On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 07:13:44 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Kwpolska <kwpol...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 6:25 PM, <ru...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:09:53 AM UTC-7, Kwpolska wrote: >>>>>[...] >>>>> PS. please do not use pastebin.com. >>>> >>>> Why? [...] > I don't understand the idea behind the boycott. Are people worried about > the longevity of linked-to content, in the event that pastebin should, > as you say, cease to exist tomorrow? Or is it that some won't click a > pastebin link in case it's abusive? This isn't the sort of abuse that > can compromise your computer.
How do you know? Between javascript and flash, just about any browser could be vulnerable to just about any website. You might implicitly trust Pastebin, but you can't possibly *know* that the site won't do bad things. It wouldn't be the first time that even a reputable website got hacked by somebody who used it to deploy malware. But that's not why I dislike Pastebin. I argue against Pastebin because: 1) Longevity of the content. Your question is going to be around for much, much longer than your pastebin. People searching for help will click through to the pastebin and find the code is gone. It is really frustrating to (say) search for the solution to a problem, and find that the answer is given in an expired pastebin. 2) When you ask for help via email, you shouldn't assume that the people reading have access to the web. Perhaps they have email access, but all or part of the web is blocked to them. Perhaps they are reading email on a mobile device and don't mind paying to download a couple of KB of email, but draw the line at (potentially) hundreds of KB of a web page plus associated images, unnecessary javascript, web bugs, advertisements, etc. Or maybe they just don't want the context switch: "I'm reading email right now, I'll click the link later..." Email is a push technology. A pastebin is a pull technology. Whenever you require your audience to actively go and get content, you're cutting your audience by some fraction. I am aware that it is irrational and silly, but for me it also has to do with a sense of fairness. I'm prepared to spend tens of minutes, or sometimes even an hour or more, solving somebody else's problem for no benefit except a sense of accomplishment. But ask me to click on a pastebin to find out what that question is, and I'm all "Why should I have to go out of my way to find out what your question is? You're asking me to do you a favour, and you're making me work to find out what the favour is??? Fuck you!" But maybe that's just me :-) I'm not saying "never use a paste bin". I think it probably makes lots of sense to use one in IRC, where it is inappropriate to paste more than a line or two of code at once, and the conversation is already ephemeral. But in a Usenet or email forum, I think it is almost always inappropriate to use paste bins. If your code is too large to paste directly in the body of your email, chances are it is too large to expect people to debug for you. But you can try adding it as an attachment (.py, not .doc), and only if you can't do that for some reason, then maybe a paste bin is appropriate. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
