shockzzz

As bullshit as the Oscars are, they at least try. There is no equivalent in the Gaming industry.

Just check out Galatea. Very few people know about that game, but it is amazing.

whaaaa

I get that "space spaces" and "personal space" both have the word "space" in it. But if we're discussing scientific studies, it's not constructive to compare the two. Unless you have something really substantial (and accurate) that adds to the conversation, I think it's time better spent to discuss the article at hand.

I personally think it's a fascinating insight into how humans interpret physical space and the implications in social situations.

Not saying that I agree with him. At the end of the day, Medium says the writers own their content. I feel ok with them, though I can empathize with OP, given the amount of shitty things BigCorp companies have done in the past.

https://medium.com/policy/medium-terms-of-service-9db0094a1e...

My point was that it's fundamentally an issue of trust. High-touch onboarding is not the only solution, but it might work for you right meow.

If they don't have trust, they have poor Marketing, few Users, or both. To me, this is a clear sign that they need a stronger #brand

I would definitely say, though, that I find Ruby development to be amazing. And I find debugging in Python to be similarly awesome.

nutrition-science-complicated

You don’t have to support old browsers and terrible setups. But you are not allowed to block them out. It is a simple matter of giving a usable interface to end users. A button that does nothing when you click it is not a good experience. Test if the functionality is available, then create or show the button. This is as simple as it is.

lolwut

Giving a usable interface for old browsers is definitely a form of support. You're telling me that my app has to support the Gopher protocol too?

At the end of the day, it depends on your Product and its Users. Some have to support many browsers. Some don't. No one expects an American vending machine to accept Euros as payment.

1) Most of Buddhist scripture is not translated to modern languages

2) There is so much of it. Which Buddhist scriptures? Zen? Theravada? Tibetan? Tantric? It's hard to say which text is representative of Buddhism as a whole. Some people say all of them are (except when they disagree).

I'd encourage you to wonder if that's the right question to ask. In terms of International war and politics, do the words themselves matter more than how they're used?

In most cases, Buddhists kill others in the name of compassion. It is compassionate to kill a misguided (or Muslim) person and give them the chance to reincarnate as a Buddhist. To me, that's more fucked up than justifying murder by twisting the definition of something like Jihad.

And, I call bullshit that you know what's in the Pali Canon. The vast majority of it is still in ancient Tibetan. You have no evidence to prove that there isn't dogma within it, nor is there any conclusive evidence that the "original" Pali Canon was all philosophy.

That's like saying the "real Bible" that Jesus heard from God was not the "actual Bible" that was written down. Perhaps the "real Bible" was only philosophy, and we humans added the dogma.

Plus - the existence of Buddhist dogma in ancient India is abundantly clear. Just go to a museum or Google it! What do you think those people are doing when they're bowing to the Buddha!?

You're also kind of an asshole to say Tantric Buddhism is a farce. Who are you to say something like that? I'm just stating a blatant fact that the Buddhist religions are indeed religions. Nothing more, nothing less.

Again - I'm not suggesting that Buddhism is bad. I think there are many beautiful lessons to be learned as you eloquently allude to. If you, as a person, connect with the Dharma, no one can take that away from you. Once you find a Sangha, it is profound and incredible. My goal is to clear misconceptions of the Buddhist religions, which many Westerners have.

I want to address this comment because it's a key objection from Buddhist Apologists.

Every small religion is going to score low on the "violence meter." That's because Buddhism wasn't politically successful. China went Communist and took over Tibet, and Buddhism lost in India.

And for those that condemn violent actions - OF COURSE! Everyone does that! Muslims overwhelmingly condemn ISIS, American Christians condemn wars and domestic terror, and many Jews condemn Israel's military behavior.

Many of the popular religions can be interpreted to be peaceful or violent. Blame the people, not the religion.

Zen came wayy after, which was more or less predicated on earlier Japanese Buddhism that integrates a great deal of Shinto beliefs.

These are not agnostic.

Not saying that Buddhism is "bad" - not at all. But it is in no way as secular, or as peaceful, as Westerners think it is. It has a long and torrid history of violence, as well as dogma.

I just wish people recognized Buddhism for what it is - a religion.

But I don't think most people understand "Occupy Wall Street" as being distinguishable from the Google protests, as Ezra suggests. Most people aren't highly specific about the difference between Uber's valuation and Subprime Mortgage Lending (including the media).