CSSrefresh - Automatically Refresh CSS files - <AUTHOR> http://cssrefresh.frebsite.nl/ <comment><USER2> LiveReload (<http://livereload.com/>) had already solved this.

I'm wondering if there's something that refreshes the browser when you make changes to the CSS files _before_ saving? Like CSSEdit (which I've used religiously for the past 2 years), but applies to all sort of files (HTML/HAML, SASS/SCSS/LESS).

<comment> X-Istence It is a real shame that CSSEdit has been rolled into Espresso with no real benefit or gain to the user. CSSEdit is one of my most favourite tools to use while developing websites and I am going to hold onto it as long as I possibly can.

<comment><USER3> I used to absolutely love both Espresso and CSSEdit too but I've now switched to a more minimal editor. I started using LESS so CSSEdit wasn't cutting it anymore. Instead I use either Less.app or CodeKit which monitors your working directory, automatically compiles LESS to CSS on save, and refreshes the browser tab of the site you're working on.

I do agree that rolling CSSEdt into Espresso isn't the same. I don't know why but I liked CSSEdit better when it was a standalone app. Anyway, as an alternative to CSSEdit or the other desktop apps that give you the instant refresh, you could always write a shell script that watches your working directory and executes the LESS (or SASS/SCSS) compiler then refreshes your browser. I actually used that once but lost it while formatting the laptop it was on. The part that watches the folder and executes the compiler is easy but I had someone else help me with the browser refreshing part.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Alternatively, LiveJS[1] which follows the same concept.

[1]: <http://livejs.com/>

</comment><comment><USER5> It would be nice to have some information about the inner workings of the script on the site.

The actual script on the site is unminified and quite easy to grasp: Since it's only a client-side solution it has to resort to polling every stylesheet every second(!) and check the file's Last-Modified header from the ajax request.

This is hardly an optimal solution, since you end up making a lot of requests even though no changes are being made. In addition to the performance standpoint, you end up cluttering any ajax monitoring views (e.g. Chrome dev tools).

LiveReload (<http://livereload.com/>) seems to be a good alternative (Mac only). Any suggestions for similar solutions for other OSes?

EDIT: Just tried the experimental v0.0.2 Windows release of LiveReload. Installation was really easy, and I got it working with the Firefox extension right away. More info: [http://help.livereload.com/kb/roadmap/latest- development-bui...](http://help.livereload.com/kb/roadmap/latest-development- builds)

<comment><USER6> I don't see an issue with the polling. You're only ever going to use this in dev, I don't care that it polls my localhost frequently. If I'm optimizing my own JavaScript I won't have it enabled. The bookmarklet seems the way to go. Enable it while you're working on CSS, otherwise you don't need it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> A very different approach, but Fog Creek's WebPutty helps solve this as well: <http://www.webputty.net/> (HN thread: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2786893>)

</comment><comment><USER8> Check my django-cssreload app <https://github.com/andreyfedoseev/django- cssreload>

It does similar thing but with less AJAX requests. Works only with Django though.

</comment><comment><USER9> "When you're coding a website, nothing can be more frustrating than having to switch from the texteditor to the browser over and over again, just for small changes to occur."

And then:

"With CSSrefresh installed, all the included stylesheets are automatically refreshed directly after you save them."

So you still have to switch between your browser and your editor, right?

<comment><USER10> side-by-side windows

<comment><USER11> or multiple monitors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I use this bookmarklet : <http://david.dojotoolkit.org/recss.html>

</comment><comment><USER13> <https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/auto-reload/> is a Firefox addon which reloads a page when it (and any linked files) changes. Works great for me. It also works with file:/// URLs.

</comment><comment><USER14> Using guard-livereload on linux, you can make the browser refresh on any change in the filesystem. <https://github.com/guard/guard-livereload> This is an awesome tool...

</comment><comment><USER15> I use firebug to do this

</comment><comment><USER16> Very cool. I still prefer editing via the Chrome developer tools resources tab.

</comment><comment><USER17> github/sourceforge/googlecode/etc link would be lovely!

</comment><comment><USER18> Awesome!!!

</comment><comment><USER19> sass -watch yourstyles.scss:yourstyles.css is what you should be doing instead of writing css.

<comment><USER5> Sorry, different issue. Automatic precompilation in SASS is nice, but it doesn't refresh the browser for you.

As mentioned in other comments, LiveReload does this for CSS or SASS (Mac only, unfortunately).

<comment><USER19> LiveReload hasn't been that consistent for me. I do wish that not to be the case.</comment></comment></comment>


PostageApp - The easier way to send email from web apps - <AUTHOR> http://postageapp.com/

<comment><USER2> 1) How is this different than <http://www.postmarkapp.com> or <http://www.sendgrid.com>?

2) What will the pricing be? No way am I signing up for a free beta and then have to deal with a crazy high price where I will have to re-do part of my app to switch away. This is still on HN: [http://jamie.ideasasylum.com/2010/07/kissmetrics-bizarre- pri...](http://jamie.ideasasylum.com/2010/07/kissmetrics-bizarre-pricing)</comment>


Ask HN: How to get into Windows app design/development in 2016? - <AUTHOR> For me, the whole .NET/Windows development cosmos seems like an even weirder world than the one that I faced when I started iOS/Mac development a few years back.
So how do you get into it in the year 2016?
I heard there is a thing called UWP and apparently MS wants it to be the only thing around, right? On the surface(haha) it sounds to be a nice thing to have one platform to rule all device sizes.
I cannot use Sketch on Windows, so what do you use for app design? I don't want to go back to Photoshop to be honest.
Visual Studio seems complex. Should I use it? I do not mind IDEs in general but there are so many new terms all over the place. (PCL, Solution, Visual C#, why not just C#?)
Why are most of the learning resources for C#? What about F#? It seems like an awesome language. Microsoft should promote it in the same way like Apple does it for Swift, right?
I don't know, but a lot of stuff just seems weird in windows land...maybe someone can open the door and give me a nice tour. <comment><USER2> I'd go with Electron. I think it's better to have your system running well and uniform across multiple platforms than investing in perfect fit in each.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm pretty sure that is a smart option for a lot of people, especially web developers, but me personally, I'm not so interested in HTML/CSS/JS.

<comment><USER3> I'm not a great programmer, so don't stop looking for information!

It mostly depends on what you want to do. Xamarin would be a great fit for cross-platform mobile applications, WPF([https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- gb/library/ms754130(v=vs.110)....](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- gb/library/ms754130\(v=vs.110\).aspx)) for big desktop programs and WinForms for tinkering with old software.

UWP is indeed the big thing for MS now, but it has lots of programming languages support(so not only JS)! I don't know anything like Sketch really; maybe this will help [https://developer.microsoft.com/en- us/windows/apps/design](https://developer.microsoft.com/en- us/windows/apps/design)

You should try VSCode(which is a lot like Atom, has excellent .NET support through OmniSharp) [https://code.visualstudio.com/](https://code.visualstudio.com/)

C# is getting more attention because a lot of F# features got into recent C# versions, people not wanting to make the switch to FP and not getting full attention of MS.</comment></comment></comment>


Mayan EDMS 3.2 Released - <AUTHOR> https://docs.mayan-edms.com/releases/3.2.html <comment><USER2> Very sizable update for just a minor number increase. Is this release compatible with the last 3.1 release? I mean, can I do a direct upgrade without worrying about losing data?

<comment><USER3> No loss of data from upgrades has been reported in years. Every release includes database schema and database data migrations.

Only incompatibility issues were with some of the config file entries. These need to updated as explained in the release notes -> [https://docs.mayan- edms.com/releases/3.2.html#backward-incom...](https://docs.mayan- edms.com/releases/3.2.html#backward-incompatible-changes)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> First round of UI navigation improvements! Yay!

<comment><USER4> The backend is rock solid, no question there. Glad to see the UI is getting some love. Keep up the good work!

<comment><USER3> Thanks! :)</comment></comment></comment>


Tumblr CEO to Users: 'Don't Worry' - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2013/05/20/tumblr-ceo-dont-worr/

<comment><USER2> "Just don't look at the new Flickr redesign and swallow this lovely blue pill and everything will be allllllllright."</comment>


Can libraries survive in a digital world? - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/9421996.stm

<comment><USER2> Speaking as a college student, many of our campus "libraries" actually have very little books on-shelf. We have "stacks" where one could go and find volumes of books and other literary works from decades ago...but we also have an online database of all that that most students will just use instead when researching.

That leaves the role of libraries today on my campus. Article discusses people not going to libraries to read ever again.

In my humble opinion, I don't think the role of libraries today (or tomorrow) is to have people come in and "read". As much as the digital world can evolve or destroy previous industries, it still can't replicate an absolutely vital necessity, in an actual human network. As popular as remote working is, people still feel the need to work together as a group. As easy as it is for me to find books online, I'll still go to the library (where I'll find the books online) for that human interaction and for that community.

That, I don't think the digital world can destroy. Libraries will evolve, but there will always be a place for them.

<comment><USER3> The internet does not enable two-way communication, but rather, one-way communication between two or more people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The library isn't dead IMHO, it's just evolving.

I visit my library at least twice a week. I usually don't browse or sit for very long because I place orders online and pick them up when they are in.

There are shelves with the books people have requested lined up by last name. The size of this section is probably 60% of the rest of the books indicating that most people use this method for checking out books.

I own a Kindle and it's OK but I like real books and because I read 2 or 3 books per week, it's nice to have a low cost solution.

</comment><comment><USER5> My wife and I check out about 2 dozen books a week from our local library. That's usually 20 childrens book for our 3 year old and 4 for us. I don't think digital will be replacing our library experience, ever.

In college, however, I only checked out 1 book over 4 years. All of my books had to be purchased, or I was able to use online references.

</comment><comment><USER6> Related discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2409868>

</comment><comment><USER7> Only as museums containing artifacts from an ancient age when people used to "print" information on physical sheets of wood pulp.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you hate cooking? What's your solution? - <AUTHOR> Cooking for yourself is a pretty tiring experience. You have to buy the right materials, store them, cook them, then clean up. Its also pretty expensive, the cost of preparing a meal for one is probably close to an actual take out meal.
I would much rather spend my time doing things I want like programming, gaming, going to the gym, etc.
For those of you who have mostly quit cooking, what do you do instead? Microwave frozen meals from the grocery? Batch cooking and storing? Take out/delivery every other night? Soylent?
Thanks <comment><USER2> This question resonates with me because I used to have a start-up that was a site for people to learn how to cook. A lot of people in the yuppie demographic told me they wanted to learn how to cook, but in practice the only people really interested in the site were parents.

At the end of the day, the start-up did fail because I think we were targeting the wrong demographic.

Now kind of getting back to your question, cooking really is a time consuming experience. But I think cooking goes a little deeper than the actual act. Taking up cooking in your life almost requires a life change as it alters weekly rhythms and habits. For example if you cooked regularly, you would have to think about what to buy, go to the market, prep the food, cook the food, and then clean up. On the other hand, it empowers you with life skills to eventually help cook if you choose to have a family and gives you control of your health.

As for time, what I would advise is to get a pressure cooker and to freeze things. With a pressure cooker, you can cook chicken thighs in about 10 minutes which is pretty amazing. Pressure cookers have evolved to be much better, and they no longer are the scary things your grandmother might have had in her kitchen.

If you plan your meals right, you can probably freeze half of your portions and then carry it on to the next week.

Lastly I recommend visiting the farmer's market as it will be much cheaper for a single person. You can literally buy 3 carrots, 2 potatoes, and a small head of lettuce instead of buying huge bulk in a grocery market. The mark-up might be a tad bit higher, but your food waste will be much more controlled.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have food allergies which require me to eat mostly home-cooked from-scratch meals, and I have a little system for coping with this:

At any time, I have a menu consisting of meals A, B, ... G (each of which could be anything I like to eat which freezes well -- usually entrees without the carbs). Because carbs are easier to cook on a weekday with almost no trouble.

However the quantities are what I call a triangular queue. This means I have

A + 2B + 3C + ... + 7G

(meaning I have one entree of recipe A, two entrees of recipe B, up to seven entrees of recipe G). At this point you can guess the algorithm for eating -- during any given week, I will eat:

A + B + C + ... + G

(meaning I will eat a different recipe for dinner on each day of the week). At which point I will have a smaller triangular queue of:

B + 2C + ... + 6G

Then at the weekend, I will batch-cook 7 new entrees of a new recipe H (which could be recipe A again if I really like it, or something new). Which brings me "back" to a triangular queue:

B + 2C + 3D + ... + 6G + 7H

It looks too methodical when described in writing, but this allows me to eat a different thing every day of the week, and yet cook only one recipe at the end of the week. For me that is a HUGE winner.

My freezer needs to have space for 28 entrees, which works well for every freezing compartment I have had. It helps to use (almost) square tupperware containers (instead of circular ones) to maximize use of freezer space. Each container is just big enough to contain one meal's entree. And to use postits to label the outside of the container with the date each item was cooked and which recipe it is. And try not to keep anything too long but for me two months (the worst case) has been perfectly fine.

Rather amusing what a programmer will think of in a Kitchen. But hey, it works :-).

The rest of the advice others have given also applies -- using some nice cookbooks, finding a pressure cooker, etc, etc. Also watch youtube cooking videos. There are a gazillion recipes on youtube, and depending on your taste, you will probably discover some cooks whose recipes you like and trust, who make many different recipes under some sort of channel or brand on youtube.

<comment><USER4> This approach is particularly elegant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> First off, accept that without spending huge amounts of money to solve this problem, you're always going to have to do some cooking.

For context: I like to cook. I just generally have other demands on my time, and I need a solution for the 6 days out of the week where I just need to fuel my body.

Being a pragmatic sort of person, I understand the importance of health, so I have a few go-to meals that are delicious (so I'm never "not in the mood" for them), which meet my health needs, and are fast to prepare. The less of a picky eater you are, the better off you are. If you take this mindset far enough, you can dump a can of beans into a sauce and have a healthy-ish meal in 5 minutes.

The other thing I do is pre-cooking and storing. I seem to have a talent for making soup (it's like a really mundane superpower), and it's easy to make a ton of soup at once. I'll eat some of it for a meal on the spot, and then store the rest in the freezer. Google around for instructions on this, there are a few surprise gotchas in the process, but all easy stuff.

<comment><USER6> > you can dump a can of beans into a sauce and have a healthy-ish meal in 5 > minutes.

I sometimes eat beans with salsa mixed in them. I find it delicious. I'm clearly not picky.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > Its also pretty expensive, the cost of preparing a meal for one is probably > close to an actual take out meal.

This may be true if you are both paying for but not accounting for quality in what you are cooking yourself, and/or if you are having lots of waste in trying to cook for one.

> Cooking for yourself is a pretty tiring experience. You have to buy the > right materials, store them, cook them, then clean up. Its also pretty > expensive, the cost of preparing a meal for one is probably close to an > actual take out meal.

(1) Batch cooking and storing is a good solution, (2) Having friends, and alternating cooking with them for shared meals (probably not for every meal, but as part of a mix with other things, inclding #1) is a good approach.

</comment><comment><USER7> Batch cooking and storing was a big thing for me when I was living on my own. Make a big portion of fried rice, and then eat it for the next four days. Make a big portion of ragu and eat it for a week. Some things, like red beans and rice, could last even longer.

It does sort of require being willing to eat the same thing over and over and over again; I'm totally fine with that, but I know that other people (notably my wife) are not.

The other advantage to cooking and storing, for me, is that you can set aside a big block of time on the weekend, for example, and get all the cooking out of the way for the week. And if you're doing large batches, it turns out that you can actually multitask pretty well; when something needs to simmer on the stove for two hours, it's pretty easy to sit down and play a computer game and just get up every 20 minutes or so to stir the pot and then sit back down.

</comment><comment><USER8> I like cooking, but I rarely have time so I basically settled on a little system that works for me.

I have a large chest freezer, and it's split roughly 50/50 between assorted bags of premixed snap-frozen vegetables, and freezer bags of 2-servings of meat (for me + wife). The meat bags might be 2 steaks, or 2 fillets of marinated chicken, or 2 fillets of fish.

Each morning before work, grab a random (literally, reach in and grab without really looking) meat bag, stick it on sink to thaw throughout day. In evening, pan-fry or oven-bake the meat, and microwave 2 cups of frozen vegetables for each person.

At most we have 1 frying pan or baking tray to clean, and the 2 plates we microwaved the veges on then ate off.

The only real preperation needed is on shopping day to split the meats into separate bags for the freezer, and because of the chest freezer we only shop once a month or so.

</comment><comment><USER9> Since I'm on a low carb diet it can be a pain trying to eat out so I just make all my own food. I really love cooking, but it can get old having to do it every day when you have lots of other things to do.

The two things I do to combat this is to either do batch cooking. I'll make a weeks worth of food sunday evening and put it in the freezer.

Another is I usually just eat one big meal a day. Bulletproof coffee for breakfast, then I'll eat around a 1300 calorie dinner around 5-7pm. The days I eat a smaller dinner I just drink a protein shake to fill up my macros.

</comment><comment><USER10> Maybe you could find some like-minded friends and cook for each other a few nights a week. I did this a lot in college. We'd go grocery shopping together, then either cook together or take turns cooking for each other. I find that it's _far_ more fulfilling to cook for someone else than to cook for just yourself, and it helps to spread the costs (and the leftovers).

</comment><comment><USER11> It happened by accident. After long coding sessions, time would fly by and instead of cooking, I would just go to sleep. Now I could pretty much eat intermittently and still perform flawlessly. I lived off of canned soup (Progresso).

Slowly eat less and less each day for a week and you'll see.

<comment><AUTHOR> This can't possibly be healthy for you. Do you know what your daily protein/carb/calorie intake is? You must be losing weight?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> beans and rice. easy, cheap, edible.

<comment><USER13> The pg recipe: [http://www.paulgraham.com/ramenprofitable.html#f1n](http://www.paulgraham.com/ramenprofitable.html#f1n)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> in chicago: factor75</comment>


Ask YC: Best ways to become socially adept? - <AUTHOR> I know about and have done Toastmasters.  Are there any other effective ways to develop my interpersonal abilities, besides reading "How to Make Friends and Influence People" etc? <comment><USER2> I went with my friend to the convenience store on the weekend. He spent a couple of minutes chatting with the clerk behind the counter while I watched. It seemed like the most natural thing in the world.

He later told me that he didn't feel at all comfortable during the conversation. He said that he has been trying to "bust out of his geeky shell" by talking to random people. To me it looked like he was just a friendly guy chatting with a stranger.

Moral of the story: just do it. It will probably feel weird but you are the only person who will notice.

<comment><USER3> Introverted people need to break out of their shell and 'just do things'. This applies to pretty much everything. If you fail, try, try again and you will eventually succeed whether you want to be able to socialize with people or learn a new language or whatever it is that you truly desire.

<comment><USER4> Introverts do not have a shell that needs breaking. We're not (necessarily) antisocial. We don't refrain from 'doing things'.

We just don't get energized from being around people. This doesn't mean we can't or don't. Like any aspect of temperament, it's mostly immutable: even a socially adept introvert (which I like to think I am) is still an introvert.

Wikipedia puts it well: "Introversion is not the same as shyness, though introverts may also be shy. Introverts choose solitary over social activities by preference, whereas shy people avoid social encounters out of fear."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Consider attending a political event. You'll be surrounded by only the socially adept who will all be forced to at least talk to you momentarily. Watch as they work a room. A relatively cheap donation will get you invited. Consider it a training fee. You'll learn more about power and interpersonal relationships in a night than a month of sitting by yourself at the bar.

btw - I second that this is a skill that does not come from books. It requires real effort on your part.

<comment><USER6> Be sure to donate to Obama.

Also, go to programmer meetups. It will be many people that you can empathize with. You'll have a lot in common with the crowd an it is a good way to start.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> From my own experience: It may seem crazy, but try this.

Climb down your geek tower and stop judging people (you may be judging people without even knowing it), then will come respect for people.

When you respect anyone around, you will gradually find interest in them; That will help break the ice, conversation will come easy and you'll found out that people are much interesting than you think.

<comment><USER8> I couldn't agree more. During Y Combinator, there were two guys sitting behind me. They said something along the lines of "Not to be sterotypical but I am suspicious of any girls here. They're probably just project managers and not really hackers."

Not a very "social" tactical move to do when there were about two girls around the area who heard his comment and some hackers wonder why girls don't talk to them.

<comment><USER9> or maybe those girls are trying to score a future millionare... hehe...

ok, just kidding. But in some "Tech parties" you always seem some of them and it is very easy to spot the Gold Digging types.

<comment><USER7> Pure in-the-hole-hacker thinking.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Find a fellow nerd and go to events together. Make it a project to encourage each other; that is, if I don't muster up the courage to meet someone and start a conversation, then _you_ get a demerit. It's almost uncanny how we will find a way to succeed given a limited scope, easily defined problem.

Once you get into the swing of things, instinct takes over and you'll be fine. You probably have something interesting to discuss with almost everyone else out there. The trick is finding it.

I don't buy into the philosphy of learning about popular culture, sports, or current events just to have something to talk about. Stick with what turns you on; you can be yourself (who else would you be?), and the same thing probably turns someone else on, too.

(Aside: A drink or two couldn't hurt. That's what it's there for.)

<comment><USER11> I'm with you on taking a buddy - nothing like the spirit of competition to get you over the line.

Tech events are great too - barcamps, meetups etc. You'd be surprised at exactly how many hackers don't just defy the monosyllabic geek stereotype, but smash it out of the park.

<comment><USER12> We used to play a game in bars and other places, one friend picks a random person and you need to hold that persons attention for X minutes of conversation. Fail to do it and the next round is on you.

Iterate until you are comfortable with it, and can leave your wallet at home.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A year of boxing worked for me. The experience of being in the ring, seeing his eyes while he's trying to punch your face, works wonders. You become peaceful and confident in everyday interactions.

Singing and playing guitar helps too, it makes you wanted and welcome, which you want to be.

A non-trivial fact for me was that a lot of conversations aren't about information; talking is a game, played for fun. Read "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", watch "Pulp Fiction", and try to do the same.

</comment><comment><USER14> Start by pretending to be genuinely interested in other people's lives, and their problems. If you pretend this for long enough, you'll find yourself actually feeling that way. And then you'll enjoy being around people, because they'll enjoy being around you.

<comment><USER15> I'm not sure you have to pretend at all. Try to realize that everyone and everything has a story and that it's often interesting to find out what it is.

Some people and things are more interesting than others of course. Learning how to gracefully exit a conversation is step #2.

<comment><USER14> I agree with you - I didn't mean to sound overly cynical. Although I find that I _do_ have to pretend when I'm dealing with people who are initially rude or hostile to me. And I don't always succeed at pretending :-). But I can when I'm at my best. And over time, I can begin to genuinely appreciate their stories, too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Some great answers on here! Just wanted to give a contrary view though..

I tried becoming more "socially adept" for quite a while, but even though I can put on a pretty lively appearance on the outside, it's just not me. I'm an introvert and I accept that.

One of the best bits of advice I've heard recently is to "focus on strengths, not weaknesses." That is, there's no point hammering away improving at things you're bad at, and ending up mediocre at everything, if you can focus on the things you already kick ass at and become world class!

Most people who are socially inept tend only to be so with the public or people who are not considered close to them. Take Stanley Kubrick. He got a reputation for being an appallingly bad socializer, yet most of his closest contacts talk about what a friendly and amazing person he was.

So.. enough people are socially awkward, or even downright grating, but are or were world class in their field. These people should be an inspiration. Don't hammer away at making yourself a socially popular person if it takes energy away from being kickass.. because if you're kickass, you don't need many social skills.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that's good advice, but I also do think I'm missing something. For some reason I am just not at ease around others, and I don't get it. I think I lack a sense of self, there's always a need for confirmation from others, not that you would think so if you knew me.

Essentially, there is something missing and I feel disconnected from others. I cannot engage them on an intuitive level, I engage them on an analytical level which tries to look natural, because my intuition is not normal, i.e. doesn't sync with most people. I think this is true for many introverts, and is why they tend to be exhausted by social interaction.

<comment><USER17> My brother just came back from the Hoffman Institute - an intensive 9 day seminar where they address how to have genuine and connected communications - picking up on patterns, and in a group therapy setting, reworking those patterns so you are reconnected... <http://www.hoffmaninstitute.org/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> You can't read yourself into social adeptness. I'd suggest participating in some non-nerd social gatherings. Figure out something you like and go spend some time doing it. Oddly enough, the nerds you do meet in other contexts tend to be interesting and well connected. (In Berlin for instance, there's a large overlap between the open source / founders social scenes and the electronic music scenes. I met my cofounder and many of the contacts that we're using through music rather than, say, the local LUG.)

<comment><USER19> I second the "meet nerds in other contexts" cause. I played some theatre at my university and besides becoming friends with some very cool girls and traveling the world, I strangely enough met a lot of other cs guys there. And those are the ones who are indeed more interesting as they have a life beyond their computer, travel the world and have a broader context in life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I had a good time with salsa dancing. It's a good way to meet girls, requires some actual skill (that can be learned with some effort), is fun in any case, and... dancing can tell you a lot about someone in a surprisingly short period of time.

</comment><comment><USER21> A) Practice, practice, practice.

B) Listening. Speaking is an important part of socializing, but it's a minor part.

</comment><comment><USER22> If you are a programmer and strongly left-brained (not always the same thing), I'd suggest tricking yourself into thinking you have a logical approach to interpersonal relationships and then going to social gatherings quickly before you over-analyze.

Step 1 - Read most of [http://www.amazon.com/Nlp-21-Days-Harry- Alder/dp/0749920300/...](http://www.amazon.com/Nlp-21-Days-Harry- Alder/dp/0749920300/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208783416&sr=8-1) \- this is NOT a good scientific book, but it seems to be good at convincing you to step outside your comfort zone. Optionally, skip this step and do sit-ups and push-ups instead which will make you feel more confident and comes with a low price tag.

Step 2 - Practice on an opposite-gendered friend whom you have _no_ romantic interest in. If such a person does not exist, skip this step.

Step 3 - Attend social events. These are easy to find: book groups, local music, free martial arts class. Talk to people with no intent to "hook up" or even make friends. And I don't mean "tell yourself you're not interested so you'll have a better shot." I mean just talk to them. Ask something about the event. Ask what time it is (don't wear a watch or carry a cell phone). You don't have to have a conversation. You just have to communicate. Likewise, anytime you eat at a restaurant require yourself to compliment at least one employee while you are there.

Step 4 - Rinse and repeat until you realize you're enjoying all of the events and you talk to random people with more ease. As some of the comments have said, you can have great conversations talking about silly stuff that you don't care about if you enjoy the process of facilitating a good conversation.

Tips:

Don't drink unless you _know_ your limit and have a pre-established track record for staying under your limit. Otherwise, you will end up undoing all confidence building when you get hammered and embarrass yourself once.

Avoid drunk people. They are a pain in the ass and will spill things on you. Both of these tips are easy to stick to if you don't go where people are drinking.

<comment><AUTHOR> I suspect you're right about the analytical approach causing me problems. But, I've had a lot of "step out of your comfort zone" type advice throughout my life. I've done this, but I guess I'm not persistent enough. At any rate, I'd like another approach if possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> One thing most geeks have in common is the ability to process information. Most of us don't have great social skills because we don't participate in social events but even more so we don't pay attention when we're in these situations. When you're in social group, push aside your latest paradigm and actually watch what other people are doing, its easy to pick out the people with the best interpersonal abilities. Watch them but don't mimic, instead find similarities in yourself (your interpersonal muscles) and then start working them out. Walk up to people and introduce yourself. Its hard at first but eventually it'll come naturally.

</comment><comment><USER24> I suggest reading the following books, but I also suggest not using their suggestions. These books are merely for awareness. I fee like knowing what was out there, gave me more confidence while I was trying to find my own style.

[the Game] - this book is about the secret lives of pickup artists and their quest to find either a Beta or Alpha Gal. This book offers- ZERO advice if you are looking for a Gamma.

[The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security] - from Kevin Mitnick, one of the fore-most books on social engineering. Reading this book kept us out of a few scams.

<comment><USER25> I agree with jdavid - books on gender-related issues can be helpful. [The Game] is hysterical. Read the ones for guys and girls. Some others:

[How to Succeed with Women] - Sounds cheesy, but goes over the basics that "geeks" often miss, including dressing appropriately, grooming, and polite conversation.

[He's Just Not That Into You] - Manual for women on how to tell if a guy doesn't care about them. Useful for learning about behaviors to avoid and their underlying reasons.

[Self-Made Man: One Woman's Journey into Manhood and Back] - Can't recommend this one enough. Norah Vincent lived for a year as a man, and reports back on the challenges and successes she had. Invaluable for understanding both men and women.

<comment><USER26> I disagree with self-made man. She confuses eye flirting with 'rude' eye contact, and other misunderstandings that would be unique to lesbians. Of course when the men don't want to flirt with you because they think your a guy, they don't try to keep eye contact with you! Something like self-made man could be counter productive, giving you negative social ideas that could make you even more awkward.

<comment><USER25> "Eye flirting" might be perceived as rude in the wrong context by people who aren't lesbians. Understanding that context is part of being socially adept.

There's a fine line between confident and creepy.

<comment><USER24> yeah, i tend to find, confidence requires you to act quickly and with allowing her to reject you. creepy usually rests in hesitation, and well non confrontational actions from a distance.

i will usually look, smile, and see if she responds, before i say something. if she does not smile, i go back to something else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Not focusing on how you feel socially inept goes a long way. People will cut you some slack if you cut yourself some.

</comment><comment><USER28> "...of awkward self consciousness, and feeling ashamed about said self consciousness" "...can't connect at the small talk level. I have an easy time talking with people like xlnt about abstract ideas and philosophy..." "but I strike out with anyone my age"

those express exactly (exactly!) as I feel. Let's see how much more we can relate. Do you also:

-Think that you are quite a weird yet funny individual, and wish you can show that to the people you know, but somehow can't? -Also, you are often feel "closed-out" when another exuberant person comes on scene. Also, you have no problem chatting, emailing, etc. and can express yourself without limitation that way. -Speeches are easy because everyone uniformly has their attention on you, but when you are in a casual group situation and have to vie for attention it gets intimidating (and you will undoubtedly reprimand yourself for later). -You also find it hard to come out and say something once you already start a pattern of not saying anything, as you begin to become over-anxious about people's reaction to your change. ...

this list can go on and on...if you're not looking at this thread anymore, yters, at least i got to spill my guts out which doesn't feel that bad. If you want to continue the list, i'd love to hear other people's situations as well, we can treat it as a fun little game.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, good phrasing. I think I feel some of that less now, i.e. social shame and getting closed out. But this was very true especially when I was in high school.

Spilling my guts is something that's helpful for me too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Shyness is self-perpetuating. So start small, by doing something as simple as saying hi to people in an elevator (btw, elevators are a great place to talk to people, because they can't avoid you).

When you go to social events, go with a friend and make it a friendly competition to see who can meet the most interesting people.

Volunteer to do as many public speaking things as you can. And just generally force yourself out of your comfort zone. Reading won't get you very far, it's just practice practice practice.

</comment><comment><USER30> I understand what you are saying. I often find myself in situations where I don't have the confidence or care to involve myself in, or to initiate, a discussion. I spent a few years as a bartender and something I've learned is that you can always talk about the present. There are tons of things you share with another in any given moment, and often they are new experiences. Finding a common ground like that can be a great way to begin.

</comment><comment><USER31> Read "How to Make Friends and Influence People".

Oh you said besides that...well practice what it preaches. Us folk (geeks/nerds/hackers) tend to like to show how much we know about a subject. Some old dude is talking about how his phone can now surf the web...what do you say? Act a bit surprised and ask him a bit more about the subject. Let HIM show what he knows, and get that little feeling of self-importance. Don't squash it by saying you could ssh in to work on your phone 5 years ago and that his phone is garbage.

Also practice, and have someone judge your performance. There are a zillion things to improve on here, it is a difficult art to master. I would also say it is a long road that I wouldn't be satisfied in saying I know well until I can sit in a room with anyone at anytime and befriend them and/or convince them they want to reconnect with me again shortly.

One last thing, I have the most difficulty talking to people I know well and respect. For example, I was recently discussing business and my goals with an old co-worker I really respected, and I found myself a bit flustered. Anyone else experienced this and/or have any suggestions?

<comment><USER32> I found that "How to Make Friends and Influence People" was really good but more suited to the workplace/building up business contacts.

<comment><USER31> Valid point, it did have that feel.

But I think the key points are suited to all interactions. If you are first meeting someone...and I don't know how to phrase this to be politically correct...you are 'intimately' interested in, perhaps telling them about your magic card collection isn't the best approach. You could discuss his/her Starcraft skills instead :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Here's a quote from "Happy to Burn" (<http://www.surreal.com.au/sankhara/Happy_To_Burn.pdf>):

 _The most effective way I know of is the giving of ourselves. I don't mean in the passionate sense, but more as a form of empathy, as a spiritual generosity._

 _For instance, try responding to people as if they were your brother or sister instead of a stranger, with candid good will; usually they'll respond in kind. If someone does something you like, tell them - nothing gushy, just let them know in a direct and quietly thankful way._

 _Let someone in a hurry go ahead of you in a queue, let them overtake you when you're driving, thank the bank teller or the shop assistant. All these things are so small, but they all add up, and from each act there will be a corresponding positive effect within you._

 _The giving of yourselves in this way has an immediate and positive effect on the mind/body. Try to be aware of how it feels as you do all of these things. You will feel your whole mind/body loosening up, a feeling of lightness that can't be achieved in any other way._

</comment><comment><USER34> The best method for you probably varies based on _why_ you're socially inept. If it's because you haven't interacted enough with other people, then the advice others have given to get more experience makes sense. If it's because you're under confident or constantly worried about things the other person is thinking, you should work at getting rid of your insecurities.

The right course of action will then depend on the insecurity, but exercise and improved health generally boosted my confidence. If you experience anxiety over others judging you, consider that in most situations the person you're worried about probably isn't paying much attention to you, and even if they do notice you do something odd, they won't necessarily remember it; everything only revolves around you in _your_ head. Most of all, just get off your butt and do something about whatever bothers you -- if you're embarrassed by your long hair, get a haircut. A surprising number of my own insecurities were things like that -- easily fixable if I only took the time to calm down, consider them, and make a list of solutions.

</comment><comment><USER35> Observe people who are.

<comment><USER36> But just observing isn't enough; it can be tempting to use observing as an excuse not to practice and talk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Want to change your lifestyle? You need to force it, it is difficult and you need to get out of your comfort zone and put yourself in awkward situations. Here is a great book with a 30 day lifestyle challenge. Each day is a new challenge. By day 30 you will be comfortable walking up to and engaging any stranger in interesting conversations. Day one challenge for instance is start five conversations with 5 strangers. Each day there is a new challenge and they get progressively harder and funny enough easier as you become more comfortable outside your comfort zone. [http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Game-Neil- Strauss/dp/0061540455/...](http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Game-Neil- Strauss/dp/0061540455/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208813483&sr=1-1)

</comment><comment><USER38> Read a book on Typewatching/MBTI. I've found it's much easier to relate to people when I understand the differences between their personalities and my own.

</comment><comment><USER39> Come on, this isn't about hacking people." Forget the X minutes, forget the competition, and just get out for face time with people.

Go to events that you're actually interested in (talking to someone with similar interests is stacking the deck), join a club or society in the same vein. When you've got a free night, check out the local calendar. Whatever you do, just get in the habit of going out, going out, going out! Don't prepare, read up for tips, construct elaborate plans...just go out. Most people are out for the same reason as you. Culley says it best when he says you can't find this in a book. It takes effort.

And remember: the worst thing that can happen is you stay inside and nothing happens.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I've tried this to some extent, and I'm no social recluse. Right now my main source of socialization is attending a church service with people my age (who aren't a bunch of cloistered preacher kids). I do this at least once every weekend. I also meet with an older couple, interact with classmates and teachers, etc. I've also tried going clubbing with groups of people, but the clubs depress me. I seem to be able to get along great with people outside my peer group (i.e. older and younger who don't see me as equal), but I strike out with anyone my age.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> IGNORE every advice out there including this, but do learn to LISTEN without jumping to conclusions - ironically, nature works in such a way that a good listener is considered exponentially nice already :) Oh, one more thing, if you learn about yourself, you are social already, for everyone else out there has the same social "adept"ability concerns - so take it easy on them and you are on your way to being a socialite (in the good sense of the word, not the crazy paparazzi); so, only if you find yourself truly, i.e. that listening is important, then the real learning takes place and fear burns away.

</comment><comment><USER41> Consider attending events about things you're interested in/ where the you have similar interests with the people attending. For example, you could go to more alumni events. Go with the intention of meeting at least 5 new people. You don't have to end up with their business card or contact information. Just practice as someone else mentioned. You'll find yourself gaining more confidence and you can start branching out to other kinds of events. This is what I did and it helped me.

</comment><comment><USER42> I've heard improv classes go a long way.

<comment><USER43> They worked wonders for Michael Scott on "The Office."

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> What exactly is most troubling for you?

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know. I shut down around the more social, outgoing people. It's partially a vicious regression of awkward self consciousness, and feeling ashamed about said self consciousness.

The other part is dreadful boredom, which I know sounds way arrogant, but I'm not saying I'm bored because I think I'm better (though that's part of it). I also seem to lack something, not sure what. I've heard about people with small souls and no chests, and I think that's me.

<comment><USER45> Well, remember Paris Hilton's advice: to appear to be interesting, say as little as possible. So maybe you have the wrong perception of yourself, and appear more interesting to the social outgoing people than you realise - without jumping through hoops.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Use your hacker skills to analyze what makes people cooler or more personal than you. List those things, then execute solutions.

Things: wardrobe, humor, hair, attitude, conversation, hygene

Dating is a huge help. A girl will help you improve all of the above things.

WARNING: Don't apply hacker skills to understanding women (on anything more than a very high level). You'll hit a critical error.

</comment><comment><USER47> Well have you read "How to Make Friends and Influence People"?

If you haven't, the advice in it sums up to: be honest, respect others, respect yourself. That's really all there is to it.

The important thing about how to make more friends is to know how to BE a friend. Think about what you can offer other people, think about how to make the law of comparative advantage work for you.

I also highly recommend Eckhart Tolle's "A New Earth" .. which will not directly talk about how to make friends, but will dig into the root causes of why you have issues with making friends.

Also I would say, one thing that helped me a lot, is I have recently been watching the latest season of "Beauty and the Geek." observe closely the character of "Joe," and instead of laughing at him or thinking how much better you are than him, think about how you are, how all of us are, so very much like him and so very much unwilling to admit it.

</comment><comment><USER48> Learn to genuinely like people.

<comment><USER49> there are a lot of replies kind of like this. but wouldn't it be better to learn to accurately judge people, and _not_ socialize with people who aren't worthwhile?

<comment><USER26> Judgmental people are not successful socially. Get off your geek high horse!

<comment><AUTHOR> But it is for this very reason we geeks always gripe about higher management, at least the ethically loose people who blended in with the crowd to work their way up the ladder.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the comments, this is kinda cathartic to see that you guys care. I haven't really seen anything new though, so I think advice is useless for me.

\- EDIT -

That's too strongly worded. I'm being moody.

Really though, I quite appreciate the concern. And I'll take the advice seriously and put it into practice.

</comment><comment><USER50> A few months ago I went down the same road that you did because of my frustrations with social interactions. I read "How to make friends...", tried to talk to people on the street, tried social lubricants like alcohol and caffeine. To my dismay, nothing seemed to work or stick. Then I read the book "The Game" and started getting into the "pick up" scene. While I felt (and still do) uncomfortable with the sometimes negative views of women and social interactions, I have to say that many of the "whys" and "hows" that they teach have helped me a great deal. The one that has helped me the most is <http://www.pickuppodcast.com>.

<comment><AUTHOR> I skimmed that book. I did feel pretty energized and powerful after reading it, like I had the inside track on things. I feel weird about that sort of thing though. I don't want to get laid or anything.

One guy gave me roses to pass out to pretty women at a bar to try and hook up. I passed them out because I do like the idea of recognizing beautiful women, but I shut down when one actually was interested in me and tried to make contact. I also tried drinking and another tried dirty dancing with me, but I mainly just got depressed and I was pretty much a fish.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think it comes with age and experience.

When I was right off school, I had the same problems as you guys, mainly overthinking about everything, and everybody you meet, makes it hard to just have casual conversations.

Just as I learned in soccer, you should just stop overthinking and overanalyzing, and just go with it, causually and naturally.

Also, in my current job, I interact with a lot more people everyday, so I was forced out of my shell a while ago.

But, when you are in parties, you have to make some effort to reach to people and talk to them. Even thou nothing might come out of it, it is better than just staying in one corner and doing nothing.

Anyway, stop reading books and just put yourself out there and practice.

It will help when you meet girls.

</comment><comment><USER51> I actually listen to PickUp Podcast (<http://www.pickuppodcast.com>) and found their advice to be right on point. I plan to enroll in one of their coaching programs in the near future.

</comment><comment><USER52> Go to bars and pull up seats next to random people. Make a game out of it. See how long you can hold a conversation until it gets awkward.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, this sort of suggestion is motivating. Actions that shatter everyone's mental rut and bring newness to everyone's experience motivate me. I might do what you say, or something similar.

The thing that turns me off in interpersonal interaction is the rote manner of interaction that I don't know, and don't want to learn. When people interact as they really are is what interests me.

For instance, a teacher challenged me to ask a girl out, so I made a dare out of it with a friend. Girl turned me down though:P a couple of them.

<comment><USER52> I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "rote manner of interaction that I don't know, and don't want to learn."

If you mean the talking about the weather thing, that's what talking people in bars should teach you to get beyond.

<comment><AUTHOR> No, it isn't small talk. It's people expecting me to act in a certain way and not liking it when I don't.

Maybe I'm just wanting two conflicting goals. The expected way of acting is natural for most people, but not for me, and I wish I could interact in a way that is natural for me too.

I think I'll give the bar thing a shot. Any types of people I should watch out for?

<comment><USER52> I think people have fewer expectations than you might assume. Most people spend too much time judging themselves when interacting to bother doing it to others. But the way you judge yourself makes you assume others are judging you, but they're not, they're focusing on themselves. If that makes any sense, which it may not.

I'd say work your way up to attractive women. They're the hardest for a number of reasons (you're afraid of them due to approach anxiety, they're used to approaches and are more on their guard, etc.) Start off talking to guys and less attractive females. People are always most receptive toward people who appear to be in their own demographic and social status level, so start there and work your way out.

<comment><AUTHOR> One more note. I don't think people are consciously judging me, it's just their natural reaction. I realize most people are much less aware than I am.

But, it isn't my natural reaction, which is why I have to learn how their system of interaction works, which seems like too much trouble.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I could tell you what works for me, but unless your personality is much like mine (which is unlikely), that isn't going to help you.

The best way to find out what works is to try. Just go out there and interact with people. Observe them to see how you are doing.

</comment><comment><USER54> You need not to talk much. I have read somewhere that if you listen 90% of the time and talk 10% of the time, people will find you very interesting and socially adept. Life as an introvert can be quite hard.

<comment><AUTHOR> Eh, or if you're me people think your weird and aloof, or some kind of aspie.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Read "How to Win Friends and Influence People", then practice what you learn. It's even in the start up FAQ.

<http://www.paulgraham.com/startupfaq.html>

</comment><comment><USER56> Just be a decent person - if you're at an event and talking to someone and another person is hovering near by, bring them into your conversation. Be friendly, try and help people etc

</comment><comment><USER57> A lot of times, if you just force yourself to smile and be friendly, it starts to feel more natural. Just do it.

What was that one line? To be enthusiastic, you have to act enthusiastic!

</comment><comment><USER58> really, its very simple:

1) practice a lot

2) recognize/record your problems/faults/issues.

3) work on either improving the improvable problems, or working around the unimprovable ones.

it would really help to have a friend looking on from the outside to help note problems. you have to be really open to change to make this work, though.

</comment><comment><USER59> Just remember WWAPD: What Would Austin Powers Do?

</comment><comment><USER60> Smile :-)

</comment><comment><USER61> Pickup-chicks stuff I have to give very mixed reviews. Yes walking up and introducing yourself to people will make you better at talking to them. That much is certainly undeniable. But the online communities associated with such things have some significant downsides.

I hate to do this but I'm going to advocate acting classes. The reason I hate to do it is there's always somebody in an improv class who's obviously just there to become more spontaneous. If you study acting because you have a genuine interest in doing it, people who are there to become more spontaneous, or better at public speaking, or whatever, are just annoying as hell. Acting classes _do_ make you socially adept but _PLEASE_ avoid serious professional acting classes in favor of weekend workshops at community colleges. Also if you are "that guy" and you're taking acting classes without any real interest in acting please understand that the serious actors want you to die.

I think the best option suggested here is user groups and presentations in front of other geeks. Not because talking to geeks is going to expose you to incredible social skills - far from it - but because sincere interest is a much healthier motivator for any type of social activity than the desire to be social for its own sake.

<comment><AUTHOR> I did Toastmasters and was pretty good at it. I've also given presentations to large groups of people and high ranking people. I don't think public speaking and spontaneity are my problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> Going out every day during lunch break to pick up girls in the town center with a guy who was very good and natural at it worked great for me.

So, I'd say find someone who's really good at socializing and hang out with him. 1000x better and faster than any book or doing it on your own.

</comment><comment><USER49> don't. people are generally least interesting in casual, social situations. for example, most of the people in this thread have said reasonably interesting, intelligent ideas. but at a bar they'd say worse things.

<comment><USER63> For anyone who couldn't figure out what the earlier replies r.e. judging people had to do with anything, the parent reply is an illustration.

<comment><AUTHOR> What he says is my problem though. I can't connect at the small talk level. I have an easy time talking with people like xlnt about abstract ideas and philosophy, but I suck at talking about "real" things.

<comment><USER49> "it's a feature not a bug"

what do you imagine would be the great benefits of having more casual social interactions?

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't really know. I suspect you are right, that it is part of my nature to be this way. But it is hard for me to be convinced, since almost everyone I respect thinks differently and encourages me to be more social.

<comment><USER49> well, what do they say the benefits would be? ask them to give solid reasons, and explain it until you are convinced! and they ought to have a plan for how you can do it before being sure it's a good thing for you to do.

also they should be open to the possibility that they are mistaken; the conversation ought to be able to go either way.

<comment><AUTHOR> The basic point is that I'm narcissistic and need to be brought out of myself. I say I don't really know, because I can't see it myself. But, that's par for the problem of narcissism:P

<comment><USER64> Like Soothsayer said earlier, I recommend you read a book about Myer-Brigg personality types in order to understand why other people behave as they do, why they expect you to behave in the same way, and why it's not your natural inclination to do that. Then you can accept who you are, and understand that you're always going to be acting to some extend when, e.g., engaging in small talk.

A book would be better than an online test because the point should be to learn about all the other personality types, and how they interact, rather than understand your own.

[http://www.amazon.com/Please-Understand-Me-Character- Tempera...](http://www.amazon.com/Please-Understand-Me-Character- Temperament/dp/0960695400/ref=pd_bbs_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208824604&sr=8-5)

<comment><AUTHOR> Now that I think about it, that's a good suggestion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> I think motivating others to socializing with you would be more comfortable for you (as in let them do the work, so to speak), and that takes charisma. Didn't pg write that (paraphrasing) charisma is basically about liking people?

Disclaimer: I am quite socially inept, and don't even care . . .</comment>


Learn Python (and everything) the Right Way - <AUTHOR> http://readncode.com/blog/learn-python-the-right-way/

<comment><USER2> Congrats to Zed's book. It was great fun watching him crank it out. I've used it personally as a quick refresher course on Python basics after having not used it at all for a couple years. It was a great, breezy tutorial, well structured, easy to crank through and good enough to get you up and running.</comment>


Ask HN: Buddhism - <AUTHOR> Anyone been looking into Buddhism? it sounds like a very Interesting religion if it is religion or more about the brain than anything.<p>Share some good resources or knowledge to learning more about mind training and buddhism. Books or audio <comment><USER3> Whilst it's possible to treat Buddhism as a religion, the true beauty of it isn't about what you can learn academically but what you can experience.

All you really need to know is how to meditate. Sit somewhere (doesn't have to be cross legged, can be in a comfy chair if you wish). Close your eyes. Breathe naturally.

The key to meditation is to observe without reaction. It's common to start by observing your breathing, as this can have a calming effect.

Your mind will frequently try to distract you. Recognise that it is happening, but without judging yourself then return to observing your breath. In time as your awareness builds it may be possible to take more in, but the idea at first is to improve the stillness of your mind, and it is easier to do that when you can focus on something like your breathing.

There are a multitude of interpretations about what you learn about yourself from meditation. If I told you what I thought it meant I'd put barriers in the way of you finding your own interpretation. That's all reading the books will do too. Your experience is your primary guide, any other sources should be in addition to your experience, to offer guidance to make sense of the experience, but not the focus.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER4> Books:

What The Buddha Taught: [http://amzn.com/0802130313](http://amzn.com/0802130313). A straightforward overview of the foundations of Buddhism.

Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism: [http://amzn.com/1570629579](http://amzn.com/1570629579). In your journey, your ego will be tempted to claim your spirituality for itself. Don't let that happen.

Mindfulness In Plain English: [http://amzn.com/0861719069](http://amzn.com/0861719069). A classic introduction to meditation.

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind: [http://amzn.com/1590308492](http://amzn.com/1590308492). A mind-opening taste of Zen, and a classic. Read with your heart, not your brain.

Other recommended Zen authors: Seung Sahn. Taizan Maezumi. Brad Warner. The aforementioned Alan Watts.

Also, an invaluable online resource: [http://www.accesstoinsight.org](http://www.accesstoinsight.org), especially essays by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/index....](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/index.html)

There are also many fantastic essays on Tricycle: [http://www.tricycle.com](http://www.tricycle.com)

Finally: reading about Buddhism is like reading about the most delicious food. It won't satisfy your hunger. It's mind-medicine - only for your mind. The only soul-medicine is sitting down every day on a cushion and looking at a white wall. (Or variations thereof.) You cannot reach enlightenment and save all beings from suffering by reading a book. Don't take my word for it - <USER2> have to see for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER5> Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind and Mindfulness in Plain English are excellent texts.

However I recommend that the single best thing you can do early on, either to figure out if this is anything your interested in or to actually get to the matter of the thing, which is to say to appreciate the practice of it, is to visit a zen center and take some sort of intro to zazen. It wasn't until I tried zazen that I felt I really 'got' what all the thinking is about.

I also found this article on Nietzsche and what impact the lineage of Buddhist thinking had on his thought (and by extension, Freud, who is widely speculated to have taken a lot of his ideas about the unconscious from Nietzsche) to be instrumental in deepening my understanding of Buddhism: [http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol1/god_is_dead.html](http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol1/god_is_dead.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> I love the following from Tao te ching:

      The ancient Masters
      were damn impressive.
      They were deep. Real deep.
      Words can't even begin to describe
      how deep they were.
      You can only talk
      about how they acted.

      They were careful,
      like a man walking on thin ice.
      They were cautious,
      like a soldier behind enemy lines.
      They were polite,
      like a guest at a party.
      They moved quickly, like melting ice.

      They were as plain as a block of wood.
      Their minds were as wide as a valley,
      and their hearts as clear as spring water.

      Can you wait
      for that kind of openness and clarity
      before you try to understand the world?

      Can you hold still
      until events have unfolded
      before you do the right thing?

      When you act without expectations,
      you can accomplish great things.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have been intersted in Taoism and Buddhism for the last 10 years, mainly because I practice Taoist Tai Chi.

I can recommend [http://zenhabits.net/lg](http://zenhabits.net/lg) a book about letting go, a concept so hard to do and so easy to say :)

Edit: the best book about Taiosm that explains Lao Tzu's words is [http://www.amazon.com/The-Tao-Speaks-Lao-Tzus- Whispers/dp/03...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Tao-Speaks-Lao-Tzus- Whispers/dp/0385472595)

</comment><comment><USER8> Here are a few links to start out with.

Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts (aeon.co) \- [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8411762](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8411762)

The Wisdom of Alan Watts in Four Thought-Provoking Animations \- [http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/the-wisdom-of-alan- watts-...](http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/the-wisdom-of-alan-watts-in- four-thought-provoking-animations.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> The Way of Zen by Alan Watts is really good. I learned a lot and it helped me view the world differently.

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Way-Zen-Alan- Watts/dp/0375705104](http://www.amazon.com/The-Way-Zen-Alan- Watts/dp/0375705104)</comment>


Why boycotting Whole Foods is Stupid - <AUTHOR> http://www.scottberkun.com/blog/2009/why-boycotting-whole-foods-is-stupid/

<comment><USER2> I read a quote somewhere (forget where) saying "folks in favor of universal healthcare keep saying 'lets have a debate'. OK, then Mackey's editorial was a PERFECT example of having a debate ... and he's getting castigated for it. This shows that folks in favor of government run healthcare are not really interested in a debate - they are interested in complete victory, with zero dissent. It's an ideology, not a rational position."

I 100% agree.

<comment><USER3> He starts his article with a line from Maggie Thatcher on socialism. Not a subtle way to tee off a debate - he may as well have dropped in a couple of references to the Third Reich while he was at it. Maybe he does raise a few interesting points, but he then completely loses it by claiming that it's plant-based nutrition (organic, no doubt) that we all need rather than doctors and medicine. It's a perfect "qu'ils mangent de la brioche" moment that shows the man has zero clue what he's talking about. This isn't a cogent argument against healthcare reform that needs defending as free-speech-under-attack; it's just a public relations facepalm of the first degree. The boycotts _are_ stupid, but that's just stupidity responding to stupidity.

<comment><USER2> > _He starts his article with a line from Maggie Thatcher on socialism. Not a > subtle way to tee off a debate - he may as well have dropped in a couple of > references to the Third Reich while he was at it._

Thatcher presided over a country with socialized health care and heavily unionized coal mining, and complained about them.

In the US, we are now debating having the government run the health sector. I.e. "socialism".

I don't think that a criticism of socialized healthcare from someone who's been there is quite the same thing as "referencing the third Reich".

<comment><USER4> To my knowledge, the Thatcher quote has nothing to do with their health care system, and it would appear she was an advocate of the NHS, not an opponent.

From [http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp...](http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp?docid=108256)

 _Our stewardship of the public finances has been better than that of any Government for nearly 50 years. It has enabled us to repay debt and cut taxes. The resulting success of the private sector has generated the wealth and revenues which pay for better social services—to double the amount being spent to help the disabled, to give extra help to war widows, and vastly to increase spending on the national health service. More than 1 million more patients are being treated each year and there are 8,000 more doctors and 53,000 more nurses to treat them.

That is the record of eleven and a half years of Conservative Government and Conservative principles. All these are grounds for congratulation, not censure, least of all from the Leader of the Opposition, who has no alternative policies._

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Incredibly well said. Reminds me of one of my favorite movie quotes, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours." \- The American President (<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112346/>)

<comment><USER6> I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. [might not be Voltaire]

<comment><USER4> I'm sorry, but the idea that the boycott is somehow threatening freedom of speech is utterly absurd.

> A boycott is a ban and bans on other people's opinions are stupid and > childish.

I don't know if this was a massive logical slip-up on Berkun's part or what, but: nobody's banning Mackey's opinion. As far as I'm aware, copies of the Wall Street Journal containing that article are not being burned, nor is the website being hacked to prevent anyone from reading it.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with guaranteeing that people should keep patronizing your business if you say something that rankles them.

<comment><USER6> Absolutely and I agree. I don't usually post ambiguous quotes but the grandparent reminded me of that quote which I liked.

I'd also say banning whole foods is somewhat analogous to people who are 'banning' non-organic products by shopping at whole foods in the first place. They are speaking with their dollars about a position they are against (genetically engineered products). If Whole Foods the company has a culture/leadership which is against health care reform, people are certainly free and rational to ban Whole Foods if they feel strongly about the issue.

<comment><USER4> Voted you back up. Fwiw, I was trying to respond to the general sentiment that this was a free speech issue, and the quote made for a good place to do so. Thanks for clarifying your stance. In retrospect, I should have used less strong language--"utterly absurd" wasn't necessary, as I can see how one might regard it a free speech issue.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _"If I were to boycott Whole Foods or critique Mackey it'd be for poor or manipulative timing, and not much else."_

Maybe that's enough?

I'm not big on boycotts, but rich business people pissing off their core constituents by opposing reforms they seek and offering fringe ideas as alternatives right in the middle of a big debate about a fundamental part of society just seems dumb. I thought we were pro dumb actions having consequences round here.

<comment><USER8> I disagree that expressing a well thought out opinion on an important social issue is a dumb action.

<comment><USER9> Clearly the market disagrees with you.

<comment><USER8> I'm not sure if you're referring to the boycotters or HN. But I'd hardly call a vocal minority "the market." The lines in the Whole Foods a couple blocks from my apartment seem to be just as long as ever.

<comment><USER9> In which case they're hardly infringing on his freedom of speech, now are they? I am, incidentally, quite serious: I can't see how "The boycotters are a meaningful threat to freedom of speech," and "The boycotters have negligible impact on the real world," are anything but mutually exclusive.

<comment><USER8> I've never said either of those things. The first one is absurd.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Whole Foods CEO wasn't just having opinions. He was actively opining (which spell check assures me is a word) that we shouldn't have a public health care system.

Why should advertisers not advertise on Glen Beck's show? For those who don't know, Beck opined on his show that President Obama has "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture. . . I'm not saying he doesn't like white people. I'm saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a racist." That's an opinion as well.

Beck's opinion is, to most, more inflammatory than Mackey's, but that can make Mackey's all the more dangerous (if you're someone who would like to see public healthcare). The fact is that Mackey seems to be a liberal of sorts (in fact, Whole Foods offers health insurance to their employees) and an at least somewhat successful business person (I don't actually know enough about Whole Foods, but they don't seem to be going bankrupt).

So, his words are quite a threat to the agenda of those who would like to see a public health plan. And his words have that much more power because they're coming from someone who seems to have liberal leanings and is running a business that _does_ provide health care to their employees. If someone is advocating for the opposite of what you would like, should you not take that into consideration? We vote with our feet every day. He took action against public health care in trying to change people's opinions through his piece. I know many who stopped buying CDs because of the RIAA's positions.

I will grant that his piece was a lot more thoughtful and measured than many have passed on, but this is an issue that is very contentious and many people feel (I'm not making any judgement here) that his words contribute to a negative impact on the possibility of a public health plan and that the lack of such a plan will have a negative impact on their life. As such, they don't want to spend their money at his business.

<comment><USER11> "So, his words are quite a threat"

I resent your use of the word "threat" in this context; a threat implies the pending use of force to harm. Are you sure that you want to equate a man expressing his opinion publicly to the promise of inflicting pain?

<comment><USER12> That's not the only meaning: "a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger". There are economic threats (the threat of bankruptcy), social threats (blackmail), etc. etc.

I think what's important here is that the boycotters perceive the Whole Foods CEO's opining as an actual threat. In the "battle" for ideas, it makes sense that you wouldn't actively support your opposition.

<comment><USER11> Even so, the word has a devious connotation. There is nothing devious about open speech.

<comment><USER12> I'm curious: what word would you use?

<comment><USER11> "So, his words are quite a _challenge_ to the agenda of those who would like to see a public health plan."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I totally agree that this boycott business is nonsense. I don't understand why some people seem to believe that everyone has to agree with you. Is the case for health care reform so weak that people need to jump on anyone who dissents? Mackey doesn't even draw a salary so by boycotting Whole Foods it isn't affecting him directly. He's a libertarian sort of guy but that's nothing new. I shop at Whole Foods every week and have no plans to stop that any time soon. My wife and I joke that we should be spending more there now that some people are boycotting.

<comment><USER14> I've shopped at Whole Foods once or twice in the past and came to the conclusion that it was a bit pricey. I just started shopping at Whole Foods again to help negate the boycott. I also plan on buying a Ford the next time I need a car. I've always bought GM/Chrysler, but Ford has earned my respect by refusing the government bailout.

<comment><USER15> I, likewise, am planning to shop at Whole Foods more frequently now. Actually, one of the reasons I didn't shop at Whole Foods before was that it was always too crowded. Maybe it'll be easier to find a parking space from now on. (It helps that my local branch is in Berkeley.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If anything, a rabid boycotting effort seems detrimental to the case of reformists; fear-mongering and verbal abuse simply because a man authors an eloquent article stating his opinions? That sounds scary to me.

Besides, Mackey's stance has been empirically expressed for a long time now; just examining the way he handles health care internally, with his own employees, should tell much of what he believes in. To rifle and shout for blood now, just because he's released a minor articulation of something he's been advocating a while now, would seem sort of silly on the part of conscious Whole Foods consumers.

</comment><comment><USER16> This seems to be news to many people, but "free speech" does not mean others have to listen to you, agree with you, or least of all financially support you.

The guy delivered a big Fuck You to his customers - the same people who are responsible for him having a stronger voice than an ordinary person. Now he has to pay the price for his stupidity, and they are absolutely right to boycott WF.

<comment><USER14> Did you even read the article? I was unable to find even one instance where he was sticking it to his customers. All his points had everything to do with changes to the health care system, but with a minimal (if any) increase in the deficit.

<comment><USER17> Did you? Read it again.

It's missing the point and excessively patronizing. He _is_ sticking it to his customers, you just aren't reading critically. To his credit, he's been consistent -- I found articles about the WF health plan from way back where he is equally patronizing about how his employees chose the "Suck Less" health care plan by vote. Gee, thanks. :-)

Lets take some choice quotes:

Covering the naive, self-serving bases we have: "Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover", "Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year." Incredibly naive. Just astoundingly so. Also, note the complete lack of concern for the _patients_ in this triangle. Or at least the ones who may not have the privilege of working at WholeFoods.

And under the WTF category: "Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation [for people with no insurance]". Does _anyone_ think this proposal is actually legitimate? This is the most intelligence insulting bit of ass-covering I've ever seen.

But it doesn't end there. He references an article in Investor's business daily which is basically full of lies (look up the rebuttals -- it's quite humorous)

And I _love_ this one. Note the pre-built conclusion: "Why would [Can,UK employees] want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an "intrinsic right to health care"?" Well, fucking duh, they don't need high deductable insurance from WholeFoods, and they want access to extra benefits in _some_ form. But, he's smart, he knew this already... He just didn't choose to phrase it that way.. for our beenfit, of course. :-)

And we have the patronizing implication in: "Unfortunately many of our health- care problems are self-inflicted:". If that isn't a huge fuck you, I have no idea what is.

<comment><USER18> Two points: 1) "voluntary, tax deductible, donation" presumably means one can donate charitably to an individual who needs a medical intervention of some sort, eg pay for your brothers kidney operation tax free - what's your objection to this sort of thing? Your vitriol is obscuring your message. 2) "many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted:", they are though aren't they? No where near all of them, but certainly many (I'm in the UK, perhaps people [contrary to all media reports] look after themselves better in the USA?).

<comment><USER17> Admittedly I was peeved when I read it, but you have to consider the reality, rather than the ideal.

You can already deduct medical expenses and charitable donations in the US, and "donating" to family members is ripe for tax fraud. It's just not realistic. But igoring that, the thrust of that part of the op-ep was that this would _pay for all those who can't afford insurance_ is absolutely ridiculous -- basically just, like I said, dumb and really naive.

As for the second, while it may be true that "many" problems are self- inflicted in a technical sense, that rather vague statement is not the point. The point is what it implies. It implies that if everyone just ate their greens, we'd see less of a problem. Not only is it basically wrong (look up the stats). It's insulting because you're implicitly blaming a significant ("many") part of the healthcare problem on the people who... seek out healthcare. This is, again, stupid, and not the debate -- WHile people could take better care of themselves, they aren't ruining the system with hangnails and type 2 diabetes caused by Twinkies. That just isn't happening the way he implies. What we are talking about is a significant class of people who _do not seek out healthcare_ because they cannot afford it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> what is a boycott but an expression of opinion?

i'm not sure how the author would reconcile the fact that the CEO of a company should have the right to express his opinion via the editorial but the consumers should not be able to express their opinion by not doing business with the company (how else will the average joe on the street be able to actually have any direct effect on or interaction with a CEO?).

<comment><USER20> Yea. The article seems more to the effect of "Your political opinions are stupid, therefore your actions to express those opinions are stupid as well" and venturing into "your opinions are so stupid that you don't have a right to express them" territory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Out of curiosity, can anyone point me at some well-argued articles offering a refutation of Mackey's original editorial?

Alternatively, bonus points if you can find me someone supporting boycotting Whole Foods who ridiculed the boycotting of the Dixie Chicks. Or vice versa.

<comment><USER20> The boycotting of the Dixie Chicks was more ridiculous, in my opinion... By a couple of orders of magnitude.

<comment><USER15> Uh huh. How so, exactly?

<comment><USER20> Because there was a larger portion of the population that agreed with it.

Not to mention that in this case, we're talking about the CEO of a company that has built itself on an image. Not only that, the company targets a certain demographic, and the majority of that demographic (at least on the surface) believes in government healthcare. For the CEO to come out and say something like this, it's almost an expected response.

The Dixie Chicks on the other hand have a wider audience, and prior to them actually saying it, I wouldn't have necessarily expected such a response from the general public or their fans. Not only that it was all over in the media with lots of 'media personalities' jumping on the 'trash the Dixie Chicks for ratings' bandwagon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> As far as the (stock) markets are concerned, Mackey's opinion piece doesn't seem to have affected the value of WFMI. After a brief dip, the value of WFMI has steadily increased during the past week: <http://bit.ly/4BCUjh>

</comment><comment><USER22> People are just unhappy that Whole Foods' senior management doesn't jive with the company's careful constructed image.

Of course, I think I'd starve to death if I boycotted all the stores that don't support my politics.

<comment><USER23> I would die of boredom if I didn't watch movies made by people on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Ok, the article seems to miss something.

The whole foods ceo is in the newspaper because he is the CEO of whole foods, not because he has all these interesting things to say. Since his ability to push his opinions through the newspaper is predicated on his position at that corporation, he is writing as 'the CEO of whole foods', not merely as a citizen. That they point out who he is adds to this, since not only is he only invited because of his job title, but the newspaper is also using the title to add weight and authority. If the employees of a company offend you the best and really only way to influence them is to stop giving that company your money.

Really, as a practical matter, no CEO of any company should be out there publicly talking about their personal political views. In fact, it is odd that the company didn't have a written policy preventing employees from using their affiliation with the company in this way. If the guy who makes sandwiches started endorsing panini grills, and the ads used the Whole Foods name, they would be shut down. It is just obvious that the sandwich guy can't use the company's trademarks to push his personal agenda, and neither should the CEO be allowed to.

<comment><USER25> You may not be aware, but John Mackey _founded_ Whole Foods (in his garage, no less) in 1978. His identity is naturally rather intertwined with his company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Both sides on this issue are failing to understand the vast potential power of the tool of the boycott. It doesn't matter whether Mackey's argument was reasonable. People are fired up and motivated, and that energy can be tapped to influence Whole Foods, and then influence another company, and another. The more we use the muscle, the stronger it gets.

What the boycotters don't understand is that you get nowhere if a bunch of disconnected individuals just stop buying something because they're angry. It only works if you make specific well-publicized demands, continue the boycott until the demands are met, and then end it. A boycott without demands is tactically pathetic. It's a bit late now, but the boycotters could have demanded, for example, that Whole Foods publicly support a single-payer system.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'd like to take a second to remind folks that _this_ is the reason that companies want to have access to your facebook pages, have you sign away your right to blog in public, etc.

While it's obviously a bit different for a CEO (being more in the public eye, and seen as the 'face' of the company), HR and legal departments are worried about similar backlashes from comments made by 'grunt-level' (or even mid- level) employees.

This is obviously a flawed assumption, because the people at the top of the company have a higher chance of garnering public outrage against a company, yet they are the ones with the most leverage to say 'screw you' to such policies that would limit their free speech and (at least try to) negotiate them out of any contracts.

</comment><comment><USER27> It seems to me that boycot is perfect way to censor people. I find nothing wrong with it. There are social consequences to what you say. This is the way it should be. Government cencorship, on the other hand...

</comment><comment><USER28> Also stupid is screwing your shareholders by pissing off your company's customers.</comment>