Is Kazaa distribution part of the answer? (was: Python and p2p)

[pedro alvarez]

claird at lairds.com (Cameron Laird) wrote in message news:<v42bvljb95lec1 at corp.supernews.com>...
> I'm not well acculturated; could someone make this more
> explicit for me?  I understand the claim to be that
> 1.  content available through Kazaa includes
>     the texts of books published conventionally
>     on dead trees

Only about 10/20% of ebooks are on dead trees. The rest are standard pdf's and 
chm's, which are easy to navigate. Trust me, i am 'experienced'


> VB and C# books are, in my experience, 
> often mediocre or worse, and they particularly don't work
> when read on a screen. 

True, vb and c# books are usually crap, they are mostly hastily assembled
pieces of toilet paper. The main culprit is M.S Press. Why cant they maintain
the same high standards as their sister companies excellent software products?
But there are a few good ones though.

 Or, Mr. Alvarez, are you saying
> that the programmers print out what they find on paper?
> Is that truly less expensive than ordering from the
> publisher?  I'm curious about such details.

Personally, i dont print out. I am used to studying e-books, and i completed
my MCSE's using only e-books. I actually prefer nicely bound paper books, and 
if i like the ebook version, i might buy the paper one if its on sale.

> 
> In any case, I'm very confident that there is absolutely
> no benefit to investing time straining to make Python more
> popular by publishing more books about it.  *None* of the
> c.l.p readers have a comparative advantage in *that* alter-
> native.
 
Well, there is the principle of the subconcious mind. The more something
is repeated to the mind, the much stonger it becomes. If crap like vb
can be famous because of the tremendous amt of material, how much more 
python?


> Writing Python books for profit, even through the secondary
> effect of promotion of a consultancy or other business, is
> ... problematic.  Believe me; I've accumulated plenty of
> evidence on this.

This can be fixed by the my point above. I have a good hunch
about that.

> 
> I summarize:  I think you're advocating that readers ought
> to write more Python books, because 
> 1.  this will encourage Python "uptake" in 
>     relatively poorer countries, and
> 2.  authors make money.
> I judge that both of these propositions apply only in very
> narrow circumstances.

The thing is, the more well known python is, the more of those hacks
who produce vb books will turn and start noticing, and they will themselves
start hacking out python books, and increase its popularity.