Chamblee, GA, United States | Member Since 2009
This book is a mishmash of clips from a variety of authors. There is very little cohesiveness to the book. If you want to sample some of the authors, then it might be worth a listen, but I would advise you to buy individual works from the various authors.
Full disclosure: I got more than 3 hours into this book and put it down. I may listen to some more of it, if, for example, I have a very long airplane ride and nothing better to do.
Here's where it breaks down for me: The first part of the book can be summarized as follows: 1. Man is a monkey with a big brain; 2. Man uses the big brain to exploit its environment; and 3. Bad things happen to other animals (particularly large animals) when man arrives on the scene. OK, that's one view of pre-history and history, but it's nothing new.
The author is what I would call glib: He presents some issues and questions that appear deep and compelling at first, but, when you think about them, they really aren't. They just take you back to points 1, 2 and 3.
Maybe there's more later, but I'm not likely to spend hours trying to find out.
This book isn't just about mammoths. It is about the science of "de-extinction," which means the possibility of bringing extinct species (or, actually, reasonable facsimiles thereof) back to life. If you like mammoths, however, there's plenty in the book for you!
Shapiro does a great job of describing the science in a reasonably accessible manner. She also explains why, although much progress has been made, there are still important scientific and practical mountains to climb.
The book presents a very balanced view of the practical and ethical issues surrounding possible de-extinction. Shapiro is not a scientist who believes that the science should simply proceed without careful (actually very careful) consideration of whether it should go forward at all.
The book is a nice length. It's long enough to go in depth, but not so long that it gets mired in details.
This book is just fascinating. It is a compelling biography of an important scientist's quest to unlock the mystery of pre-history. Although the subject matter is highly complex, the author provides a reasonably accessible explanation of what he and his team are doing and what it means. In other words, you don't need an advanced degree in biology to enjoy the book.
The findings about our nearest relative are interesting and surprising. You have probably read about the results in the popular press, but I won't spoil the results.
It's also interesting to hear about the behind the scenes struggles as Svante and his team try to gain access to bones, and worry about other, less careful, scientists beating them to the punch.
Overall, the book was highly enjoyable, and I will be looking for additional compelling developments as the science advances.
This is a fast moving interesting book that presents a very credible set of techniques for selling and persuasion. In short, Klaff demonstrates that many conventional sales techniques are at best unproductive and at worst just flat out wrong.
The information is useful for almost any profession, and not just traditional selling. I'm going to buy the e book and study it.
Although the story moves well, there are points where it gets a little overwrought, and makes me wonder if some of the examples are not embellished. "Goldhammer"?
This is a very good book that takes an in depth look at the risks associated with cyber-warfare. Although one has to be impressed with the capabilities of whatever team or teams developed Stuxnet, the point Zetter makes again and again is that cyber weapons tend to come home to create havoc. Another point she makes is that our infrastructure is probably not ready for a concentrated or government-backed attack.
The story is well-written and reads much like a mystery. That said, the book could have used some careful editing. It is probably about 20 percent too long.
Cyber vulnerability is a very important topic, and this book does a great job of providing an education about the risks. I do feel that the author understates the benefits of disrupting the Iranian nuclear program, but, in a more overall sense, she does a great job of presenting the issues and risks in a very readable manner.
This is the book Isaacson was writing that was interrupted by his very fine biography on Steve Jobs. Although a bit long and tedious at some points, the book provides a really interesting history of the development of computers and digital technology. It's amazing how far ahead of their time some of these people were. A description of a computer demonstration from1968 is amazing--at least 30 years ahead of its time. The stories are interesting, but the author's main point is that most technology does not develop as a result of a solitary inventor in a garage, but as a result of collaborative efforts that build on the work of others. His discussion of the tension between closed and open systems--which is weaved throughout the book--is very interesting. As so today we have Apple and Google. A good read. Could have been a bit shorter.
This is a really interesting book that chronicles the rise of various information technologies, starting with the telephone and ending with the Internet. Wu presents a strong argument that information technologies tend to start free and then wind up being controlled by monopolies, the government, or a combination. His discussion of how AT&T suppressed important technological developments (such as the answering machine) for decades is both fascinating and a bit depressing. The same thing happened to FM radio and other technologies. So far, the Internet has been different, but the Obama administration has just announced plans to regulate it. So, despite Wu's hope that this time might be different, it looks like the cycle is on the verge of repeating.
This is really a helpful book. In a little over two hours, DeSouza offers practical and actionable tips on prospecting, selling, and getting referrals. His tips on communicating effectively with customers are very thought-provoking. I'm not sure there is a lot here that has not been written before, but I don't think I've ever seen anything like it in such a compact and actionable presentation.
This is an important book for anyone interested in contemporary geopolitics. Friedman takes us on a quick tour of European history which focuses on the rise of Germany three times: As an economic and military power leading to World War I, as a military power under Hitler, and as the greatest post-war economic power. Now being a rich, but militarily weak, country, Friedman explains the many challenges that Germany faces for itself, and that it creates for the rest of Europe. His discussion also chronicles the reemergence of Russia, and its need to move its "buffer" to the west, having been re-positioned far to the east after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Friedman also weighs in on the enigma of France and how it is neither really a northern European economic power or a weak southern European country, but a curious mixture of both. And, of course, Great Britain's role is analyzed. No longer a world power, Britain needs Europe and keeps a watchful eye on it, but does not really want to commit to the European Union. Friedman's most incisive discussion, however, involves borderlands across the quilt of many nations that form Europe. Some borderlands are peaceful and will likely remain that way, while others--most notably Ukraine--form the flashpoint for future conflicts. Friedman's main point is that the contention that the European Union ushered in an age of prosperity for all that made conflict and war a thing of the past is simply not true. Very thought provoking. I may listen again.
This is a first hand and fast moving account of the disastrous events in Benghazi Libya on the night of September 11, 2012, as told by the surviving members of the Annex security team. If this was fiction, it might be criticized as pure fantasy. However, it really happened, and four Americans died.
It is pretty clear from the account that not enough security was in place in the beginning. It is also clear that Ambassador Stephens decided to go forward with a dangerous trip with an inadequate security team. It is also clear that bad decisions were made by the CIA when the attack started. It is somewhat unclear whether additional U.S. assets or friendly forces could have been brought in during the attack (perhaps a story for another book), but one gets the clear impression that not enough was done.
Six men were essentially left on their own to try to retrieve the Ambassador and, when that brave effort failed, to defend the Annex. Draw your own conclusions, but I strongly suspect things would have been far worse with almost any other group.
Compelling. Also very sad.
Report Inappropriate Content