Whenever in doubt of what to do always suggest to break the problem down. You are going through a lot right now so it's difficult to keep a clear head when making a decision. Take the time to go through the pro and con of leaving or staying and then see which one is more important to you. Also consider that psychologically when humans invest a
Lot of time and energy in anything it is difficult to let go (from relationships to startup). So don't allow it to be the only reason to stay.
You already received much praise on the service itself, however I wanted to congratulate you having such a clear and short TOS. TOS;DR would be proud of you.
You bringing up things being different in New York City made me remember that if you compare the proportion of women and men of New York City and Los Angeles, you will notice that there are more women than men in New York and the opposite in Los Angeles. Now this fact alone may not be enough to conclude that based on these ratios that it is the cause of such a change in quality of women. But from another perspective it makes sense. In Los Angeles and in California, there are less women. This means that women have a much larger pool of men that they can choose, so they can afford to be picky. This means that the proportion of good looking, successful men using online dating increases since there aren't enough women in the local area to date. Now New York on the other hand, the advantage is for men as there are more women and they can be picky. This means that even attractive and interesting women now have to make themselves publicly available via online dating.
Of course this is just a hypothesis so of course this may not be the case.
I highly doubt it will deter it much as I'm sure that copycat stores in China will not be affected by such a measure. However I don't know enough about copycat stores outside of China, so maybe someone else can tell me if there exists enough of them?
I was wondering, could you list some of the more recent academic works? I've touched up on the basics and feel pretty comfortable with them so I want to try something a bit more advanced.
Perhaps it's just me (and the irony of me saying this will be obvious after reading this post) but if you are writing blogs, isn't it obvious that eventually you will get negative feedback and in some cases verbal harassment? My perspective on such things is that say you have 1000 followers of your blog and you write on a topic. Odds are that out of the 1000, 75% of them will likely not give any feedback, 10% will give positive, 8% will give negative and then there's the 2% that may verbally harass you because they are offended. Does this mean that they are bad people for doing something like that? Well I guess it's up to you to decide whether they are.
However, try to remember that there are people out there who were not taught or never picked up on the idea that you should be courteous when talking to over individuals. Maybe they were never taught it, taught the opposite, or have difficulty in controlling their anger. They can also believe so strongly in something to the point of doing something unethical.
The point is not to take things personally when people attack you directly versus your ideas. Instead why not ask them why they felt it was necessary to talk in that fashion?
Apologizing for offending them can also help in alleviating any direct attacks as it makes them aware of how they are acting. A little social engineering is a good thing to know.
Don't just run away from it. There are so many better ways of going about it.
Perhaps it's all about context in terms of how you view how salient the negative feedback is. I can only speak of my experiences but I always found that no matter how frustrated I get while coding, the moment that everything finally functions releases such a dopamine rush that I quickly forget about the frustration.
Perhaps two things (probably more) are necessary in order to overcome this negative feedback loop:
Learning how to let go of failures.
Focus on the euphoria of fixing a bug.
Remember that as humans we essentially are very complex machines and perspectives partly determines how we will react to a stimuli.
This reminds me of the time where Blizzard wanted to do something similar for their forums as people would troll often. From what I remember, there was a huge backlash. They seem to be trying to take a safer approach by suggesting you do it versus forcing you. I wonder if they had that incident in the back of their mind when taking this approach.
Recording yourself is extremely important. Although it may be awkward to look at yourself stumble through a speech, you will get good understanding of how you are presenting yourself. I'd even go as far as trying different clothing and see how each changes the image your reflecting.
As I use to co-host a radio show, I found that listening to yourself live is the best way to ensure a high quality show. It makes sure you don't speak too slow,fast, if there's an echo etc.
I don't think Patrick is someone of any importance(no offence). I just think it's someone nice who is willing to give away his laptop. Hopefully only genuine people apply, but this being the internet, I doubt it will happen.
I have had a lot of fun working with Unity but not for making a game. I have actually been using it at work to use as the platform for an experiment which is being done in our Universities Geography department. what it truly taught me was how much scripting can save you a lot of time in the tweaking department. As this is my first real project that I'm doing on my own, it really helped in understanding how important making your scripting generic really is. It also has shown me the weakness of Unity's GUI library as there are some limitations with it.
That was the first thing that came to my mind. I wonder if you can prove a statistical probability that if a story happened in a movie that it could eventually take place in real life.
If I may play Devil's Advocate. I can understand why Distributors, movie companies, etc go so far in pushing anti piracy. Not necessarily just because of the fact that it hurts profits (although by a minor fraction), but also because it's only logical to do so. If movie companies were to one day come out and say that they are ok with people pirating their movies, who's to say that it won't increase the number of people attempting to pirate the movies since you would not be punished. In this case the act of making pirating taboo and portraying it as anti social behavior helps in minimizing the acceptance that pirating is OK by mass advertising(Although this technique may not effective, but I haven't read enough to get a sense that it doesn't work). Although they take extreme measures, it's that fear of getting caught that helps in maintaining their profits which make their share holders happy.