F.

This is one of the best Discworld books. Death is the most likable character, and Pratchett is in top form here. I'm currently reading it in French and have to admit it's sometimes even funnier, given the excellent work of the translator.

Well, this isn't very good.

A blog post with some action points stretched for no reason. If you want a history of the method and vague recommendations, this is it.

Why shouldn't the child use plastic cups? Because “they” say so. Good. Ad eternum filler content backed by wishful thinking.

Disclaimer: I'll raise my kids largely in the Montessori tradition, but without dogma. And, I think, this isn't the source material for how we'll decorate the home.

I found it somewhat perplexing that Pratchett's best Discworld book would be this one (for me).

The series on Death and the one on Miss Weatherwax were always my favorites. Rincewind is simply boring. But ‘Going Postal' really takes the cake. It's quite clever and touching.

Besides, it made me feel respect for Vetinari, almost wanting to know what our world would be like with a benevolent dictator.

This is, unlike many Discworld books, not just a light read, but rather an inventive book about greed and the pride of a job well done. The way the “clacks” were run mirrors that of many corporations of our own world, which was in itself gripping enough. It's hard not to like a book that pokes so much fun at managers and the rich.

It's xkcd #356 at its finest, this book is fantastic.

5 stars just on principle; in reality this might have benefited from a harsher editor and more commentary on the insights. Still... a monumental book to have had while I did/do my own shadow work.

Lots of great advice, brought down by too much explanation; too many examples; and some questionable stretches about convincing people to join your company by showing them how unhappy they are at their current jobs.

I'm giving this a preemptive 2 stars. Must all self-help books be written in a condescending tone, by people that ‘researched' something online for a week? Do we need supernatural phenomena taking place in order to enjoy tantra? Final question: is it possible the wife started feeling better due to estrogen and iron+vitamin supplementation, without special tantra sex positions making her periods “normal”? Yikes.

“(...) if you had demonstrated a mobile phone to someone in the 15th century, you probably would have been burned at the stake (...), but mobile phones actually work even if most of us do not [understand] the physics involved.” (Of course, ‘sacred' sex energy and the physics of mobile phones work hand-in-hand. Good argument.)

“This is how Western civilization was first introduced to binary arithmetic (...) [which is] also the language of all modern computers. So the computer used to write and produce the book you are reading has been developed as a direct result of Taoist Yin/Yang theory.” — Look, I actually do cherish Daoism as a philosophy (not the religious practice); but this is plain wrong and honesty a ridiculous statement. Binary is there because of the physics of electrical signals. Of course the author would then argue that computers work like tantra and mobile phones...

“It's not a great leap to imagine that if (...) [you visualize] a circuit through your body, you actually create a circuit.” Well, if you say so, why bother with proof...

At this point I'll stop quoting the book. It's too easy to dismantle cherry-picked sections.

I'd like to vouch for ‘vagina' and ‘penis' as great words. I use them whenever they make sense, i.e. where appropriate — instead of ‘pussy' and ‘dick'. I don't think ‘yoni' and ‘jade stalk' make things any better, although I concede they're funnier terms. Vaginas are lovely, and I disagree that the term has negative connotations. If Latin sounds evil to the author(s), I propose they use the Ancient Greek term, which sounds just as whimsical as ‘yoni'. In much the same vein, I also propose the author(s) consider the possibility that Western culture isn't a source of Higher Evil, as they routinely advance. I just think the book would be far more enjoyable without the ‘holier than thou' statements every other paragraph.

—

Edit: I'm done, having stopped around 50%. I wish all the best for this couple, but I hope to never again read one of their books. This was a joyless grind.

Another ‘Clean' book — and the more you've read, the more you should know what to expect.

Craftsmanship talks heavily about TDD as a way to know/prove your code works, can be refactored reliably, and doesn't break anything unexpected. It's a good lesson, and does indeed lead to the concept of craftsmanship in development.

Towards the end, Bob gets into what should be the ethics/vows of the profession, which I can largely agree with.

If you haven't read Architecture, Code or Agile, this is a good place to start.

Great visuals, but mediocre text-wise. No sense of a coherent narrative about how so many immense events fit together into such an important decade for Berlin, nor how art is really affected by them.

I've been following Randall's work since xkcd #83 — damn, I'm getting old! —, and ‘What If? 2' reads more like some of his filler work in the comics. It's 25% less compelling than its predecessor, but you're still getting a very interesting read out of this one.

I'm torn.

Maybe nostalgia for the movie clouded my judgement. The book reads really nicely, and it's breezy and even fun.

I don't get the sidebars. Most importantly: when the author draws attention to the glaring plot holes, is that self-referential fun going to be enough to ignore them?

I like the book, but I'd rather watch the movie, and that's something I wouldn't say about any other adaptation.

A watershed of compiled research, meta-analysis, and thoughtful recommendations on how to age well, live longer, and be healthy.

Lieberman's writing and advice are compelling. You might feel some hits of delight at how he goes after some myths of ‘scientific journalism' that are either poorly researched or thoroughly debunked by now.

Humans don't have a biological imperative to exercise in gyms as we do, but then again we've never been more sedentary and physically inactive. I've always exercised — aside from spells of exhaustion and... COVID-19 —, but now I have even more arguments against my own procrastination.

A crucial, must-read book for anyone that wants to fight the infirmities of old age and lead a proper human life.

Devastating at times, but a well argued and important book. As a technologist, it reaffirms my vague inkling that tech and policy are getting more disconnected; but it also offers solutions.

As technological levers increase the destructive potential of bad actors, society needs to catch up as quickly as possible. Schneier has long been a reference in infosec, and his book makes the case that it'd be better to have good policies in place now, rather than disaster remediation later. Given that politicians are too keen to power grab when bad events strike, it's in our collective interest to demand change ASAP.

Can a remote-controlled car kill you? Have we gotten to the point that a country's power grid can be taken down by bad actors? Is it getting worse? Yes to all three. We have the tools and know-how to improve things, so it's disappointing that political will is lacking.

A recommended read to everyone, as awareness of practical and real issues seems, to me, important enough.

It took me 2 years to get through this one, not for its size, but due to a lack of flow. Contrasting it with Mythos — similar subject matter —, Norse Mythology just... isn't interesting? The tone and discombobulated writing didn't work for me.

Oh boy, I came into this one with some preconceived harsh thoughts. And I left it with renewed hope for a better understanding of the gender divide that's been fomented by a value-destroying culture.

Power meanders a bit, goes off-topic here and there, and you're at times pondering whether she'll come back to bring it all home. She does.

It's quite a breeze to read, and something you'll get through in a day. Do revisit the book later. There's mentions of Jordan Peterson, online hate culture, and capitalism-spoiled movements; these are put into an interesting context where we come to see both genders as struggling for meaning and a deeper, shared value system.

What do men want? Power isn't very clear at times; but the ending pays off massively, so I won't spoil it.

In her writing I found parts of myself I couldn't identify before, vague contours of some dissatisfaction — and at times anger —, which I think can be explained by her later arguments in the book.

I'm glad to be ‘oh so very wrong' in my initial approach to the book. Nina Power brought about a book that I can cherish, something far less poisonous or trivializing than most of today's literature about what men could possibly be all about.

—

Edit: I'm going through it a second time, now taking notes and stopping to reflect on my own life.

I have to say this has been more transformative than I initially thought it might. Power has been doing a lot for my guilt-ridden relationship with masculinity. She's also prompted me to read into some of the positive modes of being a man that she highlights: the mythopoetic movement, strands of modern masculinity with a focus on nurturing male relationships, and — most importantly — the notion of male courage and male self-care as being of service to the greater society.

Normally I'm not someone that would whole-sale recommend a book (taste is intensely subjective), but the vast majority of men would certainly find in Nina Power's words the stimulus to look for the healthy version of who we are/can be, and a few pointers towards the role models that we are most definitely lacking.

I'm disappointed that a number of reviews focus — in the negative sense — on aspects that Power herself tries to explain early in the book. Are we no longer capable of discussing things without ‘whataboutism'? Even as an intersectionalist, I think it's sensible to dissect such a heated topic with a narrower scope; so as not to fall prey to vagueness and ineffectual theoreticizing. More importantly, Power actually offers a view on the interconnectedness of minority issues and the broader impact stemming from male behavior; but not that she had to, and in fact starts the book by talking about her narrow focus.

To wit: male suffering and cultural expectations, translated into certain behaviors we want to get rid of, are ultimately linked to the suffering of the female population, of the non-binary population, of the non-conforming population, etc. Oppression and suffering are universal. The pain of specific label-bound categories of people is going to end up being more or less connected to that of other categories; but the point is that these separations are arbitrary. Power specifically makes that case early in the book. Her aim seems to be explaining why certain modes of oppression and cultural norms surrounding the male construct generate echoes of pain that ripple through persons that are not within the male construct but negatively impacted by it.

Does Power also offer a better way of males and females living together? Yep. Does that somehow detract from the quality of life of, say, non-binary individuals? No, I don't see how that would be possible. Didn't we spend loads of time telling conservatives that “human rights aren't like pie”?

Now I've gotta go deal with 33 years of guilt and shame about having been born a male...

This is one of my favorite books of all time, if not THE favorite. I refuse to write much about it, it's a beautiful thing to discover on your own :)

Good lord... Honestly I had to finish this book outside at a park, near a church, and surrounded by people living their normal lives.

That's the physical space required to get through ‘There Is No Antimemetics Division'. I don't know what headspace compels you to read it in the first place or want to finish it. It's an entirely new way with which you can spook yourself and, at the end, be glad you exist.

The back and forth in timelines isn't my favorite, in a book that tackles maybe too many ideas all at once. But all in all, it's a really good read and a wonderful foray into the idea of a universe where god(s) do exist, but not the benevolent/creator-kind we've invented with religion.

A disturbing, good book. Stay away from it. Or don't. I don't know, are these memories real?

Well, I don't know what to make of this book. The initial chapter — the one that sold me — exposits about solitude in a very beautiful way. It portrays time alone as one of recharging and pursuing worthwhile, enriching endeavors. Some known and lesser known creative types (and e.g. scientists) are mentioned as having led deeply rich lives thanks to how they used their time alone. Solitude is equated not with anti-social behavior but time needed to further one's pursuits. Many of these people led very agreeable social lives. Furthermore, we're later reminded of Jung's idea of integration as much needed to engage in enriching social contact.

Beyond that first chapter, the book decays into some chaos. I think the author's attempt at narrating all the sides of being alone was a bit misguided, but hey!, I'm not writing books so I'm not here to judge. Personally, I found all the references to Freud to be not only tedious, but completely unnecessary. It's almost as if the author had a personal reason to negatively obsess about Freud, a man that contributed much to other psychologists finding ways to disprove him. So much of Freud is now obsolete that I don't see why we'd spend chapter after chapter analyzing his proposals.

We also find time to talk about prison and a number of things that are only tangential to solitude. Especially since you're probably not reading this book in prison! It's almost as if the majority of the book was a sidebar to the main topic, but I'm afraid the book itself is concerned with too many things. It's not fluff per se — as self-help might indulge in —, but feels both trivial and dismissible.

Sadly, all this meandering does a great disservice to a book that every now and the delivers tremendous insight. I found myself skimming ahead entire sections until something finally got my attention and made me stop to read slowly.

And then it all clicks together. Chapter 10 gives us the pay off for all that meandering. The object-relation psychoanalysts were mentioned extensively to be extensively disproven. But if you already knew Jung was going to come around and ‘save' psychotherapy, I still think the previous chapters felt too long and exhaustive.

Personally, I would also like to add that I found the depiction of both Kant and Wittgenstein as indicators that they would today be placed on the autistic spectrum. Ipso facto, some of the behaviors from other personalities mentioned might be classified as pathological today. That said, I do like that the author, an expert on the field himself, is essentially proposing that some of what we consider ‘damaged' might not be so. After all, if the creative act can self-actualize us and provide respite in making order out of the world, why would we think that only hyper-social people deserve to be considered healthy? I liked that redeeming quality, and the acknowledgment that many works of art we consider grandiose were put together by people struggling internally.

All in all, the right kind of “self-help” and quite informative.

My mouth tastes foul now...

This book is to history and society what self-help is to psychology and self-care: a grandiose design, filled with dread and inducing anxiety, and oft promising salvation through a prescribed set of solutions. The malady is that, like the self-help genre, it substantiates none of its claims with evidence.

I am appaled by the number of reviews talking about “facts”, as if the opinion of a largely misguided fear-mongerer was, of itself, fact-making. Facts, my fellow kin, are made so by hard evidence (what a rationalist might call lowering the probability of the opposing non-fact).

As a white European, I suppose I should be running to the hills by now. And by the hills I mean Switzerland, which stands as a bastion of purity in a completely Islamified Europe. Oh my, oh my, run away, the death of Europe is coming! We are completely surrounded and the end is near... Repent!

Oh what the hell Mr. Murray, I'll quote the great Billy Connolly: “fuck off!” It's so difficult to see a learned man succumb to the tactics of the extreme political poles (left and right). Please engage with the vast hordes of foreigners and try to be human for once. This isn't to preach that we should “open the gates” to just about anyone, that isn't the point. But I've met a number of refugees and heard their stories. Many don't want to be here in the first place.

Might I suggest, Mr. Murray — seeing as you're a Brit —, that you look at the past actions of your own country and consider how they are linked to the problems that create refugees in the first place? Oh, but oh well, I am now decrying Europe and falling prey to white guilt, I must be an ultra-leftist hyper-liberal woke anti-Christ. My, oh my, it is truly the end of the continent!

Look at the numbers, look at how migration communities contribute to their host countries, etc. Yes, some apples in the basket were rotten, but you can't burn down the whole orchard as a solution. And you shouldn't invade other countries' orchards either. Or fund the weapons used by the orchard rebels. And so on.

Let the whole of this failing continent's assailed populace cry in unison: Mr. Murray, fuck off.

I want to take a few verses from “An die Freude”, the anthem of a Union Mr. Murray's country has decided to abandon. Perhaps the very words that we hoped to enshrine — which the United Kingdom now disregards due to the force majeure of ‘migrants are terrible!' —, can shine some light on what it could mean to be a true European (a “friend's friend”):

Deine Zauber binden wieder
Was die Mode streng geteilt.
Alle Menschen werden Brüder
Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

Alright, now that that's out of the way — and I can pretend I never read this —, I'm going to enjoy my perfectly fine agnostic life. Oh sorry, I meant I'm going to try falling asleep whilst soaked in fear, surrounded by Allah-worshipping demons, in the failed nation of Belgium. I hope Brexit really fixes all of that for ya.

Pff, who am I to judge a 172-years book, that's close to 900 pages, written by a revered author? There are plenty of great reviews on Goodreads about David Copperfield — both favorable and not so much. (Some fall into the mistake of ignoring the almost 2 centuries that have passed.)

I wanted only to point out 2 things: Dickens does indeed “ramble” and over-extend the narrative with tangents that contribute nothing to the story; and the book is remarkable by most standards, whether I found it sublime or not.

If I were to remove one thing from the book, it wouldn't be Uriah or the rambling or what most reviews complain about. I would very much appreciate Dickens getting rid of the poor-people's English that e.g. Mr. Pegotty speaks. Oh, and Dora.

I don't agree with some who claim the characters to be rather flat. Well, except for the Murdstones and Dora. Good lord, do I find Dora detestable...

Regardless, it's a long, grinding read, but one with plenty of pay-off: the colossal quality of the writing, the sense that you're going through the lives of people you care for, the occasional humor, and (obviously) an ending that rewards your expectations about the main characters in the story.

SpoilerOh, and Dora dies eventually, leaving David to finally grap the love staring him right in the face, so there's that to look forward to.

I don't know how I feel about the ending, but damn, what a terrifically excellent book. I didn't even know this was a genre, but it hits the right notes. Brilliant!

I don't expect M:tG novels to be top tier, but that they at least connect to the whole of this universe and provide a decent, light read.

That said, “Prophecy” is appalling.

This was a bore, it dragged insignificant details on for so long, and I found myself skimming more than I'd do a self-help book. It's not a terrible book, but I really wish I hadn't spent time reading it. It also ties poorly with this cycle.

Basically, it all boils down to this:

=== SPOILER ===

The Phyrexian plague is spreading in Dominaria, and the Keldons are to blame. They're also awful, slave-owning, war-mongering people. Rayne dies, Barrin is upset, and Teferi is... well, the usual.

That's it, only stretched meaninglessly for hundreds of pages. I don't mean to be rude or dismissive of the author's work, it's just that this one wasn't for me.

Maybe age has finally gotten to me, and M:tG books are no longer as enjoyable. Although, having just finished “Rath and Storm” — which I found to be rather good —, perhaps it's just that the Ravnica cycle feels uninspired. Mr. Herndon's work on the Mirrodin books was perfectly fine with me, but here we have too many characters, too many new words, too many plot points, going back and forth, which makes it all a bit uninteresting.

The ending was especially lacklustre: you can't quite build up the primary antagonist to be this iconic, legendary, 10 thousand years old vampire, but also have him finished in 10 seconds by an aging cop. Something doesn't quite add up there. Mirrodin's Memnarch went down in an epic series of events, so the author can clearly deliver a good villain's downfall.

I don't intend to be too harsh, after all Goodreads labels the 2-star rating as “It's ok.” And that's what this particular book was.

EDIT: I've just started Mercadian Masques, and it's been very pleasant by comparison.

Short and to the point. Every point is well argued for, and backed by data.

On some topics, correlation is used a bit too heavily to sustain some claims. Overall that doesn't detract from the main message: we have hard, concrete facts for balance in gender pay and representation, and we have concrete data on companies benefiting from that.

The book offers some simple, easy to implement measures to improve things, which I appreciate as someone about to start their own company.

Maybe I'm too pragmatic to put non-binary, gender-as-a-spectrum concerns ahead of the here-and-now issues faced by women. And that might be why I don't get some of the bad reviews. It's not pie, and I think that if we improve the situation for cis-females, that might just make it better for everyone. Or I could be wrong. It's still a very good, short, zero-fluff book.

Nerd-snipping with a comedic twist. “If you liked Randall Munroe, you might like...”