Mr Dalio provides a straightforward overview of things that have worked magically for him and his firm. He is terrifically astute, extremely structureMr Dalio provides a straightforward overview of things that have worked magically for him and his firm. He is terrifically astute, extremely structured and even more articulate. He does not hesitate in verbalizing principles he believes in. Unlike so many other similar books, the author does not run in circles through a string of qualifiers. Mr Dalio's principles are logically consistent and his faith in their working is founded on the outstanding financial successes of him/his firm (one cannot doubt the success of Bridgewater and Mr Dalio although one may argue the drivers).
The downside of a single track discussion is that the book is unable to look at the limited applicability of its principles. Many of the principles are unworkable not just in governments, NGOs like they cannot be in schools or families (these extreme comparisons only to indicate the non-universality) but also in multinationals, manufacturing firms, firms that require many low skilled workers that are abundant and where the likely issues are other than the search for skills, organizations that have to work with communities and labour laws, companies that have multiple offices/units where standardization is critical and so on. There are firms that span generations where it is far less about the product/investment/marketing skillset of one or a few at the top.
In fact, attracting the best skills on the principles outlined here may not work in financial firms in many other parts of the world where people would rather pen down despite the compensation than be openly analyzed by their juniors or openly criticized by the seniors. If a firm is no longer as successful as the author's or unable to pay the top Dollar at the outset, the drain on account of highly stressful culture could prove far more damaging for some.
It is great to have organizations, like any group units, where a set of clear principles prove sufficient for success. In reality, the life - including corporate life - is too varied to be lived as rigidly as the rulebook provided here. ...more
Despite numerous flaws, this is a great book to read for multiple reasons. Complex systems are different in details, but most, if not all, of them havDespite numerous flaws, this is a great book to read for multiple reasons. Complex systems are different in details, but most, if not all, of them have a certain commonality in their structures because of the self-similar nature of its smaller parts. The book logically shows how the larger constructs of these lego-like blocks lead to contraptions that may appear massively different in all ordinary ways, but they retain certain important basic characteristics, which this reviewer would continue to refer to as commonalities. These commonalities of different systems built on self-similar blocks themselves have something common - called Scale mathematically.
Scale effectively means that as self-similar structures expand to build larger structures, most of the evolving inherent or emergent characteristics would follow a mathematical growth pattern that is not linear but exponential. The exponentiality could be sublinear (rapidly converging) or superlinear. And, this is true for natural phenomenon like life (or species), evolutionary human constructs like cities or even conscious artificial constructs like companies.
This wonderful book has countless nuggets of new information as it expounds on the underlying scale laws that are rarely explained in almost any other popular non-fiction books of any kind. More importantly, the author goes on to explain why the power or scale laws come into play rather than simply point to their existence.
For instance, the scaling follows quarter-power exponents - or growth equations with exponents like 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.25 - in many underlying patterns of life (across species). The author has ingenious logical arguments emanating from the three dimensions of our spatial presence to explain why. Such clear reasonings are not present elsewhere - for example, the rationale behind the Dunbar number is quite weak. And, no attempt is made to explain why city characteristics follow a power scaling of 0.15 up or down (ie, 1.15 or 0.85).
The flaws in the work are numerous, as stated earlier. The author rarely explains the statistical strengths of the fittings arrived at. Academic critics of the book's conclusions have most doubts on the data and equations that the book presents as inviolate. The authors jump from biology to cities to corporates as the three main organisms following the scale laws appear whimsical or at best, an accidental result of the author's own academic career. The last section - where the author provides his own rather subjective and disjointed rant against singularity, big data and AI - not only is indulgent but also may make readers wonder if similar preconceived views are also at the roots of other conclusions presented in the book.
While some readers would find the shortcomings in analysis, conclusions and style jarring, the focus should be on the book's unique analysis and pathbreaking important conclusions - all presented in a way almost all will be able to understand. ...more
Time is a complex subject without satisfactory answers. These inherent aspects of the topic hurt the book's utility.
Time poses different challenges whTime is a complex subject without satisfactory answers. These inherent aspects of the topic hurt the book's utility.
Time poses different challenges when viewed from different theoretical angles. It is a subject studied in great detail philosophically (including spiritually) and scientifically for millenias. The book tries to summarise some of these characteristics but does not even scratch the surface. Excellent popular books are written on these sides of time. Anyone who has read such works is likely to find the relativity, entropy-driven, history-centric or spiritual discussions in this book highly perfunctory.
The book title promises discussions from psychological and neurological angles. The author is a specialist here and his expertise provides illuminating insights when the book sticks to this core objective. The author argues that our brain is a clock with some memory in a sense: it stores past information, processes them as needed to help us get more out of the present and the future. The way this clock has evolved, it is imprecise compared to the mechanical clocks humans have designed but functional enough to help us survive.
The author has some great nuggets all through in these discussions. For example, our brain clock differs from the computer clock in the most basic way: computer clocks execute processes in terms of the number of full cycles while the brain clock does operations within one full cycle. Research studies to throw light on the extent of impreciseness of our body clock(s - there are many different varieties) make some fascinating readings.
And yet, the subject matter renders most conclusions highly ambivalent and practically of limited use. They come in the way of making the book better than it is....more
A must read book with a remarkably short shelf-life!
CRISPR-Cas9 could prove to be the biggest innovation of our time, which is full of astonishing devA must read book with a remarkably short shelf-life!
CRISPR-Cas9 could prove to be the biggest innovation of our time, which is full of astonishing developments in the fields of AI, robotics, solar, autonomous vehicles, block chain, VR and many others.
And, this is about the first popular book written on this monumental and yet esoteric discovery (also by one of the field's pioneers). The pace at which the field is changing is bound to make the book outdated in months. Far better explanations are going to flood the market too as others have a crack at explaining what this technology is. Even the long-winded moral/ethical discussions that fill the book towards the end will evolve fairly quickly.
Yet, the authors' audacious explanatory work should be read to understand where it all began. That there are naturally occurring viral DNA strands that could be used to precisely locate a region of DNA, which could then be altered at will (none of these precisely true yet) is actually true is lesser of the marvels. That we have science and scientists who actually uncover all this and are able to manipulate deserves the bigger gasp. It would be one of those mother of all understatements to state that the implications of what is being achieved in this field are far-reaching. Effectively, unless this entire gene editing technic is proven to be a Y2K-like hoax for whatever reason, life is never going to be the same. Literally.
So for all the faults, here is a must read book until the next ones begin to emerge!...more
The Invention of Science, a scholarly work, is written for a purpose quite different from the understanding it provides to most readers who are not exThe Invention of Science, a scholarly work, is written for a purpose quite different from the understanding it provides to most readers who are not experts in the field.
The author is a master of the field. Many of his arguments are counterpoints to positions taken by other renowned experts. These may be critical but subtleties are going to be beyond the comprehension of the rest. The enormous amount of details provided could be important for those in the field, but lay readers do not have the advantage of the supporting evidence or criticisms used by those being countered. As a result, the details get overwhelming every so often through the book.
Yet, the book is a fascinating work. To explain its unintended utility, let me use the example of an era our generation knows - information revolution. The similarities are definitely not precise - for example, meaningful developments were over a span of decades and centuries during what is later defined as the scientific revolution era while for us major innovation leaps happened in months and years. Still, such an example would help. Say, a later day historian is writing a book called The Invention of Digitization, language of the time - which could freely include the words like apps, browsing/search, GPUs or cloud - can fully explain the the zig-zag path through which 8084 processors, floppy disks, FTPs, GUIs, modems etc this world evolved.
What Galileo, Columbus and all the discoverers of those eras did was quite different not only from their viewpoints but also from ours. Of course, they told us about gravity and showed the way to America but they discovered "discovery". They started multiple new paths of inquiry and processes that have shaped our sciences, learning and technology ever since. What constitutes a theory or a hypothesis, the roles played by evidences, the importance of facts, the falsifiability and accumulation of rational knowledge - these are some of a large number of topics discussed in a fascinating way in this book.
This is not an easy book. So many arguments would appear overly pedantic for non-experts. Or simply a gibberish intended for another expert in the field who is not in agreement. Yet, for the patient, the book throws flashlight on the times that sparked something immense for the humanity, and mostly in the language or methods of that time rather than those of the later days....more
Human brain is about the single most important organ for life on this planet as of now. Even as a large number of us develop aAn absolute must listen.
Human brain is about the single most important organ for life on this planet as of now. Even as a large number of us develop an ever deeper understanding of subjects ranging from the big bang and black holes to artificial intelligence or genetics, what we - the non-experts - understand about human brains is pitifully low. Neuroscience is not only extremely incomplete but enormously complicated when explained in the standard, theoretical ways. Too many terms with exotic names, almost no logical/deductive explanation streams make explanations about the working of this organ nothing but a long string of facts that exist without any rhyme or reason.
The lecture series is a wonderful exception to the usual drudgery. The lecturer creates crisp narratives to impart great learnings without allowing things to get complicated almost ever. This series makes it possible to appreciate the working of brains without having to learn the underlying, immensely complex biochemistry. Yes, some of the debunked myths are too simplistic and some appear like artificially-propped strawmen to make stories, but almost every section offers valuable insights. And the lecturer is warmingly humorous and charmingly self-deprecating.
This series is far and away the easiest read/listen on neuroscience for a lay reader like me and remarkably, it still does not appear to have compromised on the learning quotient. ...more
I Contain Multitudes is a highly readable book on an important but rarely mentioned subject. However, this is about a budding and highly incomplete scI Contain Multitudes is a highly readable book on an important but rarely mentioned subject. However, this is about a budding and highly incomplete science - as a result, most of its conclusions are tentative even if highly tantalizing.
Our body has 30 trillion cells, and 39 trillion microbes. This simple fact is rarely mentioned, let alone its implications discussed, in most books on genetics. While we are rightly told that every animal's key traits are shaped by the genome and its interactions with the environment, animal behavior and evolution are also at least somewhat guided by the microbiome inside. This is one key and early conclusion of the book.
The author argues that every animal being (not just every animal specie) is an island of unique microbes that thrive and evolve differently. The variety of microbes on an animal depends on what it inherits, imbibes from the environment and subsequently as a result of the evolution of microbes within the animal lifetime. In an extreme view, in the perpetually evolving world of microbes (bacterias in particular), animal bodies are another vehicles to keep progressing in a multitude of ways (animal bodies are not only fertile grounds for their evolution but animals also spread their diaspora including interplanetary through humans and its contraptions!).
Microbes are responsible for most of our diseases, which is well known. And they are responsible for breaking down our food, another reasonably well-known fact. But, they play vital roles in countless other things: from building and nurturing our immune system to even psychologically caused mood swings. For other plants and animals, bacterias in the body play role in not just elongating life but survival. The author shows tens of examples from squids to coral reefs and even the wild animals of Africa to make this point. Bacterias also play a huge role in the inorganic world because of their ability to synthesize various chemicals. They are responsible for the environment our earth has, starting from all the oxygen that surrounds us.
Humans and human sciences have not paid sufficient attention to microbes so far. We have likely caused immense harm by thinking about them simplistically as mostly disease-carrying germs. This is finally changing. Positively, there is an exciting period ahead as microbe studies could solve many problems in the decades ahead. Negatively, for the book at least, most of its conclusions appear sweeping statements of hope and not much more!...more
Behaviour is complicated. "Behave" explains it to the extent never attempted in popular books until now.
Most books on our behaviour, including those bBehaviour is complicated. "Behave" explains it to the extent never attempted in popular books until now.
Most books on our behaviour, including those by path-breaking behavioural theorists, psychologists, sociologists and similar, shade a lot of light on our behavioural quirks. Through laboratory experiments and studies/examples of other kinds, they create numerous aha moments while revealing the not-so-obvious. However, such books rarely explore biophysical or biochemical phenomena that give rise to our actions.
"Behave" excels in exactly this. And that is also where many readers will fail the author! The underlying factors of our behaviour are not only environment or history dependent (as the book explains hundreds of times) but enormously complicated even if one simply tries to understand the scientific components and their interplays. Our brain's tens of biologically classified parts and neurones, hormones, neurotransmitters, proteins, cells, genes etc supporting interactions between them and other body parts are difficult to follow for anyone but experts. The author must be commended for making most things understandable while one is ploughing through. That said, few readers are likely to be able to summarise any of the newly learned concepts from the book a few days, if not minutes or hours, down the line.
Effectively, one needs a lot of training and years of subject mastery to truly understand the topics covered here. Learning how brain works through books like these is more difficult than learning quantum physics in a similar fashion. Unlike the esoteric science of the small, brain matters do not involve crazy mathematical equations. Yet, the science of words is more complicated because of the complexity of each of the hundreds of its most basic terms.
Yet, this is a tour de force. Anyone who soldiers on despite whatever is not understood at any stage will still find nuggets of wisdom, highly relevant in real life, all through. What one fails to understand is simply because of the underlying complexity. Whatever one is made to understand is this book's sheer force....more
Kim Philby was a bundle of contradictions. Episodes involving the biggest known double agent sort of defined the most cunning aspects of the agencies Kim Philby was a bundle of contradictions. Episodes involving the biggest known double agent sort of defined the most cunning aspects of the agencies running the Cold War. Ben Macintyre weaves a pitch perfect narrative around this most engaging of the real-life tale of deceits and counter-deceits.
The author walks through the facts from the viewpoint of a friendship - the friendship between Philby and his colleague Nick Elliot. The perspective allows him to describe emotions of the people involved in this historic cloak and dagger narrative. This humanisation works beautifully in subjectivising the well known facts although with unverifiable and suspect veracity.
The best part of the book is its vivification of the era: the text enlivens cold realities of bloody confrontations designed, won, lost or avoided at various spots through the world in those couple of decades. It also helps that the author does not play up vilification of the double agents nor exaggerate stupidity or intelligence of their exposers. ...more
Despite innumerable flaws, the book is worth reading for its rare material on an important topic - one that is becoming critically important right at Despite innumerable flaws, the book is worth reading for its rare material on an important topic - one that is becoming critically important right at this moment.
North Korea is the world's biggest enigma. A lot of what the society is today is because of the events that shaped Kim Il Sung. His story is not as fascinating as it is important to understand what lies at the root of its current leader's paranoia.
In a way, the fighter pilot story is completely out of place in the book. It has absolutely no relevance to the main Kim's saga (or if the pilot story is the main one, Kim's adventures and misadventures described in the book had no relevance). A reader might not be forgiven to conclude that the author used all the available material just to make it a short book sized paper. Such is the paucity of available literature on that era's North Korea.
In a strange way though, (and mostly unintentional), the pilot story permits humanization of exotic events in that unknown world. It could have been done differently - either through the interviews of many, many more from those to moved to S Korea at the time or even through the tales of American and the Chinese soldiers' war stories. The path chosen is lazy and yet it does help vivify the impregnable world.
The book ends strangely as well. Rather than providing a short discourse on today's North Korean ideologies (or even posing those unanaswerable questions on how such a poor and knowledge deficient society is able to hack the latest computers globally or have some wherewithals to develop nuclear arsenals that could even reach the US) or the future ahead, it fades away discussing Pilot No's mostly unremarkable life after reaching S Korea.
But for the rarity of the material on the topic, this is a poorly written discourse. But because of the same rarity, it is a good read....more
Complicated science has rarely been explained so lucidly. Despite all the other flaws that result from this style, this is a must read for not just thComplicated science has rarely been explained so lucidly. Despite all the other flaws that result from this style, this is a must read for not just those beginning their reading journey in popular science but also readers like me that have read these subjects for years and possibly also theoretical scientists.
The author has a rare gift of explaining the most difficult both simply and importantly tersely. His explanations of relativity and quantum mechanic concepts (about whom this reviewer has read a lot) too provided fresh and remarkable insights almost continuously. In fact, the same can be said about his descriptions of Greek and classical scientific theories. The book's highest utility is when it moves to the description of quantum loop theory, and the author's ability to explain does not falter even a bit despite the concepts getting far more exotic.
In a way (and this is certainly not in author's words), the infinities that destroy the compatibility between relativity and quantum theories are eliminated by quantizing the space-time itself. A removal of the continuum, or in other words a "zero", helps remove the other extreme (infinities) too. In a way, the author beautifully describes how time itself does not exist in these theories while a space-quanta are simply the nodes of the intersecting gravitational field lines/loops. And everything exists only with relation to each other and never in isolation. There are sections on thermodynamics (through heat rather than the commonly used entropy parameter) and information (Shannon's definition used in the quantum sense).
The book is extremely short despite amazingly wide scope. This immensely raises its appeal for most readers even though almost everyone will decry what it did not cover or explained less adequately. The author presents the loop theory nearly as assertively as the twentieth century's two giant theories despite the scientific community completely divided on its validity. Most importantly, there are factual errors as mentioned by many reviewers throughout the book, although they were not apparent to me.
This is one of those few books I would certainly like to get back to despite the continuous advances in theories and also the general improvement trend in books of this kind. I don't think this one can be bettered easily....more
From Bacteria to Bach is a well-written, serious book on philosophy that makes some of the most intricate mind and matter issues accessible to generalFrom Bacteria to Bach is a well-written, serious book on philosophy that makes some of the most intricate mind and matter issues accessible to general readers.
One may not agree with some, or even most of the conclusions drawn by the author. Yet, one cannot but applaud the rationale he lays bare behind them. More importantly, the book would make most people think and help arrive at their own beliefs. This is perhaps the biggest utility of this work.
For example, the author beautifully shows how consciousness is not a binary phenomenon but possibly a continuum. This reviewer started thinking in the "continuum" terms for something totally different: natural selection versus intelligent design. This is something completely unintended in the book as the author emphasises his totally different conclusions to some other ends.
Based on what the author shows, natural selection - in my view and words - is a statistical weeding out process borne out of randomness and mutation, that shapes and is shaped by the survival and thriving of those (however defined) that have the best chance (fitness however defined). The author contrasts this bottom-up process without any goal or foresight against the top-down intelligent process, where a designer intentionally creates something towards some intention or goal. A Bach creation is a designed, conscious process in some respect versus a virus that mutates to turn cancerous. This distinction is used with many nuiances to make significant philosophical points and draw real life lessons in the book including the need not to worry about the AI.
Yet, this reader wonders whether what is deemed as design at some deep level is anything but "natural selection" of memes where the statistical weeding out happens rapidly and the healthiest memes are captured and developed quicker than in some other systems or by some other human beings. In a basic sense, almost all biological and even cultural developments could be defined as a natural selection based evolution where intelligence is nothing but a super-fast elimination/selection engine (because of good perceptors or memory banks or similar).
A view down this line will add to the materialistic conclusions against free will or consciousness or even mind/body dualism - types of conclusions the author will not have too many problems with. Yet, it would also imply why we - the carbon based entities - are also nothing but machines of some kind in this evolving world where the pace of selection is continuously accelerating ever since the dawn of the biological universe. Stretching this further, selection acceleration is now spurred by us through the creation of some silicon or other material based entities that evolve without foresight at a pace that makes us unworthy and redundant in no time - and again without foresight or any intention but still evolving.
This is a book that shies away from conclusions of this kind explicitly even while seeding similar points (that evolution owes humanity nothing). Many may have objections to the excessive, almost fundamentalist support for the vague concept of memes. Some may have problems with other discussion points. It is quite likely - as is always the case with any good book on philosophy - that nobody agress with the author on everything. Yet, this is a great book that talks about concepts that are important yet esoteric, in a common-man language but without trivialization. ...more
Despite a clear apparent premise as per the title, the book lacked a clear theme in this reader's opinion.
There is a blindingly obvious fact: human beDespite a clear apparent premise as per the title, the book lacked a clear theme in this reader's opinion.
There is a blindingly obvious fact: human beings are now more connected to each other than ever. This particular argument is so indisputable that any stats on how networked we are now versus societies in any other era are likely to impress none. Our interconnectivity, whether through traded goods, travel, physical "meeting places" (like cities, economic zones, marketplaces etc), voice media or social media, has changed beyond what anyone imagined at any point even about a decade ago.
The book's main problem is what it does with a theme so wide and indescribable, which is nothing because it tries too much! After some interesting points on how maps could be done differently compared to our most garden variety ones, the book hops from one topic to the next without any purpose. Within topics, one is hit with a series of facts and opinions, again without any clear direction or narrative arc. Amongst the plethora of things discussed, some turn out to be interesting for sure. Aha moments too spring up every now and then as well either because of lesser-known factoids or the conclusions drawn but these are few and far in between.
The author has sections on supply chains, and cities, and economic zones, and infrastructure, and internet, and at least a handful others. Ironically, this book on Connectography is unable to provide decent connections between the topics discussed. The disjointed nature is mainly because of the lack of framework and narrative backbone. In a way, the vast cover provided by "Connectography" is used by the author not only discuss whatever he fancied but also conclude and value-judge with little relevant analysis. It must be emphasised that there is a lot in between that most readers will find new and interesting, and that is a definite positive....more
The Righteous Mind has a lot of new to offer. It has right intentions and it is wonderfully written. With studies and examples used from a highly ecleThe Righteous Mind has a lot of new to offer. It has right intentions and it is wonderfully written. With studies and examples used from a highly eclectic collection of scientific and philosophical branches, the erudite work soars occasionally to make some extraordinary points, including right at the end about tolerance in political life. Yet, it is badly structured, often meandering and too fixed on some of the arguments to be as outstanding as it could have been.
The blurb or the subtitle of the book defines a goal: the quest to prove why good people are divided by religion and politics. However, at best, this is one of the lesser objectives of the long essay. That said, one must agree that this objective helps the author conclude extremely well.
As a result of the multiple undefined goals, the reader is at a loss on where the author is headed for the most part (some guideposts at the beginning of the book - like the one provided near the end - and also at the beginning of every large section could have helped even though this reviewer strongly feels that the arrangements of premises and the connections should have been totally different).
The biggest problem I have, however, are some of the major conclusions in the first two parts and the explanations used in the third.
The first argument is that morality is shaped by intuitive reactions (let me ignore the more emphasised part of the thesis here that we create a lot of justifications later but what guides us is “intuition”). The absolutism of this conclusion not only prevents the author from making a stronger case for intuition but also is at odds with moral relativism he reverts to later and definition of morality provided near the end.
Let’s start with that definition that should have come far earlier in the book: the author avers that “Moral systems are interlocking sets of values, virtues, norms, practices, identities, institutions, technologies, and evolved psychological mechanisms that work together to suppress or regulate self-interest and make cooperative societies possible."
Careful parsing and re-reading make the author’s morality itself an intuition-suppressing system. To make it consistent with the first premise, it would mean that morality may be partly “inherent” (in whatever neurobiological or other senses as the author shows in the last section of his work) but mostly nurtured and nurture-able. This is an important conclusion the author misses, partly because of what comes next.
The second premise of moral relativism is where the author’s all-too-tolerant attitude begins to surface. It helps the book reach some great messages but also causes weak arguments that in different contexts are a reason behind a lot of evil in the world, past and present.
The author presents that morality is completely relativistic even if behind the different manifestations, there are six (let’s not argue why six) basic human tendencies/dualities where different systems converge on but to vastly varying degrees.
This argument helps prepare the essay in its tolerance and empathy conclusions later. I will ignore the politically acceptable digressions into how conservatives, liberals/libertarians differ on the six factors (it was understandable even though not consistent with the objectivity of the book that the author did not attempt to map religions or races or cultures on this matrix!). Yet, the rightful quest to not crown anyone as totally right leads to the wrong hidden message that nothing is wrong. Cue: slavery, misogyny, Nazism, casteism, feudalism, needless warmongering, terrorism, racism, etc etc
In a short work, the author could not have laid out the list or framework of absolute morals/immorals (which will also never be totally absolute as they will be different in different eras), but a more nuanced approach to moral relativism could have helped in insisting that in a civil society certain beliefs are uncivil and unacceptable.
The third part conclusions are less debatable from this reviewer’s viewpoint, even though the process of arriving at them and meanings leave a bit to be desired. “Group Selection” is neither Relativity like clear, objective and proven scientific theory to be used as a base despite the author’s attempt to establish it in such a way through its needless history nor really connected to our groupie tendencies. Even if evolutionary group selection is totally right, one wonders how this can be used to comprehensively justify our tendencies for all sort of groups rather than just basic familial or racial tendencies. Our social tendencies have many more at least equally deep roots as in our genes.
The author’s favourite Hive Switch (something triggered within us when in a group) generates energy that leads to many activities that individuals may not do if alone - yet, the author’s tendency is to mark all such activities as positive even though in personal life the author would also likely be as critical of such groups’ bad tendencies as the atheists etc the book denounces. By creating extremist snowmen of the atheists (in the sense that they do not see absolutely any positives in religions, groups, cultures and rites/rituals), the author takes a position at the other extreme which even most group-fundamentalists will dare to take.
All that said, the book makes you think. Will its wonderful text make any currently intolerant political or religious minded to turn more tolerant? I have my doubts but it would be worth trying even if one wonders how!
Looking back, a book that makes me review in so much detail is bound to be worth more than three stars! ...more
This uneven book is great despite all its flaws for two reasons: the emotionally super-charged personal story at the end (along with some others as weThis uneven book is great despite all its flaws for two reasons: the emotionally super-charged personal story at the end (along with some others as well) and the topic.
Dying is inevitable. Most of us think about how we are going to end at least some times, if not often. We witness it all the time, with our loved ones and others. Yet, a world that obsesses over what could be after death (through not just religion) rarely talks about the actual process except in fictional books. Dr Gawande takes the subject head-on. He minces no words while talking death for the old and the sickly. He is not here to recount stories of people who survived from the jaws of some terminal disease but about ending one's life in the best possible way once one sees the death at the doorstep.
As good as his attitude towards the subject is, the solutions offered at various points are as impractical and situation-specific as the examples on which they are based. Or they are too general to be of much use. Yes, we need tens of thousands of hospices and elderly care institutions globally, all built on different principles with much more investments but can we remotely pay even a fraction of the cost given all the other societal problems. Equally - to use one of his specific examples - if we have pets of certain kind to keep the elderly occupied (or video games or gardens or palaces...) what about the additional costs? The best hospice or elderly care professionals he encountered are possibly not even in thousands, while those who need help are in millions only in the US - how does one make it as personal as it should be? It is an incredibly tricky issue that requires ten-fold increase in spending through private or government efforts in the minimum. Yet, given the other priorities where rational economic agents would see more "returns", this one is likely to be avoided. So, what's the best way to change should have been one of the primary goals of the book.
Yet, the book succeeds more in raising the issue even if it dismally fails in offering any solutions that would be picked up those in power or other walks of life. The personal story ensures that the reader closes the book at least brooding if not emotionally drained en route to a call/meeting with someone he/she loves and old. ...more
What really works in the book is Mr Lewis's ability to tell/create a story.
Behavioural economics/finance/psychology is a fairly, well-known relativelyWhat really works in the book is Mr Lewis's ability to tell/create a story.
Behavioural economics/finance/psychology is a fairly, well-known relatively old science by now, no matter how much of its proponents try to make it sound like something revolutionarily new. It was created before the birth of the first personal computer. Most academics and even real life practitioners have been using it for a couple of decades even if it has not reached the standard college textbooks yet. Danny received his Nobel prize about 15 years ago, while both (Kahneman and Amos Tversky) began receiving their first acclamations in the late '70s.
As good as Mr Lewis's writing is, there are amazing books even in popular bookstores to learn the basics of the field including Prospect Theory, Framing, Cognitive Bias, Representativeness, Heuristics etc. Some of these are authored by Daniel Kahneman and other figures mentioned in the book. This makes The Undoing Project less about Behavioral Science and its mysteries - compared to the other books on the subject, this book would barely get a single star.
The book is about the creators of the field and their relationship. For most parts, their backstories are ordinary although in Mr Lewis's expert hands they appear pregnant with mysteries. The short book truly picks up in the last quarter when the friendship turns into a rivalry, not ugly as in the potboilers but discordant with the bonhomie before. Tversky's death and Kahneman's Nobel provide a fitting climax that is so rare in real life.
When Mr Lewis's best works are listed, this book is unlikely to make it to the best five. Yet, it is interesting on its own, partly owing to the author's mastery, partly the allure of the behavioral field and only partly due to the subjects covered....more
For the most part, WMD is a rant with only impractical statements as solutions.
The author is onto something critically important when one reads the tFor the most part, WMD is a rant with only impractical statements as solutions.
The author is onto something critically important when one reads the title of the book and goes through the first few pages. However, it is a tragedy to see the author falling in love with her own phrase WMD and completely losing the plot. The examples used are good in the beginning but soon turn ridiculous (they would be laughable if not so lamentable for the people involved). In the process, the author loses her credibility as a champion of the topic.
Consider the following example: a person is unable to find a job as he claims he fails all pre-interview personality tests. The author debunks the objectivity of tests in favor of the subjectivity of interviewers with the claim that in another world, one or the other interviewer would have given the job to this person. The author never thinks about the interviewers' non-transparent and more difficult to fathom biases wreaking greater damage in that world versus the current one where the biases are at worst in models that are far easier to scrutinize and amend. The author failts to realize that every world with fewer desirable jobs compared to applicants will leave some unhappy - the fairness is perhaps far better where the selection process is more equal for all.
In a way, the author wishes "we" to stand up and help reduce the use of math. The author is clear in the "reduction" goal without ever realizing how "we" would ever decide to what extent the reduction should take place and whether the constituents of "we" could ever agree on the replacement. The repeated call for subjective biases assumes that the biases come in only one form and are acceptable to all. The absurdities reach a peak when the author declare that at least subjective biases evolve over time and hence should be preferred while the mathematical models are static!
The author's hatred for anything involving models not only creates a highly one-sided discourse but also leads to inadequate treatment of any important points within. The only mathematical concept discussed somewhat is that of the circularity caused by the self-reinforcing feedback in multi-equilibrium equations leading to solutions that might be locally optimum but not globally (all my words). Otherwise, the book almost exclusively focuses on the unsuitability of results arrived through statistical sampling on any individual case.
To summarize, the author seems to yearn for insurance companies to abandon actuarial methods, schools to move away from test scores for admissions and financial institutions/tech companies/governments to reduce their use of numbers. The author wants humans to take decisions that these models might be taking using their value judgments. Or the world to simply not take those decisions.
There is so much sensible that needs to be discussed on the damage created by the excessive use of math in the modern world but this book is not the best place to explore it....more
Cosmosapiens should be read as a different type of "Big History". It strings together three evolutions from the start of time in the universe to TodayCosmosapiens should be read as a different type of "Big History". It strings together three evolutions from the start of time in the universe to Today in human society. The evolutions of matter, life and ideas are explained with a lot of information and tremendous summarizations. The author does a good job (and simultaneously a terrible injustice, described later) in laying out what theories truly explain as well as merely speculate/assume/doubtfully conclude about the phases of these evolutions.
The information work is encyclopedic in scope. Almost every reader is likely to have many "aha" moments when they come across something they have never heard before.
The book must be commended for the structure and the logical flow. Disparate topics are tied well under sensible, novel categorizations. Every chapter, and sets of chapters, are introduced and concluded with hard-hitting, precise messages. The body of the text detail the basis well - mostly through satisfactory summary of the theoretical work underpinning the subjects under consideration. The pace is absolutely hectic given the scope of the work, and one can always complain about the overlooked details as a result. However this is trifling compared to what the book contains and covers.
While the author is tremendous in adding the structure and coherence to a vast body of different type of work, he is almost a different person when airing the flaws of nearly any widely acclaimed theories. He repeatedly sounds bitter while describing their shortcomings (many trivial) while disdainful discussing any of their achievements. The author seems to have a deep-rooted love for underdog theories not accepted by what he sees as the mainstream groups. A small fraction of these rejected ideas are absolutely right, but the way author celebrates them while repeatedly denouncing the accepted wisdom, he appears to yearn for the theoretical world to be run by those seen as loonies by the scholars, who in turn to be thrown out as the arrogant, self-serving, egoistic idiots.
Try answering "the factors that led to Donald Trump as President". Even with all the information on how we got here, no two scholars are likely to agree on any answers propounded. Of course, no models or theories can explain what happened billions of years ago or even a couple of centuries ago except as basic outlines. The smallest model that would explain everything is the universe itself. The rest - whenever looked in detail - will only have inadequacies. As a result, most scientific models will improve over time. Every explanation will raise more questions. Throw in the fact that scientists are individuals building their own reputations, careers etc - most specialists have much more to contribute through criticisms of others' work than constructive of their own.
The author fails to realize - despite his otherwise laudable perspicacity - that the champions of Neo-Darwinian theories or the biggest proponents of the Big Bang are well aware of the flaws highlighted and more. When they reject some alternate hypothesis, they do that on account of lack of sufficient evidences. If every alternate idea were to be tested before rejection, a research budget thousands of times over cannot prove sufficient. Science will continuously be jolted by outside theories every now and then, but still more than 999 out of 1000 of those theories are wrong. The reverse is true about the mainstream ideas: all of them will need modifications over time and none can truly explain even a sliver of the whole, but what they explain as of now is more than anything else. Scientists all agree that all the theories are fallible eventually or outside the narrow contexts assumed.
But for the repeated, needless hammering of the mainstream, the book is a good read for those more interested in the research work summarized....more
Definitely a classic and hopefully the beginning of a new, exciting genre.
The last time someone introduced a completely new field was perhaps KahnemanDefinitely a classic and hopefully the beginning of a new, exciting genre.
The last time someone introduced a completely new field was perhaps Kahneman and Tversky with Behavioral Science. For the general public, they pioneered a new subject matter which over the years evolved to result in fantastic work from many others including Akerlof, Taleb, Gladwell (although the last two are not into behavioural economics as formally defined but against the previous textbook based approaches like behavioural pundits).
In a way, Mr Christian and Mr Griffith take us in the opposite direction. In behavioural and related sciences, the main focus is to show how real life behaviours and developments do not conform to the mathematical assumptions and theories used in textbooks. They offer few concrete suggestions on how to overcome these anomalies but do a great job throwing light on the non-rational nature of our thinking and activities in general life. This duo takes us to the realms of heuristical sciences and how we can use them in real life.
Heuristical sciences are difficult. They are not only intricate without much deductionist proofs but often counterintuitive. They are supposed to require enormous computing power to execute over and above being impossible to comprehend. Algorithms, created by young programmers drive our modern world, but most of us leave the understanding of them to the geeks shaping everything around. The book makes a bold attempt to prove this does not have to be.
There is new, never before heard (for this reader) information on every page. All this is not only in easily understandable format but enormously interesting and useful. The authors are gifted in making extremely complex things understandable in the simplest terms. I do not remember learning so much from one book in ages. A remarkable feat in our information-infested world. For me, this book will have to be read multiple times over the years for better understanding and amusement.
If there is one quibble, the authors pack way too much and extremely densely. They could have gone somewhat slower without worrying about the length of the book (it is frustratingly short!) and came up with more examples of their everyday application. I will refrain from listing at least ten major themes discussed in the book as they are well covered by other reviewers. In summary, a must and multiple read for everyone.
At the end of second reading in 2020: I am glad I told myself to read this again. I am not only re-amazed by how valuable every section of this book is, but also frustrated by how little I was able to recollect or apply. This is a book that needs to be read multiple times, and is worth a course for everyone when they are learning. I am also frustrated that neither the authors nor anyone else have tried to improve on the material....more
The author, to start with, is not a crypto-fanatic. He does not cover the topic chronologically, another positive. RathA balanced and thoughtful book.
The author, to start with, is not a crypto-fanatic. He does not cover the topic chronologically, another positive. Rather, he looks at various themes surrounding the concept and analyze the developments.
The book starts with a quick, even if highly simplified, summary of the roles of money. This allows him to nicely highlight the fundamental positives of bitcoin including its decentralized nature, the authorities' inability to debase the value over time whimsically, the anonymity and security offered by its transactions and also the untold (or very sparsely discussed) non-fractional-reserve-nature of (no multiplier) this currency.
The author finds good ways to traverse through the coin's highly interesting evolution including the mysterious nature of the inventor, the abuse by the nefarious elements in need of privacy and also scandals caused by the intermediaries that were nowhere as precise or technologically pure in their products as the bitcoin itself.
The questions they raise substantially undermine the positives offered. Real-life people misplace wallets. Many still recover them due to the deeds of good samaritans or with the help of the authorities. God save one if one loses the bitcoin password. If one dies without revealing the password to the inheritant, it is far worse than burying one's gold in the Sahara unmarked. Excessive privacy, like excessive security, has its own problems. You are swindled in a transaction and there is no way to reverse the payment or identify the counterparty. As examples described in the book highlight, excessive privacies and security are largely sought by people with something to hide rather than just those ideologically inclined.
It helps that the book is much more than about the bitcoin. Cryptocurrencies are prone to abuses by their creators too fortified behind the unbreakable technology. And, none of this protects one when the middlemen like exchanges or wallet providers - absolutely essential for most of us - mess up (or are messed up) - after all, we live in a world where companies with massive technology budgets are regularly hacked.
As the sections on blockchain show, none of the above should imply that this is not a revolutionary development. The author rightly concludes that the eventual cryptocurrencies and transactions could take completely different form compared to those dreamt by Satoshi or expected by the current supporters. These innovations have the power to change the world completely and one needs to keep up with them, but while retaining ones sanity about the benefits they provide and without being blinded by the dislike one may have for the existing systems....more
Loading...
