> Pick was originally implemented as the Generalized Information Retrieval Language System (GIRLS) on an IBM System/360 in 1965 by Don Nelson and Dick Pick [...]
This sounds like an incredibly foolish expedition. They took a boat to sea without practicing basic seamanship procedures (person overboard drills), an inaccessible life raft, and no practice as a crew. That’s not adventurous, it’s reckless.
Money helps, but it's neither necessary nor sufficient.
I've been at a company that many considered to have excellent design and that received a lot of attention here (Heroku). There was a culture that permeated the company around beautiful design and what I would call "maker excellence". It was a place where people who liked building great things (both engineers and designers) felt at home.
I would not classify it as great, but somewhat below par. I made a list of things I did not like about the book, but it would spoil many things. Not spoiling bits:
- All characters are two-dimensional. The further from the main protagonist, the more 2D.
- Dialogues go from wooden to cringe-worthy, with few exceptions.
- Protagonist swings from super over- cautious to careless and back.
- Alien with deus-ex-machina syndrome, always having the perfect tech, material or skill to fill in the lacks of the protagonist.
- Tired trope of amnesia to make the protagonist remember stuff progrssively for the reader.
- Extreme over-usage of flash-back, linked to previous point, but oh boy! Half the book is flashback. Waaay over-used story-telling tech.
The science, outside of the magic fuel and magic alien material is mostly correct. That's the main strong point of the book.
Assessments of what gets a sci-fi or a fantasy book classed as "great" vary widely, it seems. I find recommendations by people I don't know well, for those genres especially, to be entirely useless. May as well throw a dart.
But they didn’t just make a recommendation. They listed specific things about the book, and the writing style, as a reason for their recommendation. If you know yourself, can you not look at those points and weigh them against what you personally tend to like or dislike? Is there really nothing to be learned or nothing possibly useful?
My thoughts exactly. I'd even call it quite shallow. The only thing saving this book is science. I wouldn't say it's a disappointment. But it definitely is very "Martian".
Ray Porter is an excellent audio book voice actor. He narrates the Bobiverse books (as well as "The Singularity Trap" by the same author) which I enjoy and "Project Hail Mary" is next on my reading list after I finish out the ExForce series.
(spoiler warning) I gave up on the ExForce series after a half dozen books; it was good, just repetitive. But I couldn't force myself to purchase the Bobiverse #2. While the Bobiverse author's style was irritating to me, I thought the alien interactions in Bobiverse were laughable compared to ExForce and Hail Mary (spoiler sorry). The antagonist also left much to be desired.
But Ray Porter's voice needs to be applied to many more books. I generally only stop reading audiobooks if I can't listen to the reader any longer
I totally understand abandoning ExForce. It got better once the writer went full time but it still leaves a lot to be desired. I put up with it because I’m a completionist and the author has a plan to end the series in just a few more books so I’ll stick it out but I get it.
I think the core ideas in Bobiverse keep me hooked as I just enjoy them but I see your point and don’t begrudge anyone who gave up on it.
This is a totally random question but have you ever read the Honor Harrington series? They aren’t related at all (other than “sci-fi”) but I’m always interested in other series people have read and enjoyed (or not enjoyed) and Honorverse is one of my favorites.
I recommend the audio because the narrator does a very good job IMHO. I tried to read the books after listening to them first but felt it was lacking compared to the audio.
I will say that this series is pretty technical (in that I talks about the speeds of things and how fast things are moving) which I greatly enjoy but I know isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
Thanks for posting the PG wealth tax article. It is a highly flawed analysis.
First wealth appreciates over time. So if your wealth appreciates at 15% / year, and the govt. taxes it at 1%, the net effect is growth rate is slowed to 14%. With these assumptions, someone starting with $1mm in wealth ends up with $2.6 billion after 60 years!
Second - PG ignores that most wealth tax proposals have a high minimum wealth - in the $50mm range. So there is no early compounding of the tax. Adding this into the model, the wealthy founder ends up with $3.3 billion after 60 years.
With no wealth tax, this hypothetical founder ends up with $4.3 billion. So, yes the government has taxed a total of ~ 25% over 60 years, but the founder ends up quite wealthy.
The (very short) article clarifies the title is suggesting this could be the longest exposure ever. And just happens to have been taken using a beer can — which is important because the metal can is better at withstanding the elements for such a long time than photographic paper. The title could have maybe used a comma before “using a beer can” to clarify.
Plus of the 10% of the shares soldo, most were to institutions with an understanding that they are going to hold it "long term" (i.e. which may be just a few months). Part of the IPO road show is for the company to select investors that believe in the company and who will be "good" shareholders.
It is a misconception that when a company IPOs and the stock pops, that the delta is money left on the table. The vast majority of the shares are sold to institutional investors. There are explicit or implicit lock-up periods in place. And most of the pre-IPO investors will typically have a 6-month lockup. So if 10% of shares are sold in the IPO and 10% of those shares are actually trade-able, only 1% of the total stock is liquid. That can lead to very large price swings (i.e. the pop).
