Book Reviews

Elon Musk is kinda batshit insane. In a good way. But also a bad way. Jorgenson describes it aptly when he says that "purpose and intensity are Elon Musk's superpowers" and clearly shows it in the book. The book itself is basically a compilation of everything Elon has said, believes, or wants to do. It's not a biography, but is still a deep look into his psyche; if you listen to someone talk enough, you begin to get a clear understanding of who they are. Elon is arguably one of the best entrepreneurs of all-time. His early ventures in Zip2 and PayPal weren't necessarily as risky or ambitious, but were still very forward-looking in regards to the internet. Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, Boring Company, and xAI are where things get interesting. These were all crazy bets that weren't likely to succeed, but Musk pursued them because they are required for a better future (assuming you believe the because and reasons behind it): Tesla for autonomous driving and towards sustainable energy; SpaceX for interplanetary travel and colonization, as Earth will likely experience an extinction-level event eventually; Neuralink to augment human brains with the speed and processing power of external computers, especially for those who truly need it; Boring Company to utilize below-ground space for more efficient transportation; and xAI to discover the purpose of the universe (kidding! this is what Elon says, but if you're familiar with any sort of pro-AI argument, this doesn't need an explanation). And Elon embodies his reasons: he sleeps at his factories, he goes "demon mode", he puts his money into companies and takes any sort of profit back into R&D to continue to make things better. Elon's DOGE era is a stain on his reputation since it failed spectacularly relative to their stated goals, but this makes it clear why he thought it would work. All of his manufacturing companies have optimized things to the barest parts possible, so why couldn't it work for the government? I don't know, but it clearly didn't. How many times does someone have to succeed before luck becomes skill? Tesla and SpaceX probably would've failed if Elon wasn't leading the charge. And yet people still call him delusional for his Boring Company idea or colonizing Mars or build data centers in space. Weren't people saying the same thing for reusable rockets? Who are you (they) to say he's crazy for these other things? Sure, the odds are against him, but they were in all other instances and he still got shit done and made it work out. Reading this pains part of me because I don't have the risk tolerance or conscientousness to do anything like this. The opportunity cost is also too great. But my god what he's doing is inspirational. At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, he's sacrificed his life and health (sacrifice may be a strong, since he wants to do this) to build these amazing companies. People like this are what drive humanity forward. They deserve all the billions that come their way.

I'll be honest, I had difficulty keeping up with what was going on, but that only made this book slightly less awesome. Hiro would constantly switch in and out of the metaverse, but the shenanigans (can you even call it that?) that him and YT were doing in the real world was equally as badass: harpooning, sword fighting (oh, wait, that's the metaverse...oh, wait, he did do it in real-life too!), the list goes on. The mafia dog is freakin' badass with how much of a good (and fast! and lethal!) boy it is, clamoring out of its dog house to protect YT and kill bad men. So much going on here, so cool. Language stuff didn't really do it for me. Some select fun quotes: "This is America. People do whatever the fuck they feel like doing, you got a problem with that? Because they have a right to. And because they have guns and no one can fucking stop them." "Until a man is twenty-five, he still thinks, every so often, that under the right circumstances he could be the baddest motherfucker in the world." "The sight of the bare katana inspires everyone to a practically Nipponese level of politeness".

(I wrote this with major background noise and a foggy brain,) How do you deal with people who made bad decisions that seemed like good ones at the time? Do you forgive them because you (probably) would have done the same? Or do you shun them? I don't know the best answer. Forgiveness is good because it encourages people to repent and right their wrongs, but it can also be bad in that people can do bad things, feign remorse later, and be reintegrated into society. The solution lies somewhere in between on a case-by-case basis. There's also often a lot more to it: what was their motivation? Were they coerced or happy to do so? Was their money, fame, honor, or something else on the line? What was the zeitgeist like? Not all of these are readily apparent at first glance.

Ah, the life of a dishwasher in Paris and tramp in London... they're terrible! (That's a nod to Bettmann's The Good Old Days: They Were Terrible!") And this is a memoir, not a bunch of stories that Orwell dreamed up in the comfort of a London flat while sipping tea and munching on scones. He lived this. What exactly? Mind-crippling hunger to the point of only being able to think about food; money schemes designed to fool others for a quick buck; patience in waiting for things to happen, like the opening of a restaurant; hopes of an income being crushed; smelliness and bugs; pawning off shirts and the few items he owned, being surprised in both directions about the price he got; walking everywhere and only occasionally spending money for the metro; working double-digit-hour days six days a week and getting plastered the seventh with the others who worked the shift; the list goes on. Life in poverty is terrible. I've always wondered what it'd be like to life below the poverty line. I once designed a 30-day experiment that would have mimicked it—from no access to my nice bicycles to having to only use a certain amount of my apartment to intentionally throttling my internet speed—but never ended up doing it, which is definitely a signal that I know it would be terrible.

The good: this book makes a very compelling case for forecasting being a trainable skill. The authors outline exactly what makes superforecasters' (SF) so damn good at being accurate. The bad: I didn't learn _that_ much—a lot of it was rehashings of lessons and knowledge I already have. Page count could've been ~50% of actual and still gotten all the points across. That said, I've recently come around to books including a bunch of examples to make points because, as Paul Halmos said, "A good stock of examples, as large as possible, is indispensable for a thorough understanding of any concept, and when I want to learn something new, I make it my first job to build one." It's like the author heading off "what if" questions from readers. The case studies were explained well and relevant to the discussion. The takeaways in no particular order: start with the base rate; update as needed and you see fit; do a lot of research upfront; be willing to change your mind in the face of conflicting evidence; don't let your biases and hopes get in the way (duh!); learn from your mistakes and figure out ways not to make them in the future; predictions will get better within fields, not necessarily between fields.

The Goodreads description is actually pretty close to what I was going to type here. Guess I'll just go eat a dog now that I don't have to write this review. But if I were to write a review, it may go something like this... Yeah, it's a straight-up class war. Yeah, it started by a poor guy killing a rich dog. Yeah, there was an on-the-nose metaphor of a poor guy (one of those gross lower floor fellows, ew!) literally climbing the floors of the building thanks to his strength and size, culminating in him making it to the roof where a bunch of women were waiting for him. I think he was also naked, hairy, and hung during this multi-day adventure, making it all the more neanderthalic. I didn't really like this book because it went all over the place, but it was an interesting concept so I'll give it two stars.

Pack it up boys, the market has been solved. You can all go home now. Jim Simons and his team of freakishly smart math nerds beat us fair and square with a little linear regression, data cleaning, and sleepless nights. Seriously, the Medallion returns show that they actually "solved" a good portion of it, and by solved, they mean a program just spits out what to buy and what to sell without them really understanding the why. Which kind of makes sense to me because "reality has a surprising amount of detail"—there are hidden patterns everywhere in the world, intricacies that we can't understand much less see. But that they couldn't understand even after they could see it is what's interesting. We're often able to fit a data to a hypothesis when we have the data, but even then they weren't able to! Freaky stuff. It also surprised me how long it took them to get off the ground (again, RHASAOD). They were searching for successful commodity trading strategies for a long time and eventually were able to find them before branching out to equities and into other markets. But it really shows how difficult the problem was to solve, especially when taking into account how smart the people working on it were and the technology (or lack thereof) that they had at their disposal. Obvious kinks and hindrances were worked out over time—more accurate and faster price data, simple bugs in the code, etc—but it still took them many years to become the well-oiled machine they are today. The book delved a bit too much into the political dramas of RenTech, and while it's important to show how rich the RenTech execs (and even underlings) had become and the influence they were able to exert as a result of said wealth, the details were too much for me. Assuming Zuckerman didn't embellish, I didn't know how impactful the Mercers were for getting Trump into the White House in 2016! Jim Simons strikes me as a good man. He's caring, ambitious, generous, and kind, all attributes seen in how he ran RenTech and what he did with his fortune, like the $300MM Stony Brook donation and the various research he supported. It would've been cool if they had gone into detail about the (current) notoriously secretive RenTech hiring process. Most of the new hires they mentioned were just friends or well-known in certain communities. I wanna know how people get in now! Are they still just well known? What do the interviews look like? From what I can find, you're screwed if you don't have a PhD because of how technical the interviewers are and what they're looking for. A Hacker News commenter mentioned having to present on your research to a team followed by a proper grilling.

While you can definitely piece together this book by spending enough time on LessWrong and the Alignment Forum, this is an excellent overview for laypeople on the alignment problem and why it's really difficult to solve. I appreciate the short stories to explain their positions.

A nice dive (focused from 1994-2005) into the workings of the Supreme Court, individual justice biographies and their paths to the Court, famous cases that were decided during said years, and some perspectives of each individual justice. I was (probably) denying up until the end how much being able to choose a justice matters in regards to political power. Before this book it seemed like people were much friendlier when it came to appointments, except in rare, but arguably merited, circumstances. Scalia was a unanimous decision; Bork was denied 42-58; Thomas was denied 52-48. But why did they not try to pack the courts earlier? I am unsure. This is a potentially silly, stupid, and serious accusation, but I now wonder how much of some of the more partisan judges simply start with the morals and reason backwards to find a jurisprudential justification that supports their belief, which is quite often the belief of their nominator (no shit!). Now to some things I changed my mind on. States' rights is huge. There's definitely an argument for not touching or dictating things at the federal level and letting states govern themselves, leading to a "state market" where the better states get more talent across the board, leading the crappier states to play catch up. This is how companies work, so why not governments? Cases that were argued for a states' rights perspective were Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges. Legislating from the bench is bad in the same way that restricting free speech in any of its forms is bad: what happens when the other side gets power? (Note that while legislating from the bench isn't always cut and dry, there are definitely some examples that cross the threshold.) Fun facts about the Court, its history, and the justices are peppered throughout the book. A separate fun fact is that you can apply to the Court's lottery system for a chance to see the court in action (no phones allowed). Toobin definitely leans left and it's evident from his critiques of Rehnquist, Scalia, and Alito (not much given Alito's short tenure before the book was published). He supports O'Connor's swinginess and the other liberal judges a bit more. Overall, he's pretty fair given his background. A question I was left with and a friend posed to me is what makes a good SC nominee? My guesses were (in no particular order): a judicial philosophy that aligns with the nominator; a track record of being a good judge for many years (sorry, Clarence!) and deciding "correctly"; not old, else they could retire or die soon and the opposition may be in power; good reputation by the various societies (Federalist Society for conservatives; nothing for liberals (what????)). Also, presidents are not supposed to ask potential nominees how they would vote on X, although I'm sure it's asked in a roundabout manner.

My relationship with Mark Twight is chicken-or-egg-like. I first discovered Gym Jones 11 years ago, but wasn't aware of the philosophical side—the most important part—of the gym. Later during my college years, my philosophy towards life, training, and the relationship those two had was developing along a similar path Twight's had, and then poof! I rediscovered him. Had I read something in the interim that influenced me without my knowing it? I don't think so, but what I read after that sure as hell influenced me and spurred me deeper into the forest.

This book is the anthology of Twight's writings. Straight from the book's description on their website: "One hundred forty-one Sermons previously accessible only behind the paywall of an old website: these philosophical musings are guaranteed to motivate, admonish, inspire and critique, all linked by the inseverable bond between the physical and the psychological, the mind and the heart. Poison pays tribute to the origins of our current practice at NonProphet — combining the physical weight of a paper tome and the significance of analog art with the wormhole nature of a digital interface, reinforcing the connection between these means of communication, and expression. It offers a glimpse into the history and detail of the characters and concepts that informed these powerful essays. These Sermons were mostly philosophical — because we believe that opening or guiding the mind makes all physical work and training more effective, more transferable to life outside of the gym, and that mindfulness amplifies the physical practice itself. Each essay draws upon personal experiences — how else would the ideas manifest or be applied and tested or leak outward to “real” life?"

It's hard to quantify the impact these words have had on me—not just in the eight weeks that I was reading the book, but the years before this in which I read a handful of his articles. The scarcity of them encouraged, almost forced, me to fully digest each word, sentence, paragraph to its full extent, to see how if I currently lived that way, and if I didn't, why not. But this opened up a whole new world of writings, many of which aren't available on the internet (I'm not sure if they're even available on Gym Jones anymore).

I'm skeptical of the written word being a motivator. Music and film can only do so much before steam runs out. Inspirational quotes overlayed on some muscular man is not what will be found here. There's no "dream big, stay positive, work hard, and enjoy the journey" bullshit. But this book holds something more profound than that. It instills something deeper, something lasting, something, dare I say, inspiring. But this inspiration is a slow, steady burn, not the one-hard-push-then-back-to-laziness type. It's one of the first times I've had this happen to me. The first time? Reading Twitching With Twight.

I recommend reading one of these a day and reflecting on it. It will take many months. Tough questions will need to be asked and answered; confrontation with the self and others is inevitable; personal ideas will be torn down, solidified, or questioned greatly. But do this—do it right—and a better person will emerge at the end. They will be wiser, more thoughtful, more exacting, leaner, stronger, more focused.

Stubborn Attachment's thesis is simple: economic growth is great for all parties involved (rich, poor, producers, consumers, selfless, selfish) and should be prioritized to the utmost. On the way, he considers six issues which may help make decisions: time, aggregation, rules, uncertainty, rights, and morality. And to make an analogy to sport, policies should not focus solely on the immediate, short-term gain it can/may produce, much like marathoners do not sprint right out of the gate when they have 26 miles to go—the energy loss is too great and may put them over the fatigue edge quickly. As Cowen states, "policies that prioritize growth at breakneck speed are frequently unstable, both economically and politically". He cites the Shah of Iran forced modernization policies as an example of what not to do.

From here, three "key" questions are asked: "1. What can do to boost the rate of economic growth? 2. What can we do to make our civilization more stable? 3. How should we deal with environmental problems?"

He begins with the idea of the Crusonia plant, "a mythical, automatically growing crop which generates more output each period. If you lay the seeds, the plant just grows; you don't have to water it or tend to it. ... The apple seeds germinate, resulting in a steady and indeed growing supply of new apples and also of new apple trees, albeit based on some measure of sun and rain." Cowen then likens it to economic growth, and suggests that policies should have some level of Crusonianess.

To support the thesis that economic growth is objectively good, statistics on well-being and living standards are cited, including occupants per room, running water, lighting, education, disability, death/mortality, work hours, health, mental development. And it's not just for people of that growing country, but also the immigrants who come, learn/contribute, and then go back to their home countries and share the wealth of knowledge they've gained. He also cites a (single) study that predicts a 0.5% increase of GDP in R&D investment would have exponential effects on output.

The idea of stagnation is one I consider in many aspects, and it seemingly applies here (although I don't see it in my day-to-day!). As Cowen states, "progress is unevenly bunched, we have been in a slow period as of late, various new development are percolating, and we should do our best to help them along. ... economic growth and technological progress do not always arrive at a steady pace". Taleb has stated similar in one of his books, and I see it in everyday life. New discoveries and improvements in technique can jumpstart inventions or speed up progress. I see this in fitness where a small change in technique can allow greater efficiency, more weight to be lifted, etc. Same with educational pursuits: there have been times where I am stumped on a concept and suddenly it just clicks, opening up many more doors in the process.

I really enjoy Cowen's model of "Wealth Plus", which isn't measured solely in GDP, but everything else that contributes to overall well-being: "leisure time, household production, and environmental amenities". I am reminded of Keynes' oh-so-wrong statement about his grandchildren (who are now alive and adults!) having fifteen-hour workweeks. Wealth is not just the number of commas in the bank account.

Well-being and income is a decades-old debate, but I believe current research says that it continues to increase; Cowen cites the "most comprehensive study of the income-happiness link to do" to find a linear-log relationship. Income, and ultimately wealth (lowercase, traditional definition, not Wealth Plus) is almost an objective measure of freedom and security/peace-of-mind, so increasing wealth should in theory improve well-being.

Another central argument is that the distant future is more important than we care to think, and "if we can get over our initial impatience for receiving a reward now, our intellect is very often capable of seeing that we should care about the more distant future as much as we should care about the less distant future". And with this, some amount of faith is involved considering the uncertainty of our actions. Trust the process and stay the course.

"Our strongest obligations are to contribute to sustainable economic growth and to support the general spread of civilization, rather than to engage in massive charitable redistribution ... greater economic growth and a more stable civilization will help the poor most of all." This ties into the preceding paragraph: the present poor will not benefit now, but the future poor will (and they may not even by poor then!). Redistribution, if enacted, should prioritize those that are most likely to contribute to economic growth (without violating any rights, of course). This means major capitalists would likely be first in line to receive benefits. "If we combine the trickle-down effect from the wealth of the wealthy with a zero rate of discount, it is easy to generate scenarios in which utilitarianism would recommend the redistribution of wealth to the wealthy."

Linking back to my first paragraph, Cowen claims there are two policy categories once-and-for-all and growth rate. OAFA is self-explanatory, while GR is more Crusonian and helps facilitate other improvements as a result of its enactment. I disagree that these two are mutually exclusive: OAFA can remove certain harmful regulations and open up competition, fostering innovation and improving consumer experience. The Solow model is mentioned, with its key point being that "the primary way to increase ongoing growth is to induce a higher rate of technological innovation". I will need to compare timelines of world GDP and some measure of technological progress. Cowen counters Solow with the "increasing returns" model, which states that growth/improvements begets more growth/improvements, with ideas being the fundamental source of returns: they can be re-used, improved upon, debated, used as inspiration, etc. See open-source software/licensing as an excellent example.

Uncertainty must also be considered when implementing policy. There is no telling how things will end up in the future—randomness is too strong, especially with so many variables at play. Between two choices, one with a small benefit or cost and the other barebones, the small benefit or cost should not be considered, as it will eventually be of zero value.

Some high-level takeaways. First, my current career is likely making a not-significant impact on the future of humanity through my innovation and ideas. Second, my public publishing of thoughts/information/knowledge has hopefully influenced a reader in some form or fashion, enough that they produce something that I had a minor hand in.

War and Peace is often acclaimed as one of, if not the, greatest novels of all-time, as evident by the high-ranking and sheer number of "best book" lists it makes it on, including Bloom's Western Canon. This claim is not an opinion, nor can it be argued, questioned, or debated—it just is, and only those who have read this masterpiece will be able to comprehend this fact.

Tolstoy explores a plethora (but not to excess) of themes through the perspective of five aristocratic Russian families and their relations during the Napoleonic Wars: Bolkónsky, Rostov, Bezúkhov, Kurágin, and Drubetskóy. And despite being written 150 years ago, these motifs still directly apply to 21st-century life. Past generations are often looked at differently than the current generation—the current gen'ers think their parents can't and don't and won't possibly understand what is going on, can't possibly put themselves in their position, can't feel what they are feeling—but how they are mistaken. Some experiences transcend the time period, the social status, the location that people think make them unique and unlike anybody else. Tolstoy recognizes this fact of life while looking back from the 1860s onto the 1800-1820s, masterfully discussing the bravery required during times of war; the passion one feels towards a lover both in and out of their presence; financial stress and its toll on mental and physical health; the concept of love, not just of a spouse, but of comrades, family members, and humanity in general; the difference between free will and consciousness and their role in contributing to history; teenage infatuation and mistaking it for love and allowing it to engulf your thoughts and body and actions and life and being, only to eventually to realize it's not what it was nor will it ever be that; the concept of being good and doing good for their intrinsic value, not for some underlying purpose; the desire for glory and fame amongst one's peers and countrymen and family and the fine line between courage and sheer recklessness in the attempt to achieve it; the sense of identity one feels with their nation and their people and their desire to contribute to and support that identity through the participation of war; the need for revenge after one has been wronged and the forgiveness that some choose to give towards the offender; the love of God and all His doings; the feeling of needing to take action, even when the event that the action is acting upon is already in motion and the action one proposes will serve little to no purpose except making them feel and look better; the facade of strength one puts on to ward off an enemy, despite being crippled internally; the concession of valuables in exchange for a later, but more valuable result; the standing up against adversity for what one knows and believes is the right action, regardless of the difficulty of the decision; the momentum one feels from victories, the dejection one feels from losses, and the contribution each has on the psyche and performance of an individual in future ventures. These are only some of the themes within this beautiful work and are much more elegantly expressed and developed within the pages.

The final part (Epilogue: Part Two (note that this is not the Pevear-Volohonsky translation, but the gist is understood)) is the most significant of all of the volumes and parts and worth reading in and of itself. Tolstoy discusses power, free will, causes, and their roles in shaping and driving history forward. After examining the former two, he asks and promptly answers the "two essential questions of history: (1) What is power? and (2) What force produces the movement of peoples?" In regards to power, "power is that relation of a certain person to other persons in which the person takes the less part in the action the more he expresses opinions, suppositions, and justifications for the jointly accomplished action." Tolstoy uses the standard military model to exemplify power—the commander-in-chief takes the least part of action and the most of expressing his opinion (giving orders), the generals have a bit more action and less opinion, and so on and so forth all the way down to the infantry, where they perform all the action and have little to no opinion in the grand scheme of things. In regards to the force, "the movement of peoples is produced, not by power, not by intellectual activity, not even by a combination of the two,...but by the activity of all the people taking part in the event and always joining together in such a way that those who take the greatest direct part in the event, take the least responsibility upon themselves, and vice versa." This definition is a bit opaque, allowing it to serve as a segue into the second part of Part Two: free will. Do humans truly have free will? is a question that has plagued philosophers since the beginning. We believe in and trust the natural laws that govern physical objects, e.g., gravity, but refuse to accept that man's will may be governed by a set of natural laws that, despite not being seen nor understood, act upon us as gravity does an apple. Tolstoy distinguishes between consciousness (our ability to lift our arm when told to) and free will (the ability to direct our paths in life): consciousness is completely within reach of the individual, while free will is out of reach and dictated by history.

What causes history to occur? Is it the leaders of men, like Napoleon or Alexander I? The great man theory states that "history can be largely explained by the impact of great men". Tolstoy rejects this notion, instead proposing that no event has a single cause, but rather a multitude of smaller causes. While some view event X as the cause of of event Z, others may have a different perspective and see event Y as the cause of event Z. Does this mean one of them is wrong? Possibly. But one cause may not be mutually exclusive with another. One can go down the line of causes, finding a chain reaction that never ends. This is Tolstoy's grievance with (some) historians: they attempt to ascribe a single cause to the happening of something, not taking into account the many factors that contribute. When these factors align by coincidence is when great events occurs. For example, take a 20-digit combination lock, where the unlocking is a great event and the individual numbers are causes in the form of events. It takes all twenty numbers to align for the lock to open, but none of the individual numbers were the deciding factor in the event happening.

Tolstoy does not consider War and Peace a novel, nor an epic, nor a historical chronicle, nor really fit for any set genre of literature. Instead, it's in its own category altogether, mixing and refining a variety of literary genres to create the 1200+ page (translation-dependent) work.

Translations are a tricky and often controversial subject. Some readers swear by one translator, while others condemn that translator for their lack of accuracy and inability to convey the subtleties that author originally meant to express in the native version of the work. Pevear is a low-level Russian speaker and native English speaker and Volokhonsky is a native Russian speaker and high-level English speaker. (I can't find any CEFR results from either Pevear or Volokhonsky, but based on interviews I've watched, she has a strong grasp of English and he has been said to be non-conversational in Russian, implying some proficiency.) Together they have a comprehensive, close-to-foolproof method of translating. Volokhonsky goes through the novel's Russian version and translates it directly to English, along with notes about the author's intricate meanings and verbiage within the text: What did Tolstoy really mean by that? How does Dostoevsky's use of this specific phrase contribute to the atmosphere of the passage? Pevear then cleans up her direct translation into more fluid English. Volokhonsky checks his new-and-improved translation and they continue to refine it until the English version matches the Russian version in all details, such as tone, meaning, etc. This exchange of accuracy and nuance continues a few more times in either direction, until they are satisfied. Pevear then reads the newly-translated English version to Volokhonsky while she simultaneously reads the original Russian. This method is advantageous for two obvious reasons. First, there are native speakers of both languages checking the original and checking the translation, producing two checkpoints in which errors can be detected. The native part is crucial. Other translators, like Garnett, learned the from-language later in life (Garnett began learning Russian at the ripe age of 30), which many believe to be less efficient and effective than learning them as a child. (This has been refuted by some, but by-and-large remains true: I nor anyone in my close friend group know anyone who has learned another language past the age of 20 to the fluency required to make an accurate translation. And yet, most bilingual speakers learned their languages at a young age.) Garnett's late-learning shows in her criticisms by Nabokov. Second, and an extension of the first, there are more checkpoints for errors to be detected. No first draft is ever perfect (Tolstoy is reported to have written seven drafts for War and Peace!), and both errors and improvements can be found when making multiple passes. With all this being said and while I suggest Pevear and Volokhonsky's translation, I encourage you to do your research on translations and choose the one you think is best.

Russian novels, and this book in particular, are infamous for giving readers trouble when it comes to names. After a few hundred pages, the many relations are clear, but it definitely helps to have a loose sheet at the ready. If the book includes the list, bookmark that for quick reference.

The length is no doubt daunting, but the story is engrossing enough that the number of pages becomes irrelevant. All you begin to care about is what happens next, not that you have 800 pages left. I personally tend to get bored after around 400-500 pages—get to the point! Not with War and Peace. The length allows Tolstoy's thoughts to develop at their own pace—they're not hurried because the book is getting too long.

This book should be and needs to be read by all, whether interested in literature or not. The themes are timeless, the writing superb, and the story riveting.

I didn't see an overarching plot, but Steinbeck did a good job of showing the diversity of personalities and lifestyles of Cannery Row. The ending was a good touch to show how communal Cannery Row was. As Wikipedia describes, it a "regional slice of life" book, which is very fitting.

You can't help but feel sorry for Lennie despite his unintentionally bad actions. Steinbeck masterfully crafts his words to make us pity Lennie no matter what he does—kill a mouse, kill a puppy, kill a woman. He makes genuine attempts to do better and remember, but is limited and cannot.

Based on the last chapter, George seems to stay with Lennie out of loneliness: "Because I got you an——" "An' I got you. We got each other, that's what, that gives a hoot in hell about us". George describing their ideal life is for both of them, not just Lennie. Something to strive and look forward to, something to take the burden off their physically-demanding and oppressive jobs.

Book is very short at ~100 pages (depending on edition) and easily readable, besides the English used.

A friend who is deep into meditation recommends this to me as a basic introduction to mindfulness. I think he was accurate in his recommendation, hence the four stars (i.e., it achieves its objective of introducing mindfulness in basic English).

The book itself is set up in a tutorial-like manner. Mindfulness as a concept is discussed, followed by practicing it, then problems that one may experience. The actual descriptions are unnecessarily verbose, but in case the initial explanations aren't enough, it definitely gets the point across.

Length is fine, but like I mentioned a sentence ago, could probably be shorted to less than 50 pages.

I'm not sure who the target audience is for this: people who grew up in the 80s and are looking for a dose of nerdy nostalgia, people who wished they grew up in the 80s, or just plain nerds (not in the derogatory sense) who want to geek out on the concept of a metaverse and all it has to offer. The book is riddled with references to older video games and movies, most of which I didn't get. Definitely geared towards an 80s kid or a teenager today.

It is well-written, a page-turner for sure, but it is also very easily-written. I blazed through it in maybe four hours or so.

Lots of cringy love confessions from Wade towards Art3mis, the exact kind a 14-year-old would make to his first crush (so maybe it does deserve a better rating for accuracy!). Cline does get the verbiage/sayings of teenagers and their interactions with each other right, so props to that.

As to the theme: this parallels well with net neutrality and the internet losing its independence and becoming an ad space for companies. OASIS is free to begin with and only costs money when you want to buy extra in-game items. Net neutrality proponents propose the same thing: free internet access for all, but you still need to pay for goods (duh). And no one wants ads to cover any space, except the producers of the ads (IOI in RPO's case and general companies in reality's case). Wade's fight really is noble, outside of the personal spaceship portion.

I really enjoyed the idea of him breaking into, then out of, the IOI's system, as well as programming the robot to take care of the shield. Smart, cool, effective.

I would only recommend this book to teenagers who are into video games or other sci-fi fans.

A collection of essays by LessWrong users. Most were interesting (to me), a few inapplicable and irrelevant (to me).

The editing is poor. Lots of formatting errors.

I've been bamboozled! Should've read the description... I assumed it was going to be the actual 1,000-person dataset, but nope, just a summarization and insights based on the data. From the little dating advice I read in there, it seemed reasonable (don't treat it like an interview or be bossy!), but there was a lot of fluff to increase page count.

No rating as I didn't read it all the way through.

A satisfying finale to a superb trilogy. I don't have much else to say. Ken Liu's translation is beautifully written and I'm sure expresses Liu Cixin's writing well.

A fantastic follow-up to The Three-Body Problem. Plot twists and philosophical notions are abundant, keeping the story gripping and entertaining. Not much else to say. On to Death's End...

Liu does an excellent job (from what I can tell) of accurately portraying the technical aspects of the story (outside of the science fiction items, of course!). This is refreshing, as most SF authors seem to not consider actual physics when dealing with the real world.

When Ye's betrayal of mankind is first revealed, it's hard to commiserate with her: she effectively doomed future generations to death, slavery, or similar, all dependent on the mercy of the Trisolarians. But after pondering it for a bit, it begins to make more sense. She saw her father murdered in the name of the Cultural Revolution, read the horrors of Silent Spring, and was labeled a traitor by her own government. How can she not be hateful towards mankind as a whole? She isn't the only Chinese person experiencing this, nor is she the only [insert nationality here] person experiencing this. It happens all over the world and shows no sign of stopping. Wouldn't you take a bet for an all-powerful alien civilization to come and show us how to live? Okay, well maybe not... but the answer may be different when in Ye's shoes!

The book has similar vibes to the movie Arrival, in which alien spaceships come to Earth and two factions form among humans: a let's-be-friends-with-the-aliens group and a destroy-the-aliens group. As to which seems more reasonable is a conversation for another review.

I slightly disagree with the video game within the book, called Three Body, only attracting the intellectual elite and not any laypersons. He reasons "the game required too much background knowledge and in-depth thinking, and most young players didn't have the patience or skill to discover the shocking truth beneath its apparently common surface. Those who were attracted by it were still mostly intellectuals." While this is understandable, there are still plenty non-intellectuals (by degree/trade) that are interested in mentally-stimulating games. I wonder if having more regular folk would have changed the dynamic of the ETO.

Poliquin is arguably one of the most successful, well-known strength coaches of all-time. This book is a testament as to why. It's primarily geared towards bodybuilding, but strength athletes can easily apply its principles.

First, theory is discussed. Sets, reps, tempo, exercise selection and order, etc. Second, applying said theory in the form of various exercises is discussed. This is divvied up by body part and concludes with nutrition.

A few gripes...

First, There is no references section, nor are there any in-line citations. This is ridiculous given the numerous amount of times a variant of "studies show" is said. This is fallacious (appealing to authority) and I frankly expect better from the Poliquin Group. The only reason I give them a slight pass is that a majority of the info presented is a) pretty basic and well-established, and b) easily found online.

Second, the recovery section is garbage. It discusses training twice a day (to prevent longer sessions, which have associated issues) and spends a single paragraph on eating patterns. Completely disregarded are sleep (which is featured a lot on their website), food quality (which is addressed later in the book, to their defense), and supplemental training (e.g., foam rolling, mobility work, etc). As Mark Twight so rightfully states: "Recovery is more than 50 percent of the process. Poliquin Principles doesn't even begin to give the recovery process the credit it deserves.

I really did not enjoy this book. The prose is elementary and lackluster, the character development basic, the story itself boring. I respect the premise a bit more than the rest of the book: the Memory Police controls what is and isn't in the society, resulting in citizens eventually forgetting what was and wasn't. Who is to decide that? Surely not the government, but the people? And even then, should it be an explicit decision or something that fades over time?

Besides that, there's few impactful questions this book poses and little entertainment it provides.

This book does a solid job of introducing rationalism to the average person. My main gripe—the one that causes it to get two stars—is the unnecessary length. I appreciate the fact that examples and length can add to a book, but Galef takes it a step too far. The entire book can be boiled down to about 50 pages, rather than the 240 it currently is. Zainab's review here does a good job of explaining my criticism.

The concept of the scout is a good one. This book is probably worth reading just for the quality content. If you see an example coming up, it can likely be glossed over without missing any important information.

I first learned about this book from this blog, in which the author described it as his "favorite book of all time". I bought it on a whim after reading the Goodreads description, but did not expect such an enthralling tale of two brothers and their divergent, but eventually convergent, paths in life.

Simha Meir, or Max, what he later changes his name to, works himself hard throughout life, beginning with his studies and ending with his factory post-revolution. But to what end? He alienates his wife, two children, brother, father, and everyone else who meant something to him, all on the quest to become King of Lodz and rich. His health in his final years deteriorates quickly, to the point of having to regularly take medicine. Is this really such a bad thing? Working a lot (using "too much" is subjective) is both praised and frowned upon in modern American culture. Some commend the commitment and encourage the long hours spent, while others reprimand those who work long hours, taking an interest in their health, well-being, and work-life balance. But what if the latter group truly enjoys what they do? What if those long hours bring purpose and happiness to their lives, instead of snatching it away? The book never directly mentions if Max is discontent or adverse to work, only that he arrives with the first worker and leaves along with the last. He does this day-in and day-out, rarely taking breaks for any reason.

The few times he does feel unhappiness and/or jealousy is at Jacob's luck in the form of two marriages, both supplying him with wealthy wives/father-in-laws. He views the luck as unfair, that he has done all this work but only received a relatively small reward, that Jacob is lazy and unfit for such a fortune. But, alas, this is life, something Max hasn't come to terms with yet.

This book taught me both that there's more to life than work, and that work can be life. This book reiterated that what seems all-important now may not be so in the near or far future. This book taught me to fight for and believe in causes with absolute conviction and no deviation. Many more themes than I care to write about are explored throughout the novel.

The character development of Max and Jacob is threaded with the development of Lodz as a city, from its humble beginning to industrial present (of the time). History of the revolution is also discussed.

A fantastic novel that is comparatively unknown to many others.

Feeling Good should be read by everyone. It shows the reader how their thinking can be plain wrong or distorted and how to both identify and fix those faulty thinking patterns (they're called cognitive distortions and there are 10 identified by Burns). And the distortions are not exclusive to one demographic or type or personality—everyone makes them. Everyone overgeneralizes negatives, everyone disqualifies positives and focuses on the negatives, everyone mind-reads the supposed negative thoughts of others. Note the common theme across the distortions: negative. These distortions ruin happiness and cause the CBT feedback loop. If negative thoughts occur, these lead to negative feelings (sadness, guilt, shame, etc). These negative feelings lead to poor behaviors. These poor behaviors finish the loop and produce more negative thoughts. This loop can propagate infinitely, getting worse and worse. CBT seeks to stop the negative feedback by changing the thoughts one has in regards to events (notice the lack of negative or positive qualifier). Fewer negative thoughts means fewer negative feelings means fewer negative behaviors, eventually reaching close to zero across all vertices of the triangle (zero is extremely difficult). Instead, positive thoughts (learned from CBT training) means positive feelings means positive behaviors.

Examples are presented throughout every step of the book, and Burns does an excellent job of explaining them such that a layperson can understand. No complex words, no previous knowledge of psychology needed.

I did not read the parts discussing depression or related issues.

Fenn and Byrne's The key principles of cognitive behavioural therapy provides a decent overview of CBT and provide solid resources (see linked-to papers within the paper) to specifics.

Caplan's primary selling point on why one should have children, especially more children, is that they're easier to raise than most people anticipate or society portrays. To support this, he cites twin and adoption studies, which allow the nature vs. nurture argument to be quantified. Six typical wishes of parents are examined: health, intelligence, happiness, success, character, and values. (I can't think of any other wishes I would make for my child to have.) According to the cited studies, all come back pointing towards genetics as the driving factor, taking some responsibility off of the parent(s) for the success (in all aspects) of their child. And while some parental efforts may make long-term impacts, most regress to their "personal mean" (quotations mine). Caplan's message to parents essentially boils down to "relax, they'll turn out fine or not, and it probably won't be your fault".

Caplan moves onto looking at what he calls "fade-out", or the regression or progression to what was originally to be, despite the parents' efforts. Fade-out appears in regards to intelligence, income, crime, and religion. For example, "During childhood, the nurture effect is big. If you're more religious than 80 percent of kids, we should expect your adopted sibling to be more religious than 68 percent. Yet by the time you're thirty-three years old, two-thirds of this effect fades out." He then provides three suggestions for making the best of nature vs. nurture (where nature has a larger impact): "lighten up", "choose a spouse who resembles the kids you want to have", "if you want to drastically improve a childs life, adopt from the third world", "raise your children with kindness and respect", "share your creed, but don't expect miracles", "don't write off your teens", and "have more kids".

More topics, including child safety, heuristics for determining number of kids, why more kids are better for the world, being a grandparent, birth-related technology are discussed. Finally, Caplan discusses his arguments with fictional characters to bring a more balanced view to the book.

He has >50% convinced me that it is easier to raise children than society portrays. Not making them do things they don't want to (to an extent), giving them more independence, and trying less (wow, that sounds bad!) will make my job easier as a parent and their lives more enjoyable/fruitful. Next up on the parenting reading list is Harris' The Nurture Assumption.

The book is well-formatted and well-written. All claims are clearly cited in the Notes section by respective text, e.g., "Children under five years old are almost five times as safe, [full citation]".

Full text here. Took me <30 min to read.

Aga talks about his home country of Sudan, his abduction and subsequent sale by slavers, and (forced) travels to Egypt, Italy, and finally England. Poems are included at the end. The Seasons is quite nice.

Per Larson's usual style, multiple storylines are followed: that of Isaac Cline, chief meteorologist of the U.S. Weather Bureau's Galveston office; that of the Weather Bureau itself and its development; and that of the poor souls of Galveston who suffered on that fateful day. Of course, there is a fair amount of speculation on Larson's part. Documentation regarding that day is less widespread than it would be in today's digital age, but his speculations are not that far-fetched, e.g., bodies undoubtedly stunk, those who stayed in place towards the beginning very probably doubted the storm's tenacity.

However, there is too much fluff. Larson provides accounts of the storm that are almost too detailed, but they do serve to show the thinking at the time and intensity of the hurricane during its peak.

And as usual, Larson's notes are phenomenal. He emits nothing (unlike some books) and specifies his research method.

Recommended by a friend one day, picked up the next, finished less than 36 hours later. A few themes and questions to explore below.

Self-reliance is instilled in Ender at a young age. After removing his monitor, a group of boys attacks Ender, resulting in one of them dying unbeknownst to Ender. Later during Battle School, Ender grossly offends a student three years in senior, resulting in a shower fight and the death of the attacker, still unbeknownst to Ender. The latter fight is what sets the reality in: no one is coming to save him at any point, imminent danger or otherwise. This is a major milestone in Ender's education and progress as a military commander. When he's ready to fight, whether it be a simulation or the real deal against real buggers, he knows he's all alone, save the team he commands. This concept of self-reliance is a big part of my personal philosophy. From a blog post: "Ultimately, we are all alone. People can be unreliable and disloyal, have higher priorities, change interests. Many friends and family you know will die while you continue living. Relying on yourself is an underrated, under-thought-of skill nowadays. There's nothing wrong with leaning on others for support, but it should only be opted for once the first line of defense has failed: yourself." If someone does come, great, help has arrived. If someone doesn't, fine, preparations were made and no help was ever expected.

Ender's leadership abilities develop throughout the course of his time at Battle School, arguably due to his intelligence and by extension, his quick advances and leaderboard ranks. Leadership is a mixture of innate ability and developed skills, with the former being more important. Innate leadership qualities include (roughly by order, exceptions exist), but are not limited to: intelligence, physical attributes (height, attractiveness), and charisma (arguably a developed skill, but I'll keep it here). Find me a major leader in either the private or public sector who is not somewhat intelligent. I'll wait. Ender exceeds the intelligence requirement but fails in physical attributes relative to other leaders and charisma in the beginning. His developed skills is what sets him apart. Those who excel in something—sport, career, etc—automatically are more valuable to the organization, and value rises to the top where it can provide more value. Ender does just that. He continues to practice and develop his own skills in the battle rooms and as a leader, all while climbing the ranks within Battle School.

There is more on the purpose of games and how they relate to military training and the balance of compassion and ruthlessness (they are not necessarily mutually exclusive by my definitions), but I'm too lazy to write about those. Maybe another time.

My only critique of this book is how easy Ender had it during Battle School in terms of competition. He lost one single time (only counting situations truly under his control) throughout his entire time there, and that was the first time playing a game he had only observed for a short while, much less actually played. He trounced every single other army that challenged his and topped the leaderboards in multiple categories. How accurate or likely is this flawless record? Well, if Ender truly is what Graff and others think he is (and he is), then it's fairly likely, but makes for more boring and predictable plot than if he lost a battle here or there. Some situations were practically un-winnable, at least at first glance, and Ender defied the odds and came out victorious. But events like this had a purpose: showing the reader and other characters Ender really was that good.

The beauty of non-fiction books is that they are supported by sources, sources that can be found in the references section of the book, not on the author's website because of "limitations of space". It's literally a 400-page book and the most important part is abbreviated? Instead he invites readers to his website for additional references.

Let's do some math. Because I'm too lazy to go through and count every additional reference and searching the page source doesn't yield anything obvious, the first four chapters have roughly 100 references total. There are 20 chapters, so 500 (20 chap * 100 ref / 4 chap) references if we extrapolate. Each page in the actual book holds roughly 12 references, giving a total number of pages of 500/12 = 42 pages. The current length is 10, so an extra 32 pages, or 7% of the current book's size, are required to fit all references.

How much extra does this cost? Using Amazon's KDP cost estimator, two costs can be calculated: that for 443 pages (current size) and that for 443+32=475 pages. The cost per book is then found to be $6.17 and $6.55, respectively—a $0.38 difference. However, this is KDP, designed for individuals. I was not able to find info on HarperCollins printing costs, but I imagine they are significantly lower since Sapiens would be printed en masse.

Wild claims are made without any sort of evidence to back it up. (Well, maybe there is, but I'm not going to sort through his website to search for it. The burden of proof is on Harari.) The tipping point for me was this footnote, in reference to how violent our ancestors were: "It might be argued that not all eighteen ancient Danubians actually died from the violence whose marks can be seen on their remains. Some were only injured. However, this is probably counterbalanced by deaths from trauma to soft tissues and from the invisible deprivations that accompany war." Statements like these require some form of evidence, of which none is given, and statements like these are littered throughout the first 62 pages of the book. Why 62 and not after? I stopped reading at 62.

This is not a scientific book. Sure, there are some basic facts and well-established information there, but for the speculative parts, Harari fails miserably at supporting his theories.

Do not waste your time on this book.

This program is excellent for GPP. Surprisingly well written and provides sound training advice. This program is easily integrable into most athletes' regimens, whether endurance- or strength-based.

Faced with death by chance, should it be taken honorably and without protest, or with a fight and begging? Should your social position dictate your ability to get out of it? Does getting out of it by way of another's death (agreed upon by both individuals) make you a coward?

As many other reviewers say, the prose is masterfully written. Ishiguro is able to take the form of a legitimate English butler (not that I've ever met one or know what they sound like, but if I had to imagine, this is it) and runs with it in all of Stevens' behaviors, mannerisms, and speech. His awkwardness and ignorance with other staff and his masters is portrayed perfectly.

The reader understands quickly that Stevens' work is his life, and despite the modern tendency to denounce this and say "work to live", Stevens is quite satisfied with it. He enjoys his work, doesn't dislike his lack of vacation time, and takes pride in his leading a staff, big and small. I expected him to become disillusioned with his work-life balance (or lack thereof) as he went further away from Darlington Hall, but I was proven wrong: he encountered no resistance to his ways despite meeting many different people, nor did he explicitly express regret at how he lived his life. Many can take a note out of his book!

Part of his work=life is the impact he saw it having on the world. The late-night cigar sessions, the constant refilling of drinks, etc, he saw as facilitating discussion that led to world-impacting decisions, discussion that would not have been as fruitful had he not been there taking care of the small details. Whether or not he truly mattered we will never know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

The quote that stuck with me the most was: "After all, what can we ever gain in forever looking back and blaming ourselves if our lives have not turned out quite as we might have wished? The hard reality is, surely, that for the likes of you and me, there is little choice other than to leave our fate, ultimately, in the hands of those great gentlemen at the hub of this world, who employ our services. What is the point in worrying oneself too much about what one could or could not have done to control the course one's life took? Surely it is enough that the likes of you and me at least try to make a small contribution count for something true and worthy. And if some of us are prepared to sacrifice much in life in order to pursue such aspirations, surely that is in itself, whatever the outcome, cause for pride and contentment."

Regret of one's past decisions plays a crucial teaching role in future decisions, one that can rarely be taught in other fashions. I view us as having two fates. One is immediate and almost entirely within our control: we can choose our jobs, our friends, our hobbies, our actions. This guides our life in the direction we want it, and is almost entirely out of the "hands of those great gentlemen at the hub of this world". The other fate is determined by those aforementioned gentlemen. I will (hopefully) never guide U.S. domestic policy in my lifetime. I leave that up to the elected officials myself and others put into office. In a country- and world-sense, those decisions are out of our hands and not worth concerning ourselves with. His last point hits home and applies universally. Contribution is a key factor in life satisfaction and should be thought of with pride and contentment. And in the end, isn't happiness the only thing that matters?

When to Rob a Bank is just a compilation of blog posts from Freakonomics. The posts vary wildly: most are funny, some are smart, some are not-so-smart, and a few are serious.

This is good bedtime reading, but not really otherwise.

de Becker's premise is simple: violence can (likely) be predicted. The person that lashes out in contradiction to their normal behavior probably had indicators that could have been noticed before the incident occurred.

Gift of Fear is primarily geared towards women and employers (because of workplace violence), but de Becker discusses a few other things.

de Becker also argues that one should listen to fear whenever it's present and justified.

Anecdotes are presented throughout to exemplify the principles.

Brief notes here.

See my notes (quotes) on the book here. The corresponding website is vagabonding.net.

Potts offers both advice on the physical and mental aspects of traveling, from what to bring on the months-long trip to how to approach adventure and the actual act of vagabonding. At the end of each chapter is a "Tip Sheet", where Potts provides further resources on the chapter's topic, including books and a short summary, websites, and other pieces of advice. Relevant quotes are found throughout the book.

My main takeaways: pack light; go with the flow; do what you want.

See also My Journey to Lhasa, In Xanadu, Arabian Sands, Among the Mountains, A Time of Gifts.

Link to another translation here. I also recommend checking out The Internet Classics Archives for similar free literature.

I came in expecting a book as impactful as Aurelius's Meditations, which is one of the most important and formative books I've read, but was disappointed. It reads similarly, but the topics are just not the same.

Seneca's argument is simple. Life is short, but only feels short to those who waste it. It is those who maximize their days that get the most out of life, both in quality and quantity.

A few good quotes:

"It is not that we have a short space of time, but that we waste much of it. Life is long enough, and it has been given in sufficiently generous measure to allow the accomplishment of the very greatest things if the whole of it is well invested. But when it is squandered in luxury and carelessness, when it is devoted to no good end, forced at last by the ultimate necessity we perceive that it has passed away before we were aware that it was passing. So it is—the life we receive is not short, but we make it so, nor do we have any lack of it, but are wasteful of it." This reminds me of the cliche quote that goes something like "Everyone has 24 hours in a day. How will you choose to spend yours?" While obvious, it should be understood. Too many spend their 16 waking hours mindlessly browsing their phone and doing unproductive, unenjoyable activities out of habit or lack of freedom (paychecks are required to live).

"The space you have, which reason can prolong, although it naturally hurries away, of necessity escapes from you quickly; for you do not seize it, you neither hold it back, nor impose delay upon the swiftest thing in the world, but you allow it to slip away as if it were something superfluous and that could be replaced." This sums up one of Seneca's primary arguments: time is irreplaceable and thus the most valuable asset any human possesses. Material objects, money, etc., can easily be replaced, but you can never get back the time that just passed while reading this sentence. And yet people allow time to flow right past them without giving it a second thought.

"Life will follow the path it started upon, and will neither reverse nor check its course; it will make no noise, it will not remind you of its swiftness. Silent it will glide on; it will not prolong itself at the command of a king, or at the applause of the populace. Just as it was started on its first day, so it will run; nowhere will it turn aside, nowhere will it delay. And what will be the result? You have been engrossed, life hasten by; meanwhile death will be at hand, for which, willy nilly, you must find leisure." First off, yes, "willy nilly" is verbatim. This idea of time making no noise or reminding you is a common experience in society. Parents often say "it seemed like he was just [age] a minute ago..." and most adults feel like "they were just starting work yesterday". I experienced this with passing through university: while it took four years and I can vividly remember each of the eight, busy semesters, it nonetheless passed quickly (and much more quickly than I would have liked!). I now try to take a moment when I'm doing something enjoyable (hanging out with friends, enjoying nice weather outside, eating a delicious meal) to stop and take in the full experience.

A wonderful, capturing story of gross injustice and the vengeance upon the wrongdoers, exploring themes of love and the extent of revenge in the process.

So, can revenge go too far? Does it depend on the crime committed, and should the severity of revenge be greater than the severity of the crime? Who is to determine that? What happens when innocent bystanders are negatively affected, or even killed? These are all questions posed to the reader as the story progresses.

The book is quite long, mostly as a function of the language of the times. For example, an excerpt: "I confess this is the drollest thing I have ever met with in the course of my extensive foreign transactions and you may readily suppose it has greatly roused my curiosity; indeed, so much did I long to see the bearer of so unprecedented an order for an unlimited credit, that I took the trouble this morning to call on the pretended count, for his title is a mere fiction—of that I am persuaded." While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, it absolutely contributes to the massive length of the book (the Modern Library edition is 1462 pages). I recommend learning the characters' names, relations, and positions, as it makes understanding the text much easier.

Dalrymple's account of following in Marco Polo's journey in his book, The Travels of Marco Polo. He alternates between the culture and history of the place he's at and his actual travels. See David-Néel's My Journey to Lhasa (my review) for a similar adventure.

Short disclaimer: I am 22 y.o. white middle-class male. I grew up playing violent video games akin to the ones he describes in the book (Halo, Call of Duty, although Grand Theft Auto wasn't allowed until around 12 y.o.). I have never taken prescription drugs for ADHD, but have many friends who have. My kindergarten classroom was not as rigorous as Sax describes modern classrooms—we had story time, nap time, and recess.

With all that said, I did not enjoy this book, specifically the video games section. Sax attributes the "growing epidemic of unmotivated boys and underachieving young men" to five distinct factors: video games, teaching methods, prescription drugs, environmental toxins, and devaluation of masculinity. (This is on the cover page of some books, but not for others.)

Video games have been blamed as the cause of violence by the media for a number of years now. They question the motives of school shooters, sometimes wondering if video games are to blame. The American Pscyhological Association has stated that there is insufficient evidence to link violence and video games. This book was published in 2007, so well before the APA's Resolution on Violent Video Games was published. Regardless, some of his suggestions for the "appropriate use of video games" are practically ridiculous: "no more than forty minutes a day on school days, one hour a day on other days" (forty minutes is hardly enough time to have fun time), "some of the E-rated games were more violent—and engendered more violent behaviors—than some explicitly violent "T" games" (yet these games were not named in Boys Adrift nor the cited book, Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents). As for anecdotal evidence, neither myself nor any of my violent-video-game-playing friends, numbering well over 10 (so not quite statistically significant), have ever shown questionable signs of violence. And yet we still enjoy action and war movies, shooting guns, etc.

His other suggestions and remedies are more reasonable. In regards to education, don't force boys to start so early in life and focus the curriculum on experiencing things, rather than just book-smart knowledge. In regards to ADHD diagnosis, choose an independent evaluator that goes through all the steps to determine if the child likely has ADHD, and only then prescribe him medicine in conservative amount.

This book is worth reading because a) it has a few tidbits of helpful advice, and b) it is so short and not much time will be spent on it.

Richard Feynman is known for a few things: his work on quantum mechanics, his undergraduate lecture series on the standard physics series (mechanics and thermodynamics, electricity and magnetism, and quantum), and his work on the Manhattan Project. What most people don't realize is that this physics professor also had fun in his spare time, and this book is his chance to enlighten us.

Feynman's adventures are numerous and diverse, including fixing broken radios; designing a burglar alarm (and having it work on his mother); stealing doors from fellow fraternity members; reciting Italian poems to Girl Scouts; serving as a chief research chemist; lecturing to Einstein, von Neumann, and Pauli; smelling books and finding out exactly who touched them; watching the Trinity test; cracking safes; picking up women at bars; learning Portuguese in preparation for Brazil; gambling with other people's money; learning how to draw; serving on a commission that chooses textbooks for public schools (and getting wooed by the publishers).

The final chapter discusses the scientific method and scientific integrity. See his lecture here and his answer to the simple question "why".

A few other reviewers mention his arrogance and that most of his jokes are at the expense of others. This is true, but not nearly as pronounced as they make it to be. He tends to be humble in his descriptions, but whether that is honest or hollow must be determined by the reader.

As the name implies, this book is a series of essays written by John Muir, a prominent outdoorsman and one of the primary reasons America has so many national parks.

Muir eloquently describes his romps around the woods, climbs up prominent peaks (Mt. Shasta, Rainier), and other adventures in the untouched western U.S. wilderness. His writing is quite beautiful, invoking feelings of awe towards nature and providing vivid imagery to put the reader in Muir's own boots. An excerpt: "when one of the greatest and most impressively sublime of all the mountain views I've ever enjoyed it came full in sight – more than three hundred miles of closely packed peaks of the great Coast Range, sculptured in the boldest manner imaginable, their naked tops and dividing ridges dark in color, their sides in the cañons, gorges, and valleys between them loaded with glaciers and snow. From this standpoint I counted upwards of two hundred glaciers, while dark-centered, luminous clouds with fringed edges hovered and crawled over them, now slowly descending, casting transparent shadows on the ice and snow, now rising high above them, lingering like loving angels guarding the crystal gifts they had bestowed."

There is no mistaking Muir's fascination and sheer love for the wilderness: his writing conveys just how much nature means to him and how he sees it differently than the average hiker.

This book is highly recommended for any outdoors person, and should be read while experiencing nature (preferably similar to where was!).

If you're wanting to experience Californian nature and mountains, I highly recommend Trinity Alps Resort, located near Redding, CA. Established in the 1920's (my great-grandfather went there as a child), it is a wonderful place to relax with friends and family and experience nature. The hike to Emerald Lake is challenging (26 miles round-trip from TAR), but entirely worth it: landscapes straight out of this book are present along the entire trail.

See also: Albert Bierstadt's complete works, California's High Sierra.

This book is an extended case study on "110 low-income unwed fathers" in the Philadelphia metropolitan area (Camden, NJ, is included in this). Black and white, young and old, mature and immature.

A few takeaways from this:

In most families, the relationship of the parents come first, followed by the birth of the child. For a large majority of the fathers surveyed, the child came first, followed by the relationship. How? Lack of care about contraceptives is the main cause. Men often don't wear condoms and women are sometimes off of birth control. Some also just don't care or have enough foresight to consider the consequences.

Fathers are largely excited and accepting towards becoming a father. In contrast to society's stereotypical view of low-income fathers who impregnate a woman and then leave, most of the men view their being a father as the best thing to ever happen to them, for a few reasons. For one, it is a goal they've always had: raising a little them and watching their growth and development in the world. It's also a catalyst for change, especially when the fathers' paths are not on an optimal path: the child gives them meaning and purpose in their lives.

Ideal characteristics of a father are common among inner-city fathers, but the ability to provide reigns supreme above all. This can be especially problematic for those with low paychecks, as their take-home pay after the essentials (rent, groceries, etc) can be quite small, minimizing the amount they can provide for their children.

"Quality time" is one of the most important parts of the father-child relationship. Fathers cherish the regular activities they get to do with their children, be it watching television or going to the park.

Mothers are discussed briefly, but their views are similar across the board: fathers need to contribute both financially and morally, be accountable (no more going to the bars after work when the baby's at home), and so on. Some men oppose this and view it as constricting on their lifestyle, causing them to not pursue a relationship with the mother.

An appendix details the statistics of the fathers, including their income, reactions to pregnancy, level of pregnancy intentionality, relationship strains preceding breakup, etc.

A thrilling travel tale of Alexandra David-Néel's journey to the Thibetan city of Lhasa, complete with adventures of conjuring evil magic against potential robbers, telling the fortune (Mo) of Thibetans they meet along the way, and avoiding detection by the hundreds of travelers and villagers they encounter on their journey.

Neel and her adopted Thibetan son, Yongden (who is also a Western-educated lama), took on the disguises of beggars making a pilgrimage to Lhasa. Their overt belongings included tents and food, while a compass, revolver, and money were hidden, only to be used when needed. Neel, having a white complexion, darkened her face with powder or cream (not sure how exactly to describe it) and wore a bonnet. Most travel took place at night to avoid interaction and possible detection, and she feigned ignorance when topics were discussed that a beggar should have no knowledge of. They stayed in villages, on rocky and plush ground, in abandoned huts; traveled through dense forests, over mountain peaks with blistering winds and dense snow, across valleys with lush grasslands; encountered pilgrims, robbers, reported cannibals (supposedly people who entered the Polung Teangpo region never returned, so there's only one thing that could have happened... (note that this region is not found on Google Maps nor Google in general)), lamas, bears; told lies as amusement (not cruelly), impressed others with their abilities, shot at a robber, prepared for battle against a gang. Despite their near-death experiences, Neel had the time of her life on the journey, but for her it was not about the journey, but the destination, for she would have been the first Western woman to ever set foot in Lhasa, also known as the Forbidden City.

She arrived there just in time for the New Year celebrations (assumedly Losar, the Thibetan New Year, but she never mentions it by name), remaining there and experiencing all the culture it had to offer. She slowly progresses in status to a middle-class woman with a servant.

Thibetan culture is explained throughout, helping to supplement some of their actions. While not nearly as dedicated to the culture as her other book, Magic and Mystery in Tibet, it offers a shallow, seemingly-comprehensive introduction into Thibetan culture and customs that would be difficult to learn about otherwise.

A short compilation of Thibetan scenery can be found here. This picture seems to be the best available that features her route to Lhasa.

This should be a part of any and every travel- or adventure-related bookshelf. Highly entertaining and informative, so highly recommended!

War can be hell for multiple reasons. Most think of the gruesome fighting. The bullets whizzing and cracking past your ear, the smell of gunpowder and death and blood overwhelming the nostrils, the smoke clouding your vision, the fear that disables all bladder and bowel control, the thoughts of your past and future experiences that haven't happened yet and at this rate won't. But there is another hell people don't know about or even consider: the non-combative hell, the hell where you don't experience your expectations and are disappointed more than you thought possible.

Imagine this: from a young age you dream of being a [insert career path here]. You read all the books and watch all the television shows that glorify that career and give you a false notion as to what it entails and how many women will be obsessing over you. As you grow older, you begin to train and invest precious youthful time to best prepare you, whether it be lifting weights or studying or practicing a craft. Finally, the momentous day comes: you've accepted the job offer. Your family and friends are there in support and cheer as your dream of over a decade has come to fruition. You are excited for what the future holds. You aren't jaded. Yet.

You begin job-specific training and learn the tricks of the trade, the do's and dont's. You continue training and refining your skills, ready to be called upon to serve the purpose you've been waiting for for the majority of your life. Months or years may go by before that happens, but the day finally comes: you've been called to serve your [company/country/community]. You enthusiastically follow your colleagues to the area of operation and patiently wait for further orders. It's so close, and you've waited so long, what's a few more days? You continue perfecting your skills, ready to demonstrate them to your hard-ass boss on a moment's notice. Your mind is calm and collected. This is what you've been bred, raised, and trained to do. The moment is nigh, and you are about to carpe the ever-living [your choice of expletive here] out of it. It's all anybody can talk about, interrupting sleep to stay up late talking about what's going to happen and how they're going to do it and why they want to do it. There's variations to the predicted events and reasons each gives, but at the core they're all the same.

But days turn to weeks, and weeks to months as you wonder where the action the smooth-talking guy promised you when you talked about the job with childish excitement in your voice and a reptilian gleam in his eyes. Excitement turns to boredom turns to anger. You've been lied to, bamboozled, fooled, used, tricked out of a life of glamour and being the hero the TV said you would be. You still train, but it's not the same. Before it was for a purpose, but now there's no purpose. You realize the training was never going to be used, it was just a ploy to motivate you. How could you be so naive and blind?

You return home to your family and friends and acquaintances, who view you with a halo on your head and a heavenly glow surrounding your body: you're a hero. You keep a straight face that conceals your disagreement and disillusionment, understanding there's no way to change this narrative. They won't be able to understand what you went through. The years of excitement building up, only to have it come crashing down in a few short, boring, life-changing weeks.

English translation here, funded by the blog Slate Star Codex (SSC author's review here.)

For those that don't know, this book is written by Lázló Polgár, a Hungarian who trained all three of his daughters to become chess Grandmasters. His youngest, Judit, is considered the best female chess player of all-time.

Polgar's method for raising a genius is relatively straightforward and devised from the upbringings of other so-called geniuses (Polgar researched many childhoods in preparation for his own children's). Start young, specialize in a specific topic, and continue studying and refining specialization. After reading this, most people would have an image of an abusive father disciplining his children for only studying chess openings for 6 hours that day, not 7—but Polgar is quite the opposite: he focused on ensuring his children's happiness alongside their success, not just the latter. The children want to play and learn chess for both themselves and their father, and do not feel forced or pressured into doing so. He balances failures and successes in a 1:10 ratio, allowing the children to experience what it's like to fail while still gaining self-confidence through successes. They should be praised often for their work, not to inflate their ego, but to make them feel worthy as a competitor and peer, not just a child.

Starting young is due to Polgar's belief (he cites the 1) WHO's Barnet (can't find source) saying that "the first five years of life are most important in forming a person’s behavior," and 2) B. Bloom's book Stability and Change in Human Characteristics, which says that "50% of a person’s intellect is formed during the first four years of life, and a child’s extraordinary ability to understand, typical until four years of age, little by little decreases with the passage of time") that after childhood, the brain's ability to learn new skills drastically diminishes, e.g., learning a foreign language is much more difficult for adults than young children. To take advantage of this time, Polgar started his children at the ripe age of 3. He begins with basic instruction in foreign languages (his top choice was Esperanto for its simplicity and cultural significance, but the girls also speak Russian) and moves on to basic games to pique the child's interest. Serious training begins around the age of 6 and continues from there.

Polgar chose his children's specialization as chess, but also proposes mathematics, physics, music, and foreign languages. This decision needs to be made at a young age (3-4), so as not to waste any of their precious enhanced-development time.

In continuing their chess specialization, Polgar had them playing chess 5-6 hours per day from the age of 4-5. One clarification on the word "playing" in the previous sentence: while "playing" is grammatically correct and it is not referred to as "training" or "working" chess, it was still "play" in the true sense of the noun: the girls were having fun while continuing to develop their abilities to high levels. This perception of play is crucial to the development of a genius, as it prevents burnout and boredom from occurring. A typical day for his children consists of "4 hours of specialist study, 1 hour of a foreign language, 1 hour of a general study (native language, natural science and social studies), 1 hour of computing, 1 hour of moral, psychological, and pedagogical studies (humor lessons as well), [and] 1 hour of gymnastics". A full day! But going back to the use of "playing", these days are enjoyable. The girls enjoy learning new chess openings, or how to converse in Esperanto, or a new joke.

While this specialization is exclusive to one field, hence the term "specialization", it does make the acquisition of other skills easier through the use of learning heuristics. It's often said the the knowledge learned in university may not be directly applicable to a career, but the problem-solving skills learned will be. Polgar states the same thing. By achieving a high level in one field and "learn[ing] how to learn", picking up new skills will be easier.

Polgar often claims that he himself can raise anybody to be a genius given full reign of their environment, especially the social aspect: "Genius is not born, genius is raised." The nature crowd from the nature vs. nurture debate will have a pretty big issue with this. He cites Watson's "twelve infants" quote, in which the famous psychologist boasts he can raise any one of them into a "specialist...regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors."

Even if Polgar's claims about the guarantee of raising a genius using similar methods, the child raised will still be an outstanding citizen. Polgar preaches morality as the foundation of genius, and views it as a major factor in the development of genius. He describes his qualities of a moral genius as follows: "I see before me a person who is sacrificial, honest, and courageous; a good friend and family member, not cynical, not egotistical, but empathetic and good-hearted, who feels responsibility, is attentive, and is capable of keeping secrets, who does not misuse their power, does not gossip, and can master their ambition, who is just, demands quality, an internationalist and not envious, who generally behaves in a friendly way and does not judge others easily, who is persistent, has initiative, conscious of duty, critical, self-critical and conscientious, who relates well to learning or ignorance, and who is capable of self-education (self-perfection), who has self-control, who is sincere and strives for freedom for themself and others, whose ethics are at a similarly high level, who is modest, able to love others, who has solidarity, tolerance and politeness, has a healthy competitiveness, is helpful, peaceful, and well-intentioned, who shows respect to those who merit it, etc. This kind of person is definitely an exemplary moral authority. Whoever has in themselves all of the qualities above to a high level is a moral genius, even if they never become a hero, and even if those around them never consider them to be one." Try to find an undesirable quality in the above description—it's impossible.

Polgar does not shy away from criticisms of his system (there are many, including from the Hungarian government itself), but answers them thoughfully and completely. Hungary originally tried to suppress the Polgar sisters' successes, but thankfully did not succeed. He is especially critical of modern educational systems in regards to learning, stating the children see no obvious purpose in learning. In his system, they see tangible progress and become more motivated, creating a perpetual cycle of learning. I must agree with him here. Are "international and cultural diversity" credits (as my university referred to them) truly necessary? What is the purpose of making them a mandatory part of a degree program? To make sure I'm a well-rounded citizen of society? Who's to say I'm not already? Anything worth learning should have a purpose to it, else it seems fruitless and motivations wanes. He also sees educational systems as catering to the lowest common denominator, preventing potential geniuses from succeeding and fulfilling said potential. This was one of the principal reasons he chose to self-teach his girls.

The book is organized in a question-answer fashion, with Endre Farkas acting as the interviewer.

While I am no parent, it seems reasonable enough to suggest that most people should read this book. Outside of the genius education part, Polgar makes a compelling case on ways to raise a child to be well-rounded in ethics, morals, intelligence, work ethic, and any other venture they attempt.

A deeply moving story about a mentally retarded adult's journey from retardation to genius and back, complete with experiences of love, realization, learning, self-reflection, success, and failure. The writing is masterful—Keyes is able to gradually display Charlie's ever-increasing intelligence just through writing. He begins learning punctuation, remembers the correct spelling of words, and makes connections with the real world.

I especially liked the adherence to the hypothesis: "artificially-induced intelligence deteriorates at a rate of time directly proportional to the quantity of the increase". In laymen terms, if you gain a significant amount of intelligence from the surgery, expect to lose it quickly when you start to lose it. Charlie is sadly proven correct: while his initial intelligence gain was slow, his decline was quick, taking a short two months, from mid-September to mid-November, peak to original standing.

I wasn't alive in 1982, so I don't have much say as to how relevant it was then (almost 40 years ago!), but it is largely, if not entirely, irrelevant now. Fussell illustrates the various U.S. class systems primarily through examples, looking at anatomy, appearances, homes, consumption and recreation, mental state and tendencies, and speech. The last two chapters discuss the difficulty in changing classes, especially the improvement part.

If you are to take two things from this book, the first is that class is largely signaling. People want to appear healthier, wealthier, more well-read, etc., than their neighbors and friends. Stop trying to keep up with the Joneses and live your life. The second is that people of different classes view the so-called requirement to join each class as different. Upper class, while having money, views their class as one based on behaviors. The source of the money is also a factor: those that inherited their bank accounts' nine digits are considered a higher class than those that earned it through business ventures. Middle class believes in both education and money. Low class believes almost entirely in money. Fussell gives an example of two people that make the same amount of money: one is a white-collar worker, the other blue-collar. Their differences lie in their interests and behaviors. The white-collar worker drinks a "classier" cocktail than the blue-collar's cheap light beer. The white-collar worker has a decent-sized library, whereas the blue-collar worker can't remember the last time he read a book, much less owned one.

I did not enjoy this book. I made it through about 50 pages before realizing its irrelevancy, especially in its endless examples, and skimming the rest.

The Devil in the White City consists of two stories that overlap slightly: the life and murders committed by Dr. H. H. Holmes and the inception, development, creation, and operation of the 1893 World's Fair (also called the World's Columbian Fair, in recognition of Columbus' discovery of America 400 years earlier, and Chicago's World Fair).

Larson shows us the immense amount of planning and organization that went in to building the so-called "White City" and the various obstacles and setbacks encountered. See the planning fallacy, which was inconveniently proposed well after the Fair took place.

Holmes' life is also examined, beginning with his formative years to his time as one of the country's most prolific serial killers and con artists (he also committed large amounts of insurance fraud).

I didn't enjoy the book like I did Larson's other, In the Garden of Beasts (review here), but I suggest reading it if you enjoy his writing style. It provides an excellent glimpse into what life was like back then.

Some great pictures of the Fair can be found here. You can also find the architectural plans and blueprints at the Library of Congress here.

Interesting proposal by Sears: simply keep percentages of carbohydrate/protein/fat to 40/30/30% and you will remain in the Zone. Sears presents the science behind the diet and exactly how it works (hormonal responses). Literature is cited at the end of the book.

I plan to run a month-long experiment in October 2020 to test Sears' claims. Will update this review accordingly.

You can read my full summary here. It includes some things I felt were important that O'Hanlon left out and excludes some things from the book I felt weren't as important if you have a basic physics/chemistry background, e.g., gas properties).

If your career deals with vacuum, read this book cover-to-cover. O'Hanlon begins with the basics of gases (their properties, flow regimes, relation with solids) and progresses to actual vacuum concepts. The mathematics behind vacuum are included with explanations, as well as lay-person descriptions. While the descriptions are nice, I encourage the reader to search the internet for videos of how the various pumps operate, as it is much clearer than words and a static figure.

Third edition should be purchased if possible—the second edition was published before the invention of some important technology, e.g., scroll pumps.

(Short disclaimer: I am not nor have ever been a graduate student, but worked extensively around a wide range of STEM Ph.D. students (over 100 total) at a top 20 in engineering U.S. university for three years).

The book is short (took me about two hours to read) and discusses Guo's experiences as a Ph.D. student in computer science at one of the U.S.' most prestigious universities. Each of his six years has one chapter devoted to it: projects worked on, individuals met, mindset (happy, burnt out, frustrated, etc), and vision for the future. The epilogue includes 20 lessons Guo learned and serves as a good, high-level summary of his graduate studies.

Academia has a lot of intricacies that generally aren't understood and can't be learned by outsiders—in order to understand, one has to be a part of a research group. Guo offers a vicarious glimpse into what academia is: he explains what certain things mean, why things are the way they are, and the reasons he did things.

This is an especially valuable read for anyone considering entering into a Ph.D. program. While this is only one individual's experience, I know of others who have had very similar times in graduate school.

Here is a negative review of the book. Reading the review prior to the book and keeping it mind may be helpful.

More of a parable than entire book, A Message to Garcia is meant to illustrate the virtue of initiative when given a task.

I've seen it myself firsthand: someone is told to complete task, and replies with a barrage of questions that are easily answered with 10 minutes of cursory Google searches. Is it laziness that causes this? Does the task-doer just want most of the job to be done for him, so he can move on to more interesting (at least to him) things? This is absolutely part of it. What about selfishness and fairness? Does the task-doer want the task-master to take some amount of ownership in the task, since he seems to be doing nothing other than ordering his inferiors around? This is a plausible explanation, but one likely taken by the ignorant (although in some cases this absolutely can be true): the task-master likely has higher-level tasks needing to be done, and delegation is a great tool for improving efficiency. The last cause can be attributed to ignorance. The task-doer simply doesn't know that he can find the answers to his questions independently, leading him to ask his questions. This should be explained and forgiven only once: show him how to find answers, and for any questions asked for future tasks, precede the answers with a simple counter-questions: have you tried searching for it?

There are controversial views present (especially in the age of mega-corporations and their inhumane treatment of their serva...employees), but they are mostly reflected at small businesses with direct relationships between the head honcho and the employees. Regardless, some quotes: (1) "My heart goes out to the man who does his work when the “boss” is away, as well as when he is at home." (2) "I know one man of really brilliant parts who has not the ability to manage a business of his own, and yet who is absolutely worthless to any one else, because he carries with him constantly the insane suspicion that his employer is oppressing, or intending to oppress, him." Oh, how Hubbard would be surprised. (3) "I think if I worked for a man, I would work for him. I would not work for him a part of his time, but all of his time. I would give an undivided service or none."

The message is still relevant, but some parts dated and no longer applicable to life now. The story and its apologia can be read for free and in less than 15 minutes here on Project Gutenberg. Another nice resource is lmgtfy (let me Google that for you), whose motto is "For all those people who find it more convenient to bother you with their question rather than search it for themselves."

If news broke today that an eighth continent had been found, tens of thousands would flock to their nearest airport for a chance to experience this unexplored territory. Now, what if this new continent covered the remaining 71% of the Earth?

This is the feeling of wonder Jacques Cousteau felt when he finally succeeded in breathing while underwater with his invention the Aqualung (Emile Gagnan contributed heavily to the engineering aspect of it). After many failed attempts at other devices, the Aqualung was able to let Cousteau and his fellow divers breath easily and safely underwater, marking the beginning of the SCUBA revolution.

The book begins with a history of underwater breathing attempts and devices, giving the reasons behind why they didn't work and what was done to improve the designs.

From there, Cousteau goes into details about the underwater adventures he and his group (he directed the French military's Undersea Research Group) had over the years, sound almost Captain-Nemo-like: cave diving to the point of almost passing out, exceeding the estimated underwater depth limits of humans, exploring shipwrecks and finding "treasure" (if you can count old silverware), testing the closest distance TNT can explode and the diver still survive (yes, you read that right), and the various creatures and flora encountered while diving.

The science of diving (what the bends (decompression sickness) is and how it occurs, the total number of atmospheres felt at various depths, etc) is explained throughout and in detail.

The insert is 65 pages (pictures of both in black-and-white and color) of underwater action shots, group and individual portraits, and other supporting images to put a picture with/to the text. Included is Cousteau's closest encounter with a shark, where it came within two feet of him.

My only qualm with this book, as at least one other reviewer pointed out, is their killing of underwater life. While URG occasionally showed some discretion, contests were made out to kill X lbs of fish in Y minutes, it seems all for fun. Later, while watching traditional Mediterranean fishing from below (video here, note it may be a bit offensive to some), Cousteau expresses his desire to free the fish from their ever-tightening graveyard.

After reading this, I plan to do some SCUBA diving at some point, preferably in the Caribbean or Mediterranean.

The term snakehead refers to a Chinese person who facilitates the smuggling of fellow Chinese into other countries, namely Western nations. The use of the verb "smuggling" should be noted here, as smuggling and trafficking are not synonymous. Smuggling is the illegal transportation of a cooperative person from location A to location B. Trafficking is the illegal transportation of an uncooperative person from location A to location B and generally involves sex and/or slavery, among other things. All of the people in this book were smuggled into the U.S. willingly and without coercion.

The book revolves around two things: The most famous of snakeheads, Cheng Chui Ping (image here, more commonly known by her moniker Sister Ping and the incident of the Golden Venture.

Born in Fujian, China (where a majority of snakeheads are from), Sister Ping immigrated to New York City's Chinatown to run a shop, while also smuggling as her side hustle with her husband. She charged over $30,000 USD for a single person to be smuggled. Being from Fujian in that time generally meant that you were poor, an agreement was made: pay a small down payment, then pay the remaining balance after you got into the U.S. The remaining balance was paid through underground labor, e.g. dishwashing. Sister Ping's reputation was impeccable. She got people in safely and with money-back guarantee. As time progressed, other snakeheads got into the game, hopeful of the riches that came with the business. Snakeheads worked together to board people onto a common ship, making a single run cheaper than it would have been individually. Some even feigned association with Sister Ping to make their business seem more credible to prospective customers.

The Golden Venture was a cargo ship that intentionally ran aground outside of New York City. Almost 300 illegal aliens were on board and jumped ship in their attempt to make it to the promised land that was the U.S. Those that did not drown (10) or were not caught (not sure the number here) were taken to various prisons throughout the U.S. to await sentencing. It was here that they applied for asylum. Here is where it gets tricky. Snakeheads had taught their customers how to essentially guarantee their asylum request was granted. Just say you were persecuted in China and/or that you feared for your life, and bam! you can stay. This is problematic for obvious reasons. How are these claims meant to be verified? Lawyers and law enforcement have a few methods to check the aliens' veracity: Repeat what they said back to them, but change a small detail (if they confirm your sentence, then it contradicts what they just said). Ask them about something they said a few days ago and see if the story changes. Cross-examine other witnesses or official accounts. Even then, the possibility remains that some are just excellent liars or just really stuck to their script (after all, they had many months to get their stories straight). This delegitimizes other immigrants' asylum requests. You're from North Korea? Let us vet you first, and if you're clean, welcome to America. You're from Saddam's Iraq and opposed the Ba'ath Party? Prove it and we'll welcome you to America.

As you can see, immigration is a significant topic in this book and thankfully presents both sides of the still-ongoing, probably never-ending issue that was reignited during Trump's presidential campaign and administration. There are two landmarks in New York that are directly related to immigration:Ellis Island, an island in New York Harbor that served as the first stop of new immigrants coming to America, and the Statue of Liberty. The Statue of Liberty is a beacon of hope for all, immigrants and citizens alike. It principally represents freedom—freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom to do what you like within reason—and is one of the main reasons the U.S. is the country that accepts the most immigrants year after year. The poem The New Colossus is posted inside the Statue, and includes the lines "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." While this poem is not the law, it describes the attitude of the U.S. in the early 1900s. Many Americans are of the mind that immigrants made this country what it is today. So, should we adhere to our ancestor's mindsets? Or has the world changed enough that it should remain a part of history? Being the most prosperous nation in the world (see Credit Suisse's 2019 global wealth report here (note: it will attempt to download a PDF) , do we have an obligation to accept immigrants of other countries that are plagued by conflict, adverse living conditions, and persecution? Should we offer reprieve to those who knowingly break their country's laws, even if the law is unjust (in our opinion)?This day and review are neither the time nor place for this topic, but the book begs these questions.

The snakeheads' importation methods were diverse at the end, but the journey up to then was template-like. First, get the customers out of China. This was not too difficult (the place of leaving was generally Hong Kong or a corrupt SE Asian country, like Thailand), but the consequence of being caught by authorities was severe. After leaving China, the customers generally followed a path that looks like something out of Verne's Around the World in 80 Days (but including South America). For example, a one path was "Fuzhou—Hong Kong—Bangkok—Moscow—Havana—Managua—Tucson". Entry in to the U.S. was done by boat, car (Sister Ping once used a false bottom in a vehicle to transport customers over the U.S.-Mexican border undetected), coyotes, or even plane. How did they get onto the plane, you ask? Fake identification. While on the plane, these were promptly destroyed and followed by—you guessed it—an asylum request. Once in the U.S., it was a free-for-all. They diffused throughout the U.S. (with most going to NYC's Chinatown) and became a part of the underground economy, getting paid under the table by their employers. Official (the person, not the adjective) corruption was paramount to snakeheads, hence the inclusion of the South American countries (is a source really needed for this?), specifically Guatemala, in their path to freedom.

The legal perspective of snakeheads is examined in-depth: investigations into gangs and their relationship with snakeheads (gangs often acted as enforcers for the snakeheads, but eventually began having some form of control over the snakeheads), the trial of Sister Ping, and so on.

Other topics discussed: Fujian culture, Chinese gangs and their terrorization of Chinatown (through acts like protection money), how the state of China at the time promoted the emigration of their own citizens.

Keefe did an excellent job with this book. The sources are well-documented, he is impartial (asking tough questions of one side of the aisle does not mean you lean to the other side!), and a holistic view of the issue is presented.

See also:
- Say Nothing by Patrick Radden Keefe. His newest book (published 2019 vs. this one being 2009) that discusses The Troubles. It is formatted very similarly: focus is put on one event (the murder of Jean McConville) and multiple individuals involved with the conflict.
- Immigration policy of Donald Trump. A rather controversial (putting it lightly) summary of Trump's policies. He campaigned on a strong legal immigration platform, vowing to keep criminals out of the U.S. and reserve certain jobs for Americans.
Xiaomanyc. The YouTube channel of self-taught American Chinese speaker. He often goes around NYC Chinatown and surprises Chinese workers with his fluent, native-like Chinese. Fun reactions.

Junger's thesis is simple: Society is better when humans work and live peacefully together. He cited countless examples of how people's lives have markedly improved during or after a traumatic event or major conflict, e.g. The Blitz or the September 11 attacks.

While applicable to a lot of veterans, it is not exclusively for them. Everyone can learn something from this book, whether it be to promote inclusiveness in your community, not treat veterans as victims, or just to be kind to one another.

The book itself is quite short. An average reader can probably finish it within 2 hours.

See also:
- On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. An excellent, in-depth book about the effects of killing on the human psyche.
- Man's Search for Meaning. A Holocaust survivor's account of his finding meaning in a concentration camp and what followed after.
- Joe Rogan Experience (podcast). I first heard about this book on podcast #1247 with Andy Stumpf, who also runs another podcast, Cleared Hot.

Full disclosure: I have never been addicted to anything. Drugs, alcohol, coffee, pornography, nothing. I haven't had the gross misfortune of being prescribed and becoming reliant on pain medication, only to have the rug pulled out from under my feeble feet, forcing me to search for alternative opiate sources, like heroin or oxycodone. I have never had to plan my day around an addiction, wondering how I'll last until lunch or closing unless I get my fix. I've never had to steal from friends or family in an effort to scrounge up enough for a 15 minutes of pleasure and reprieve from withdrawals. I do not claim to know what addiction is like, but reading from other sources (mainly the internet and friends), I have a minute fraction of an idea of how it develops and transforms a person.

Requiem for a Dream is a book about addiction and what it does to people's lives. Four individuals are followed over the course of an indeterminate time period: Harry, a drug-dealing heroin addict; Tyrone, Harry's partner and fellow addict; Marion, Harry's girlfriend and fellow addict; and Sara, Harry's mother and television and diet pill addict.

Their lives start out addiction-free. Harry and Tyrone are semi-regular heroin users. Harry occasionally pawns his mother's television to get enough money to score, and they both work odd jobs when needed. Marion doesn't do much work-wise. Sara eats quite a bit (bagels with cream cheese and danishes are her favorite) while watching television all day.

Harry and Tyrone eventually come up with the bright idea of selling heroin, referred to as "dope" in the novel. (FYI: dope = heroin in the drug world. Dope =/= marijuana, cocaine, or anything else.) Their plan was simple: sell enough (but don't get high!!) to get rich enough to do whatever they wanted. Business starts booming for them, and Harry is able to afford a new TV for his mother and new clothes for himself and everything is going accordingly to plan and Marion and Harry have these amazing plans to build an open-air coffee house where artists can drink coffee from a hundred different countries while mingling and connecting with other artists. (That's a snippet of how the book is written. Many run-on sentences, some spanning over one page.) But this honeymoon phase only lasts so long. Harry and Marion start to up their dope usage. A hit here and there, but not much more than their normal amount. The coffee house plans sit untouched while they continue to plan their lives together: what kind of family they'll have, the car and house they'll own, how they'll live. But they can easily stop anytime they want - this stuff doesn't have that much of a grip on them.

Then the great shortage happens. There's no dope to be found in the city. Whispers on the street hint of a new supply coming tomorrow, the next day, next week, but the number of times those rumors are actually realized is small. This is the first time the reader realizes that Harry and Marion are addicted to dope. Selby's ability to transition the couple from average users to their current state is subtle and masterful. They start to realize their uncomfortableness when they won't or don't have a hit for the morning. Irritability and anxiety and dread soon follow. Now, I know what you're thinking, they're addicted. Well, that's where you're wrong. They can still stop anytime, but times are hard and this takes the edge off, so why stop now? (You can see the pattern of rationalizing that has been taking place.)

Eventually, a reputable source is able to get heroin into the city. Every junkie from miles around converges on a single part of the city, Harry and Tyrone among them. They cop (buy), book it back to their place, get off, then cut and bag the rest (short, of course) for selling. Marion questions his supply: Do you really have to sell that much? What if there is no more? What about us? How will we get our fix?

Marion turns to selling herself to a heroin supplier. She does what she needs to with him without hesitation to score a few bags (without Harry knowing that she is hiding two of them), eventually getting with other women at the supplier's request to get her oh-so-precious fix. It was gross, but easy enough when considering what was on the line. Did she really want to be dopesick for hours on end, or just be uncomfortable for a half-hour?

While all of this is going on, Sara is busy getting addicted to diet pills, prescribed to her by her doctor. These are amphetamines. For those that have ever taken Adderall, Vyvanse, methanphetamine, etc. you realize you don't think about eating nor get hungry. She really, really wants to fit into her beautiful red dress for when she eventually makes it onto television (she's going on, there's no way she isn't, they called her and everything and they still have her card and she's just waiting for the call to tell her what show she'll be on and she'll be ready, more ready than any of the other contestants, because she's been watching every single quiz show on the tube and practicing her walk-up and smile and wave and it's perfect, but she just needs the call!!!!!!!!). The pills do their job—she's lost over 25 pounds—but at a cost. She hasn't had a proper meal in months, and they are no longer having the same effect. She goes back to the doctor's office and gets prescribed Valium to calm her down. This mix of uppers and downers is potent, sending her to hospital where she is deemed schizophrenic and is treated with electroconvulsive therapy at the recommendation of an impulsive doctor. She tries protesting, telling them she can't breath or eat and it hurts, but to no avail. She lives out the rest of her days in the mental hospital with no television to watch or cheese danishes to eat.

The book ends with Harry and Tyrone driving straight to the source in Miami. Harry's arm becomes infected while in the Deep South and they both get arrested for being New York dopers in their town. Harry gets his arm amputated and Tyrone is sentenced to a few months on a work crew, where he is repeatedly harassed for being black.

As I said, I've never been addicted to anything, nor do I plan on it (does anyone ever?). But I can say that addiction is hell for everyone. Short periods of temporary relief followed by longer periods of looking forward to the next fix leave the user in a perpetual hell, being cooled off every so often by ice water, yet still surrounded by scorching-hot flames. The pleasure of some of these drugs is a million times better than the best orgasm you've ever had, and you know how great that feels. Your brain chemistry will physically change and your body and mind and life will become dependent on the drug, subsequently changing your personality and behaviors and thoughts and the entire person you once were. You become a shell of your former self and lose family and friends to the only two-faced friend left in your life: the drug. Everything that used to give you pleasure—video games, food, theme parks—pales in comparison to this drug. Nothing will ever compare to this, and anything you do thereafter will never give you the same level of satisfaction as before.

If you want to hear from (presumably) real opiate users on their experiences, I encourage you to browse the r/opiates subreddit. Users (no pun intended) discuss their use and addiction, as applicable. You can see how addiction develops, try to understand what withdrawal symptoms feel like and why they will do almost anything to avoid them, and get a general sense of what usage is like. Another glimpse into how quickly it gets real is u/SpontaneousH's experience with heroin. He spontaneously (hence the username) tried heroin and promptly got addicted, as seen in his post history here. His original r/IAmA has telltale signs of what ends up happening. Thankfully, his last update told us he is 6 years clean.

See also:
- Otherside by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis. A chilling song about Macklemore's personal experiences with drug addiction and what it does to people.
- Stan Marsh on marijuana. Drug-related, but not necessarily directly addiction-related (because hey, it's impossible for marijuana to be addictive /s).

Sometimes I wish I was born a few generations earlier. No, I am not a le wrong generation kid complaining about Soundcloud rappers. I'm complaining about the lack of uncharted territory in the world. Reading Thesiger's account of his exploration of the Empty Quarter. He is truly venturing into the unknown, without knowledge of what lies in that vast, arid, uninhabitable (the Bedu would beg to differ) region. There are very few places left on Earth that are unexplored, namely islands and other hard-to-access places. I can only imagine the wonder and excitement Thesiger felt as he traveled in places no human had before.

Keep in mind that this book was published in 1959, before the globalization and modernization of Arabia and the essential extinction of traditional Bedu culture.

The book switches off between two topics: Thesiger's travel accounts and discussion of Arab, specifically Bedu, culture. The travel accounts are quite detailed, sometimes to the point of boring, but do an excellent job of describing the Sands and their brutality, monotony, and beauty. Rain is scarce, but an ample rainfall provides up to years of grazing for the Bedu's beloved camels (more on this later). The dunes stretch on and on and on and on for miles and rise up hundreds of feet, preventing even the most durable of camels from summiting. And yet Thesiger could not keep away. He found himself pining for the Sands whenever at home in England and did whatever he could to get back to his second home of Arabia.

Back to camels: surprisingly, unless you are already knowledegable about the Bedu, they comprise a significant portion of the book. They are the Bedu's racehorse-equivalent, although the camels aren't named like horses. Camels are treated with the utmost respect by their owners due to their career as a desert workhorse. Food, water, and rest are prioritized for the camels. Bedu are also similar to elephants in that they never forget (any camel they see). If they see a camel, it is forever burned into their memory. They also have the rather remarkable skill of being able to analyze a situation based off of a camel's tracks in the dry desert sand. This claim, which sounds like nonsense, is corroborated on page 59 of this 234-page book on camels, appropriately named Camel and this article (Control-F the word "read" for the specific instances).

Bedu personality is very peculiar. They will bicker with each other about money, even after the transaction is months old. They will absolutely not let a guest refuse a meal - if you're with them, you're eating, no questions asked. To look greedy is to be known as the guy that eats the last piece of [your friend group's favorite food here], but ten times worse. If you accidentally kill a Bedu, say by accidentally kicking him in his solar plexus (like Thesiger did), you will die. No joke. The list goes on. Thesiger learned all of these intricacies throughout his years of living amongst the Bedu.

One passage spoke to me directly: "No, it is not the goal but the way there that matters, and the harder the way the more worth while the journey… I felt instinctively that it was better to fail on Everest withut oxygen than to attain the summit with its use." it seems like most modern-day adventurers use (read: require) varying amounts of assistance, whether it be through tools or personnel. For example, only 5% of Everest summits have been without oxygen. That is not to take away from those who did it with the precious gas, but it is significantly less impressive than their counterparts. Why can't things go back to being raw? If you can't bench press that weight without elbow sleeves, a bench shirt, a Gateway-Arch-esque spine, and your hands touching the plate, you shouldn't be benching that weight, just like you shouldn't be climbing Everest if you need a porter, five oxygen tanks, and all the latest and greatest REI gear (I also wrote about this in my review of Into Thin Air (last paragraph before "Further Reading"). Mark Twight also embodies this. During his days at Gym Jones, they trained balls-to-the-wall in street clothes without worrying that their shirt wasn't of moisture-wicking technology. Anyway, rant over. Do what you want and what makes you happy.

An insert is included, containing pictures of bin Kabina, one of Thesiger's longest travel mates and to whom the book is dedicated, other Bedu (such as falconers), and landscape shots. Names of Bedu that Thesiger travels with can be difficult to keep track of, so "A List of the Chief Characters on the Various Journeys" is included as an appendix, organized by specific trip, e.g. "The Journey from Salala to Mughshin."

That's about it. If you want to learn more about Bedu culture and read a classic in the travel literature genre, then this is the book for you. If you're interested in how early maps were mapped, then this is a book for you. If you're wanting to go on an adventure in a barren wasteland with the occasional oasis and need an estimate on how much it will suck, this is a book for you._x000B_
My three stars is the average of my enjoyment (2) and thoroughness of the book (4).

Further materials:
- The Empty Quarter documentary (1967).
- The Silent World. Discusses the beginning of SCUBA gear and the exploration of the sea through extended dives (as opposed to freediving).
- Among the Mountains: Travels Through Asia. Another of Thesiger's accounts, this time throughout mountains of Asia: Hindu Kush, Karakorams, and Pamirs. Another solid travel book.

This book is sectioned into four parts: Into Action (infiltration and attempted escape), Call to Arms (Coburn's early days and military training), Guest of Saddam (time as prisoner-of-war), and Release (self-explanatory). Coburn finally details the legal headache that was the publishing this book and all that the Ministry of Defense did to try to stop it. A glossary and insert (pictures in the middle) are also included.

Into Action:

During the Gulf War, a group of eight men (all SAS) were inserted deep into Iraq to hunt for Scuds. The mission almost instantly went wrong: their communications weren't working properly (someone gave them the wrong frequencies) and their position almost compromised by a goatherder (similar to what caused Operation Red Wing's demise). Finally, an Iraqi driving a bulldozer is what gave them away. The rest of this section details their attempted escape through a snowstorm and sharp winds, hijacking a taxi and taking a policeman hostage, and almost making it across the Syria-Iraq border to safety.

Call to Arms:

Coburn discusses the path that led him to the military, specifically the New Zealand SAS, and his time spent training with various squadrons in mountains and jungles. After a while with the NZSAS, both Coburn and his friend Pete venture to Hereford to attempt to join the 22 SAS. The 22 SAS selection includes the infamous Fan Dance. (For those in States interested in a similar event that goes towards a good cause, check out the Bataan Memorial Death March.)

Guest of Saddam:

Coburn endures a mixture of brutal treatment by Iraqi police and decent medical care while a POW.

Release:

Coburn is liberated when the war ends and is reunited with surviving teammates. Together they are able to piece together what happened, and back in the UK, find out exactly who causes the mission's failure (you guessed it: a lot of people not wanting to fess up).

Overall, I enjoyed this book. Coburn (and/or his editor) is a good writer and provides excellent descriptions while sprinkling humor in every so often. Military terms and concepts are well-explained so the layperson can understand.

Other book suggestions: Lone Survivor, Black Hawk Down, and SEAL Team Six.

The Troubles was a harrowing time in Ireland's history: bombs going off throughout Belfast (the capital of the Protestant Northern Ireland), parents and spouses being kidnapped in the middle of the night, murders by both sides of the bloody conflict. The quest for a unified Ireland began by the southerners being peaceful, only to come to the conclusion that, despite the popular saying, violence was the answer.

Say Nothing uses the lives of two individuals to provide a history and story of the Troubles: Dolours Price, an IRA Volunteer ("Volunteer" is their proper name, but is akin to soldier), and Jean McConville, a mother-of-ten who was kidnapped and murdered by the IRA after being accused of being an informant to the British.

The book follows the Troubles in chronological order, beginning in the early 1960s (there is no definitive start date of the conflict) up to the controversial Good Friday Agreement, which was deemed "Got Fuck All" by some.

Many major players in the Troubles were discussed and interviewed: Gerry Adams, an IRA-member-turned-denier and eventual president of the Sinn Féin political party, Brendan Hughes, an IRA Volunteer who led their "special operations" (for lack of a better term) and organized the infamous Bloody Friday (which he publicly and deeply regrets), and Mackers, another IRA Volunteer who ended up leading the interview process of the Belfast Project, an oral history of the Troubles told by former IRA Volunteers who now disagreed with what the movement had become.

The perspectives of all are given throughout. Readers will better understand why the Troubles started in the first place, why the IRA did what they did, and why the conflict was so prolonged.

Despite the thoroughness of the book, Keefe did omit some aspects, e.g. loyalist terrorism. He humbly acknowledges this and directs the interested reader to "one of the many excellent books cited in the notes that address the Troubles more broadly or your favored subject in particular." Sources and notes are discussed in full and included at the end.

Overall, an excellent book that does a good job of portraying the perspectives of the Republic of Ireland during the Troubles. Next on my list to read is a more general history of the Irish Conflict that began in the 1600s.

Further reading:
- r/TheMotte on the Kilmichael Ambush

Open-source software (OSS) is the most impactful, technological concept (not invention) ever conceived. With hundreds of people collaborating on a single, multi-faceted project, an astronomical amount of progress is able to be achieved. And yet, often this is done for free, without expectation of riches or fame to follow. The question that follows is obvious: Why? Why would people spend time outside of their paid job to code for little to no recognition nor money? Well, why do people volunteer in general? For one, they feel part of a community helping to volunteer. The same feeling applies for these OS projects. These contributors are working with people from all over the world with similar interests, helping them to improve a project for everyone else. A sense of progress is another motivator. We as humans love to see tangible progress in things we do. Productivity apps nowadays rely on the concept of "gamifying" things, i.e. showing you making progress while doing various tasks. Every accepted pull request on Github is one small (or possibly big) step of progress for that project and anything that project goes to support.

Anyways, off my soapbox and onto the book.

The book primarily focuses on the inception, development, and commercialization of the open-source operating system Linux. Originally created in 1991 by Linus Torvalds, a Finnish graduate student at the time, as an alternative to MINIX, it grew exponentially as more and more people online heard about it.

Other relevant open-source projects, concepts, and people are detailed and discussed, e.g. Richard Stallman and his GNU Project, Free Software Foundation, and GNU General Public License. (GPL is quite clever in that any product that uses another product that is licensed under GPL must also be licensed under GPL. The product's freeness then propagates the down the line. This concept is called copyleft.)

Note that this book was published in 2001, well before the advent of Github, a company that hosts both public and private projects. It used a system called Git, which was also created by Linus to help aide Linux development. While I don't keep up with software news, I suspect this book can easily be rewritten to reflect the events that have occurred in the open-source community since 2001 (20 years ago, what!).

If you are interested in programming as a career or hobby, I highly encourage you to join Github and see if you can help contribute to an open-source project. They are always looking for people to help, even if your experience is little to none. Find a project, fix a bug or add a feature, and submit a pull request. The worst thing that can happen is it gets rejected.

My rating is two stars for excitement (no offense, but how exciting can a book like this be?) and five stars for comprehensiveness and research put into this book. There is no source section, but he mentions "the vast majority of quotations in this book are drawn from interviews". Would be nice to see the sources he did draw from (that weren't direct conversations) listed.

Further reading:
- Code by Charles Petzold.
- The Information by James Gleick.
- DOOM (video game) source code. If you're interested in retro games, check this out.
- Apollo 11 source code. This repository contains the code that first got man to the moon back in 1969 on the Apollo mission.

While a lot of topics are discussed in this book, I have a few all-encompassing takeaways (in order of importance): never stop growing, and assume control of what is yours (life) and what you want (from life), and take risks.

Life is a growing process, both literally and figuratively. Everyone reaches peak bone mass in their late 20s, but some continue to grow muscles or fat after that, cutting and bulking or maintaining that state for years on end. This growth is second to the growth of the mind. The word "learning" can easily replace the word "growing" in this paragraph's first sentence: Life is a learning process. We as both individuals and a species are constantly inventing, discovering, and refining what we do and how we do it — sometimes for ourselves and sometimes for others. Failure is a major part of growth. Failure gives feedback on actions and thoughts, allowing learning to occur. Was that the best way to go about this? Why did I think that would work? This feedback need not be applied solely to that specific action or thought, but can instead be used across a range of them: what worked in realm A can easily be applied in realm B, etc. Mark says "Truth is the source of growth," and this is spot-on. Taking an honest look at ourselves or situations gives us a clear view of what needs to be done. I'm guilty of lying to myself on many occasions to avoid the reality of the situation — this only served to make things worse later on. Do yourself a favor and be brutally honest to yourself and a-bit-less-than-brutally-honest to your companions (brutal honesty can be a bit much for some, which can cause them to use Mark's "knife" on you!) from the get-go. Those companions that appreciate the honesty are definitely worth keeping.

Twitching with Twight, arguably Mark's most famous essay (it's included in his book Kiss or Kill), is a prime example of seizing control of life, cutting off the excess fat and distractions, and focusing on the goals and desires one truly wants. A key part of this is the "cutting" - often times certain objects (gear), people (significant others or friends), or mindsets (fear of failure, lack of belief of capability) hold us back from achieving our true potential. Cliche, yes, but true nonetheless. Mark discusses the "knife", referring to his ability to "cut off everything that might have held [him] back." While some view this cutting as detrimental, it can actually be quite beneficial. Take the friend who is a leech on your wellbeing or the mindset that you will never be able to climb that route or lift that much weight. Cut that friend out of your life and believe in your ability to achieve that feat - these cuts will greatly improve your life, assuming you do your part of putting in the work to achieve these goals. Mark says it best at the end of "Unlock" piece: "It [control] can start anywhere — we need only realize that the lock is within, and the key within reach. ... We learn that by taking control of ourselves we reduce the power others have over us. ... the goal of [fitness] is autonomy. It is Self-determination." (While I'm sure those that read this book are aware of Mark's background, he created the reputed Gym Jones, hence the fitness references found throughout the book.) Unsurprisingly, Mark is a fan of Ayn Rand, referencing her The Fountainhead and acknowledging her influence in his own Kiss or Kill.

Part of this "taking control" is standing strong against the norm — one must find their own way among the vast sea of disinformation and what is considered "right" and "good". (Howard Roark, The Fountainhead's protagonist, is a great example of this.) In high school, I kept my interests hidden from my friends, as it was different from what others thought a normal teenager should be doing. In hindsight, this was *somewhat* wrong. While being proud of some interested would have gotten me made fun of, others likely would not have. I now unashamedly promote most of my interests, only hiding the ones that deviate significantly from the norm. "We need more individuals, of unique opinion and voice and strength."

Taking and accepting risks is an important part of the human experience. They can be frightening, exhilarating, and/or wildly rewarding, depending on the venture. It is especially rewarding when that risk pays off and you grow as a person. Not much more needs to be said on this. Analyze the possible outcomes and those outcomes' outcomes and all of their respective probabilities, then make the choice to push ahead and stay back. Just make sure you won't regret it later.

Now, a bit about the book itself. The book is simply a series of short (1-3 page) essays. The writing can be a bit cryptic at times, as you'll know if you've read Kiss or Kill. This turned me off at times, but is helpful in provoking thought about what Twight meant and why he expressed it that way. It is full of images that have accompanying text: some photographs (portraits, action shots, nature-related), some renderings (not sure if that's the right word, but it's the best I have), some paintings (?). There are a few sections where the creation and design of the book is discussed.

Further reading:
* Ayn Rand novels: The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, her magnum opus.
* Kiss or Kill by Mark Twight
* Skin in the Game by Nassim Taleb
* Non-Prophet journal
* Non-Prophet The Practice (scroll all the way to the bottom and choose months. Includes training sessions and writings, all free.)

King Solomon's Mines is not just an adventure novel, it is THE adventure novel that started the lost world genre. From Hilton's Lost Horizon about Tibet's mythical Shangri-La to Vernes' novels, this was the catalyst to one of literature's most exciting, interesting, versatile genres.

Set in first-person, Quatermain (Haggard) describes his adventures to find the brother of a stranger who disappeared while trying to locate the famous mines of King Solomon. They trek across a desert, convince an unknown tribe that they are white god-like men from space, participate in tribal warfare to execute a coup (although it isn't illegal - ain't no laws when you're in the middle of nowhere), and finally loot diamonds.

The writing is descriptive and reads as you would expect an 19th-century to: (I can't describe it, but you know what I'm talking about!)

Overall, the best introduction to the adventure/lost world genre you can ask for.

Further reading:
- Anything by Jules Vernes
- Stanley: The Impossible Life of Africa's Greatest Explorer. Henry Stanley somewhat resembles Allan Quatermain: he explores Africa, discovering tribes, landscapes, and things never before documents. However, Quatermain lacks famous quotes, e.g. "Dr. Livingstone, I presume?".
- Lost Horizon

The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World describes - you guessed it - the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World: Great Pyramid of Giza, Hanging Gardens of Babylon, Statue of Zeus at Olympia, Temple of Artemis at Ephesos, Mausoleum at Halicarnassus, Colossus of Rhodes, and Pharos (Lighthouse) at Alexandria. The epilogue discusses other "wonders" left off this exclusive list.

Each wonder has its own chapter. Clayton discusses in great detail the history leading up the construction and what has happened since. A variety of sources are consulted and compared against one another, from ancient authors (such as Pliny the Elder's Natural History) to modern-day researchers and excavators. Note: some histories are definitive, others just theories. Clayton distinguishes as needed.

Architecture takes up a significant portion of each chapter. Specific dimensions are listed down to the meter and decorations are described in vivid detail.

Supplemental illustrations and photographs are included throughout each chapter to give a better idea of what these structures looked like. (At least to some peoples' imaginations: some we have no idea what they looked like besides ancient drawings and engravings. For example, there is little evidence to suggest that they existed at all, much less in Babylon.)

This book would serve better as a reference than a pleasure read, even for non-fiction fans. A writer reconstructing the ancient city of Alexandria could easily use this to help their imagery. A researcher can use the book itself or its selected bibliography to find more sources.

Overall, the book was quite bland (read: factual), well-researched, and well-organized.

Flawless: Inside the Largest Diamond Heist in History details the 2003 Antwerp diamond heist, the largest objective heist in history. (Objective meaning the value of stolen goods is accurate. Stolen artwork's value is difficult to quantify.) While the heist itself comprises most of the book, the authors discuss culture and industry information as needed.

The book is organized in rough chronological order. It begins with a detailed history of the Italian city Turin, where all of the thieves involved in the heist hail from. The chapter is titled School of Turin, referencing the not-insignificant amount of career criminals that the city produces (schools may be a better verb here). The authors describe the history and culture of the city, and how Notarbartolo, the mastermind behind the heist, fits in to the city.

The history and current standing of the diamond industry is provided throughout the book: culture, conflict (see blood diamonds), and standard operating procedures, among other aspects. Readers will also learn how the giant De Beers unashamedly has (had?) a monopoly on the diamond industry. (Consider getting your significant other a moissanite stone or lab-grown diamond. Significantly less expensive and conflict-free!)

A majority of the book details the planning, preparation, and execution of the heist. Notarbartolo spent over two years casing the building and its security before they executed. These two years were not spent waiting for the right moment - Notarbartolo was constantly taking notes and gaining information crucial to the heist (type of vault door, patterns of security, etc). He made regular trips back to Italy to consult with his partners and share his recent learnings.

These two long years culminated on the evening of 15 February 2003. The team was able to infiltrate the building using a homemade garage door opener (with 2^8 = 1024 possible frequencies, it is easy to iterate through the combinations to find the correct one to open the door). They proceeded to the vault, where they were able to bypass/disable three alarms/sensors: motion, sound, and a magnet inside the vault door. Once inside, the rest was easy. Using a specialized tool, the thieves were easily able to pry open a majority of the rather flimsy safety deposit boxes belonging to a variety of companies and individuals. The loot was varied: gemstones, watches, currency, securities/bonds, and personal effects. There was so much to steal that they had to leave a fair amount behind. Using a getaway car, they retreated to Notarbartolo's apartment to sift through their treasure, throwing out comparatively-worthless emeralds.

The following morning, each member left separately (some in groups of two) to head back to Italy while the crime was being discovered only a small distance away. One member was tasked with disposing of the trash, which included some compromising materials. He chose what turned out to be one of the unluckiest spots in all of Belgium: a forest owned by a nothing-better-to-do-than-patrol-his-land-for-litterers man. (Not to say littering is acceptable, but dumping garbage in forests is common in Belgium and not many seem to care (according to the authors).) This was the downfall of the team. The detectives were immediately dispatched to the rural plot of land and were able to begin piecing together who was behind this expensive crime.

After dividing their haul accordingly in the safety of Italy, Notarbartolo returned to Antwerp to tie up loose ends, unaware that he was the most-wanted man in the country. He was promptly detained along with his wife and friends, marking the beginning of his multi-year confinement (consisting of detainment and actual imprisonment). The authors briefly describe the Belgian legal system and prisons in this section.

While in prison, Notarbartolo attempted to sell the rights to his story (emphasis discussed in next sentence) to multiple sources. "His" is highlighted because it varies wildly from both what the authors write here and what is probable/believable. The authors refute his account in the last section.

The authors preface the book by describing their research method. Throughout the book, they are careful to denote hazy, non-established points, e.g. no one knows why the thieves did this, but here's why we think they did it, etc. Notes are detailed and well-documented for further reading or referencing.

I see a few things wrong with the team's operation. First is the poor disposal of the garbage. To put everything together is sheer idiocy. Throwing it away in an unknown location doubles up on the foolishness. Too much of their heist was left up to blind luck (that was decreased to an extent): avoiding building guards or police, not knowing about a hidden sensor, and so on. They had over two years to prepare for the simple garbage disposal, yet failed in the worst possible way. Second is Notarbartolo's failure to place goods in his safety deposit box then proceed to rob himself (his box wasn't even opened!). He claimed that he took everything out beforehand, but even then that is suspicious. Instead, he should have placed a significant amount of material in there and simply pried open his, too. Third is their lack of Italian extradition laws. While these eventually changed under pressure from other European nations, resulting in the imprisonment of other members of the team, they would have all been safe for quite a long time had they just stayed in Italy. I suspect it would have also been more difficult to gather a case against them. Fourth, they should not have taken specifically-dated surveillance tapes, but rather all of them. This shifts focus off of those specific days and obscures the suspect list. Their disposal of the tapes was also subpar: they simply pulled them apart. Investigators were able to reconstruct them, furthering the evidence they had against the team. Surprisingly fundamental mistakes by a team intelligent enough to plan and execute a heist of this magnitude.

Overall, I enjoyed this book. It reads similar to an Ocean's film, except it actually happened.

Further reading/watching:
* Ocean's series. Eleven, Twelve, and Thirteen are the original trilogy and worth watching for heist film fans. I haven't seen Ocean's Eight.
* A Burglar's Guide to the City by Geoff Manaugh. My review here.
* Exposing Brilliant Earth. The author describes Brilliant Earth's deceptive practices. In 2017, YouTuber Jacob Avital was sued for defamation by Brilliant Earth for a video he posted criticizing their practices (read: lying). His channel is no longer up. Coincidence? I think not. Links here and here.
* The 10 Greatest Heists in History.

Into Thin Air describes the 1996 Mount Everest disaster. (The subtitle seems somewhat disrespectful. If you define "disaster" as multiple people dying in a single summit attempt, then this happens fairly regularly, thus it is not the disaster, but rather the 1996 disaster. However, being published in 1997, there had only been a few multi-death events.)

The book provides a list of people and their affiliations, which makes it a lot easier to keep track of who's who, and a map of the route taken from Everest base camp to the summit.

Krakauer provides a history of Everest throughout the book, from the initial Hillary and Tenzing ascent to modern-day climbs, as well as the progression of the climbing itself and culture behind it. People often think climbing Everest is a simple task: go to Nepal/Tibet (there's a Tibet route), acclimate to the altitude, rent some O2 tanks, then get yourself up to the top. In reality, it is an extremely expensive ($11,000 permit just to be allowed to climb from the Nepal side) and time-consuming (two months is about average summit time) adventure. Teams will hire base camp managers just to coordinate resources for getting up the mountain. Included in this history is Krakauer's expeditions's lead guide Rob Hall's climbing experience.

Sherpa culture is described more in-depth than expected. Their superstitions, competitiveness for climbing bids, and traditions are explained in the context of climbing Everest.

Climbing terms and concepts are explained as needed for those that are unfamiliar.

The summit trip began on May 6 and is described extremely in-depth. Krakauer provides everyone's movements and survivor's experiences. Krakauer is one of the first to get back to Camp Four safely, unaware of the other climbers experiencing the storm higher up on the mountain.

Krakauer reflects on the decisions both he and others made while up on the mountain. However, the brain behaves significantly differently when hypoxic (almost impossible to avoid at Everest-level altitudes) and under extreme fatigue (both from lack of sleep and physical exertion).

The last 50-ish pages account the evacuation of the injured off the mountain and Krakauer's personal dealings with what happened.

A postscript is provided to refute Anatoli Boukreev's book The Climb and the criticisms of Into Thin Air. Boukreev was a lead guide for another expedition who descended from the summit long before many of his expedition's clients made it up. A quote from the book describing Boukreev's guide philosophy: "... strongly held opinions about how the mountain should be ascended. He was quite outspoken in his belief that it was a mistake for guides to pamper their clients. 'If client cannot climb Everest without big help from guide, this client should not be on Everest. Otherwise there can be big problems up high.'"

Further reading:
- Kiss or Kill: Confessions of a Serial Mountain Climber by Mark Twight

I am often in a pickle with some of the non-fiction books I read. The research that goes into some of them is easily five-star-quality, but the topic is so dull (to me!) that my enjoyment is a mere one- or two-star. Using this type of two-quality rating system, Goldman Sachs: The Culture of Success deserves a solid three stars: five for research, thoroughness, and analysis, and one for my personal satisfaction.

Lisa Endlich, a former GS VP and trader, lays out the complete history of Goldman Sachs during its privately-owned days (inception up to May 1999, when the company went public). Chapters are separated by years, some short (Chapter 4 is 1990-1991) and some long (Chapter 2 is 1869-1976).

In discussing the history, the expansion into foreign/emerging markets and new geographical places is focused on. There was often debate between GS becoming a jack of all trades and master of none, or focusing on a select few business divisions and becoming the best in those. In the end, they essentially decided both. Without expanding into new businesses, the firm would not be able to expand as they wanted to.

Partnership is one of the common themes you will see throughout the book. To become a partner means you've made it, plain and simple. It is an exclusive, prestigious club that only a select few get the privilege of becoming a part of. Partners were inducted every X years (I forgot exactly, may be X = 1) after a lengthy, intense, and argumentative session about who should be chosen and who should be left behind. Some left the firm after being told this wasn't their year, feeling betrayed after giving their working life to the firm.

The subtitle, The Culture of Success, is also a common theme. At GS, you must be a contributor (why is this not a policy everywhere?), else you will see the door very quickly. GS attempted to recruit the smartest, hardest-working people, especially those who would put the firm at the top of their priorities. Through this selection process, the firm's culture of success and competitiveness was created.

While I'm sure the media contributes to the GS took a position against the product they were selling to customers, yet Blankfein continues to defend his firm's actions... How!

The later chapters are devoted to the discussion of GS's famous IPO. Jon Corzine, former trader and then-CEO, was instrumental in convincing the partnership of selling the company to the public. This decision was made over the course of many, many years, roundtables, and hours of analysis and thinking. The IPO did not come fast enough from their final "yes", though. The market soon tumbled, and what was going to make some of the top partners $100MM+ richer soon went down into a measly (ha!) 8-figure range.

Some amount of financial literacy and understanding of how markets operate would help, but is not necessary.

For similar books, see Fortune's The Smartest [Business] Books We Know. I especially enjoyed The Smartest Guys in the Room.

As the description states, Midnight Express details the experience of Billy Hayes, an American who was sentenced to life imprisonment (commuted to 30 years) for attempting to smuggle hashish through Turkey back to the U.S.

While I have not been to any prison, some aspects of Turkish prison life seem quite nice compared to what I've heard from former U.S. inmates. Food is allowed to be purchased, guards take bribes willingly (not sure about this one in the U.S.), and if you escape and make it out of Turkey, they will likely not pursue you, with the unspoken agreement that you will never step foot onto Turkish soil again. In the case of the prison Hayes spent most of his time in, children were in an adjacent facility, allowing them to play ball together during recesses.

Smuggling was commonplace throughout the prisons. Hashish (wait, what?), drugs, and other items were smuggled in by various means, such as outside workers, and sold to inmates. Billy received money hidden in books sent to him.

The frustration of the bureaucratic process of Hayes' case is embedded in the text. He constantly writes to a U.S. official at the embassy for assistance, but doesn't hear back for weeks at a time, only to find out the case has moved nowhere. Turkish lawyers give Hayes hope of early release after charging him hundreds or thousand of lira, then claim they haven't been able to make progress or what they said earlier didn't hold. On the bright side, Hayes' sentence was commuted several times: originally sentenced to four years, the charge was changed to smuggling from possession resulting in a standard length of life. After being bumped down to 30 years, he was granted amnesty and the sentence again commuted. Finally, good behavior knocks off a third of your final sentence length. This left Hayes with a grand total of about seven years in prison.

After trying multiple avenues of both legal and illegal escape (using U.S. clout, getting transferred to an insane asylum, attempting to use a file to cut the bars on his window), he settled on escaping from an island prison. Hayes swam out to anchored fishing boats, stole a small dingy, then rowed to shore, where he poorly disguised himself and was able to make his way to Greece. He was captured by Greek forces, interrogated (nicely) for a few weeks, then finally deported back to the U.S.

Hayes also discusses his emotional state throughout his imprisonment in regards to his parents (specifically his father), his lover (Lillian), and friendships (and sexual relations) with fellow inmates. "The emotional coldness of prison life was worth than the physical cold. Loneliness is an aching pain." Massive guilt is felt about his crime and how it has affected his parents, especially after his father's warnings about dropping out of university and going to travel the world would get him into "trouble". His father was significantly impacted financially due to lawyer fees and travel costs (later helped by the book's advance money). His lover, Lillian, was extremely supportive during his imprisonment and played a significant role in making it easier on him. Some friendships were formed, one of which turned into a sexual one through a basic need for human touch and love.

I think Hayes did a good job of describing both what prison life is like on the body, mind, and soul. My one takeaway (that was already well ingrained in me): don't go to prison!

Some further videos to watch: Wes Watson, a former shot caller in a California state prison gang, discusses his experiences in prison and why you never, ever want to go there. While the stories can't be completely corroborated, they are not unreasonable to believe. This should further viewers' desires not to end up in prison one day. Channel here. My favorites: Prison Gangs- You Have No Choice and Prison Gangs- The SHU.

In the Garden of Beasts details the life of United States Ambassador to Germany William Dodd while living in Berlin from 1933-1937. There is also sufficient coverage of his life before the ambassadorship and after his forced resignation.

Dodd, a professor of American history at University of Chicago focusing on the American South, was recommended to Roosevelt by an old friend. Having completed his PhD studies at Leipzig University in German, he was already familiar with the culture and language and could hit the ground running when he arrived. He hesitantly accepted and brought his family: wife, Mattie, daughter, Martha, and son, Bill Jr.

The book focuses mostly on Dodd, but a good portion is also spent on Martha and her various love affairs and doings in Berlin. Martha starts out as a Nazi sympathizer, claiming they are simply proud of their country and wanting the best for it after the disastrous WWI. She is courted by multiple Nazis, including Gestapo chief Rudolf Diels, and a Russian secretly working for the NKVD (Russian secret police). Her support for the Nazi party gradually wanes as she experiences more violence and discontent among German citizens.

Multiple people (called the Pretty Good Club (this is the only book I can find on them)) in the State Department were not fans of Dodd due to his lack of prestigious upbringing (read: lack of Ivy League education) and wealth. Due to the Great Depression happening in the U.S., Dodd insisted that he should live within his modest $17500 salary. This included driving his rather outdated Chevrolet or even walking to work. These seemingly innocent actions infuriated PGC, as it insulted and tainted the prestige of the ambassador position. I must agree with Dodd's position here, even if it is a bit extreme. He cites other U.S. officials and their relatively small families living in massive homes with opulent decor and numerous servants, all of which is unnecessary (a subjective word, but likely to be generally agreed upon). Passive aggressive letters were sent by the PGC in response to Dodd's, and other letters Dodd sent that were explicitly said to be confidential were leaked to the press to stir disfavor.

The naivety of Dodd and other U.S. officials surprised me. While hindsight is 20/20, the gross transgressions against U.S. citizens in Germany and the gradual restriction of Jewish rights/privileges should have been dealt with more severely. Several times the German SA attacked U.S. citizens for minor (although major for them) issues, like not saluting while a parade was going on. Nazi officials placated Dodd and others by promising these members would be brought to justice and that this type of behavior was an abnormality.

Major events leading up to the peak of Nazi Germany are discussed: purges (Night of the Long Knives), controversial laws, changes in the governmental structure (the most significant, in my opinion, was the death of German president Hindenburg and Hitler's immediate consolidation of the position of president and chancellor, which effectively gave him complete control of the government), and events that affected the U.S.-Germany relationship (1934 Mock Trial of Hitler), among many others.

In the Sources and Acknowledgment sections, Larson discusses his sources and which ones were more valuable for his "particular parcel of ground", rather than just general histories of Nazi Germany or WWII. Ambassador Dodd's Diary (no reviews??) and Martha's memoir, Through Embassy Eyes, were particularly helpful in getting a glimpse into both of their thought processes and obtaining direct quotes. University libraries (Yale, Harvard, Columbia) and public resources were also used. Larson explains his careful cross-examination of sources to verify information. This section is greatly appreciated - it gives credibility to the information and the further reading can be especially guiding to those interested in this topic/time period. A standard list of sources is included after the source discussion.

Overall, an excellent book that provides a unique perspective that I, and likely many others, never considered. I highly recommend reading this book.

I first heard of Mark Twight back into 2010 through Gym Jones, a "cult"gym in Salt Lake City. Their approach to and mindset about training was quite different from Globo Gyms (of course) and even other non-conventional training methods, like Crossfit. You can see more about Gym Jones philosophy here.

Kiss or Kill is not a traditional book, but rather a series of Twight's essays concatenated together with pictures of various mountains, climbing, and other things, such as this photo, captioned "Saying hello and goodbye to France, and the press in general." These essays were all penned pre-2001 (publication date), so Twight includes a "2000 Author's Note" at the end of each to reflect on what he thinks of the essays now and anything left unwritten.

The essays are a combination of Twight's philosophy and climbing stories (with his philosophy indirectly explained).

His obsession (that's what it is, no less) with climbing is impressive. He ruined relationships (both friendships and marriages) and risked in his life many a time in pursuit of pushing the limits of alpining. He remains cognizant of his decisions and how they affected both himself and others, yet continues in this fashion to keep doing what he loves: climbing mountains.

His writing is surprisingly good, both in describing his thought processes and the insane climbs he and others completed and attempted.

Twitching With Twight (5 min read) does the best job of describing Twight's philosophy without embedding it into a climbing story. Twight lives by this without deviation. He learned the reality of his own selfishness. He lived with commitment to his climbing career and nothing else. Most importantly, he lived for himself and no one else (not surprisingly, he acknowledges Ayn Rand at the end).

Overall, any mountaineer/alpinist would likely enjoy this book for its history aspect (Twight made the first ascents on quite a few routes), while non-climbers may still find it interesting for its imagery. Climbing aside, everyone can learn something from his philosophy.

Disclaimer: I did not read the entire book, just the "A" section and skimmed important cases from the remaining 25 sections (yes, it's literally A to Z).

The book begins with a chronology of major sexspionage cases and an introduction into what sexspionage is and how it's used in modern espionage.

The main part of the book is a comprehensive dictionary of sexspionage cases conducted by all nations (U.S., Russia, Cuba, etc). Each case is thoroughly detailed with names, dates, locations, explanations, and conclusions (to both the case itself and the individual). References to other cases are also included when applicable.

Important cases include the following: Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen, Martin Luther King Jr., Special Operations Executive, and Leon Trotsky. Concepts/definitions and their applications and history are defined, such as homosexuality and profiling.

Sexspionage is an important subset of espionage and intelligence and a good book to have at least skimmed for an espionage history enthusiast. Nigel West is an acclaimed intelligence author and has other dictionary-type books on British intelligence, international intelligence, and Cold War counterintelligence.

The book follows the lives of five North Korean defectors (NK): Mrs. Song, a mother devoted to the NK regime, Oak-hee, Mrs. Song's rebellious daughter, Dr. Kim, a medical doctor practicing in Chongjin, Jun-Sang, a high-class student at the prestigious Pyongyang University, Mi-Ran, Jun-Sang's lover and low-class teacher, and Kim Hyuck, a child turned smuggler of Chinese goods across the NK-China border.

Demick does an excellent job of detailing their individual lives while also discussing NK culture and history: familial expectations, class systems, values, the formation of NK after the Korean War, and NK's relation with the rest of the world (primarily China, SK, U.S., and other multi-national organization, such as the U.N.).

Each person's narrative starts from when they were devout citizens (except for Oak-hee) and ends with their current lives in SK. Their realizing that NK is not what the regime says is gradual. It begins with noticing the electricity is intermittent: sometimes it works, but most of the time it doesn't. Then it progresses to lack of food and salary. (Their assigned jobs normally gave them paychecks and foodstamp-equivalents to pay for basic items and get their three daily meal.) Salaries dwindled down to nothing and foodstamps provided three, then two, then a measly one meal per day (and even that one meal regressed in size). Propaganda offset the frustration by encouraging one meal a day to help their country and blaming capitalism for preventing food deliveries. Black markets thrived, with authorities turning a blind eye, as they were also hungry.

Hunger was a large focus of the book. To make up for lack of food and lack of money to purchase food, people got creative (as we normally do when faced with a life-or-death situation). They traveled far into the countryside to raid orchards. They peeled bark off of trees, ground it into a coarse powder, then boiled it into soup, along with freshly-picked grass from the side of the road. They picked from the excrement of animals to salvage undigested food. Some opened up illegal gardens in their backyards. Roaming gangs of children, or kotjebi, would rush markets, knocking over the stall and its vendor and grabbing as much food as possible. Children were admitted to hospitals due to intense stomach aches caused by inedible items used as food that their immature stomachs couldn't process. Prostitution was common, with payment being in form of food.

Another focus was propaganda and the "brainwashing" (should that really be in quotes?) of the citizens. Kim il-Sung (the original leader of North Korea) died in 1994 and caused a week of lamentation across the entire country. People never considered the fact that their "Great Leader" (how they refer to him) could actually die. This caused huge concern about the future: if Kim il-Sung could die, anything could happen. Children were taught songs, one of which's had a phrase that included the title of the book. (I find this quite ironic, as it can take on two meanings. They are completely satisfied and have nothing they envy of others, or they have nothing that others would envy of them. The latter seems much more applicable.) To maintain the stature of the leader, insults or derogatory remarks about them resulted in hard labor camps ( more on NK prisons here) and even executions (which were performed regularly). Everyone was encouraged to spy on their neighbors for any signs of lack of allegiance.

One side note on NK giving up their nuclear weapons (briefly discussed in the book). I attended a lecture by Winston Lord, who is currently on the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea. During the Q&A portion, someone asked his thoughts about the NK nuclear situation. He was firm in his response: NK will never give up their nuclear weapons. After Qaddafi gave up his WMDs, we left him high and dry. NK apparently (I haven't been able to find a source - please reply to this if you can find one!) released an official statement saying something along the lines of "we now know what happens when a country gives up their WMDs". While I hope denuclearization does happen, I must agree with Lord. NK's WMDs and the supposed hundreds of missiles pointing at SK are the only things stopping the regime from being removed.

Soldiers of Reason details the history of RAND, from its inception to modern times (well, 2008, when the book was published). Abella discusses and details both the important periods of time/events RAND was involved in (Cold War, Vietnam War, Gulf War, Iraq War, Watergate, Cuban Missile Crisis, etc.), as well as the notable people involved (Henry Kissinger, Paul Wolfowitz and others) and the role they played in guiding both the organization itself and the government (exclusively the U.S., up until the 2000's) it served.

RAND, standing for Research ANd Development, was established to assist the U.S. Air Force in various research capacities. It attracted a wide-range of academics, from physicists to social scientists and everyone in between. Nuclear war was the primary focus in the early stages of RAND, where the researchers asked questions about preemptive strikes, strategic locations of munitions and vehicles, and the status of the Soviet's nuclear program. Game theory was researched by John Von Neumann (arguably the greatest polymath of all-time) and others to be applied to the Soviet threat.

During the Vietnam War, RAND analysts participated by interviewing North Vietnamese prisoners-of-war to learn about their motivation. After finding out that the Vietcong "described themselves as patriots leading a war of national liberation", the analysts realized the war would be a lot more difficult than initially anticipated. However, it was not their place to decide what was right or wrong, difficult or easy: their job was to synthesize the data and report it. Like America at the time, a large rift was created between RAND employees: pro-war and anti-war. Daniel Ellsberg, part of the anti-war faction, was the RAND employee who leaked what is known as the Pentagon Papers, documents detailing the truth on what the U.S. government was really doing in Vietnam.

In addition to international assignments, RAND also accepted commissions concerning domestic matters, such as one from New York City's mayor John Lindsay to study reformation of the city's unpopular government. Other federal entities, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), have also sought RAND's abilities in improving their methods.

The book's last few chapters discuss terrorism and RAND's role in working with and assisting the U.S. government in combating it.

RAND is still alive and well today (rand.org). Their website details all of their research areas and divisions, the reports they publish, the experts they employ, and their abilities. They even have a graduate school for public policy.

Despite being mostly in the shadows, RAND has and will continue to play a large (the importance is subjective) role in shaping and guiding U.S. policy for the foreseeable future.

Overall, a run-of-the-mill nonfiction book detailing the history of a company. Definitely boring at times, but interesting at others.

A thoroughly-researched book that examines the both Stuxnet virus and cyberwarfare policy individually, as well as their crossroads as it relates to the modern era.

Zetter's descriptions and explanations of all things technical is phenomenal. From the uranium-enriching centrifuges to zero-day computer exploits to SCADA, they are simplified enough for the layperson to understand without sacrificing information. Little to no technical background is required to understand the technology discussed, although it certainly doesn't hurt.

The book details the investigation (and obsession) of Stuxnet by a select number of security researchers and firms spread across the world. Zetter describes the researchers' process into dissecting the incredibly complex Stuxnet code (I suggest reading through this link, as Symantec was one of those "select number of security researchers and firms") and how they were finally able to understand its final payload.

U.S. cybersecurity and cyberwarfare policy, general cyber "philosophy" (for lack of a better term), and the legality of cyber operations are also discussed. Should zero-day exploits be able to be sold to the highest bidder, whether that be a nation-state or terror group? Do zero-day researchers have an obligation to disclose said exploit to the respective software? How should we respond to zero-day offensives aimed at the U.S? (Hint: depending on the severity of the attack, it may be considered an act of war, and you don't want to be on the wrong side of America when that happens.) Zetter describes what the U.S.' current policy is towards these questions and what discussions are taking place, albeit behind closed doors.

Even if you don't care about the Stuxnet virus or its impact, the cyber aspect of the book is extremely important to understand in this day and age. Our lives are becoming evermore electronically interconnected (phones connect to computers to cars to refrigerators (wait, what?) to watches), and with it comes vulnerabilities. While those are small-scale connections, compromising large-scale systems has the potential to kill individuals and ravage society: economic markets, power grids, transportation networks, healthcare systems, and computing centers. While there is little ordinary citizens can do to help prevent this, it helps to be informed on issues like this.

Review summary: An enjoyable (can I say that with what this book is about?) read about a horrific historical time period. Solzhenitsyn, with the translation help of Willetts, does a good job of describing the human condition in the face of evil and how it was managed over many years.

The book accounts details the fictional Ivan Denisovich's (Shukhov, Slavic naming conventions can help here, and in other Russian novels) experiences in one of Stalin's forced labor camps. Forced to confess he was a German spy, this account was taken during around his seventh year in prison.

Despite the horrible conditions they faced, there was plenty of time for happiness to be felt in the form of tobacco, warmth, and Sundays off (quite similar to what non-prisoners enjoy!). As the final paragraph begins: "Shukhov felt pleased with life as he went to sleep. A lot of good things had happened that day." An important lesson can be learned from this: despite harrowing conditions, happiness can still be felt in the form of hope (e.g. your prison sentence ending) or temporary relief (e.g. a cigarette).

The treatment of the prisoners was better than what I was expecting, although I'm not sure how much was censored by the USSR. The Gulag Archipelago, also by Solzhenitsyn, is supposedly more brutal and uncensored than One Day, which, not coincidentally, he was not allowed to publish in the USSR.

While I'm not a Russian speaker, Willetts seemed to do an adequate job of translating the humor and messages (after all, it's the only authorized version of this book).

One Day and The Gulag Archipelago are two important books about a terrible time in world history. OD is a bit more accessible (shorter, less descriptive), while TGA is out of reach/interest for many readers (~2000 pages across three volumes, vivid imagery = darker). I will tackle TGA at some point and compare with this.

For historical background, Wikipedia's Gulag article is well-researched, descriptive, and comprehensive if you are looking to learn more about this time period.

This book describes the relationship between burglary and the architecture of the building being burglarized, giving anecdotes and personal experiences along the way.

As other reviewers have said, the book spends a decent amount of time discussing his experiences researching the book (riding along in an LAPD helicopter, getting taught lock-picking, talking to detectives), but they do not give enough credit to his takeaways from those experiences. In the helicopter ride-along he learns about the ideal city layout for policing, and other small bits of knowledge about "bulgar theory" and policing methods.

A good portion of the book consists of anecdotes to complement his learnings and give some practical (although some of them are not so practical!) examples of real-life burglaries. He discusses tunneling into bank vaults ( yes, this does happen) and using social engineering to fool companies into sending you master key cards.

Manaugh briefly discusses the legal theory behind burglary. What is considered a building? When and where are you considered to be "inside" of a building? Some states take into account intent, meaning if you have suspicious items on you, despite a perfectly good explanation for each, you can still be charged with a crime.

An important topic discussed towards the book's end is that of "Nakatomi Space", named after the plaza in the movie Die Hard, where the protagonist travels around a skyscraper uses everything but conventional methods. The independent research Gwern discusses Nakatomi Space and some of its applications in this Reddit comment.

My biggest takeaway from this book is using objects in manners they are not meant to be used in, e.g. enter a room through the thin drywall rather than the reinforced steel door with three deadbolts and a booby trap. It is through this outside-of-the-box thinking that the most successful burglars have gotten away with crimes.

Magic and Mystery in Tibet provides an excellent summary of Tibetan practices, beliefs, and culture in the beginning of the 20th century. If anyone has a suggestion for a more modern book detailing similar information, I'd love to hear it.

Alexandra David-Néel is a French linguist and Buddhist who has spent significant time traveling in and around Tibet.

The book is split up into eight chapters: Tibet and the Lamas, A Guest of the Lamas, A Famous Tibetan Monastery, Dealing with Ghosts and Demons, Disciples of Yore and Their Contemporary Emulators, Psychic Sports, Mystic Theories and Spiritual Training, and Psychic Phenomena in Tibet - How Tibetans Explain Them.

Each chapter is a mix of her travels in Tibet and Tibetan practices as they relate to the chapter's title. She gives detailed background information about the practices: how they began, what Tibetans believe about them, and how the practices are actually performed. Take, for example, lung-gom , a type of training that is said to "develop uncommon nimbleness and especially enables its adepts to take extraordinarily long tramps with amazing rapidity". David-Néel describes her interactions with lung-gom-pas , first encountering one in Chang thang of Northern Tibet, then another who was wearing iron chains to prevent himself from floating off into space (since the training supposedly makes you lighter than air). She then describes the training itself: jumping cross-legged from the bottom of a pit and crawling through a minuscule hole from a cell they've been in for seven days. Throughout these descriptions, she explains the Tibetans' reasoning and thoughts behind why and how these work. Complementary anecdotes and folklore are also shared throughout the book. This process is used for the most of the Tibetan practices and culture she describes.

There is a lot of mysticism and spiritual belief that David-Néel does a good (and respectful) job of not diminishing, but rather objectively explains their perspective. The book ends in a request for scientists to "undertake serious investigations of the phenomena [which David-Néel experienced]", as some of the events she describes are seemingly unexplainable. Considering this was written in the 1930s, I am curious to see how much, if any, Tibetan beliefs have changed in regard to these subjects since then.

There is little concept of time throughout (no "in 19XX I did this"), but she does mention this book is the culmination of over 10 years of research and studying.

Pictures are mostly of persons, but also include some places.