Franothy

Digestable in audio format with much concentration

Revisado: 04-17-15

Would you consider the audio edition of Capital in the Twenty-First Century to be better than the print version?

I listened to the book with 100% concentration and was able to digest his ideas and understand the main points without any of the supporting charts and figures, and simply relied on the audio explanation. But it was difficult. Sometimes I wished I had a printout in front of me. I went back after finishing to review the supporting figures. For some people, I can understand that an audiobook would be difficult and discouraging to the point of giving up. I found myself rewinding 15-30 seconds 100's of times, and pausing frequently to digest certain points. But overall, I think I'd much prefer the audiobook despite the drawbacks. And I would have the printouts in front of me. This means the audiobook isn't the type that is best digested at a desk, on the couch, or on a plane. Maybe not on the bus, in the car, while exercising, etc.

What other book might you compare Capital in the Twenty-First Century to and why?

The book is long and exhaustive, even if thoroughly enlightening. It reminded me of reading Guns, Germs, and Steel in that the author Jared Diamond is relentless in explaining his point of view.

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

When I read that the biggest university endowments (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc) rate of return was around 10%, yet the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia was around 2-3% because the former does not invest much in low yield bonds and the Saudi Arabia invests heavily in U.S. Treasury bonds, I was floored. Why would Saudi Arabia accept such a low rate of return and reduced portfolio diversity that other wealth funds do not? Is this how Saudi Arabia stealthily pays for it's security in the Middle East without drawing public ire? Is the United States enormous defense industry possible in part because of the returns on oil revenue? If this is true, I'll stop short of properly describing and labeling such institutions. Draw your own conclusions.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great book for some

Revisado: 03-06-15

Great story, full of non-obvious science, especially because of Mars' different environment. The author weaves technical problem solving seamlessly, and non-stop, into the story. Even some technical luck helps our stranded Martian. I'm sure many are bound to nitpick some scientific errors, or battle over scientific conjecture, or maybe even pick apart the entire strategy of such a mission and the technology that mission employs, but that would be missing the point of such an awesome story.

Where the story falls flat is on the human side. Our fearless humorous Martian is nearly unchanged by one life threatening situation after another. How many people have spent over a year without human contact? What does that do to a person? If you're expecting a bit of Tom Hanks from the movie "Castaway" you'll be sorely disappointed. Sure, we have an astronaut, not a FedEx manager, but humans are humans. I was hoping for more, but realized 1/3 of the way through the book that wasn't going to happen.

Also, what about Tom Watney's wounds? What about potential sickness or skin problems? What about long term effects of lesser gravity and an odd diet, not to mention air quality issues. What about risks of poor sanitation. The author delves solely into the scientific and technical. In the end, Watney just smells bad and is a bit roughed up. Seriously. I expected a man cheating death in one or more ways.

Great book for what it is, and for certain audiences, but could have been a great book for everyone.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Answer: "Not as much as I hoped"

Revisado: 01-09-15

Would you recommend this book to a friend? Why or why not?

No. It's interesting, but conclusions could be condensed into about 1 hour. But I would, and do, discuss the epigenetic phenomenon. Most people are completely unaware of how this works. If people understood this on a basic level, they might change some of their behavior or the environment of their child.

Would you be willing to try another book from Paul Raeburn? Why or why not?

Yes, I might. This book had enough interesting information.

What does Paul Raeburn bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

Audiobook are so convenient and pleasant. I only read online or magazines.

Could you see Do Fathers Matter? being made into a movie or a TV series? Who should the stars be?

No.

Any additional comments?

I said "Not as much as I hoped" to my wife when she asked me, "Well, DO fathers matter?". She thought that was pretty funny. But, yes, I matter.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Answer: The questions mostly aren't interesting

Revisado: 01-09-15

What did you like best about What If?? What did you like least?

The short critique to the "What if?" proposed by the author is: "Who cares?"The long critique:I was really excited to listen to this audiobook. I heard a few of the interesting questions highlighted on another podcast, Science Friday. I expected to love it.But the questions are mostly not interesting. Why? Because the questions pose something absurdly impossible. I'm OK with asking things like "What if the earth's magnetic field was twice the strength that it is?" While this is absurdly impossible to occur, it still is possible that this is what the Earth always had. But the questions that are posed are things like "What if all of the lightning in the world struck in one time and place?" or "What if you drained the worlds oceans and pumped the water to Mars?". This is not only absurdly impossible, it's a stupid question that isn't entertaining to me, and I'm the nerdy engineer type that this book aims to sell to. Unfortunately, you got me. I didn't investigate all of the questions before buying this audiobook. Shame on me.Now on the answers. The author over-explains some questions and under-explains others. By over-explaining, I mean going outside the scope of the original question. 80% of that time, I'm uninterested with this over-explanation. Some of the answers are actually wrong! What would happen if the sun disappeared? Aside from being a dumb question, the answer is filled with wrong answers. If you really don't know what would happen, you don't know when he's joking. Plus, he doesn't answer the part about the loss of gravitational pull. So that answer is wrong, incomplete, AND not funny.Which brings me to the final critique about the sense of humor throughout the audtiobook. It's geeky enough to turn you off if you're not a geek. I love science, but I"m not a geek. Unfortunately, people like me are in the minority. I could stomach about 80% of the bad childish, enginerd humor. At least 20% of it needs to be removed. Please.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña