Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Books Python

Remirroring Mark Pilgrim's Sites 46

Posted by timothy
from the yeoman's-effort dept.
First time accepted submitter ServerCobra writes "Last week, Mark Pilgrim 'pulled down his popular 'Dive Into...' sites. I remirrored a couple of them, because they are far too helpful and important to lose. DiveIntoPython.net, DiveIntoPython3.net, and DiveIntoHTML5.net."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Remirroring Mark Pilgrim's Sites

Comments Filter:
  • by msauve (701917) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @03:17PM (#37705144)
    was this done with his permission? He presumably holds the copyright, and took them down for reasons apparently only known to himself.
    • Re:And... (Score:5, Informative)

      by sakdoctor (1087155) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @03:18PM (#37705164) Homepage

      The Work shall remain online under the CC-BY-3.0 License

    • by Millennium (2451)

      As evidenced by the licenses they were released under, yes.

  • I see a generic Copyright notice below, though other licenses are scattered throughout.

    So how is this not food for the Copyright brigade?

    • by Java Pimp (98454)

      From the book [diveintopython.net]:

      Permission is granted to copy, distribute, and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in Appendix G, GNU Free Documentation License.

  • It's the ultimate backup.

    • A copyleft licence is better.

  • http://diveintohtml5.info/table-of-contents.html [diveintohtml5.info]

    Domain Name:DIVEINTOHTML5.INFO
    Created On:05-Oct-2011 03:34:16 UTC

    Domain: diveintohtml5.net
    Registration Date: 2011-10-10

  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @03:40PM (#37705430)

    The license those "Dive Into..." sites use explicitly allows exactly this sort of mirroring - so I can't see Mark Pilgrim raising a ruckus.

    It sounds like he didn't just pull down those sites - he's removed pretty much every piece of his web-based presence. I can understand that - although he has given no explanation for his actions, I know from experience (albeit on a much smaller scale) when you put informational documents online for free the support demands made by the wider world can be pretty overwhelming. If he chose to throw up his hands and say "enough!", I can't blame him. But I am glad someone is taking action to keep these resources available while following the intent stated by the original author.

  • I remember bookmarking his Python pages online, and I thought to myself, "Awesome, this is, like, the future, man. I'm not going to download it all and keep a hard copy, I can just access it anytime. The future is, like, now, dude." Wholly my own fault, but I feel strangely... weird. My cloud-faith is... shaken. Maybe I should start printing out all my emails like it's 1993...
  • Good thing I wget'd -r -U'd all his stuff.
  • Don't know about the rest of the 'Dive Into...' sites, but the world may be actually better off without the Python site, if we are to believe this blog [oppugn.us]:

    "Beginners see this and think that Python is complex and hard when it's actually one of the few languages designed to be easy to use. It's a damn shame they run into this book first.
    (...)
    This is for a first program? When beginners are told "go read Dive Into Python" they run into examples like this and get discouraged. I could see if Mr. Pilgrim had a giant

    • by opposabledumbs (1434215) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @09:36PM (#37709224)
      A blog post written by Zed Shaw, author of the web-book/e-book/html guide Learn Python the Hard Way , which you can have a look at here:

      http://learnpythonthehardway.org/ [learnpytho...ardway.org]

      Don't think this is a neutral point of view. Dive into Python tends to come up before Learn Python the Hard Way in most searches, and I think that could have something to do with that opinion.

      I've used both, and in my opinion, both have a strong case for existence.

      • Having said that, I do think Zed's stuff is better for me as a beginner. But I can't claim to be the same as everyone else.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Yes, Zed Shaw's stuff is better for a beginner. Particularly a very young one with a severe lack of maturity (but perhaps great bow staff skills.) Why that pipsqueak's juvenile rantings caused Mark Pilgrim such distress is beyond me though.

  • by bcrowell (177657) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @11:02PM (#37709860) Homepage

    I run a site that catalogs books that have intentionally been made free by their authors (see my sig). By far the majority of such books are just free-as-in-beer, not free-as-in-speech.

    The half-life of the free-as-in-beer books seems to be something like 5 years. That's about how long it typically takes before the author takes them down off the web, and they are lost forever. (This is not just like a printed book going out of print. These books are typically not sitting around in libraries. That means they're as lost as a lost play by Aristophanes.)

    Free-as-in-beer books are different. The beautiful thing about copyleft licensing is that once you provide the world with the gift of a piece of copylefted information, it's free forever. It basically doesn't matter at all that Mark Pilgrim has taken down his web site. Because his books are free-as-in-speech, his valuable contributions to the digital commons are still out there, making people's lives better.

    We would all be a lot richer if more people could be convinced of what a good thing copyleft licenses are. When it comes to books, the problem seems to be that people underestimate how hard it is to do commercially successful writing. They have this illusion that they're going to make all kinds of money from their wonderful book, and they see copyleft licensing as being incompatible with that. The hard truth is that even a good, well-written book is seldom significantly profitable.

    • by tehcyder (746570)

      We would all be a lot richer if more people could be convinced of what a good thing copyleft licenses are. When it comes to books, the problem seems to be that people underestimate how hard it is to do commercially successful writing. They have this illusion that they're going to make all kinds of money from their wonderful book, and they see copyleft licensing as being incompatible with that. The hard truth is that even a good, well-written book is seldom significantly profitable.

      Yes, but once you have no copyright restrictions at all, then no book is even slightly profitable (at least for the author)..

      • by Kidbro (80868)

        While GP used the word "Copyleft", I'm suspecting he actually meant to include licenses such as Creative Commons - under which successful (as in profitable for the author) commercial works have been released.

      • by bcrowell (177657)

        Yes, but once you have no copyright restrictions at all, then no book is even slightly profitable (at least for the author)..

        Two misconceptions here: (1) Copyleft is not the same as having no copyright restrictions at all. Copyleft means using a license such as CC-BY-SA. (2) Copyleft is not incompatible with profit. My own physics textbooks, for example, are copylefted and profitable for me. (I make money from ads on my web site, but other authors of copylefted books have other ways of making a buck.)

        • ...other authors of copylefted books have other ways of making a buck.)

          Hot chicks read my book, and then I make a fortune selling my "genetic material injection service" to them. It pays a lot more than paltry royalties, and it's good fun when they opt for the "direct injection" service, which I offer at half the price of the standard in vitro service.

          In all seriousness, if I had it all to do over again, I'd probably choose a copyleft license for my book. You can't make a lot of money with books like this, and once they get tied up in all these contracts and licensing agree

  • I'll go download Mendel Cooper's bash programming guide I've used countless times, just in case.
    http://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/ [tldp.org]

    • Thanks for the useful link. It looks very informative and nothing like as large a download as I feared

      (Not yet had my third coffee of the day, I assumed tldp stood for "too long; didn't print")

What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying. -- Nikita Khruschev

Working...