11–20 of 20 posts
It looks like the bug was reported by someone named "Alan", yet it doesn't look like any of the authors of those books have that name. So possibly just disgruntled third party pointing out the piracy.
62 up-votes on this link so far, #1 on HN, and it's not even true. A good title goes a long way.
It looks like the bug was reported by someone named "Alan", yet it doesn't look like any of the authors of those books have that name. So possibly just disgruntled third party pointing out the piracy.
62 up-votes on this link so far, #1 on HN, and it's not even true. A good title goes a long way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
62 up-votes on this link so far, #1 on HN, and it's not even true. A good title goes a long way.
Why is it not true; the bug reporter never claims to be the author, just notes that the book isn't owned by the repo owner (those names don't match) and that the ebook is most likely pirated. If it is not pirated, and wright.edu has access to the Thomson course technology materials, then distributing/making available publicly is certainly a violation of the epub license agreement.
Looks like the repo has been taken down now
At my university I haven't seen anything this egregious, but students will use Google Code or GitHub for course projects, ignoring that they are public. I used BitBucket's free private hosting for a recent project, and GitHub is great about supporting students if they just ask.
Quick takedown by Google. Lucky for the student, as he was easily identifiable through his .edu email address on the project. At my university I haven't seen anything this egregious, but students will use Google Code or GitHub for course projects, ignoring that they are public. I used BitBucket's free private hosting for a recent project, and GitHub is great about supporting students if they just ask.
I've read that they give out private repositories for school projects, but they haven't replied to a request I've opened 2 or 3 days ago. I got a paid account because I needed the repository today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe people upvote it because of the content, not because of who made it ? If it turns out it's one of the publishers (or even a fan) instead of the author, this bug report will still be just as awesome.
Maybe. But I'm pretty sure it was upvoted because of the sensationalist title.