Aron 2 Blue

Is Clancy as rich as J.K. Rowling, of the Harry Potter Empire? We know he didn't make as much as an author, because Rowling was the first author to break $1B. But maybe with his video game company, he's close to that? I would guess he's a $100 millionaire, which puts him within an order of magnitude. Patriot Games is gripping, fast paced, and written before editors were afraid to tell him to cut stuff. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's dated, because it deals with the IRA as terrorists, and with the lack of terrorist attacks on US soil. I watched the movie right after finishing the book. Contrasts with the movie were numerous. Especially the end. I thought the book flowed better at the end. It was more complicated, because there were a lot of terrorists, instead of just four in the movie, and they actually captured Jack and the prince for a bit in the book, until they were rescued by Jack's bud, Robby. The neat wrap up in the movie where all the bad guys die (surprise,...

Politics Lost: How American Democracy Was Trivialized By People Who Think You're Stupid at PBSwap Author: Joe Klein Fun, mostly a tour of the last several presidential campaigns, and what the author/reporter knows about the influence of pollsters and consultants on the candidates campaigns, for better or worse. I'm cringing right after the Iowa caucus to hear every single damn Democrat say that they are the candidate for 'change', after Obama won. Stupid to try to rip Obama's consistent message, when it hasn't been their message. Of course, Hillary is trying to say I'm for change, but I have experience too! And I've changed things, too! I don't think people are buying it, much. I wrote that on Jan 8, and I agree now. Seems like Douglas Rushkoff agrees with me. Or rather I agree with him.

Moon Called (Mercy Thompson, Bk 1) at PBSwap Author: Patricia Briggs It's a page turner. Modern day setting, with magical creatures of all sorts trying to hide and thrive in modern settings. In this book, murder and dominance, a bit of lust, and mysterious crime solving in werewolf packs. Strangely, even though I've not followed the comic books, only the movies, I found strong similarities to the X-men. The 'fae' have been exposed to the public and media, but the stronger/more dangerous magical beings like werewolves and vampires are still secret. Criminal forensics has made the existence of werewolves an 'open secret', in that the FBI as an organization seems to know of their existence. Sounds a _lot_ like the mutants being exposed to media attention in X-men, and the backlash and reaction. I think it lets the author explore some interesting moral dilemmas, but there's not much of that in this first book. I was bothered by the overwhelming presence of viole...

From the National Safety Council: Odds of Dying . One of those things you never know when you'll need. Update: new link.

Someday I might get the hang of this. I put out two new posts, Kavalier and Clay and Coffin for Dimitrios, but their dates stuck at when I started the post, not when I finished it. So my recent posts were inserted a while back. Weird.

I had a strong moment of self-recognition with this chapter. In talking about rational approaches to voting, Harford described the person who is going to vote, but knows that they have hardly any chance of affecting the outcome (casting the winning vote). So they vote like that - like they can't affect the outcome. I do that. I think about voting, especially in local elections. I try to pay attention, and learn something about the candidates. But I can't motivate myself to spend time, search, and make in-depth comparisons. I rely on bumping in to information, and other people's analysis, if I'm lucky. If I'm not, I end up voting based on party. And in a non-swing state, that means my vote doesn't matter much. Interesting vicious circle, eh?

The second chapter is discussed . Fabio Rojas has a great discussion. From this, I'm realizing that I don't have an objection to people being mostly rational, most of the time. I object to equilibrium. Game theory was developed in the framework of equilibrium, and outside of ideal situations like a poker game, I don't see where it applies. It's like fluid dynamics. We can write down an exact equation for how fluids flow. (Lorentz or somebody, I should know this). But when we try to solve them, they are horrendously complicated, and exhibit chaotic behavior. So instead, for practical results, we using finite simulations, where we don't get the exact answer, but limit ourselves to some time and spatial resolution. That is often good enough, and gets better with every cycle of Moore's law. But how do we tell when it's "good enough"? With fluid dynamics, we can see some of the results in films - digital water has gotten better, from The Abyss to Titan...