Swedish journalist Stieg Larrson wrote novels, for fun, in his spare time.  Larrson died in November of 2004, leaving three unpublished books.   These were the only novels known to have been written by the man, and they have received many awards and accolades in Europe after their posthumous publishing.  Since their translation to English they have enjoyed great success in the English speaking world as well.  Only the first two books have been released in The United States, though it is not very difficult to obtain a copy of the third online.

The Millennium Trilogy follows the exploits of twenty-something, anti-social hacker Lisbeth Salander and middle-aged, controversial reporter Mikael Blomkvist.  The duo find themselves united in the first book to solve a 30 year old murder mystery, but the plot thickens from there.   The second and third books each tell a story of their own while also telling an overarching story, and bring to conclusion a lot of themes and unresolved issues from the first book.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is the first in the trilogy.  I found this book to be the best of the bunch, which shouldn’t take anything away from the other books.  Dragon introduces us to a rich set of characters and to locations that are unfamiliar.  The settings in the book are almost exclusively in Sweden, and Larrson goes into some detail about the cities, towns, transportation, restaurants, and general ambiance there.  The characters are well developed and interesting.  The two lead characters both have similar attitudes, and express these attitudes in very different ways.  All of this is stacked on top of a rather interesting murder mystery.

The Girl Who Played with Fire continues on with the characters about a year after the end of Dragon.  Fire continues with many of the themes established in the first book, and jumps into some of the more interesting teasers left hanging.  We soon find the roles our lead characters took in the first book reversed.  This book quickly turns into another murder mystery, but that is not what is really going on.  Blomkvist and Salander separately race to solve related portions of the same mystery, although this time it isn’t so much a mystery for Salander, but history.  The book has a couple of interesting plot twists at the end, and while it resolves the central mystery of the book it does leave at least one character in serious jeopardy.

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets’ Nest concludes the trilogy, and finishes the overarching story started in Fire.  Again Blomkvist and Salander are fighting against unknown adversaries, this time with a more united front.  At the end of the book Larrson leaves the characters ready for more battles together, and one can only imagine what would have come from his mind had he lived.  However, this trilogy does tell a complete overall story and closes all the loose threads.  In the final analysis its a story about friendship and loyalty between many different characters, but mostly between Salander and Blomkvist.

I recommend the trilogy to anyone that enjoys good fiction.  As an avid science and science fiction reader, I am not entirely sure what lured me into reading these books.  But I found them all very good reads.

My wife and I are both currently reading The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo, a financial-crime mystery of sorts, on our Kindles.  The book is part 1 of a 3 part series written by the late Swedish author Stieg Larsson.  Books 1 and 2, The Girl Who Played with Fire, are available on Kindle and for purchase in bookstores in the US.  Book 3, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest, is not available in the US despite the fact that the series is very popular and the book was published in 2007.  In Europe the book is widely available, and is even on the UK Kindle site.  US citizens cannot buy it from the UK Kindle site.  Why is this book being held back from America in such a contrived fashion?  The publisher is trying to create demand for the book, which will be released to the US market in the spring of 2010.  There is just one problem with this plan.  Its easy to get the book.  US booksellers are importing it from Europe.  And digital versions of the book are easy to find, for free, online.  Theoretically I could have already downloaded it, without paying for it, and it could theoretically be sitting on our Kindles right now waiting to be read.

I ran into this same phenomenon tonight with a new show I wanted to view but had missed on television, White Collar.  USA and Hulu only offer the last few episodes.  I want to start from the beginning.  So this leaves me with three options.  I can start from the middle of the season (yuck).  I can decide to ignore it until it comes out on DVD and rent it through NetFlix (if I remember to do so).   The third option should be obvious: its dead simple to find this show on any of the popular torrent sights.  Its widely distributed and quickly downloadable.  If I were to theoretically download it, I would assume that it would be commercial free.  USA has just lost out on potential commercial revenue.  Just as the publisher of The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest lost out of a sale.

Media companies, whether they are book, movie, television or music publishers, suffer a stupidity tax when they don’t make their items easily available in a digital format online.  This is (almost) 2010.  The internet as been a big thing for about 15 years now.  If a company is too stupid to realize someone can simply download their stuff if they don’t allow it on their site, then I think they incur this tax.  You can argue morality here, but from a purely-business perspective this is just a futile attempt to hold onto the pre-1994 world.

This isn’t Dr. Dre and Metallica fighting Napster, with everyone trying to figure out the realities of this new economy.  Today it shouldn’t even be an issue.  For example, right this moment Metallica’s entire catalog is available online in multiple stores.  Hell, they have a lot of free and pay concert music on their site ready to be downloaded.  They learned the lesson the entire media industry should have learned 10 years ago!

So why haven’t people learned?  I honestly think it is plain-old stupidity.  I think there are old people running companies that just simple don’t get it.  Nothing else can explain the complete lack of business sense in relation to digital media and the Internet.  But there are bright spots.  There are a number of shows with a significant portion of their catalog available, for free, on Hulu.  These companies and Hulu are making advertising money for what amounts to re-runs.

Make it easy for people to do the right thing and they will do the right thing.  If not, then most people are going to do as they please.  We aren’t talking about murder here; people are usually downloading things that are either overpriced or not available.  Digital distribution is easy; there are plenty of pioneers and a lot of great software to support it.  The trail has already been blazed, and there are working business models to be followed.  Digital distribution should be cheap.  Releasing content digitally should at very least save the cost of producing a physical product.

So, I might watch some television on my laptop tonight then settle into bed with my Kindle for some reading.

I just finished reading a marvelous book titled The Greatest Show On Earth: The Evidence for Evolution by the eminent biologist Richard Dawkins.  The book is about evolution, if you couldn’t tell from the title. So this review is going to be about evolution.

If you are one of those people that disagrees with the theory of evolution via natural selection, I hope you will read this full review and I hope you will read Mr. Dawkins’s book.  Here in the United States, about 40% of the general public believe that that the theory of evolution is false.   I italicize believe, because discounting evolution must be based on belief, not on evidence.  From a scientific perspective, there isn’t a single piece of evidence, not one, that goes against this well established theory.  It is considered one of the most well-proven theories in all of science.  Mr. Dawkins argues, as others have, that such a well-proven theory should actually have a better name that “theory”.  In science the word “theory” has a very different meaning that in general usage.

Here are the two definitions of theory as provided from the Princeton Wordnet:

1. A tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena.
2. A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena.

Can you understand the massive difference between these two definitions?  The first one is the common, everyday, non-scientific one.  It just means a hypothesis, an idea.  The second is the actual scientific one, and it is pretty obvious that it caries with it the implication of proof.  When you read “The Theory of Gravity” or “Einstein’s General Theory of General Relativity”, and yes, “The Theory of Evolution”, the second definition of theory is the one in use.  Because of this confusion a creationist might argue against The Theory of Evolution by saying, “Its just a theory.”  But in scientific parlance, that translates to “Its just a fact.”

Evolution is a fact.  In general, non-scientific speak, that is the crux of it.  Dawkins lays out the evidence, and wow, there is evidence.  We have a rich fossil record that supports the theory of evolution, but even without a single fossil evolution would be proven.  How?  Our very DNA proves evolution.  There is also substantial supporting evidence in the embryology of any animal, including humans.  In the first weeks of gestation a human embryo is not very different from that of a fish.  And it isn’t surprising, because an ancient ancestor of our race is the fish.  Dawkins discusses many other pieces of supporting evidence that are to be found throughout the world, including cases where evolution has actually been observed first hand!

Dawkins also leaves the science of biology and discusses in depth the scientific methodology that proves evolution.  Young earth creationist will be especially horrified to learn of the variety of dating methodologies in use by modern scientists, each corroborated by at least one other.  How do we know a fossil is 10k years old or 100k years old or 1 million years old?  Dawkins discusses the various techniques used to do this dating, in detail.  He leaves no doubt.  And then he repeats this type of discussion, rolling through a number of different scientific procedures.  I really got a flavor of what biologists, geologists, anthropologists, archeologists and other scientists do when they are studying evolution.  Well, I am married to a geologist so I kinda already understood some of that stuff.

Dawkins also spends portions of each chapter debunking various creationist slanders on evolution.  I use the word slander because that is what it often amounts.  However, the creationist isn’t always willfully ignoring the facts and presenting lies.  It would appear from arguments Mr. Dawkins relates that some creationists simply don’t know any better.  Their ignorance of the rich set of data available handicaps them in any debate.  A common example is the creationist attack on the fossil record, the “missing link” argument.  The problem with this creationist argument is that there really isn’t a missing link in the fossil record.  And the fossil record doesn’t matter.  As Dawkins points out, evolution is proved in several different ways that can each stand on their own, alone.  Mr. Dawkins points out these types of logical fallacies over and over.

Dawkins authored the book to try to help fight the fight against ignorance.  Campaigns such as “Teach the Controversy” are often conducted by creationists.  Except there is not controversy.  Evolution is the accepted theory.  As I mentioned earlier, Dawkins points out again and again throughout the book, the areas of science where even one piece of evidence would cast a doubt on evolution, yet we do not find any such negative evidence.  He actually shows where one would go (intellectually) to attempt to disprove evolution.  I think this really shows the true spirit of science.  Of course its easy to do when you do you are right.

I previously reviewed another book on evolution, Why Evolution Is True by Jerry Coyne.  I found Coyne’s book to be an easier read than Dawkins’s book on the same subject.  However, I found that Dawkins covered more material and went into some depth to show how the science is actually done, not just what the science has found.

In the end, I would find it hard to believe that anyone that gave The Greatest Show On Earth an honest read would question evolution.  Not only that, but the proof against a designer fabricating the world is enormous.  This will be a dangerous book for you if you are a creationist.  It will challenge your beliefs with irrefutable evidence.  For the scientifically-minded individual, I think you will discover a number of interesting facts, and find great enjoyment in Mr. Dawkins’s careful explanations of the science around evolutions.

I just finished a great book titled On Intelligence, written by the founder of Palm and Handspring, Jeff Hawkins.  Hawkins is a Silicon Valley genius, having invented several significant technologies.  He has also been a life-long brain and AI enthusiast.  Hawkins begins his book about human intelligence relating his experience attempting to get involved with AI and neurology.  I drew some interesting parallels between his exclusion from the MIT AI program and his great success with start-ups.  Imagine being known as the department that didn’t accept the inventor of The Palm Pilot and Graffiti into your grad program!  If he is bitter he doesn’t show it.  Instead he brings a personal enthusiasm and flavor to a very deep subject.  He dives into his impressions on how intelligence works in the human neocortex.  His description of the hierarchical structure that is used in the cortex was very enlightening.   I have found myself thinking about many of his concepts over the last few days.

How we evolved to have intelligence is a fascinating subject.  How is it we humans are able to do the things we do?  Imagine the art, the science, the great goods and the terrible evils we have done to each other.  No other species has war.  No other species has our rich language.  We have created a technological civilization with our biological brains.  Hawkins wants to use the same techniques to create artificial intelligence, and is putting his considerable money where his mouth is with his own AI start-up.

I would encourage anyone interested in this fascinating subject to pick up a copy of On Intelligence.  Its probably the best pure brain/intelligence/AI book I have read (GEB is a better book but spends much less time on AI and intelligence).

I just finished reading The Crucible of Consciousness: An Integrated Theory of Mind and Brain by Zoltan Torey. The book deals with the concept that we call “consciousness” or “the mind”: what it is, how it works, and how we evolved to have this amazing ability.

Torey approaches the subject based purely on the evidence at hand. While at times this read requires a dictionary for those like myself without a background in psychology or neurology, the book is accessible enough to the lay person to allow a trek into the mechanics of the brain. If one takes the time to plow through some of the more dense areas, the reward is a more thorough explanation later in each section and chapter.

Torey’s central theme is that human evolution slowly began developing brain structures to help with a number of tasks before consciousness came into play. These specialized brain regions helped with a number of tasks including simple naming communication, such as “lion” or “danger”. In time mankind developed speech-thought, which gave these enhanced areas of the brain the ability to form a framework with which to achieve self-reflection or consciousness. At times Torey glosses over the underlying science that supports his theory and instead references other papers and books. In this respect the book can seem slightly out of reach to the layman that has not read the other seminal works in cognitive science. At other times he dives into some detail, rewarding the reader with real insights into the science supporting his claims.

Near the end of the book Torey drifts away from his hard-science approach and speculates on a number of subjects related to consciousness. It was this part I enjoyed the least. While he clearly states that these are just speculations, I feel that he drifts far off target and perhaps frames some of the science incorrectly, particularly his characterizations around quantum mechanics.

All and all I really enjoyed this book. It offers a wonderful insight supported by real science as to what we are as conscious beings.

I just finished reading Carl Sagan’s The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.  The topic of the book is science, pure and simple.   I found the book enjoyable, stirring, enraging, and finally compelling.

Sagan starts the book with chapter after chapter of analysis of the utter stupidity of mankind.  UFOs, The Catholic Inquisition, Global Warming Deniers, Evolution Deniers, and any number of other topics are covered.  After summing up the mass idiocy that can exist in any human culture with a lack of critical thinking, Sagan dives into the scientific method and how science works.  Sagan frames good science as wonder + skepticism.  He discusses the error correcting mechanisms built into science: prediction, verification of prediction through experimentation, and peer review.  Sagan then drags out his famous Bologna Detection Kit, a useful set of rules to ferret out pseudo-scientific and anti-scientific arguments.  This simple set of rules comes in handy; you will be surprised how many fallacious arguments can be easily detected by one or more of these rules.

Sagan ends the book discussing the founding of The United States.  Many of the founders were amateur or professional scientists.  Sagan equates the good things in science with the good things in democracy.  In the end it dovetails well.  He makes a convincing argument that a public schooled in basic scientific methodology is also a good democratic public.

The United States now trails many other nations in science, math and reading.  People argue against the scientific fact of evolution.  In Texas, science textbooks have been stripped of the true age of Earth (around 4.5 billion years, not 6000 years).  Arguments are made that global warming isn’t real because, hey, all the scientists are liberals and are controlled by Al Gore.  For the price of a single attack helicopter we can fund SETI for 10 years.  Well, lets go buy an attack helicopter instead.  Sagan makes a devastating argument that much of the American public not only misunderstands the practice of science, but the don’t even grasp the fundamental principles.  So much for the hopes of our founders.  Yet Sagan encourages scientists and science enthusiasts to use patience, understanding and clear communication to educate the general public.

The Demon-Haunted world was published in 1997, but feels like it was written yesterday.  The themes ring true, louder and clearer now than they would have for me if I had read the book 12 years ago.  I highly recommend this book.  It is a real eye opener.

Having enjoyed reading The Tipping Point a year ago, I was interested in another Malcolm Gladwell book I stumbled across called Outliers: The Source of Success.  Outliers is by far the superior book, because not only does Gladwell continue to provide what is becoming his trademark way of weaving scientific studies, sociology, psychology and style, but he brings a very personal touch with Outliers that drives his point home.  I won’t ruin it for you, but I will say that Outliers provides several insights into the nature of success, and also into the nature of the type of super-star success obtained by the like of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and others.

Be sure to read the book all the way through to the end.  My favorite part of the book was the Epilogue, which should not be read until the book is done. Gladwell’s tale of success in America takes a surprising, enlightening and personal turn in the end that really connected the issues he discussed in a real way for me.

This is one of the favorite non-fiction books I have read in a while.

About a year ago I started digging back into science fiction reading.  I wanted to spend some time getting back into something I had really enjoyed when I was younger.  As a goal I decided to start reading Hugo Award winning books.  In the last year I have read a number of great science fiction novels from a variety of sub-generas, but none have taken hold of my imagination like the works of Neal Stephenson.

About 6 months ago I picked up The Diamond Age or, A Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer.  I had read an article about a reprinting of The Diamond Age which made the book sound fascinating, and it was a Hugo winner so it fit into my reading list.  Upon getting about 20 pages in, I thought nothing was further from the truth.  I wanted to put the book down and never see it again.  The story was confusing; it was being told from the perspective of about 7 different people most of whom didn’t interact with each other.  A coworker that had read the book some years before recommend I read to page 100, and if I still didn’t like it that I should quit.  By the time I got to page 100 I was enthralled with the book.  The depth in which Mr. Stephenson had researched numerous cultures and technologies was amazing, the characters he portrayed were multi-layered and real, and the various plots he was carefully weaving from multiple starting points had hints of dovetailing into something marvelous.  By the end of the book I was eagerly waiting for something fantastic, and the book did not disappoint.

It was with this experience that I purchased Snow Crash.  The publishing of Snow Crash predates that of the The Diamond Age by 3 years.  Snow Crash had apparently been the break through book for Stephenson back in the early 90s.  I dove right in.  This time I knew that the plot might be disorienting and splintered at first, but that I should pay attention and stick to it.  Snow Crash did not let me down.  Again I was impressed with the level or research Stephenson must have done in religion, ancient cultures, technology and various other subjects.  The characters and locations were futuristic yet real.  I found myself cheering for the Protagonist in the book (capitalized because that was his name) and his side-kick (which is what he referrers to her as).  The book has a wonder self-referential feel that one usually see from more mature, already-confident-from-their-success authors.  Stephenson knew what his world was, knew who his characters were, and knew what happened to them.  The book was a tour de force with no apologies.  When it ended I wished for a sequel which Stephenson has not written and probably will not.

I settled for the next best thing: I ordered a couple more Neal Stephenson book.  I have just cracked into my 3rd of his books, and am just now at that threshold where his initial introduction of characters is starting to turn to coherent plot.  Now I cannot believe that I ever disliked this style of writing.

I would highly recommend both The Diamond Age and Snow Crash to anyone looking for hard science fiction.  They are both well written, seem (for the most part) technically accurate, and will leave your mind racing after you are done.