Greetings, friends!
I'm just noting for my own, future reference locations at which I have uploaded a translation:
Academia
On EpicureanFriends
Society of Friends of Epicurus
I'll make primary updates on twentiers.com/biography, but I've uploaded static copies elsewhere.
Nothing new lately. I hope everyone is well. 
Our friend Marcus with the Society of Friends of Epicurus shared a collection of excerpts that I have compiled into Philodemus' text "On Gods" or "On the Gods" found here.
That is awesome! I love the color.
I really want a copy of Dorandi's translation. I need Amazon to drop the price. 
THANK YOU!
I have been reading through your letter to Herodotus a little every day. "Shining a new light" may seem trite, but it applies to your brilliant and beautiful work (I looked at that letter very closely last year, but you brought out many different and new ways of looking at it).
Just as a point of discussion: I was initially a bit surprised by your preservation of cases in the transliterations used in your translation -- certainly not something I have ever seen before -- but now I think it serves as a linguistic bridge to draw a potential student closer to the original!
I really appreciate that. I am really glad to hear that you, in particular Bryan have found it to be a faithful reflection, and are appreciating the choices in delivery and presentation. Anything I've really drawn attention to are points that I myself once had doubts, or about which I had some kind of partial curiosity, so I do hope my approach reinforces helpful paths for study (and keeps it fun!)
As 21st-century Epicureans, how do you integrate it into your daily life? Is there any particular structure or set of practices involved?
Perhaps Eikadistes may have something to share in regard to that.
Most definitely! More than just passing curiosities, the teachings of the Garden provide practical guidance so we can confidently respond to the obstacles that characterize daily life:
"We must simultaneously laugh and philosophize and manage a household and administrate the economic affairs and never let go of the language of the true philosophies." (VS 41)
(1) Memorizing and reciting the Doctrines, and parts of the Epitomes are prescribed spiritual practices from the Hegemon. A few random, but specific examples I can think of:
I'm just paraphrasing, but the sources of those statements help us focus on the most important things, spiritual/intellectual tools. Along those lines, he specifically calls 1-4 the "most important".
Incidentally, Philódēmos calls Doctrines 1-4 the "most important", and preserves them in his proverbial "Tetrapharmakos", a recipe to prepare a person for the blessed life. It contains a short list of ingredients: recognition that life is a product of nature, acceptance that we only live once, assurance that life is worth living, remembrance that terror is temporary; pleasure is inevitable.
That last one is actually really helpful in dealing with turmoil (that 4th doctrine), that pain is temporary. For me, it's a kind of spiritual mantra akin to "All Things Must Pass". No matter how bad things get, you're one step closer to the pleasurable goal of life. Even facing terminal conditions, as long as we still have awareness, we have power over our ability to choose to try to be chill.
So, I do actually flip around the Tetrapharmakos in my mind, along with a few memorable sayings.
They also really come in handy for discussions. Epíkouros provides us with some really great quips that immediately address a handful of very popular, very intellectually-lazy beliefs that are rearing their heads in the maze of a society consumed with media and technology. The bubbles of some of these ideas can be easily popped by posing things in an Epicurean light. For example:
Anyway, memorizing lines, propositions, and key points, like mantras, is a large part of the practice. In this group, I'd include anything related to capturing a higher resolution picture of the philosophy through studying ancient history, economics, or anything that helps advance your personal study.
(2) Then there are the gatherings. Like you mentioned, Eikas is the unifying one, but there are also holidays. As it turns out, celebrating one's birthday was not a common practice in ancient Greece, but was, at least, for a period, seen as a Persian import. Epíkouros prescribed the celebration of his own birthday, and observed celebrations for each of his family members, and his best friends, so the notion of having personal celebrations (which we commonly do as "Birthdays"), is categorically Epicurean. It's sort of a "gimme" in our culture, because of the coherence, but it is also on point.
We recognize major life events with feasts and celebrations, just like any other tradition. Weddings and funerals are universal, and we each co-opt them with our preferred spiritual flavor. There isn't, necessarily, a prescribed "New Human in the Community" ritual for Epicureans, though I'm not opposed to it (I mean something like a secular baptism). We don't have any specific
(3) Any kind of liberatory practice (like offering libations at the beginning of Eikas to the kathegemones) falls in this category. Maybe this comes in the form of setting aside a personal tithe, or donating. We support medical research efforts that will contribute to providing future cures for illnesses that affected our loved ones, and all of this is contextualized in a belief that reality is knowable, science if advanceable, cures are discoverable, and the one life each generation receives can be improved, so long as we all agree to abandon superstition and magical thinking.
Those are fairly ubiquitous practices that aren't specific to Epicureans, but, even if the currents of our culture shifted directions, I would still abide by these behaviors, to some degree.
(4) Ancient Epicureans made art and jewelry in the name of the tradition, and many of us here (check out Bryan's latest post for a perfect example) follow suit. I'm don't usually wear rings and necklaces, but I own a few t-shirts with the Hegemon's head, magnets, and other decor. That's a little more on the peripheral side of the art, and less to do with spiritual practice, but it still comes from a place of reflection and devotion and, I believe, let's us have our own historical expression to demonstrate the sort of experience we are having with the tradition in this period.
I've also got a few Epicurean tattoos. Just another example in the category of spiritual devotion.
everything you do is folded into the master plan of living happily according to Epicurus' worldview
I think Cassius really nails the main point, which is that everything we do, as a result of these deeply-help philosophical positions, is affected, guided, and directed by those beliefs. Otherwise, our lifestyles are all essentially the same. Most of us are paying too much for eggs, and burning more petroleum than we thought we would, and spending our days replacing tires and tying trash bags. It's usually only when it comes to Death, or something heavy, that the rest of the "religious crowd" properly invokes their religious identity. Otherwise, we're trying to find new places to put our plastic, convincing ourselves we're eating right, and consuming entertainment.
Posting an update to coins and rings I have been making, They are still a bit rough, but if anybody wants any, let me know. The necklaces and the coins are the easiest to make, and the Lucretius Trio ring is "on hold" at the moment (but I should be able to make more, somewhat better versions, soon).
AWESOME! 
Related question: How does a modern-day Epicurean reconcile a) the predominant theory that the universe has a beginning with b) the Epicurean idea that the universe has no beginning and end?
I'm glad you asked! 
From my perspective, the Epicurean kósmos (which is defined as having a beginning and an end) is most conceptually-similar with the contemporary "Observable Universe". I contrast that against that idea of the metakosmíos (which contains an infinite number of generative and decaying kósmoi), which, I think, is best exemplified by the hypothetical concept of a "multiverse".
For that reason, I've left kósmos untranslated in my recent project. It's not quite a "world", but it's not quite a "universe", and I think it might be best to keep each idea contextualized in its history. (The same, I think, is true of the modern word "atoms", which refers to divisible amalagamations).
I particularly like the etymology of κακόν because it has been thematically consistent for so many millennia: as a kid, whether it was friends in the Northeast, or South, or Appalachia, in the city, or the country, from any side of the tracks, everyone told their toddlers that gross things are "kaka".
It's silly, but also, it reinforces that this notion is foundational to how we understand the world. It seems almost like a pure preconception: bad is painful is unhealthy. 
I've finally got all of the Hegemon's works updated on the site.
We have a fresh translation of all of Epíkouros' completed works and some of his fragments.
I wonder if she believes that the Universe, itself, is responsible for creating her videos.
Most definitely! There are a ton of similarities, coherences, and explicit inspirations. As The Dude writes, "Dudeism is inspired by a lot of ancient philosophy. Probably the two most influential have been Epicureanism and Taoism. We’ve gone into great depths discussing Dudeism’s relationship to Taoism, but not so much in regards to Epicureanism." I collaborated with The Dude to compose a "Dudeist" version of the Letter to Menoeceus: https://dudeism.com/the-dudes-letter-to-menoeceus/
But I like this concept that Eikadistes made some time ago... I've made it as a plain symbol without words:
In the even that anyone else wants to play with the gibbous moon design, I'm happy to share with you high resolution versions of the wordless transparencies I created for the Hedonicon and elsewhere.
And, actually, just to piggy-back off of that, it has become a lot more clear to me why Lucretius chose the words he did (or coined them). He took the Hegemon's concepts and transposed them:
CORPORA — “first bodies” (Munro)
CORPORA MATERIAI — “elements of matter” (Munro)
CORPORA PRIMA — “first bodies” (Munro)
CORPORIBUS PRIMIS — “first bodies” (Munro)
CORPORIS — “first body” (Munro)
CORPVSCVLA MATERIAI — “the minute bodies of matter” (Munro)
ELEMENTA — “elements” (Munro)
ELEMENTAQUE PRIMA — “prime elements” (Munro)
ELEMENTIS — “elements” (Munro)
EXORDIA — “beginnings” (Munro)
EXORDIA PRIMA — “first-beginnings” (Munro)
EXORDIA RERVM — “beginnings of things” (Munro)
FIGVRAS — “elements” (Munro)
GENITALIA CORPORA — “begetting bodies” (Munro)
GENITALIA CORPORA REBVS — “begetting bodies of things” (Munro)
MATERIAI CORPORA — “bodies of matter” (Munro)
MATERIAI CORPORIBVS — “bodies of matter” (Munro)
MATERIEM RERVM — “matter of things” (Munro)
MATERIES AETERNA — “matter everlasting” (Munro)
MINVTIS PERQVAM CORPORIBVS — “exceedingly minute bodies” (Munro)
PRIMAS PARTIS — “primal parts” (Munro)
PRIMASQVE FIGVRAS — “primary elements” (Munro)
PRIMORDIA — “first-beginnings” (Munro)
PRIMORDIA CORPORE — “first elements” (Munro)
PRIMORDIA PRINCIPIORVM — “basic elements” (Humphries)
PRIMORDIA RERVM — “first beginnings of things” (Munro)
PRIMORDIAQVE — “firstlings” (Humphries)
PRIMORVM — “first things” (Munro)
PRINCIPIIS — “primary particles” (Smith)
PRINCIPIIS RERVM — “primary elements of things” (Smith)
PRINCIPIORVM — “primary elements” (Smith)
PRINCIPIORVM CORPORIBVS — “primary particles” (Melville)
PRINCIPIORVM CORPORIS ATQVE ANIMI — “the elements of the body and spirit” (Smith)
SEMINA — “seeds” (Munro)
SEMINA REBVS — “seeds of things” (Munro)
SEMINA RERVM — “seeds of things” (Munro)
SEMINAQVE — “seeds” (Smith)
SEMINE — “seed” (Munro)
SEMINIBVS — “seeds” (Munro)
SEMINIS — “seeds” (Munro)
For sure, I just shared the nominative, plural for the sake of consistency.
I recently made a discovery I wanted to share:
The Hegemon never really refers to particles as the noun “atoms” or “uncuttables“. He only ever uses a form of word átomos as an adjective. As many times as he refers to “uncuttable” parts, he equally refers to them as “countless”, “microscopic”, and “primordial”. Just as easily as we have adopted the term “atom”, we could just as easily say “mikron”, “ametabolon”, or “apeiron”. Still, two words from this Epicurean vocabulary survived history and contribute to contemporary jargon; those two words are “proton” and “lepton”. Otherwise, Epíkouros properly refers to these bits of matter as σπερμά (spermá, “seeds”), ᾰ̓ρχαί (ărkhaí, “beginnings”), σώματα (sṓmata, simple “bodies”), ὄγκοι (ónkoi, “hooks”), τομαί (tomaí, “splinters”), λεπτομερής (leptomerḗs, “fine parts”), λεπτοί (leptoí, “cents”), μόρια (mória, “motes”), and, most frequently, as μέρη (mérē) meaning “parts” or “particles”.
Those are my translations of them, anyway. Lepton is particularly cool, because is it used when referring to particles of the soul, and lepton is also a small unit of Greek currency, so it lends itself to the phrase "cents of consciousness." (... get it?) 
the widespread symbol in the ancient world that we know of was the image of Epicurus in stone, on cups, on rings, etc.
I do like the idea of a symbol reflecting the Hegemon, himself, in the spirit of consistency with the ancient tradition. This is what I came up with a while ago to place focus back on The Man:
This placement in 10.62 is interesting: he presents a scenario where the ἐπιβολὴν λαμβανόμενον τῇ διανοίᾳ (épibolēn lampanómenon têi dianoíai), the "apprehending being grasped [by] the intellect" ἐστι ἀληθές or "is true", verus it being false under dissimilar conditions.
More and more, it seems to me that there is no, true "Fourth Criterion" of the Kanon because Epíkouros, himself, writes that one such apprehension "is true" but another such "is false". However, that does not mean this, true apprehension is un-useful in having coherence with reality.
Also, based on the consistency with which this phrase is re-employed, combined with the naturalistic language he uses when making analogies, I think he supposes that thinking, itself, can reliably be said to be like a fisherman purposefully casting a net in meaningful directions to catch thoughts.
The caveat here is that anything that is capable of being generated, or destroyed can neither be an uncuttable particle, nor void nature. Otherwise, everything else is fair game.
Give that "Particles" + "Void = "The All", I might avoid using "all things", if we are to suppose the plethora of particles and the boundless void to be things among "all things".
