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 Castle is the best of Kafka in the way it is conceived and starts, but the worst of him in the way it hobbles from midway to not end. If the authoThe Castle is the best of Kafka in the way it is conceived and starts, but the worst of him in the way it hobbles from midway to not end. If the author had been able to finish, he or his publishers might have edited out a lot of prattle that affected the last parts while providing more shape to the great themes the author brings forth from the beginning.
Between surrealism and dark humor, the Castle has perhaps the best first half of the master author's great works. This no-small-feat frequently gives rise to excellent little sections with pithy quotes throwing light on the inanity of many of our ardent pursuits. The dependencies that emerge out of K's erroneous assignment could have provided excellent secondary motifs on the primary concept of inscrutable bureaucracy and bumbledom. Instead, one gets almost Freudianisq ramblings around relationships that are ill-conceived and too open-ended. It is no wonder that most summaries on the web spend nearly the whole length on the first third of the book.
In general, genes are counted as the fundamental constituent of our body. Many popular books are written with it at the center or associated entities In general, genes are counted as the fundamental constituent of our body. Many popular books are written with it at the center or associated entities like DNA or chromosomes. One also comes across books that weave the science around RNA or other cell organelles like mitochondria.
A story, and it is a story in the hands of Mr. Mukherjee, around the cell provides perspectives that are new and useful. The book does not much rehash the basic genetic concepts, discoveries, and histories typical in most other works of the genre. Also gone are discussions on the latest discoveries and debates.
What one gets, instead, is a book focused on pathology. The subject is so vast that almost any part of genetic or medicinal sciences could have been deemed relevant. The author sticks to what he knows best based on his physician's background. More often than not, he describes the workings of the cells using what happens when something goes wrong. This is not how one learns these concepts in a biology course. And it surely does not make cheerful learning.
As is well known by now, Mr. Mukherjee excels in weaving in personal history and experiences he has had as a doctor. These stories, high in emotional quotients, provide relief from weighty topics and act as good bridges between completely disparate subjects.
Many readers, like this reviewer, will find it difficult to follow the details strewn everywhere in the book. The subject matter is complicated and developing a genuine understanding of even a fraction requires long training. The book will help the readers get initiated in multiple new areas and also appreciate how far along sciences have come, even when they have remotely not come far enough. ...more
The vastness of mathematics is conveyed in this unique volume. The book is clearly for the fans. The book presumes a relatively reasonable level of maThe vastness of mathematics is conveyed in this unique volume. The book is clearly for the fans. The book presumes a relatively reasonable level of mathematical foreknowledge and proficiency. Most importantly, it is all about the breadth of the subject at the shallowest depth of any topic mentioned.
Each of the nearly three dozen chapters focuses on a different area of mathematics and another interesting real-world application. Even those who know their math well and use it regularly will have much to learn, relearn, and refresh. The chapters are uneven in their complexity and even readability, but few are rendered trivial to be widely understood. The book is heavy reading, and a real understanding of many topics will require much more training elsewhere, along with reading subject-specific books....more
Biloxi repeatedly flatters to deceive. A reader should be excused to ensure from the cover that the author is John Grisham, not Jeffrey Archer, while Biloxi repeatedly flatters to deceive. A reader should be excused to ensure from the cover that the author is John Grisham, not Jeffrey Archer, while going through the story. The broad strokes of multi-generational family feuds, the holier-than-thou good folks with their state power pitted against the darker-than-coal villains, like-father-like-son family traits, elections, etc. are all the hallmark features of an Archer novel. As is usual in such stories, there are no mysteries, and the violence is portrayed as incidental.
None of these is a drawback. The best of Archer, however, works not because of his typical story arcs but because of all the rousing/moving anecdotes he weaves in with sharp dialogs and twisty word plays. Mr. Grisham cannot be faulted for failing on this, but what is inexcusable is a lack of good courtroom drama, which is his forte. There are multiple court scenes but with the perpetrators never in doubt - not just for the readers but also for the judge and the jury - they are unusually drab.
As a result, the end product reads like monotonous, information-providing non-fiction, which the novel is not. ...more
There is a lot wrong with Three Roads. It presupposes decent familiarity with the basics of not just general relativity and quantum mechanics but alsoThere is a lot wrong with Three Roads. It presupposes decent familiarity with the basics of not just general relativity and quantum mechanics but also string or loop quantum theories. It was published over a couple of decades ago, which makes it dated, and this is not fixable with just a couple of later-day post scripts. Its earliest projections have been proven comprehensively wrong. Plus, some may find it overly simplistic. Or excessively speculative. Or too verbose. Or often with rather tacky analogies, etc., etc.
And yet, this is a must-read for the non-experts after they have gone through a few more basic, popular books. I have read a few dozen books on these subjects over the last few decades, and I could still find a large collection of new concepts and understandings in this book, which is something I cannot say about even the most recently published ones:
Observer-dependence realities and the need for the final quantum gravity theory to include the observer as a part of the observed
How a final, decohered reality could imply a superimposition of various histories, with some that different observers might have experienced differently
Black hole thermodynamics and Bekenstein bound that support the atomic or quantized structure of space-time
Potentially different light speeds (or the upper bound) for waves/particles of different frequencies Background independent nature of general relativity versus the dependency of quantum and string theories
Other details in how the atomic structure of space could be connected to the entropy of blackhole, the event horizon relationships' links to the holographic principles, relational framework of loop quantum theory to explain the atomic structure of space-time, and at least a handful more
The author is a renowned scientist with ideas that are not generally accepted by the majority in his fraternity. One can almost see why even in the book. The author is a dreamer and loves to speculate what the world's structure could be, even when what he speculates is thoroughly untestable for the foreseeable future.
This is most obvious when the author tries to find a middle ground between his favorite loop quantum gravity (LQG) and the more popular rival string theories. The rapprochement, as per the author, is if the world is constituted of strings that have their background in a lattice of far tinier loops (with the strings also made of the same, tiny loops). The same romanticism is present in the assumption of baby universes behind the black hole event horizons, the expectations of expanding black holes creating their big bangs, or even the invalidated hope of an all-agreed quantum gravity theory in a decade.
The reviewer would like to conclude with one side note on the author's argument that the LQG has a far higher chance of being right because it is a unique, self-sufficient theory. The author states that string theories come in multiple self-sufficient versions. If only strings and nothing else were at the base of our world, our world could only be one of these versions' manifestations. And if that proves to be the case, it would either mean somebody from outside - say, a God - randomly selected this version, or we have to assume a world bubbling with other manifestations with our universe only one of those multiple worlds. The author uses this argument to argue that a bottom-up, self-sufficient LQG may come in only one variety and may not require either of these assumptions.
If this reviewer understood this argument well, it contains a substantial logical fallacy which means there is no true invalidation of the presumption that the world might be one of the string theory manifestations (or something different). We already know that there are completely self-contained theories that do not represent our world. In zero dimensions, such a model would be one of "nothing." The author talks about how scientists have discovered one and two dimensions, self-contained mathematical models that also do not represent our world. One way or the other, our world is, at best, one mathematical model with many others left out. This might be LQG (assuming it is not a specific case of anything else, as the author believes) or a string theory with arbitrary parameters/selections thrown in. It will be impossible to prove - a conjecture - that there is only one mathematical set of equations that can result in a universe/world, while no other set will be fully complete or manifestable.
A lot of words there. In conclusion, the book is worth reading as it provides a lot of new material to think about. But, this one is not for anyone picking up a popular book to understand the basics or anyone who does not like wild, almost mystical conjectures, however smart....more
The consequences of the First World War shape global geopolitics today, more than a hundred years later. They are far less studied and read than needeThe consequences of the First World War shape global geopolitics today, more than a hundred years later. They are far less studied and read than needed and none more so than what happened with the fall of the Ottomans.
The book provides a lengthy account of the war's battles and events from the Middle Eastern theatre. The chronological method focusing on the details of war-front action means a large part of the book will engage only the pundits of this history or those who enjoy detailed military accounts.
The book is less for casual readers who want to understand the roots of the current Middle East geopolitics. These roots undeniably stretch back to the 1910s, the fall of the Ottomans, and even some before. This book traces them somewhat, but its focus is squarely on the well-researched narration of what happened rather than the fallouts....more
Immortal North may attract a specific reader group because of its unique content, but the author needs a strict editor for a wider appeal. The work isImmortal North may attract a specific reader group because of its unique content, but the author needs a strict editor for a wider appeal. The work is too verbose, with joy-sapping repetitions as the author focuses more on the ability to provide lengthy descriptions. Many of the language errors - say, the use of different tense structures in the same paragraph, let alone through the book - are easily fixable. The others, like in inadvertent switches in narrative styles (from a third party, formal, all-seeing observer type to conversationist with the reader with the deployment of "you", for example), require more training and discipline.
The book's story and lead characters exhibited promise....more
David Baldacci is generally at his best in the Decker series, and this one is perhaps the best of the series so far. The mystery woven through red herDavid Baldacci is generally at his best in the Decker series, and this one is perhaps the best of the series so far. The mystery woven through red herrings, double flips, triple flips, a conflation of crimes, coincidences, and a dose of historic events is captivating all through.
The fast-moving story with over a dozen characters still has enough space for the usual new-cop-partners-who-initially-hate-each-other-to-hug-in-the-end caper, which somehow never grows old. The book also makes appropriate use of Decker's superheroic memory skills. ...more
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
Seinfeld, famously, was a show about nothing. So great was the humor quotient in interactions between its characters that the writers rightly decided Seinfeld, famously, was a show about nothing. So great was the humor quotient in interactions between its characters that the writers rightly decided they needed nothing else.
In a way, Wodehouse was perhaps the master originator of the idea that if one is brilliant at penning humor through interactions and characters, there is no need to have a story to dilute the impact.
Mr. O'Donnell is brilliant in contorting the language to create some of the wittiest dialogues. If only the book had skipped out on the macabre and the occult. The book is an absolute delight when it is not working on the murder mystery. The story itself is unlikely to appeal to most for various reasons and even less to those turning to the book for its humor quotient. ...more
The book is in two parts, although not separately but interwoven. The parts that discuss potential changes brought in by augmented and virtual realityThe book is in two parts, although not separately but interwoven. The parts that discuss potential changes brought in by augmented and virtual reality technologies are more credible, although without original, radical new use cases. Most of these have been discussed in great detail for years.
The book's primary objective is to promote decentralized technologies, including DAOs, DeFi's, and NFTs. Despite the occasional, balanced arguments, the author claims that any metaverse without these is undesirable.
The book was clearly written at the peak of the crypto bull market. A year of crypto winter makes one far more skeptical about the tall claims around what DAOs and the likes have to offer. The much-discussed advantages of these technologies are nowhere near being delivered, while their disadvantages continue to accumulate as things stand now.
So far, the crypto world continues to show the same tendencies of centralization for anything meaningful (and a lot that is not). A good, useful decent-sized product requires a lot of planning and decision-making that is perhaps as unlikely to happen without hierarchical decision-making as an orchestra. For DAOs to upstage centralized entities' far more user-friendly, secure, responsible, and legal-backed products, much more proof is needed. Until then, any claims of their superior privacy offering - themselves debatable so far - are far too small for most regular users. They require far too much time, effort, and technical skills to appeal to non-gamers or those not interested in only token values.
DAOs and Defi's have a place. Their developments are making the centralized world work on their shortcomings. But all said and done, it is far more likely that centralized entities with their digital certificates, CBDCs, official fractional ownership tokens, etc., will continue to rule the years ahead until DAOs emerge with something much, much better. ...more
Reading this book three decades after its publication is not as illuminating as its author planned. The work hailed as revolutionary appears inevitablReading this book three decades after its publication is not as illuminating as its author planned. The work hailed as revolutionary appears inevitable as humanity began developing the use cases of exponentially growing computational abilities. In fact, the pioneers and their pioneering work were small first steps in the long journey to where data analytics and its impact on all sciences are a few short years ahead. This reviewer had a handful of other takeaways, even though none were intended in the story.
It is fashionable to assume, as oft-repeated in the book, that most giants of various fields of the previous eras truly believed in linear, polynomial equations comprehensively providing answers about whatever they were investigating. The doyens worked with pens and papers, log tables and limited precise information; they were simply providing some logic or structure they could, based on the capacities of the tools at their disposal. The celebrated scientists and philosophers were not as stupid as often made out to be because of the theories they championed that appear highly simplistic (or worse) in our era.
Until the arrival of digital computers, it was impossible to explore the fields of recursive, iterative, circular equations involving a small number of simple linear equations. Digital computers not only made it possible to do calculations using higher power polynomial equations but afforded the luxury of having equations feeding into each other and measuring their impact after thousands of iterations (of course, the abilities are far higher now).
Santa Fe pioneers - as described in the book - were one of the first to witness the results of some such interplays. Should they be credited as the first to come up with ideas like "markets do not have an equilibrium"? I feel the author goes too far in such assertions.
The other problem is the importance assigned to armchair work without theoretical rigor or genuine practical links. If there is a set of all mathematical equations, linear equations - a highly specific case - will be an infinitesimally small part. Any claims that almost all rule-based life equations are nonlinear are stating an obvious and not necessarily radical. And this has been true from time immemorial. Most thinkers of the past sought refuge in linearity out of necessity, as explained above, and not dumbness.
It is easy to comprehend how those who first harnessed the powers of early computers to play around with hypothetical recursive, iterative equations were surprised by what they ended up with over time. With modern computing power and visualization tools, a neophyte learns how a seemingly homogenous cloud could be converted into lumpy clusters with a tiny perturbation and simple recursive mathematical steps that favor clustering. The pioneers of the book were the first ones to generate some of it, but their work is not as radical as claimed despite big words like the title in the book. Similar simulations were going on at countless places in those years with the new-fangled machines. It is almost given that many others had obtained the same results in those years with their hypothetical equation sets. It would have been different if the academics discussed in the book had come up with some precise, universal laws before anyone else. That certain types of equation interplay can suddenly turn chaotic from orderly or vice versa is not novel enough now and was perhaps not even then.
The holy grail in any field - scientific, economic, or any other walk of life - is to find the equations that work (to explain alone would be a great enough start). Given that the book's heroes were not pursuing any pure mathematical concepts and coming out with generalized laws, their work needed applicability for validity. In the absence of these, it was certainly not an idle pursuit, but this reviewer would join the ranks of many baffled colleagues of the pioneers discussed in wondering what all the fuss is about. The author might have missed that such bafflement does not equate to disagreement with the conclusions.
All that said, the book is at its best when explaining the dominance of nonlinearity in dynamic systems we see all around. ...more
In far many more ways than intended, Monkey King is a bizarre read. It is entertaining and informative of the value systems of the era in an equal meaIn far many more ways than intended, Monkey King is a bizarre read. It is entertaining and informative of the value systems of the era in an equal measure.
The army of monsters and demons, or even Monkey's superpowers, is more out of ancient Indian fables involving Hindu gods, but not how battles are fought and won. There is not much room for compassion, for instance. While there is humor and satire aplenty, there is little spirituality or even attempts at deeper life meanings.
The reverence for authorities and the descriptions of bureaucracy are uniquely Chinese. The transactional nature of interactions, including in the most extraordinary conversations with Buddha that permeates the story, is joyful initially but becomes grating as the story progresses. One gets a unique insight through the portrayed frictions between the disciples of Daoism and Buddhism. It goes against the conventional wisdom of these two paths' coexistence and mutually compatible natures.
Written texts have always held the highest importance in Chinese culture. The westward journey never wavered from it being a quest to secure the sutras and scriptures - something all Indian religions would consign to a far lower place to learning spirituality through meditation and spiritual/ascetic experiences. The most unbelievable parts of the book are not Monkey's extraordinary powers but the way its medieval author(s) perceived the path to attaining Buddhahood....more
The End of the World reads like a political manifesto. Most of the book will resonate well if the reader is an American nationalist, particularly a MAThe End of the World reads like a political manifesto. Most of the book will resonate well if the reader is an American nationalist, particularly a MAGA-believing Trump supporter. Otherwise, a lot in the book would be so deeply offensive that most readers are unlikely to retain their objectivity enough to pick the good points in between.
It must be recorded that the author declares himself a democrat as well as an internationalist in the passing. He is definitely not a climate-damage denier. Some sections support the climate claims, although they too are used more to prove that those the author likes will gain and the others will perish, rather than for any other genuine purposes.
In summary, the author strongly believes that almost all non-Americans are people without resources, industry, innovativeness, and any good institutional structures. These folks - variously called lazy, without creativity, fractious, herd-like, but thankfully not identified as having wrong religions or skin colors - have benefited from America-sponsored, America-created globalization of the last few decades. American sacrifices - something he explicitly mentions - made it possible for the rest of the world to have decent economic existence. The rest of the world has grown as the US, as per the author, sacrificed some of its. The book's first conclusion is that this is coming to an end (although it often reads like he desires rather than predicts it).
To be clear, the author has a concise list of nations that he favors. Many are preferred because their populations are not falling, while others are because of positive relationships with the United States. His preference order starts with the favorites as France and Argentina, followed by Sweden, Japan, UK, Colombia, Canada, Mexico, Singapore, Germany, New Zealand, South Korea, India, and SE Asia/Australia as a region (I might have missed a couple). However, almost none of these are seen as able to survive independently but could be worthy protectorate candidates for America. The rest are so doomed that at a certain point, the author even predicts a billion or more (of course, from the places he dislikes, with the most intense dislike reserved for China) to perish.
The author can and does offend anyone who does not belong to his echo chamber (effectively people who believe in perpetual population growth, fossil fuels, Southern American values/beliefs/lifestyles, apart from the belief that no one except the US can truly innovate and grow). His tone on American Exceptionalism is designed to denigrate everyone else. The basic idea is to close the US economy because the US can not only survive easily without others but also do far better relying on its own resources and workers (particularly from the South, including Texas) with occasional help from Mexico and a handful of others. Such closing of the US will almost send the rest to doom because of their inherent inadequacies.
In terms of the content, the book is littered with errors, not just while demeaning every other economy's ability or promoting American supremacy/isolationism but also while making points on topics like demographics or the impracticality of green energy. There are multiple good observations on how little green energy has contributed, agricultural challenges, and changing demographics. Still, most points fail to make a good impression because of the quickly drawn and often-disconnected, extreme, biased conclusions.
With this book, Mr. Zeihan may have significantly boosted the chances of being invited for a senior government position when a nationalistic leader becomes the US president in the future. This work should not be ignored for its potential impact on policymaking despite all the flaws....more
The Murder Rule is an intelligent, fast-moving story without any distractions. There are no side stories, needless humor, or other emotion-generating The Murder Rule is an intelligent, fast-moving story without any distractions. There are no side stories, needless humor, or other emotion-generating anecdotes not connected with the main story.
As a result, the burden is wholly on the main arc. The book is engaging because of the rapid-moving nature of events. The climax hits the right high notes, even if through set pieces and a host of unbelievable coincidences and impractical decisions. The book ends with appropriate twists to cap it all and make it a wonderful reading experience.
Many other reviewers have pointed out substantial errors in the details. They did not come in the way of the reading experience for this reviewer. That said, it is true that this is one of those feel-good, read-and-forget capers where the more one delves into any aspects, the less positive one is likely to get....more
Loading...
