Thoughts on Mark “diveintomark” Pilgrim's and _why's infosuicides (2011)
hanselman.com
hanselman.com
He is the original author of the ion window manager[1] and had what, in my opinion, were very strong and thought provoking opinions and attitudes on software development, interfaces ... and even mice and keyboards.
I was very sorry that he stopped his public writing and even more sorry that he took down the blog and all of his previous posts[2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_(window_manager)
[2] sort-of-archive: https://tuomov.bitcheese.net/
His experiences on receiving bug reports from patched versions of Ion distributed by debian(?) was my first real exposure to the idea that distributions aren't just distributing software.
Checking now -- I'm glad to see there've been efforts to collect Taco's work on YouTube -- You Are a Chef [1] is one of the most well known and accessible (which spawned a text adventure of the same name); Dorito Song [2] is one of my favorites.
Here [3] I found a compilation, which unfortunately and sadly states that the artist behind Taco, one Morgan Vogel, died by suicide a few years ago. RIP Morgan, Taco will forever hold a place in my psyche.
[1] https://youtu.be/4MmFqhMdx28
Ask HN: Anyone know where Mark Pilgrim went? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3073798
Searching for Mark Pilgrim https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3073842
IMHO Deleting everything invites drama. If you don't want it just post a one line "I'm on a break from Internet" message
If they didn’t feel like having an online identity anymore then they’ve got every right to delete[0] themselves.
I think the whole “expectation” that free content is persistent forever and someone is supposed to keep it reliably hosted and/or keep pumping stuff out is another fucked up byproduct of the modern internet, so much expectations from people who aren’t contributing anything financially or materially. It’s why YouTubers have mental breakdowns, bloggers snap and wipe their blogs, open source contributors close their projects, etc etc. Having a public identity has massive pressures.
[0] Effectiveness of that based on archives/crawlers/etc is a whole other discussion.
Which was why people called the police. They thought he was potentially going to kill himself. Because this is the sort of thing people do before committing suicide.
Also this stuff was all in his own name and built up over years. Not a short-term alias he'd used for a few months.
I don't understand the question. Do you think curiosity is based on entitlement?
The idea that these occasions violate some unwritten moral/social contract of the Web is strange to me also. I understand the inconvenience (which is proving to be short-lived with regard to the mirrors that appear afterward), but I greater empathize with the act of revolting against a medium that abstracts the social sciences beyond what humans were prepared for prior to its inception.
The unfortunate consequence is that concerned checking in doesn't scale well, and is indistinguishable from mob action to the person being checked in on. (Which is how it played out, if I remember right). So even though the person certainly doesn't owe anyone an explanation, it can be in their own best interests to provide enough of one to curtail concern.
>The fact that instances such as Pilgrim's and _why's are referred to as a form of "death" itself is telling. Why even strike such a grave association to begin with?
It's a pretty silly metaphor, in my opinion. Quitting my casual basketball team.. sportsuicide? It makes it difficult to take seriously any views that follow such excessive exaggeration.
What didn't help _why or mark pilgrim was the seemingly universal praise. Their work was too quirky to be very popular. e.g. Dive Into Python's choice of roman numeral conversion as an exercise. Also Mark must've felt like a fish out of water at IBM.
Huh?
Dissapearenace aside, he is (or was) a programmer, writer and blogger, with quite regular opinions, not some quirky magical writer of whimsy.
I can understand _why_'s fox-ladden guide to Ruby to be considered "quirky" but there's nothing quirky about Dive Into Python, I can't even understand how one would get that idea (I'd consider the thought itself quirky!).
And how is the choice of "roman numeral conversion as an exercise" quirky in any way? As far as programming exercises go, it's quite standard and straightforward.
People are likely to know a little about roman numerals (if not from anything else, from movie and game titles using roman numerals), and there's a mapping with well defined rules between roman and decimal representations.
Oh, and Dive into Python was quite popular, and it was even put in print (both editions), iirc from Apress. Mark had also written a few books for O'Reilly, back when doing so was kind of a bigger deal.
I bought a physical copy of Dive into Python. Gave it up after one or two chapters and just bought dabeaz's reference instead.
I'm not the only one with a negative reaction towards the choice of Roman numerals!
Don't know if you're a new programmer, but command line based examples, that are neither websites nor games nor visual, are the norm in almost every programming book, including almost all Python books.
This idea that Dive Into Python was somehow an exception or "quirky" because it didn't have examples of visual programs ("websites or games"), is entirely out of touch with programming books.
(And of course, dabeaz's reference is a different thing altogether, and even further away from "something visual; website or game maybe").
Roman numeral conversion is not one of those. Neither, for example is SICP's example of Newton-Raphson.
I don't want to bang on about it. They're fine books. Just could have used an better editor or some other constructive advice to make it less niche and more relatable.
FWIW I also bought Learning Python which was meh, and Python Cookbook which is directly useful.
enjoy them while you can. don't take them for granted. you never know when they'll be gone.