Wanting is a thought-provoking book in parts, but its most significant utility is its knack for compelling introspection. That our desires are not as Wanting is a thought-provoking book in parts, but its most significant utility is its knack for compelling introspection. That our desires are not as original as we credit them with is not a massively original message by itself. Introducing mimetic desire as a revolutionary idea feels like a rebranded take on what we've long intuited. One is still forced to think about which of one's yearnings result from others' influences, and in those self-reflections, many readers could find their joys or utility.
Mimetic desires are a social phenomenon. In its simplest form, it means we often want what others want. In cruder terms, we're prone to coveting what our neighbors prize. As parents have lectured children from time immemorial across cultures, these things lead to an insidious cycle of competition and rivalry, which can spiral into conflict, violence, and even war at the darkest depths. More common manifestations are self-destructive behaviors, addiction, and consumerism. Of course, at times, they can also be a force of good.
This reader found the section on scapegoating particularly striking - not for its originality, but for its resonant echoes of memories past, casting them in a new light. For other readers, different chapters may stir their depths; the book's breezy narrative is sure to inspire a reflective pause. ...more
Rules of Law is an ambitious project zipping through the fragmented history of law globally. It oscillates between covering too much ground in too litRules of Law is an ambitious project zipping through the fragmented history of law globally. It oscillates between covering too much ground in too little time and then, paradoxically, too little in too much. The author's exhaustive approach creates a desultory journey through minutiae or loosely related facts with little purpose other than to present the material the author collected.
Despite the division into twelve chapters covering different aspects of history, most of the book feels like a whirlwind tour, darting from one tiny aspect of a societal structure to another, spanning time and space with little to no transition. This abrupt shifting of focus can leave the reader disoriented and struggling to follow the narrative thread. While ostensibly dedicated to exploring the specific legal codes of different cultures, the chapters often deviate into discussions on a wide array of topics ranging from formal rules to guidelines, from religious edicts and proclamations to societal norms and community guidelines.
'Rule of Laws' is teeming with anecdotes and details, which, while intriguing in their own right, often feel disjointed and tangential to the broader themes. The narrative frequently jumps from one era to another within the span of a few paragraphs. And still, across chapters, the book appears repetitive, with many themes or even societies/eras revisited multiple times. There is a wealth of information in every part, but with few, that would make a reader pause.
In conclusion, the ambitious book falls short of delivering a cohesive and enlightening narrative.
Entangled Life is a must-read. For most readers like this reviewer, fungi will be a new topic, rarely discussed at length in any exciting way in populEntangled Life is a must-read. For most readers like this reviewer, fungi will be a new topic, rarely discussed at length in any exciting way in popular books. The author simply hits it out of the park, again and again, all through in the most engaging ways. Each part makes you wonder how most of us have been so ignorant about critical aspects of such a vital life form.
Fungi are not just passive organisms. They are capable of complex behaviors, including communication, decision-making, and even learning. Their methods have so much to teach us about the complexities of natural life and our networks, including the web and the neural varieties.
One starts with the journey of these 1.5m or so species with the giant mycelial networks. If the reader is not spooked enough by the nature of their growth, there is more to follow in symbiotic relationships between fungi and algae and, later, fungi and plants. In between, readers are introduced to mycoremediation, the process by which fungi can help clean polluted soil or mycorrhizal networks, where fungi exchange nutrients with plants.
The Wood Wide Web is perhaps the most shocking, with its network of mycelia linking plant roots, facilitating communication and nutrient exchange. Or maybe, this should be reserved for psilocybin mushrooms (magic mushrooms) and the impact of their usage in various cultures. These are tricky waters; the author does well discussing psychedelics with depth, understanding, and respect, setting a foundation for their therapeutic uses.
In between molds and lichens, one comes across the familiar yeasts and popular poisonous mushrooms. Some fungi play a role in industrial processes for the chemicals they produce, and others preserve our nature by helping wood decay. The author has amusing anecdotes that link the disparate topics seamlessly without burdening readers with excessive theory (this is despite frequent discussions on topics like fungi cell structure, reproduction, and metabolism).
The subject's importance is matched by the author's extraordinary ability to explain, which makes it a compulsive and not just a compulsory read....more
Imagine a philosopher from a century ago who encounters the first motion pictures. Overwhelmed and captivated by this groundbreaking technology, the p Imagine a philosopher from a century ago who encounters the first motion pictures. Overwhelmed and captivated by this groundbreaking technology, the philosopher posited that we could be only three- or four-dimensional projections created by advanced beings from higher dimensions. "Reality+" can be seen as a contemporary parallel to this hypothetical philosopher's musings, where Chalmers replaces the concept of motion pictures with the more contemporary idea of virtual reality.
The book presents many innovative concepts and thought-provoking ideas, but its conclusions ultimately appear speculative and unsubstantiated hypotheses. These theories seem to emerge from the author's conviction that the primary task is to reframe our worldview in light of the most recent technological advancements without considering the potential for future refinements or modifications.
In concepts like "virtual could be unrecognizable from real" or "physical is different from digital," the book moves around in circles on axiomatic propositions seemingly conjured out of thin air, like Pascal's wager. We will use only one example - the utterly needless distinction in the book between physical and digital because of the author's preoccupation with it-from-bit-type concepts - to illuminate the limits imposed by extrapolating a set of latest technologies.
Arguably, as long as we are in a digital, rule-based world, the author's distinction between physical and digital becomes redundant, at the very least. Let's say our world comprises basic constituents - particles or forces - that come in n distinct forms, where n could be any number from 1. Each of these building blocks B1...Bn can be represented in a Cartesian form with quantum values (q1...qn) and multiple positions in an m-dimensional space-time, defining our world's entire existence. In some ways, this is nothing but an information string in a higher dimension, the same as those of the author's digital world except of higher complexity. In other words, even a purely physical world of the author, encompassing quarks, proteins, matter, life forms, or black holes, could be an information form as is or in some machine's image.
The crucial point is that for an advanced civilization, the resources required to construct our type of world - physically, as the author prefers to differentiate using building blocks - may not be resource-intensive at all. For the creationist theories that the book wishes to speculate on, most of its simulation-focused sections may prove to be unnecessary.
The author's creationist ideas rely on the same arguments made since time immemorial but in different garbs. Something from nothing is difficult for any one of us to accept. Creationist theories appear far more sound in our world of exquisitely finely tuned parameters as they provide a more straightforward point to stop questioning. The only thing we are asked to do in such cases is not to concern ourselves too much with these creators' identities, logic, or intentions and go on our merry ways!
By evoking the possibility of us being a simulation on an advanced society's computer, the book wonders if we could be a creation of a higher life or non-life form. The speculation is used to explain concepts as broad as the imperfections of our "gods" to free will, all non-provable and as whimsical as any wonderland of an Alice in any realm.
The author is the first to acknowledge that most of his theories are unverifiable if we live in a perfect simulation. He tries to make a virtue of the unverifiability by hypothesizing on the post-human reality of upcoming centuries. The discussions are often fascinating but still never far from fanciful....more
In "The Age of the Strongman," Rachman attempts to shed light on the rise of strongman leaders in the modern world. It spends excessive effort describIn "The Age of the Strongman," Rachman attempts to shed light on the rise of strongman leaders in the modern world. It spends excessive effort describing leaders while failing to analyse the phenomenon sufficiently. Most of the book consists of brief histories and actions of various contemporary strongman leaders, offering little new information or insights.
The book would have benefited from a more in-depth exploration of the causes and effects of this rise in strongman politics as against readily-available and well-known descriptions of these leaders. The sections on leaders read like short encyclopedia entries with little depth or nuance.
The book makes some, but inadequate, mention that strongman leaders are a function of the tide against liberalism. They often appeal to majoritarianism and nationalism while implicitly or explicitly suppressing the rights of disliked minorities. To exploit majoritarian sentiment, they suppress the rights of marginalized minorities, which could be migrant workers, outsiders, or other nationals based on ethnicity, religion, race, or sexual orientation. They perforce reject equalitarian or humanitarian principles and exhibit intolerance toward those who preach tolerance. This reasoning cycle - not discussed in the book - warranted more focus, as it is a crucial aspect of understanding the phenomenon of strongman politics.
Another important factor the book overlooks is the role of direct communication between leaders and their base. In the age of social media and instant connectivity, strongmen bypass traditional media and speak directly to their supporters. The method necessitates more authoritative communication for effect and without the need for compromise or debate with intermediaries like traditional media. Analyzing how this shift in communication has contributed to the rise of strongman leaders would have added depth to the book.
Rachman fails to adequately address the differences between today's strongman leaders and the authoritarians who wreaked havoc in the middle of the last century. Modern strongmen have less military control and fewer freedoms to suppress dissent than their predecessors (this is not true in every individual case, but evident on average).
There are other undiscussed implications of the rise of strongman politics. Positively, these leaders are decisive. They cut through the bureaucratic jangles and rarely tolerate petty fights among their minions coming in the way of decision-making. Of course, their decisions are often wrong, but these days they are rarely wishy-washy.
Negatively, the rise of strongmen is likely to increase tensions and conflicts, both within nations and on the international stage. The book would have been more insightful had it delved into these broader consequences.
Overall, the strongmen prove that there is no end of history in sight. And that's bad!...more
Future generations must have a full understanding of how wars-that-nobody-wanted happen. Max Hastings' Vietnam covers all the relevant bases of the trFuture generations must have a full understanding of how wars-that-nobody-wanted happen. Max Hastings' Vietnam covers all the relevant bases of the tragedy perfectly, with empathy, without bias, focusing equally on the broad trends and battles on the ground, with adequate preambles and postambles to describe causes and effects - a perfect book for those interested in the history of the era.
The war that left indelible scars on hundreds of millions of present and future Vietnamese needed a moving, rather than a merely informative, account. One fears a more Western viewpoint picking up a book on the subject for the trauma it caused in American society and its impact on US politics for a decade, let alone its consequences on the Cold War. The book is most aware of the disproportionate sufferings. It is never too far away from more criticisms on how the locals, apart from exceptionally young, barely-adult soldiers, kept on suffering because of high politics elsewhere. The book excels in stories of soldiers, civilians, and families on all sides, keeping the human face of the conflict at the center of all its descriptions.
The book is well-researched and carefully crafted to cover political, social, and military aspects of events spanning three decades. One of the book's greatest strengths is its ability to recount history as it happened and stay in the present rather than be affected by the knowledge of events that come later. As a result, one learns that everything was already a mess in real-time and not just through the lenses of colossal, cumulative losses that are only known after everything is over.
Equally importantly, the book stays focussed on the subject. It does not have any space for other momentous events that were happening globally during these decades. The French colonization and departure, Viet Minh insurgences, Ho Chi Minh's rise, North Korean communist government evolutions, Chinese involvements, and Cambodia/other Indo China fallouts are discussed to the extent to provide a deeper understanding of the subject matter, just like the political ups and downs in the US.
Hastings is not afraid to critique the actions of both the US and the North Vietnamese forces, providing a nuanced and multifaceted perspective on the war. The book provides adequate descriptions of the wars' brutality to make one aware of the savagery.
There are many personalities and events in a war spanning a decade. The book is a cohesive narrative that brings the war to life rather than a collection of segments. The book covers the momentous events in detail, including the assassination of South Vietnamese Prime Minister Ngo Dinh Diem, the Tet Offensive, and the fall of Saigon. Descriptions of these events are vivid and powerful, enabling their separation in significance from other continuous battles. On-the-ground military encounters had their own notable events, including the battle of Khe Sanh, the My Lai massacre, and the Easter Offensive. The book provides great descriptions of soldiers' actions and sufferings that somehow keep them always individualistic, specific, and different, even if they were more the same at the broad level.
The war resulted from US politicians' political agendas and its cold war struggles rather than anything to do with the welfare of the Vietnamese people. The South Vietnamese government was more liberal than the North's, but it was also far less capable, committed to any causes, and organized. The profligate wastefulness of the war is most reflected in the fact that it continued for almost seven years despite the US deciding the first pull-outs as early as 1968.
In conclusion, this is an exceptionally well-written account of the Vietnam War. ...more
Subliminal attempts to shed light on the workings of the human mind, especially the part our conscious mind is unaware of. That our brain has hidden pSubliminal attempts to shed light on the workings of the human mind, especially the part our conscious mind is unaware of. That our brain has hidden processes, methods, biases, decisions, etc., governing our behavior is well known for decades. The book's efforts to introduce them as something new will appeal only to those new to the subject.
As discussed best by Kahneman best, the human mind has a part that acts quickly without apparent awareness or step-by-step deliberation involvement and another part that reaches conclusions slowly after a lot of contemplation and analysis. The second part, however, is also influenced by abstruse environmental and internal factors that the author makes a part of his "subliminal" genre. Unfortunately, the idea is old and has been explored well in numerous bestselling behavioral science books.
The author presents several examples to illustrate his points. Some hidden influencers are in how our receptors/perceivers take in information, a few lurk in the imperfections of our memories and remembrances, and many are in our inscrutable processors. Ultimately, our actions as individuals and groups are frequently baffling and difficult to replicate even by our own selves in a different context. We give our idiosyncrasies terms like biases and blind spots in common languages. At the same time, behavioral fields have a more defined and refined long list to categorize them better for analytical purposes. The book is somewhere in between, more interested in unearthing non-rational behavior in broad strokes, which, as said before, will have utility for neophytes only.
As the book says, the field of neuroscience is a more exact science for understanding all this. Neuroscientists are making rapid progress in discovering the drivers of our quirks in the way our brains are wired and their intricate entanglements. However, the book's limited terminology related to a handful of parts of the brain does not do justice to the complexity of the human brain. The book simplifies neuroscience and presents it in a way that is easy to understand, but it does not add anything new.
One of the book's most significant shortcomings is its failure to discuss what laypeople can do to change our mind's strange ways. This is a missed opportunity, as practical advice here could have been beneficial....more
Tracers in the dark is a fascinating and thrilling work of non-fiction that offers a detailed analysis of some of the most notorious cyber crimes righTracers in the dark is a fascinating and thrilling work of non-fiction that offers a detailed analysis of some of the most notorious cyber crimes right from its inception. From the Bridges/Force case and Mt. Gox to Silk Road, Alpha Bay, Hansa, Welcome to Video, BTC-e, and recent ransomware attacks, each story is told in a captivating and informative way. The author's ability to weave together a coherent narrative that provides a behind-the-scenes look at the intricate operations of these criminal networks and the methods law enforcement agencies use to track them down is truly remarkable.
What sets this book apart is the author's clear and concise writing style, which makes even the most technical aspects of cybercrime accessible to readers. The book provides a rare glimpse into how investigators broke a supposedly unbreakable blockchain, a testament to the author's knowledge and expertise. Additionally, the book effectively debunks the myth that cryptocurrencies provide privacy. Instead, it shows how law enforcement agencies can use blockchain to trace and track cryptocurrency transactions, thereby identifying criminals and bringing them to justice.
Tracers in the dark is a must-read for anyone interested in cybercrime, law enforcement, or technology. It is a captivating and informative work of non-fiction that is sure to keep readers on the edge of their seats. With its detailed analysis of each case, clear and concise writing style, and insightful commentary on the world of cybercrime, this book would make an excellent source for a multi-season TV series....more
It is not often that this reviewer picks up a collection of essays. The exception for David Sedaris's "When You Are Engulfed in Flames" proved more thIt is not often that this reviewer picks up a collection of essays. The exception for David Sedaris's "When You Are Engulfed in Flames" proved more than worthwhile.
Its entertaining and engaging collection of essays had frequent laughing-out-loud moments. The essayist's wry humor and sharp observations about everyday life mix with his incisive writing skills, resulting in unexpected statements that make you pause. This is due, in part, to the ability to find the absurd in the mundane.
The satirist is not afraid to bare inner fears and vulnerabilities. He feasts on them while sharing highly personal stories. The level of honesty makes the exposition of many age-old themes, like love or addiction, fresh and charming.
It also helps that the author has traveled extensively, lived in so many varied societies, and has been able to sprinkle stories from so many parts of the world. Still, he cannot avoid some of the essays turning repetitive or their topics appearing stale—a minor flaw in an otherwise highly engaging collection. ...more
Economic historians talk a lot about bubbles and busts, more so about the greatest of them all, the great depression. As they describe events, they poEconomic historians talk a lot about bubbles and busts, more so about the greatest of them all, the great depression. As they describe events, they ponder the causes and effects using various economic, social, behavioral, political, and other theories with cursory references to the personalities.
This book approaches the historic bust from the opposite angle: despite momentous events that preceded the collapse in the previous decades, the author lays the blame squarely on the misguided actions of four gents heading the central banks of the US, UK, France, and Germany.
The approach provides a unique perspective. The policy missteps were not a result of beliefs in wrong economic theories. The author proves that these gents were wrong because of a combination of instinctive steps without thinking about consequences, too much power that others could not check, stubbornness, inexperience, rudimentary institutional structures of the early days, etc.
The claims are somewhat extreme, as are others that deify Keynes or indirectly glorify the current economic management. A lot of sections are full of irrelevant details. At the same time, the author misses out on discussing whether all other crises before or after were also because of incompetent men (it has been chiefly men so far in economic spheres ahead of significant boom-bust episodes) or if 1929 was unique.
Taking a narrow view to make a broad point, one can always debate whether the crash was more intense because the gold standard framework was a wrong monetary framework or whether it was because of the decision-makers who believed in it for whatever human reasons. It is equivalent to asking whether the collapse of the Soviet Union was because of the leaders who ruined the union in the preceding decades or because of the tenets of communism. It is always a combination of both, of course, but few would lay such little importance on beliefs compared to their personalities. ...more
An easy way to write a bestseller in recent years is to attack algorithms that drive our lives through the largest tech companies' apps, products, andAn easy way to write a bestseller in recent years is to attack algorithms that drive our lives through the largest tech companies' apps, products, and associated ads. It did not matter if all the suggestions of such books were utterly impractical as long as they succeeded in arousing the hackles by invoking the loss of privacy and choice.
Josh Simons' book is exactly the opposite and hence is unlikely to be a bestseller! The author approaches the topic pedantically with the writing style also of a career academician. The analysis is scholarly, nuanced, and result driven. The technical details, discussions of obscure philosophical points, and a tendency towards accepting the powers of some new-age forces cause the book challenging to accept for anyone looking for quick fixes or points for dinner party conversations. If one throws in some of the conclusions that argue against needless political and other interventions, the practicality and sagacity make it perfectly serious but so unsalacious that it is not a surprise this review is the first on the book's page weeks after its publication.
The following are reviewers' notes based on some of the lessons from the book and others completely independent. Technology continues to increase its influence on how we live. As much as it works in most cases, no amount of customization will make it work perfectly for all in all cases. Many commentators love imposing arbitrary limits on the workings of technology based on these negative outcomes regardless of the substantial cumulative benefits.
The critics' most strident issues are with the biases; the author mostly keeps the discussions to those more relevant in the US, but the arguments are universally applicable in different forms. Models trained on past patterns, the argument goes, are unlikely to help us move away from the plagues of race, religion, gender, wealth, and countless similar bigotries of our past.
The calls to eliminate the biases invariably turn to suggestions that the book shows will do more harm than good. Any forced removal of certain information from the models is unlikely to change the conclusions in a world where machine learning algorithms no longer work on human-created parameters or classifications. The results from algorithms may not be any different (or even worse) if the methods used are so simplistic.
The solutions are partly in assertive, outside-the-model actions that improve the prospects of the disadvantaged. The solutions are partly in the continuous monitoring of the end results by all concerned in critical life areas to permit suitable feedback loops. The solutions are in competition, and more use of technologies for higher granularity, fewer regulations on processes, judicious use of fines, simultaneous human monitoring, etc.
This is a serious book for those interested in the topic. The conclusions are not all I summarise here. They are granular and arrived at with many weighty arguments of all kinds. ...more
As a course, The Big Questions of Philosophy is well-designed, effectively presented, and immensely thought-provoking. For some, this is another kind As a course, The Big Questions of Philosophy is well-designed, effectively presented, and immensely thought-provoking. For some, this is another kind of introduction to the major areas of philosophy, including metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and political philosophy. However, it is more than a course because the big questions are spot on. Their sequencing makes sense as they do not appear like excuses to introduce any set of philosophers or their theories in any particular order. More importantly, the attempts to answer are genuine, with every chapter razor focussed on the issues at hand without any needless digressions. It is almost like whatever philosophical theories one learns are just a side-effect.
While the Professor does not equivocate, he is far more persuasive while denying or destroying proposed answers than in providing assertive, constructive resolutions to any topic. His unequivocal refutations of many cherished beliefs mean the course will have a pleasant and palatable appeal to those who already share the author’s perspective. There is likely to be a self-selection in those who pick the course; it is an echo chamber of sorts.
The biggest question for this reviewer, because of the book and not addressed in it, is why it is so easy in Philosophy to refute than to construct. This question is not as superfluous as it sounds. In a way, it is the mother of all questions that provide a context to why most philosophical arguments cannot but lead nowhere once done with criticizing others.
Conventional languages are grossly inadequate in the attempts to tackle myriads of real-life issues they try to address. History of how these languages evolved, on the one hand, and the ever-rising complexities of life as humanity progresses, on the other, make the inadequacies exponentially more flagrant over time. Philosophers' habitual efforts to arrive at one-size-fits-all generalized proclamations work until the next one sits down to rip them apart.
Imagine if the world had stuck with only Pythagorean-era Math and Newton or Bohr were needed to compose their theories in them. Conventional languages have not evolved at all compared to real life. This was when they were inadequate to address the life that was right from the start.
Philosophers' artificial constraints – imposed to arrive at universal or generalizable conclusions – make their quests doomed before they begin. Let's use another example: we know that languages do not have sufficient words to describe billions of viruses and bacteria that exist out there. Simply asserting that some virus or a bacterium causes Covid is no more helpful than ascribing it to a demon. Suppose the statement “virus causes Covid” must have a strict truth value of 0 or 1. In that case, you could almost expect a horde of intellectuals going back and forth for centuries arguing how most "viruses" do not cause this or how this statement might conflict with another one that says a virus is a cause of something non- Covid or it is not just a particular type of virus that is a cause always but only within a context.
Let's use this ridiculous example to see how similar philosophical wrangles on finding universal moral or even legal principles from conventional language are. A principal “Lying is bad” by one philosopher would evoke nothing but above virus-like, must-have wide range of exceptions to highlight the inadequacy of the dictum. This is even before the smarter ones begin debating the definition of a “Lie” or what is “Bad” in the same vein as trying to arrive at the meaning of what is meant by “conscience,” “soul,” “free will,” or “God.”
Machine Learning tools are the latest scientific/technological set proving how we cannot achieve much in a structured quest using words or categories invented by ancestors eons ago. The best philosophers spent ages trying to fine-tune the meanings of the words to make them usable, only to be summarily dismissed by the next generations.
As the professor concludes, this does not make philosophical quests, courses, or arguments unnecessary. We are wired such that many of us will want to seek the answers to the kind of big questions posed in the book, fully knowing the futility. Still, somebody should attempt a course on what could happen to a being who refuses to think about existential issues and universal principles while focusing on broad guidelines and creating room for addressing specific situations as they arise rather than looking for perpetual hypothetical answers.
Elusive comes in two parts: it is a book about a man, and it is also a book about his discovery. It works more as a book on Higgs boson than on Peter Elusive comes in two parts: it is a book about a man, and it is also a book about his discovery. It works more as a book on Higgs boson than on Peter Higgs.
The book's primary objective is to look into the famous scientist's life. The author repeatedly highlights Higgs' shy and unassuming personality and how he goes to great lengths to deflect attention from himself. It is almost like the most interesting stories in the life of the celebrated scientist are all about how he makes himself uninteresting! Clearly, he does not make a good subject for a biography.
His discovery is a different matter. A part of the tale of his boson is about the particles' validation journey from around the mid-1990s until recently. A handful of books have come out on the LHC in the last few years. This book does not have much new to add to this part of the boson's rise to preeminence.
The author shines in his explanations of the discovery itself. Particle physics is a challenging topic for a popular science book, and the Higgs boson, with its intricate conceptualization, is worse. However, the author does an exceptional job of tackling the subject head-on, providing a detailed and comprehensive explanation of the relevant concepts without wasting space on more basic discussions on forces and fields commonly found in other popular books.
The author uses clear language and interesting analogies to make the topics more accessible. For example, when the author discusses why certain bosons are massless while others have mass, he explains utilizing the effect of plasma in the ionosphere. A plasma structure causes the reflection of waves below a certain frequency, causing an illusion of mass. Another good analogy is that of flat galaxy structures (and not spherical): this is an understandable example of how unstable symmetries break to create stable asymmetries. Once explained so clearly, it becomes easier for an average reader to understand the breaking of the electroweak force.
With additional arguments adopted from gauge theory (equations that remain invariant under certain transformations), the arguments move to non-zero vacuum expectation value and with associated Goldstone bosons that have mass.
Higgs' Boson story is incomplete. One knows extremely little about the underlying field and its mechanism. Those interested in the subject are assured of enhancing their understanding of what is achieved and what is pending....more
In Strangers to Ourselves, Rachel Aviv explores the unique experiences and challenges faced by individuals struggling with mental illness.
One of the In Strangers to Ourselves, Rachel Aviv explores the unique experiences and challenges faced by individuals struggling with mental illness.
One of the main lessons of the book is that each mental patient is distinctive, with a highly unique set of problems. Through a series of case studies, Aviv demonstrates the importance of personalized, individualized treatment, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach.
One of the book's strengths is the diversity of the six case studies, which showcase the breadth of issues faced by people with different mental illnesses over their decades of suffering. However, this same diversity also makes the book feel uneven, as it is difficult for readers to connect equally with every case study presented. Most importantly, the portfolio of the studies feels highly inadequate: the book could have covered more ground with at least four to five more examples.
Despite these limitations, Strangers to Ourselves is a valuable and thought-provoking read. Aviv writes with empathy and insight, and her depiction of the lives of the people she has handpicked is impactful. Overall, I hope that the debut author continues to explore these important themes in future work....more
A lot of arguments in The Sum of Us are highly debatable. The author's extreme takes convert numerous inequality, corporate greed, and electoral systeA lot of arguments in The Sum of Us are highly debatable. The author's extreme takes convert numerous inequality, corporate greed, and electoral system rigidities into race issues which is at least partly driven by the author's politics. The solutions - also reflective of the author's political and economic leanings - do not attempt to solve the inherent racism issues as much as issues of the other realms. Ideally, these non-racism issues should be debated separately for the proponents and opponents to argue the pros and cons more dispassionately.
All that said, the book refuses to pull any punches in throwing light on the topic the privileged want only to gloss over. Through discussions that often turn extreme, it covers the well-trodden grounds and exposes issues from other realms having outcomes that perpetuate and reinforce the racial divides. They are issues of inequality, corporate greed, and electoral system rigidities, which now intersect with and exacerbate issues of racism.
All humanitarians should read this book carefully, even if they are not from the United States or from vastly different economic or political schools compared to the author. ...more
It is good to read books that tout blindingly obvious messages.
The book effectively has three messages: the organization should think long-term, haveIt is good to read books that tout blindingly obvious messages.
The book effectively has three messages: the organization should think long-term, have motivated workers, and not do the wrong things. It is sometimes inspiring, but at most others, it is repetitive w and with messages that are so plain that they come off preachy rather than informative.
It does not help that the examples used are curve-fitted to suit the author’s perspectives. The book refuses to pick genuine real-life examples where the decisions involve difficult compromises, unexpected fallouts, or bad outcomes. If presented with examples of someone failing while practicing the book’s methods, the author will likely find a way to make it the practitioner’s fault for not doing things exactly the way he would do them.
Going by the evidence of the book, the author is unlikely ever to admit that there are many circumstances where what he preaches could result in bad outcomes or what he preaches against may work.
The messages are incontrovertible in a vacuum. Even if their utility as a decision-making framework is questionable in many cases, they are the beacons to be kept in mind even in arduous circumstances. Despite their monotony and self-evidence, hearing them now and then will provide areas for reconsideration to most real-life managers. One must suppress the impulse to dispute the examples used and how the author presents them. ...more
Existential Physics is a rare book I read twice back-to-back. This was not because it was difficult to understand (actually, some of the technical andExistential Physics is a rare book I read twice back-to-back. This was not because it was difficult to understand (actually, some of the technical and philosophical discussions are) but because I wanted to ponder more over so many new points the author had put forward.
Ms. Hossenfelder is an accomplished, empirical experimentalist scientist who is also a gifted writer. She is clear about what she believes in and why. More importantly, she is clear about what she does not believe in, cannot believe in, would not believe in, and where she has no way of knowing whether to believe in or not. Her conceptual clarity may not convert others who do not share the same views, but they would surely spark many worthwhile new thoughts.
The author is not exactly a fan of theoretical physicists. If the previous books had not clarified this clearly, it comes out far more forcefully in Existential Physics. The armchair physicists are frequently put in the same category as the prophets, sages, charlatans, and others from time immemorial that claimed to have figured out how the world works. The path chosen to come down heavily on this group is through the notion of scientific versus ascientific theories. The author makes it clear that just like most religious assertions, theories like inflation, loop quantum, string, etc., are speculative without any basis in known or even knowable science. The book is about how much we really know and what we can know. It does the first part extremely well. But it isn't easy to agree with the author's binning of a lot of good theoretical work despite their speculative nature.
Some propositions and assertions, often misnamed as theories, are clearly wrong. In taking a liberal view, the author not only shies away from picking the most obvious wrong ones, but she also refuses to acknowledge that some of the theoretical physicists' suppositions are significantly less wrong compared to made-up assertions from other fields. Historic, non-rational theories are issued as given; they are unmodifiable and non-mathematic. To equate them with mathematical, modifiable forms with current theoretical physicists' is needlessly extreme in many cases.
As the author says herself, we need hypotheses for science to progress. From a given circle of relatively proven "science," one path of progress is by observing and fitting more data (and, in the process, expanding our equations/theories). This is the path of experimentalists like the author. The other path is by first hypothesizing what further progress could be and then looking for data for confirmation or repudiation.
The second method, by definition, will start speculatively. It may often have to turn bombastic, too, like in search of better math (or alternate math) that can deal with the infinities/singularities that recur in current mathematical equations (of science) but somehow get resolved without problems in reality as we experience. For example, the Navier-Stokes equation could be more resolvable using completely outlandish math, like Fermat's last theorm. If such math is proposed Today, it may not appear to have any utility at the outset until it suddenly begins solving unsolvable equations using current methods.
This hypothesis-first path of theoretical scientists has worked spectacularly for centuries. Given the state of Today's data, tools, and science, it might not be possible for humans sitting behind a desk to produce the correct theories out of thin air like Einstein before, but proposals that make some sense could be put forward by machines too. If they are not falsifiable in their first versions, many of these proposals could be modified/amended in their equations to become more verifiable over time. This reviewer is with the author in seeing a diminished role for theoretical innovations in the periods ahead, but to equate their ascientific theories with other ascientific theories from the non-physics realm, like the way the author does, is extreme.
The book makes some excellent points on fundamental versus emergent theories. The author asserts that there are no strongly emergent theories. All emergent properties, like the structure of DNA or waves of an ocean (let alone consciousness or love the mother has for her child), emerge from more fundamental laws of particle physics/relativity, even if we may not be able to provide the full calculation linkages Today. As much as the author claims that she is not a reductionist - ontological or theoretical - her assertions against strong emergence appear ascientific. If Today's fundamental theories - along with 26 constants, 25 particles, four forces, and the current set of equations - cannot precisely explain why the H-O-H bond in a water molecule is 104.5 degrees and not 125 degrees or predicate why proteins take certain shapes but not others, there might be something in emergent properties not completely available in fundamental theories as we know them.
In other words, we are supposed to take it for granted that all higher-level emergent properties come out of the same lower-level equations even when it is not mathematically possible to achieve it currently. The reviewer, like the author, believes that there is no mind or consciousness or free will below the emergent properties of underlying forces and matter, but this is another ascientific assertion, in a way. This is not much different from multiverses the author argues against because they are ascientific and arbitrary.
The larger point is that almost all of us are prone to fall for unprovable assertions without realizing them. The author is far more obviously ascientific in her views on artificial general intelligence.
The book is not only good in addressing many philosophical issues but also in explaining many scientific concepts. One example is the discussions on why it might not always be possible to predict completely deterministic systems. The author explains this through quantum uncertainty and then the chaotic nature of calculations first, but soon moves beyond. Godel's incompleteness theorem and the halting problem are used to show how notwithstanding the rest, there are always problems that cannot be solved in finite steps using any mathematical system. There are many other problems that encounter singularities and infinities in the math we operate, even while they resolve beautifully in real life.
Here are some other small nuggets of information:
-- Is the world mathematical, or is math just the language we use for its description? The second is demonstrably true, while the first is an ascientific assumption. It is unlikely we figured out what the world is or even what the best description language of the world is on our first try
-- All laws are time irreversible, except the collapse of the wave function and the information lost at the black hole.
-- Quantum collapse is something that happens when a wave function interacts with any sufficiently impactful macro matter. There are non-zero chances of quantum equations being emergent and not fundamental.
-- Time irreversibility means that from any fully described system, we can deterministically determine both the full past and present.
-- Today's theoretical world is full of speculative conjectures on items 10-15 orders different from our best ability to observe - like inflation, protein decay, black hole evaporation, etc. One should realize that these ascientific theories are hopeless in many ways.
-- Quantum entanglement is observed non-locally but has to be enacted locally.
-- General relativity does not limit the speed of light but merely states that acceleration from below the speed of light level to above requires infinite energy.
-- No cloning means you cannot ever copy a neuron completely faithfully
Overall, the book has many extreme conclusions for almost any type of reader. The author stands her ground well. As a result, she will make her readers think deeply to understand what they honestly disagree with. ...more
The reformation paved the way for the renaissance and political revolutions that together birthed modernity as we know it. For an outsider like this rThe reformation paved the way for the renaissance and political revolutions that together birthed modernity as we know it. For an outsider like this reviewer, the book is a concise and readable summary of one of the most seminal historic episodes. For those who know even somewhat about the rise of Protestantism, there might be precious little as the author does not attempt to uncover anything new.
The last chapter - bar its final section that tries to link the current US political morass to the events of the sixteenth century - is the most edifying. It all started with an individual's struggle with the far-away Catholic headquarters' indulgences and corruption. The resistance, as the book shows, soon morphed into casting doubts on numerous theological issues that the Church had settled through decrees. A host of coincident forces - political, ethnological, technological - forces played a role, as did the circumstances of key individuals. The apparent result was the reformation, but it was much more.
The implications from the querying of the edicts and not believing in anything arbitrarily branded preordained (including the "rights" of kings and monarchs) sparked a wildfire transforming humanity everywhere. Martin Luther's repudiation immediately led to a fragmentation of the ecclesiastical structure, which in turn gave rise to the first instances of pluralism and tolerance a few decades later (it was not an easy process). The use of reason and senses to better understand the world was not far away, nor was the tendency to treat the rulers as just regular people who could be cast away when deemed incompetent. The rest of the world caught on, albeit with a lag of a century or more.
A good primer for those not too aware of this history.
The Romance of Reality keeps shuffling between a bit of sublime and a lot of ridiculous. The prose gets extremely muddled with heavy name-throwing wheThe Romance of Reality keeps shuffling between a bit of sublime and a lot of ridiculous. The prose gets extremely muddled with heavy name-throwing when the author makes significant, unsubstantiated claims as if they are accepted, scientific facts by many experts, or just so obvious that only narrowly focused scientist types would miss them!
That said, the book is most readable in the initial sections, where the author argues why life might have been inevitable somewhere in our world rather than a low-probability accident. Paraphrasing the book's arguments, the forces that propel the world towards increasing worldwide disorder - led by the second law of thermodynamics - are more than counterbalanced by other forces/processes that foster self-catalyzing, recursive complexity in microspheres. While the author does not mention this adequately, the order-creating mechanisms emerging from all the other laws of physics sans the second law of thermodynamics are why we have atoms and galaxies and all the chemical elements, let alone life.
As the book progresses, it turns mystic, never mind the author's repeated claims of everything being rational and proof-driven. Many sections are laughable, like those coming down heavily on the thinkers who argue against free will with the most naive objections imaginable. The other sections ascribing purpose and direction, including somehow providing a space to blockchain in the teleological destiny of our universe, are incomprehensible even for those who want to hear out the alternate ideas without prejudice. Data-driven scientists will have more issues with so many word-based assumptions, and conclusion jumps on the back of sheer didactic and polemic.
The author's take on consciousness provides the best example of how little attention he may have paid to the various debates on the subject and the simplicity of the conclusions based on his wishes and already-formed views on what reality has to be rather than what it might be. ...more
I write this review a few days after the book's publication and the day after the US announced a sweeping set of restrictions on US tools sold to any I write this review a few days after the book's publication and the day after the US announced a sweeping set of restrictions on US tools sold to any advanced Chinese semiconductor chip manufacturer. There could not have been a more forceful endorsement of the relevance of any book.
Chip War is more than topical. It presents a highly readable history of the industry. While refreshingly unbiased in many arguments, the book sheds light on the thinking pervasive amongst US policymakers. In a world where most software (from the search to finance to consumer use related) is relatively easily replicable, most policymakers feel that the non-duplicable part of the technology industry is what one can do on a silicon wafer. The US believes that it is the leader in this segment - along with a few others who are a part of its influence sphere - and should use not just innovations but also other political tools to retain supremacy.
The author is clear in drawing his lessons from a chronological set of main events and personalities that built the industry in the West. The following are some of the questions not asked in the book but worth thinking about based on the same historical facts.
a. If one looks at the market caps of upstream chip manufacturers as a percentage of the total technology industry capitalization over time, semi-companies do not seem to hold as much monopoly power or importance in the eyes of investors as believed in many other circles
b. While the book mentions a good number of early innovators by name from the earliest decades, there has been almost no named scientist in the last twenty-five years (this is eons in the tech industry). There are several potential reasons behind here: narratives and tales surrounding innovators are far more common in the United States than in Eastern nations. Also, innovation stories are more relatable when they are easier to understand - most semiconductor manufacturing innovations for the last thirty years are in detail and not in broad subjects like transistor or UV lithography. And lastly, the latest tech innovations are team- and resource-based rather than individual-driven.
c. Semiconductor manufacturing knowledge is highly diffused. Many in the US may feel that the knowledge is all American because of the work of the earliest giants, but this is no different from if Europe were to seek credit for early innovations in internal combustion engines or nuclear theories. Even if some of the knowledge had been previously stolen, the most critical parts of advanced manufacturing now are not all necessarily in the US. The rise of the likes of TSMC and Samsung Electronics, along with the inability of American companies to keep pace, are proof. The diffusion of the know-how happened quite early as reflected in the dominance of the Japanese - well described in the book - in the 1980s.
d. Nobody has been able to maintain dominance in this space for long. The book is littered with the tale of well-known names that led the space for a few short years. From Fairchild, Texas Instruments, through Motorola, Nikon, and now Intel, one can name a couple of dozen companies that seemingly had an unbeatable innovation lead only to see someone else take over. Is semiconductor manufacturing so challenging to master that a lot of money and an army of engineers cannot solve it without being a part of an existing establishment?
e. One wonders if the military establishment needs instruments created by the most advanced fabs of this year? It is clear that most rival superpowers of the world have access to technologies of a few years ago - say 2014/5 - even if they are blocked on the latest fabs. If, in the worst case, either the US or China does not have access to the latest processes of - say - TSMC, how bad is that truly?
f. Irrespective of whether semis are indeed the new oil or not (some of the questions posed above suggest that the industry might not be as critical or unique as made out to be), perceptions are going to keep them at the center in global geopolitics. The industry makes Taiwan far more pivotal for both US and China in their rivalry. The developments are likely to make China more committed to self-sufficiency in semis. It might not be as difficult as presumed, even if they remain somewhat behind compared to the cutting edge.
g. There is a tendency amongst some US nationalists (at times in the book too) to look down upon others' progress. If they see an advanced fab in a foreign land, they feel it is because of a transfer of technology or worse, or because of the low cost of debt (never mind the low cost of equity funding in the US), subsidization, government policies, etc. A lot of this is true, but even more accurate is the rapid, unheralded, vast number of innovations - as reflected in the patents filed - in these Asian countries.
Even fifty years on, Chip War is about a fast-changing industry. It is about the world's most politically colored industry also. The book will surely become dated soon, but the sections on the early days will be helpful for any reader who wants to learn how the industry evolved in its first few phases....more
Loading...
