internaut

The adage 'birds of a feather flock together' is a true one. Our ability to communicate with each other relies most strongly on shared experience esp. with regard to normative behavior, thoughts.

I would not advise you to act as neurotypical but to seek out your own kind. That might not be easily found in collected pools of humans but to take a leaf out of the Major's book: 'The net is vast and infinite.'

How many of us have mentioned an obscure topic in passing on HN, and then been surprised by an erudite observation? Of course this does not always prevail, but it happens with enough frequency that I am convinced for each person there are companions.

To be less academic, if there are conventions for furries, then there are places in the world for you too!

It is frequently noted that geeks do much better at themed events with a purpose than at generic social outings. Less night club, more book club. The more object oriented the activity, the easier geeks get along. If you've been to a Hackerspace you'll know there is a wide range of interesting people at such places.

P.S. Every line cook I've known does claim to be in their own screaming hell.

Did anybody understand where Margaret Levi got this?

"Indeed, the expectation of reciprocity can both reduce and even undermine altruism."

Surely expectation of reciprocity would make the reciprocal loop stronger, not weaker.

As I see it, neurodiversity is more useful if the environment suddenly changes. In a stable environmental niche most forms of neurodiversity are probably a drawback.

For instance (reflecting on your examples) it should be obvious to us that the word 'crime' meant something much narrower several thousand (or hundred) years ago.

Surely we have devised experiments for which the use of the human genome is indeed expendable? e.g. tissue cultures.

We have a positive surplus of intelligent ambitious people in Japan, Europe and America. What we don't have is savings or capital. This malaise is generational, not regional.