wouldn't have reproduced). The drive to create and focus that your talking about is an evolutionary advantage. Men that have it survived and procreated. While doing these things will bring joy irregardless of whether it brings poon or not, the fact that it has brought poon in the past is why you have that drive.

Sometimes that comes out in a useful way like starting a company. Sometimes it comes out in a useless way like building a robot. You know all those guys playing WoW 18 hours a day. That's just their evolutionary drive misfiring on modern technology thier drives don't understand (OMG, a hierarchy, I better climb it. I got to the top, yay dopamine release). If you look at modern videogames they mostly recreate things that men have been doing to get and control women for millenia (fighting, exploring, building, etc). The game just tricks you into thinking you are doing those things, and gives you the corresponding dopamine release.

Quote: "The message is that Asian girls like nerdy white computer geniuses, and they like them even better if they are Jewish"

I think the Asian girls are attracted to money. They just believe that all Jews are rich.

Being a nerd has nothing to do with whether you are alpha or beta. Bill gates is the most alpha man of all time and he's as nerdy as it gets.

And blacks are more muscular and have more testosterone and are faster and more athletic, and have have larger genitalia, but they are beta because they are poor.

HS writes,

"But after he becomes famous, he gets a bunch of Asian girl groupies, and they even give him blowjobs."

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

"The message is that Asian girls like nerdy white computer geniuses, and they like them even better if they are Jewish."

Yeah, those damned Jews are taking all my Asian chicks!

"However, the movie attempts to show that Asian girls can be as big psycho-bitches as white girls."

That's no joke. I've been there.

"he doesn’t come across as bitter or an asshole in his real-life public appearances like he did in the movie."

Yeah, well, I'm a bitter asshole. And don't you forget it!

Crop,

lol. Bill Gates isn't very alpha. Is Bill Gates on the cover of chicks magazines? What's his partner count, especially amongst non gold diggers? He's rich, but if he ever tried to do something cool with his money like have someone important killed or run a country he'd get nowhere.

Money doesn't equal alpha. Money comes and goes. Genes stay. Gates has characteristics + circumstances that allowed him to get rich at an exact place and time. His genes generally aren't dominant genes in most situations and times.

100 years ago he dies in a trench or to influenza. 100 years from now maybe the same. Can he fight in battle? Can he lead men (without a whole army, police force, and court system backing his patents? Certain things: strength, charisma, endurance, and cunning are useful any time in human history. Nerds don't have these things, at best they are cunning and even then many are only book smart.

@ asdf,
But a society with too many "alphas" isn't functional because they are too busy being macho and competing with each other for women. Who would work on the development of unglamorous technology? Do you really want to live in a world like pre-colonial sub-Saharan Africa (or post-colonial, for that matter)?

"Money doesn't equal alpha. Money comes and goes. Genes stay. Gates has characteristics + circumstances that allowed him to get rich at an exact place and time. His genes generally aren't dominant genes in most situations and times."

This is the only time and place his genes have been tested, and they performed better than everyone else.. Who know how he would have performed 100 years ago. How would he have performed in a galaxy far, far away? Perhaps even better. How would he perform 1000 years from now when robots rule the world? Better still.

And money doesn't come and go. He's been the richest man in America for years and years and years. The ability to attract women based on looks is what comes and goes, and very quickly.

[HS: If Bill Gates had the same genes and was born to prole parents, he'd probably have a decent white collar job as a computer programmer, maybe a manager of other computer programmers, but he'd never have become a billionaire.]

asdf,

That's all well and good you argue that we are driven by what we find pleasurable. And what we find pleasurable originated from genes that was naturally selected to our evolution.

But you were arguing that Zuckerberg was aware and "knows its billionaire or bust for him being a success" as to quote your words, while pointing that Eduardo was more cautious stated that he only needed to be a rich IBer to attract women.

So earlier, you were saying his only chance of success was to compensate by making several billion dollars so he semi-consciously/consciously gambled big. I (and others) countered that I think it is more likely that Zuckerberg was a product of his interests it just turns out that one of products made makes a coupe of billion. Now you are claiming it is an accidental process where before you seem to be writing as if it was a purposeful and conscious process.

So again, Zuckerberg's success was not driven by a desire to get the girl, but from his natural curiosity and ability to enjoy doing the activities that one of the products happen to make far more than he probably imagined. Yes, his natural curiosity and ability to enjoy such activities originated from natural selection of genes that allows him to feel pleasure from such an activity(or a more recent mutation). But earlier you were writing that he was going billionaire or bust knowing he is a loser.

Also, I have to note that the way you are writing that it sounds like genes program all of our achievements. Yes, it set for our disposition likes and dislikes. For the nerdier types, the expression of such programming means liking nerdy stuff while not being able to enjoy things many like, but it doesn't necessitate Betaness. You mentioned earlier that you are a nerd, but are you saying you can't acquire leadership traits from your consciousness. You can't hit the gym to acquire muscles? Or learn how to be charismatic (what's the point of learning game if you can't acquire charisma)?

The programing sets dispositions. Like what we are inclined to like and enjoy and our initial tendencies, but nerdiness precludes the abilty to gain muscle no matter how much time at the gym or learn how to talk to people. Unless you want to play semantics where nerdiness must include the negative aspects along with nerdy interests and anyone who have nerdy interest but have social skills falls outside of the term.

Dreamer,

1) Zuckerberg understands at both a conscious and unconscious level, to different degrees, that he needs to hit it big to succeed in mating. One need not totally exclude the other. Nor both be completely turned on/off or of the same nature.

2) The traits that cause Zuckerberg to enjoy hitting it big are selected by evolution (hitting it big gets women). Even if he isn't very interested in chicks, the things he is interested in are things that tend to get people chicks throughout history. There is no escaping it. There is no saying, "I'm above it all." Everything you do is some direct or indirect evolutionary impulse (baring some belief in God).

3) Zuckerberg is driven by many things. For instance, he could cash out facebook now, but he would much rather run the thing. It keeps him in the spotlight. It makes him relevent. He's on magazine covers. If he sells he's just another rich guy. He will have much better social and mating opportunities with higher quality people/mates if he remains CEO.

Let's say I could prove that Zuck is driven by a desire to show a high school bully who beat him up how much better he is then him. Is that escaping the mating impulse? Or is wanting to surpass other men in status, power, and success just a reflection of the fact that doing so gets women?

4) Genes are the most important part of out achievement, at least if we are going to measure achievement in an objective and absolute manner. Let's examine some questions:

You can't hit the gym to acquire muscles?

I was born with bone deformities and a number of serious genetic health ailments. Despite 5 days at the gym and frequent sports I'm very scrawny, weak, and unattractive. Nothing will change that, its genes.

Similairly I had a roomate from a long line of buff marines. He smoke, drank, and didn't work out. But he was tall and had guns and was attractive by default.

Or learn how to be charismatic (what's the point of learning game if you can't acquire charisma)?

You can make improvements in anything, but there are limits. A natural introvert will always be a natural introvert. You can send him to some toastmasters classes, maybe get it to the point we he can work a room for two hours. But is he going to be a natural? Unlikely. Is he going to learn to enjoy frequent shallow social interaction? Unlikely.

Here's another one, can the low IQ become academic successes?

I worked at an Asian test prep place once. I had one student who was mentally retarded. His Asian parents believed he could go to Harvard. In addition to full time school he spent 30 hours a week in cram school. Let's just say not a lot of progress was made.

There is always room for improvement, but I think people focus way to much on that. Almost everyone knows what they need to do to improve and how much of an effect that is likely to have. This represents pretty small variance compared to the baseline.

Brave New World got it right in putting everyone into tracks based on their genetic worthiness. Instead of being judged as being on top of all castes you were judged as being a good delta or not. A good alpha or not. You don't judge a delta by alpha standards. And you try to make sure each caste member, if they do a good job of being a part of their caste, can get the basic things they need to live a fulfilled life for who they are.

Most displeasure in this world comes from the fact that we don't have genetic castes. So you get mutants, people with certain alpha characteristics but other epsilon characteristics. Or you get betas born to alpha parents and put on the wrong track which isn't built for them. Remember how miserable Bernard was?

Te,

Look up the richest people 1,000 years ago. I guarantee most have reverted to the mean. Evolution takes the long view. Genes take the long view.

betanon,

Evolution doesn't give a fuck about society. Quite frankly, society doesn't give a fuck about society.

"[HS: If Bill Gates had the same genes and was born to prole parents, he'd probably have a decent white collar job as a computer programmer, maybe a manager of other computer programmers, but he'd never have become a billionaire.]"

But he still would have become a centimillionaire.

"Let's say I could prove that Zuck is driven by a desire to show a high school bully who beat him up how much better he is then him. Is that escaping the mating impulse? Or is wanting to surpass other men in status, power, and success just a reflection of the fact that doing so gets women?"

Your Darwinian reasoning is very amateurish. There are many ways humans have evolved to pass on genes besides getting women. Besides women are desperate. You don't need to be a billionaire or even a millionaire or even middle class to get women. And the number of genes you pass on through mating is a drop in the ocean. In fact the most efficient way for zuckerberg to preserve his genes is to give his billions to the Israel lobby.

Asdf,

I will address first to you last section. I will use your example of the gym first as I think it is more "empathizable" of all the examples.

If you are really born with bone deformities, then I'm sorry. You're right. There no hope you can make yourself be like the marine. No amount of time at the gym can change that. For the rest of us, the vast majority, enough gym time and good nutrition can make themselves into the marine though it's true your marine roommate never had to lift a finger to gain that.

That's not fair, but I never argued it was. But it also means many if not most skinny guys can become pretty buff. Basically a respectable level by about all measures. Unless your measure is Mr. Universe.

The same applies to intelligence and sociability. You're right the introvert may never enjoy it as an extrovert. You're also right that a kid with mental retardation can meet the standards for Harvard. But most people can build enough social skill to extract the main value from the activity. Most people are not mentally retarded either and like Mr. Universe, making to Harvard is usually not the measuring stick.

In short, you exaggerated the how low the average baseline is and underestimated how much possible deviate from our baseline. Unless you're measuring to a Mr. Universe/Harvard standard.

Now for the Zuckerberg response. Again, you are way putting the bar too high. You are arguing again that Zuckerberg have to become a billionaire to, well frankly, keep his quite mediocre girl. Even look at Harvard students, many of them can get a girl equal or better and about none of them had to reach Zuckerberg's level. Again, I never said his traits were not selected by evolution and he was above it all, but I'm saying you are missing what I'm trying to explain.

Evolution/Natural Selection not just don't give a shit about society, it doesn't even give a shit how the genomes. It is an explanation and we confuse it by giving it some kind of intelligence. The right ingredients can create a chemical reaction and some chemical reaction can begets a renewed reaction. At its base, all evolution means is a set of code instructing a set of behaviors and the code that gets reduplicated gets to rerun it again. Everything else is an accidental byproduct.

The conscious mind, human curiosity, ambition or lack thereof, desire to build things or finding it boring, all that crap are all accidents of evolution, not a tool of it. All that crap isn't trying to follow an unconscious or conscious aim to reproduce, it just have a reproductive value (negative or positive).

This means Zuckerberg can very much just be motivated to create stuff as it is enjoyable to him that just happens to make a lot of money. There can be no conscious or unconscious desire to impress any woman, but there's still a reproductive value. The desire to top a bully can remain true and while you can say the origin of the desire to top him is evolution, but it doesn't mean he actually trying to impress. Rather there's a value that goes with it that may mean reproduction.

This means one can be "above" the desire to mate. A person may have no desire to reproduce. It just that one cannot be above reproductive value. The person who have no big drive for woman is not hipster strategy or lying, but a genuine expression that just have a very negative reproductive value. For Zuck, he can very well choose not to sell Facebook for reasons that is not related to attracting (or keeping his one girl) women, it is just that it still has a reproductive value.

Dreamer,

Male sexual success is distributed exponentially, not linearly. So it does require a different measuring stick. Either you're on top, or you're not. If the curse of women is that they are rarely great, the curse of men is that they must be great.

I know all too well what it takes to be reproductively successful when your an unattractive nerd. It takes lots of work on your shortcomings and massive career success. I did terrible with women when I was young. When I became successful and wealthier I did better, but still do far worse then most people with my absolute level of success that are attractive. Attractive people understimate just what it takes to overcome unattractiveness, and they also understimate how strongly the have and have not dichotomy male sexual success is.

If we actually look at the data, we find Harvard nerds really aren't getting laid a whole lot. At least compared to most college students. This confirms my opinion that being a nerd is a huge penalty against mating.

Only the superior earnings power and status can make up for it, but that doesn't kick in till later. And in a post scarcity world, that earning power's mating value is diminished. A few lucky nerd guys will get nerd girls, but we all know demand > supply on that one.

The rest of your post is a game of terms. I don't see how it contradicts what I'm saying in a substantative manner. You don't like thinking about your actions as being about reproduction, so you spend a like of time going over what "about" means. Unless we are going to get theological this question of "about" is just semantics.

Crop,

If you are attractive you can get women without much. Being attractive and poor is better for mating prospects then unattractive and upper middle class.

Wealth correlates negatively with fertility, so lets not assume giving money to Isreal would be good for breeding.

Asdf,

You're correct that male sexual success is exponential, but I don't agree the middle area is zero. Just the very top get tons. The RTP guy is a good example. He is not that insanely exceptional, but he does okay as he explained. I know you dismissed him as nothing surprising, but your other posts sounds like he should get nothing. Most people can be around his level. Very few can be Brad Pitt or but it is not that exponential.

So what degree are you saying here? People can't be RTP (and remember most do not live in NYC and even there's enclaves)? Or you are exaggerating the exponential of success.

I know that answering the above won't really answer the difficulties of your own life. But I don't think the penalty is that bad. I think the penalty is more to social skills, low activity, and confidence issues of nerds rather than the attraction to things like engineering in-of-itself. I don't see learning those skills is that impossible. You don't need to pull a Zuckerberg as you seem to be drawing.

I am aware of the Harvard study. But note that both sexes have a very low count. My understanding of the dynamic there is they really do have a lower drive, slower in starting (as in just starting to date versus screwing at 14 in other groups) to pair up, and when they do - it is in a more long-term form. The low count is not just unattractiveness. I recalled a post here that really described the dynamic there: Harvard Man, Harvard Married, and Fail. A few clean up bagging a couple dozen each totaling a few hundred of the total pop. Most are able to reach Harvard married with a respectable girl. The rest really struggle but the greater majority is the second category, not the third as you seem to paint. This also apply to many other campuses and the nerdier the school (so MIT is even more), the more it is like that.

As for the game of terms. I find it important to argue it because I think you can't just discount every motivation and experience of each individual. The behaviors and observations remain the same, hence why you don't see how substantial of what I said. It doesn't contradict you saying Zuckerberg made a billion and the existence of the mating impulse. Just that the impulse doesn't mean a theory that he made Facebook because he can as many nerdy type like to do so should be dismissed as a substantive reason and motivator in favor of reducing to only the drive to be able to attract girls/keep his one. If you actually find no issue with that, then we have actually been in agreement the entire time.

"If we actually look at the data, we find Harvard nerds really aren't getting laid a whole lot. At least compared to most college students. This confirms my opinion that being a nerd is a huge penalty against mating."

That's largely because Harvard nerds are less interested in getting laid. You go to the inner city and getting laid is all the men talk about. You go to Harvard and it hardly ever comes up. See Rushton's r/K evolutionary theory. r selected individuals have evolved to be very promiscuous, have large sex organs and lots of partners but little parental care and shorter life spans. K selected individuals have sex much later in life if they have sex at all, but when they do settle down, have stable families with very few kids, but lots of parental care so each kid survives and slowly develops into a big brained low sex drive adult.

"Wealth correlates negatively with fertility, so lets not assume giving money to Isreal would be good for breeding."

The wealthy are less fertile largely because the wealthy are more K, since according to Rushton, K traits are the ones that created civilization (intelligence, familiy stability, social organization etc). However once a civilization becomes wealthy, there are enough resources for r genotypes to survive, and actually thrive, given thier prolific breeding. This pattern explains the rise and fall of civilizations according to Rushton.

As for Israel; the Israel lobby keeps trying to expand that country's territory, because the more land a people spread themselves over, the larger becomes their population.

asdf gets the big picture where as others seem focused on the esoteric. A lot of nerd denial and self delusion going on here.

"I was born with bone deformities and a number of serious genetic health ailments. Despite 5 days at the gym and frequent sports I'm very scrawny, weak, and unattractive. Nothing will change that, its genes."

Anabolic steroids will. Easily obtained online. You should look into it.

@ Peter,

Regarding testosterone look up differences in androgen receptor ( see google books Race & Crime: A Biosocial Analysis by Anthony Walsh).

****&"why'd you do it?" And the character replies, "For the same reason men attempt to do anything great: to impress a woman."****

That is a common Sorkin theme. In Studio Sixty on the Sunset Strip Matthew Perry's character says basically the same thing. Then Eli Wallach has a cameo as an old comedian and also says his best work was done when he was trying to impress a woman.

Dreamer,

RTP benches 530lb. He's cut big time. Other then his 5'9" height he sounds really attractive. And height can be worked around. Date shorter women. Avoid being around really tall men for comparison. In flyover country with a decent job and cut like a statue he's on the higher end of the scale. Yeah, he's no contradiction.

Linda,

Yes, essentially. High IQ is its own undoing, in the end.

Hark,

This displays gross ignorance.

asdf,

Yeah and all but the population of NYC, DC, and LA have that much more reasonable scale. You write as if flyover country is something to be ashamed rather than NYC is unreasonable.

So in short, your response is RTP is exceptional. I have to ask, how hard is it to reach that level? My response is that level isn't that hard and it is reachable for most that was are focused about.

If you're still reading this. Let me put a more reasonable example if you're too caught up in the attainability of 530lb (and it was dead-lifts, not benchpress, if he was benching that and that was the standard for success, yeah everyone is screwed).

The measuring bar for me is a fellow college friend. He's around 5' 8, Asian, and was/is a generally nerdy kid. If met him at Freshman year, you would have categorize him at the typical milquetoast sticky Asian kid with the damned oval-shape unoffensive glasses (and got the bad luck of a high voice to boot). I remembered the embarrassing drama towards the of freshman year as he got played by a manipulative little girl who happens to be my floormate.

But how he handles himself now is night and day. He's still a nerd and more than capable to talk endlessly of Star Wars if prodded, STEM degree, and other selected nerdy stuff. But he is a A far cry from his Freshman self - analyzing over every little word. What changed? He gained some muscle, but not that much, he never benched much higher than 135 though he developed some level of a six-pack that lasted until senior year. He built skill and status through his individual sport specialty (Kung Fu). He remained sociable. The following college years, he did decently with a decent clip of girls and had two primary college sweethearts (second still with).

I think he did a very respectable level of success that most would be satisfied. Did any I just said is that unattainable for most people or nerds?

In short he is doing well. More importantly for this post, he didn't have to go to that much extreme as you seem to be claiming like make 10 billion. Of course, he wasn't born with bone deformities or other major weaknesses, but most people don't have that handicap. No offense, but I sense your opinion is based from your own difficulties, if what you said is true, you really got the short stick. Most people/nerds aren't given that bad of a hand.

The comments to this entry are closed.