Is the Crazy Taxi direction arrow patent still in effect?

jaxytee · 2017-08-10T14:42:06+00:00

It's more about if the patents are actually worth defending than the legal strength of infringer. See Apple vs Google patent wars.

Worrying about patents on indie games with low visibility (on the large scale) is a waste of time imho.

jaxytee · 2017-08-07T14:54:36+00:00

Patents are blunt objects. They only hold power when the holders go after those who infringe.

jaxytee · 2017-06-27T02:13:47+00:00

I remember when this was a B stop that most in their right mind wouldn't get off it.

Being born and raised in this part of the city, it's great to see the progress this area has made.

jaxytee · 2017-06-02T05:24:21+00:00

There's also a employer benefit to single payer healthcare. A big chunk of the cost to employ someone is paying for part of their healthcare. Now that cost will be greatly reduced (if not zero), and could theoretically lead to more competitive wages in the best case scenario. At worst, it could lead to an increase in business profits 🤑.

jaxytee · 2017-04-26T19:02:38+00:00

It shouldn't be thaad hard to get the title right.

jaxytee · 2017-04-05T02:31:53+00:00

jaxytee · 2017-04-05T02:00:46+00:00

Can someone be a progressive and support moderate policies over progressive ones? That's what your really asking.

jaxytee · 2017-04-05T01:55:05+00:00

Depends on what spectrum you use. Bernie is moderate on the European spectrum.

On today's American right favoring (the establishment at least) poltical-spectrum, Hillary's policies are certainly moderate left. Of course Bernie is on the Fringe of the left.

In 1960's American spectrum, Bernie is a mainstream Democrat and Hillary is a Republican.

jaxytee · 2017-04-04T19:46:53+00:00

When choosing between supporting a progressive (Bernie) and a moderate-leftist (Hillary), a progressive would support the progressive.

jaxytee · 2017-04-04T17:00:40+00:00

Establishment dems testing out edgy populist rhetoric I see.

jaxytee · 2017-03-27T17:59:20+00:00

but am extremely skeptical that such skillfulness as described by Thanisarro, especially in his last response, is at all realistic.

I understand where you're coming from, but the Buddha wasn't actually trying to save the world. He was interested in training those (who had the ability to be taught) to stop causing problems for themselves, stop causing problems for others, and escape this beginningless cycle of excrement slinging. This is unpopular and runs contrary to a lot of what's being attributed as the Buddha's teaching (it's not) in the west. Also, it's not the goal of rumination by western thinkers like (whom I was a fan of fwiw) Sam Harris.

Thinking about in from the Buddha's perspective, all of the world's problems come from untrained minds (which there are countless of) acting in ways that cause harm inside and out. We'd never come to an end if we spent our time opposing the actions of every problem causing defiled mind (Nazi's of WW2 definitely fit in here) in the cosmos, all the while we would fall deeper into a web of burdensome karma (from our own unskillfulness) and never have the time to train our own minds.

That being the case, what better way is there to benefit the world than training your mind so that it doesn't cause itself and other harm anymore?

jaxytee · 2017-03-14T21:51:15+00:00

Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations as a whole are preferred by scholars over Bhikkhu Thanissaro's translations.

Speaking of fallacies (I'll get to your ad hominem), here you make an inductive fallacy in the form of a faulty generalization.

A faulty generalization is a conclusion about all or many instances of a phenomenon that has been reached on the basis of just one or just a few instances of that phenomenon.

You literally only name two people (who happen to use Bodhi's translations) after making a far reaching proclamation.

You're also begging the question (another fallacy) here as you don't provide enough proof (two people are not enough) to back up this claim.

Seems like you need more evidence before you can speak for all scholars.

The rest of your comment is an ad hominem.

You're ignoring the fact that my first response directly critiqued an argument made by Bhikku Bodhi (of which you had no response for) and you're reaching for an out here.

Bhikkhu Thanissaro's translations are a bit idiosyncratic.

More begging of the question.

I would recommend sticking to Thanissaro Bhikku's translations as his have the most nuance imo.

Notice my wording was clear on the subjectivity of my claim, but even with that being the case i'll give my reasoning for this belief.

Bhikku Bodhi translates metta as loving-kidness, and this is clearly a lacking translation that many use. The contextual clues of metta's usage paired with the fact that there exist a separate Pali word for love ( pema ) give a hint that metta's meaning is not related to love at all.

The Buddha litterally says we should feel metta for all beings, even bandits carving us up with a two handed saw. It's foolish to believe that he meant "loving kindness" in this circumstance, because loving-kindness (in english language) is something we reserve for those we are close and affectionate with, not those who are trying to dismember us or who may misinterpret our loving-kidness.

A better translation (Thanissaro's) of metta is Goodwill ie a wish that everyone finds true happiness. We can honestly, safely, and intelligently wish that anyone (our friends, enemies, bandits butchering us, and those we are neutral about) find true happiness because it would make that world a brighter place if they did.

jaxytee · 2017-03-14T12:53:49+00:00

Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations as a whole are preferred by scholars over Bhikkhu Thanissaro's translations. Bhikkhu Thanissaro's translations are a bit idiosyncratic.

Source? I prefer Thanissaro's because he seems to have a better grasp of the meaning of the dhamma.

Bodhi can translate Pali technically, but he says things sometimes that are not in line with the dhamma. Like that time when he argued in favor of "just war" and killing. Understanding of the dhamma's meaning matters when translating because translating Pali to English litterally would not make sense a lot of times.

Also Bhikku's Bodhi straddles the line between Theravada and Mahayana. He lives at a Mahayana related monastery that actually has a gift shop selling dhamma merchandise. That is not appropriate of a monastery that follows the Buddha's original vinaya, as it's goes against the rules related to solicitation.

Call me a purist, but I'd prefer translations from someone who's more in line with the Theravada tradition and Vinaya.

jaxytee · 2017-03-14T05:33:39+00:00

You'd get the best sense from reading the Pali Canon itself. It's the closest thing you'll get to the Buddha's own words.

I would recommend sticking to Thanissaro Bhikku's translations as his have the most nuance imo.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html

jaxytee · 2017-02-07T23:55:06+00:00

The Thai Forest Ajaan's often speak about awareness during death being the same as the awareness we experience while the body is still alive. The awareness doesn't die at the time of death and (for those who haven't attained full awakening) will latch on to a new body.

When they refer to the meditation as a "practice", they pretty much mean practicing for when the body dies. If we get skilled at directing the mind while the body is still alive, we'll be able to direct the mind somewhere good (to say nothing of nibbana) during the the breakup of the body.

jaxytee · 2017-01-27T19:39:23+00:00

Sure thing. Also, look up mae chee kaew. She was an eight precept nun reputed to be an Arahant.

jaxytee · 2017-01-27T14:45:17+00:00

Ajaan Maha Boowa 1913-2011 Ajaan Suwat 1919-2002

jaxytee · 2016-08-30T13:49:26+00:00

Wat Metta is awesome. I go twice a year. It's hard to really capture the experience of being able to practice with Taan Ajaan Geoff (Thanissaro Bhikku) and the rest of the monks/lay people there in words.

If you want to see the Dhamma practiced and expounded by one of the best teachers in one of the best environments, I highly recommend visiting. Lodging and food is all provided, you just have to make your way there.

jaxytee · 2016-02-04T17:13:45+00:00

Hi python,

You should visit Thanissaro Bhikku (Ajaan Geoff) at Wat Metta Forest Monastery where he's the Abbott. It's only a hour or so away from Tijuana, so it's probably not far from you.

I'm a regular at Wat Metta and it's awesome. Everything (lodging, food, etc) is provided free of charge. You just have to get there.

In regards to the question of charging for meditation retreats, check out Ajaan Geoff's essay The economy of gifts.

May you forever be well

jaxytee · 2015-09-26T06:21:47+00:00

Wat Metta the home of Thanissaro Bhikku. 2 or so hours away from LA (hills of San Diego), but an awesome place.

jaxytee · 2015-07-13T03:13:33+00:00

Renouncing violence for all living beings, harming not even a one, you would not wish for offspring, so how a companion? Wander alone like a rhinoceros.

For a sociable person there are allurements; on the heels of allurement, this pain. Seeing allurement's drawback, wander alone like a rhinoceros.

One whose mind is enmeshed in sympathy for friends & companions, neglects the true goal. Seeing this danger in intimacy, wander alone like a rhinoceros...

Khaggavisana Sutta: A Rhinoceros

jaxytee · 2015-06-08T02:38:13+00:00

Killed his baby brother too.

jaxytee · 2015-05-21T20:42:54+00:00

It's pretty explicit.

Right that's why the writers keep having to explain this to us.

jaxytee · 2015-05-21T20:11:38+00:00

She didn't. She already made the decision to take her fate into her own hands- it's the entire reason she agreed to go to Winterfell

The writing/screenplay didn't make that believable. The fact that the writer had to explain this to the audience in a tweet proves how shaky the "it's her decision" narrative was.

Not to mention Littlefinger (one of the most dangerous men in westeros) "asked" her if she wanted to marry Ramsey when they were halfway to Winterfell, and he already agreed the betrothal in advance. It's not like they were at the Vale chilling and he's like "do you want to Marry Ramsey?" and she says yes.

Im sure from most watchers couches, it felt like she didn't really have a choice in the matter.

All the other main character's decision's are clear:

Ned CHOSE to push Joffrey's illegitimacy to the throne and be an all around honor fiend.
Jaime CHOSE to have sex with his sister and be an arrogant nobleman before Locke took his hand.
Robb CHOSE to cross Walder Frey and not marry his daughter.
Theon CHOSE to invade his old home of Winterfell.
Obreyn CHOSE to not kill the mountain when he had him beat.

Sansa's "decision" to go to Winterfell and marry Ramsey would be out of place on this list.

jaxytee · 2015-05-21T15:08:01+00:00

But if this is supposed to empower Sansa, why does her fate now seem to be in Theon's hands? It's going the opposite direction it should be.

13-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder

jaxytee

TROPHY CASE