Recommended books: George R. R. Martin, Rick Strassman, and Andrew McAfee

Here are books I finished in December. I finally decided to jump into the Game of Thrones series…

A Storm of Swords by George R. R. Martin
A Feast for Crows by George R. R. Martin

Books 3 and 4 in the series. HBO is midway through Book 3 and has faithfully followed the timeline and stories, but both will increasingly diverge from here.

Be Slightly Evil by Venkatesh Rao

I enjoy his blog and read 1/2 of this book. I stopped reading it one day and just knew I wouldn’t come back to it, so it’s listed here for record-keeping.

DMT: The Spirit Molecule by Rick Strassman

Wow.

Race Against The Machine by Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson

We are seeing a socioeconomic transformation — driven by computers and this internet thing — that has not been seen for decades, perhaps as far back as the late 1800s. This book gets at the why and the how and its implications for individuals and companies.

That’s it for December. What books have you enjoyed reading? Not that I need to send Amazon more money, but I will.

1-Page Cheatsheet: David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell

Malcolm GladwellI thoroughly enjoyed the book. Gladwell’s storytelling is better than ever. While Tipping Point had a greater influence on how I view the world, and I found Outliers more engrossing because it featured entrepreneurs like Ron Popeil and Bill Gates, David and Goliath [Amazon Kindle] is a pure expression of Gladwell’s desire to tackle Big questions and answer them in an entertaining, breezily analytical way. He’s like a kind, witty 21st-century Socrates, pushing us to think big and think different.

His arguments and stories are so nuanced, so artfully woven together, that it would have been impossible for me to write an accurate summary without everything being a vulgar generalization. My goal, instead, is to showcase a small selection of his insights and stories. If the book is a 12-course meal at a 2-star Michelin restaurant, this is like the amuse-bouche before drinks are served. I should just call it the 1-page amuse-bouche instead…

David had a gun and Goliath was partially blind

Eitan Hirsch, a ballistics expert with the Israeli Defense Forces, recently did a series of calculations showing that a typical-size stone hurled by an expert slinger at a distance of thirty-five meters would have hit Goliath’s head with a velocity of thirty-four meters per second—more than enough to penetrate his skull and render him unconscious or dead. In terms of stopping power, that is equivalent to a fair-size modern handgun.

What many medical experts now believe, in fact, is that Goliath had a serious medical condition. He looks and sounds like someone suffering from what is called acromegaly—a disease caused by a benign tumor of the pituitary gland. The tumor causes an overproduction of human growth hormone, which would explain Goliath’s extraordinary size. And furthermore, one of the common side effects of acromegaly is vision problems.

Underdogs change the rules, usually because they are outsiders

David refused to engage Goliath in close quarters, where he would surely lose. He stood well back, using the full valley as his battlefield. The girls of Redwood City used the same tactic. They defended all ninety-four feet of the basketball court. The full-court press is legs, not arms. It supplants ability with effort. […] You have to be outside the establishment—a foreigner new to the game or a skinny kid from New York at the end of the bench—to have the audacity to play it that way.

Smaller classes don’t mean better students; better teachers do

Fifteen percent find statistically significant evidence that students do better in smaller classes. Roughly the same number find that students do worse in smaller classes. After sorting through thousands of pages of data on student performance from eighteen separate countries, the economists concluded that there were only two places in the world—Greece and Iceland—where there were “nontrivial beneficial effects of reduced class sizes.”

The one thing that all educational researchers agree about is that teacher quality matters far more than the size of the class. A great teacher can teach your child a year and a half’s material in one year. A below-average teacher might teach your child half a year’s material in one year. That’s a year’s difference in learning, in one year. That suggests that there is much more to be gained by focusing on the person at the front of the classroom than on the number of people sitting in the classroom. The problem is that great teachers are rare.

Nature is run by the Inverted-U; our brains tend to ignore it

Psychologists Barry Schwartz and Adam Grant argue, in a brilliant paper, that, in fact, nearly everything of consequence follows the inverted U: “Across many domains of psychology, one finds that X increases Y to a point, and then it decreases Y.…There is no such thing as an unmitigated good. All positive traits, states, and experiences have costs that at high levels may begin to outweigh their benefits.”

Here’s my write-up on that paper.

Being a bigger fish in a smaller pond can be better for your career

The very best students at a non–top 30 school—that is, a school so far down the list that someone from the Ivy League would grimace at the thought of even setting foot there—have a publication number of 1.05, substantially better than everyone except the very best students at Harvard, MIT, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Stanford, and Chicago.

Imagine two black law school students with identical grades and identical test scores. Both are admitted to an elite law school under an affirmative-action program. One accepts and one declines. The one who declines chooses instead—for logistical or financial or family reasons—to attend his or her second choice, a less prestigious and less selective law school. Sander and Taylor looked at a large sample of these kinds of “matched pairs” and compared how well they did on four measures: law school graduation rate, passing the bar on their first attempt, ever passing the bar, and actually practicing law. The comparison is not even close. By every measure, black students who don’t go to the “best” school they get into outperform those who do.

An underdog’s early difficulties can serve as the source of later strengths

Sixty-seven percent of the prime ministers in her sample lost a parent before the age of sixteen. That’s roughly twice the rate of parental loss during the same period for members of the British upper class—the socioeconomic segment from which most prime ministers came. The same pattern can be found among American presidents. Twelve of the first forty-four U.S. presidents—beginning with George Washington and going all the way up to Barack Obama—lost their fathers while they were young.

Losing a parent is not like having your house bombed or being set upon by a crazed mob. It’s worse. It’s not over in one terrible moment, and the injuries do not heal as quickly as a bruise or a wound. But what happens to children whose worst fear is realized—and then they discover that they are still standing? Couldn’t they also gain what Shuttlesworth and the Blitz remote misses gained—a self-confidence that is the very father and mother of courage?

Underdogs have less to lose and can take bigger risks

Dyslexics compensate for their disability by developing other skills that—at times—can prove highly advantageous. Being bombed or orphaned can be a near-miss experience and leave you devastated. Or it can be a remote miss and leave you stronger. These are David’s opportunities: the occasions in which difficulties, paradoxically, turn out to be desirable. The lesson of the trickster tales is the third desirable difficulty: the unexpected freedom that comes from having nothing to lose. The trickster gets to break the rules.

Germany’s Blitz bombing of London backfired

So why were Londoners so unfazed by the Blitz? Because forty thousand deaths and forty-six thousand injuries—spread across a metropolitan area of more than eight million people—means that there were many more remote misses who were emboldened by the experience of being bombed than there were near misses who were traumatized by it.

More punishment may not lead to less crime; it may be an Inverted-U

Prison has a direct effect on crime: it puts a bad person behind bars, where he can’t victimize anyone else. But it also has an indirect effect on crime, in that it affects all the people with whom that criminal comes into contact. A very high number of the men who get sent to prison, for example, are fathers. (One-fourth of juveniles convicted of crimes have children.) And the effect on a child of having a father sent away to prison is devastating. Some criminals are lousy fathers: abusive, volatile, absent. But many are not. Their earnings—both from crime and legal jobs—help support their families. For a child, losing a father to prison is an undesirable difficulty. Having a parent incarcerated increases a child’s chances of juvenile delinquency between 300 and 400 percent; it increases the odds of a serious psychiatric disorder by 250 percent.

In the mid-1990s, the IRA was organizing daily bus trips to the prison outside Belfast, as if it were an amusement park. “Almost everyone in the Catholic ghettos has a father, brother, uncle, or cousin who has been in prison,” the political scientist John Soule wrote at the height of the Troubles. “Young people in this atmosphere come to learn that prison is a badge of honor rather than a disgrace.”

Trivia

Citizens of happy countries have higher suicide rates than citizens of unhappy countries, because they look at the smiling faces around them and the contrast is too great.

The psychologist Jordan Peterson argues that innovators and revolutionaries tend to have a very particular mix of these traits—particularly the last three: openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. Innovators have to be open. They also need to be conscientious. But crucially, innovators need to be disagreeable.

Thanks for reading! And thanks to those who have emailed me comments, questions, book recommendations, and even cool research papers. I love to nerd it up.

Books I recently enjoyed: Malcolm Gladwell, Neil Gaiman, William Gibson, and Haruki Murakami

Here are books I finished in October and November. It was a less productive book-reading period, due to a recent obsession with video games and with reading about bitcoin.

David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell

Having read his previous books (Tipping Point, Blink, What The Dog Saw, and Outliers), this one shot to the front of my queue when it was released. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Purely a nitpick: the insights are not as foundations-shaking as Tipping Point, for example, but like a great piece of fiction, you’re totally absorbed in his stories even when he’s teaching you fairly academic topics. All educational writing should be like this. It would make school, and learning, a helluva lot more fun. Here’s a great piece on why Gladwell might be underrated, and another that analyzes his writing.

Sidenote: I’d always thought of it as David VERSUS Goliath, not AND. Interesting, the difference one word makes

Neuromancer by William Gibson (audiobook)

Recommended by a friend after I told her how much I enjoyed Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash. William Gibson is like a godfather of the cyberpunk and steampunk genres. Wikipedia editors even believe he coined the term “cyberspace”.

Honestly, I stopped about 3/5 of the way in. I was having a hard time following the story and figuring out who did what to whom and when where why. It reminds me, obliquely, of David Foster Wallace; reading their work is like taking your cerebral cortex to the gym.

But, I’m glad I made the attempt. It’s the sort of writing that expands your universe of what is possible in science and fiction and story-telling.

Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman (audiobook)

This is my 3rd Neil Gaiman written-and-narrated audiobook. The first, and most enjoyable, was The Graveyard Book (thanks to Tim Ferriss’ glowing recommendation). The second, and least-enjoyable-but-still-entertaining, was The Ocean at the End of the Lane.

It’s easy to be jealous of Neil. If good writing were a recreational drug, then Neil’s would be the purest form of cocaine you could buy on the street. Not only that, he has the perfect storytelling voice, which is why I’ve only bought and listened to his audiobooks when they were self-narrated. This is because I was perfectly spoiled by The Graveyard Book, still the best audiobook I’ve chanced upon. I associate audiobooks with reading bedtime stories to kids. This is the purest form of bedtime story-telling. At least, I imagine so, since my immigrant parents didn’t do this :)

South of the Border, West of the Sun by Haruki Murakami

Murakami is at his best, or rather I enjoy Murakami’s writing the best, when he’s telling stories best described as a sad sort of love. You know, like nostalgic love, heartbreak, regret in love, longing for love. As I read SOTB, I felt like I was riding a similar wave to Norwegian Wood. I didn’t feel this way with Kafka and Hard-Boiled.

I’m disappointed Murakami didn’t win the Nobel Prize this year, but after reading Alice Munro’s The Bear Came Over The Mountain, it’s hard to begrudge her victory. And Murakami is still young, in a particular type of writer’s years, and still very productive.

That’s it for the past few months. What books have you enjoyed reading? Not that I need to send Amazon more money, but I will.

What they talk about when they talk about writing

I write only when inspiration strikes me. Fortunately it strikes me every morning at nine o’clock sharp. – Somerset Maugham

There’s a deep satisfaction that comes from publishing a piece of writing, even if it’s seen by only a handful of anonymous readers.

That satisfaction comes from a basic human desire. It’s the desire to create something with our hands, something that we alone willed into existence, and something that has a chance – however small – of outlasting us.

I want to write more than I currently do, but it’s hard. The problem? Finding the right words and putting them in the right order.

But I’m determined to become a better writer. Writing is like a sport – it’s fun to play, but it’s more fun when you’re good.

I stop every day right at the point where I feel I can write more. Do that, and the next day’s work goes surprisingly smoothly. I think Ernest Hemingway did something like that. – Murakami

As an avid reader, the writers I most enjoy (say, Orwell, or Hemingway, or Carver) seem to possess 2 skills: a mastery of style, which is like the foundation and walls of a house, and the ability to evoke emotion, which is like the furnishing and appliances.

You need the foundation and walls, but it’s the plush couch and comfortable lighting that make a place feel like home.

People ask me why I write. I write to find out what I know – Virginia Woolf

I have a lot of catching up to do. In 16 years of school, I barely learned the basics of writing style and certainly not the harder art of engaging emotion. Though we read Shakespeare and Twain and Achebe, I can’t explain how or why their work was so effective.

And though I wrote stacks of essays in response to various prompts, it’s the equivalent of a kid who, wanting to play in the NBA, practices by shooting free throws in the park.

This too to remember. If a man writes clearly enough any one can see if he fakes. If he mystifies to avoid a straight statement, which is very different from breaking so-called rules of syntax or grammar to make an effect which can be obtained in no other way, the writer takes a longer time to be known as a fake and other writers who are afflicted by the same necessity will praise him in their own defense. True mysticism should not be confused with incompetence in writing which seeks to mystify where there is no mystery but is really only the necessity to fake to cover lack of knowledge or the inability to state clearly. Mysticism implies a mystery and there are many mysteries; but incompetence is not one of them; nor is overwritten journalism made literature by the injection of a false epic quality. Remember this too: all bad writers are in love with the epic. – Ernest Hemingway

After school, I spent 7 years in business. Here, quantity and speed are more important than style and feeling. We write a novella’s worth of emails every week, but it’s done on deadline and with competing priorities. Sure, we may type a thoughtful team email or diligent Board update, but it’s filled with jargon and lacks feeling. Good writing – to me – is all about feeling.

With the aim of becoming a better writer, I’ve set 3 priorities:

Priority #1 is to write more and write carefully. Like meditation, careful writing is tough because it feels like an absence of activity. You use the same amount of energy as composing a business email, but at half the speed. You need to carefully choose your words. Write and rewrite paragraphs. Minimize jargon and overused figures of speech. And above all, make sure you’re saying what you want to say, and you’re saying it clearly.

Priority #2 is to study the work of good writers. Writing is a vulnerable, visible profession. Writers may not appear in celebrity tabloids or reality TV shows, but their brains are on display with every sentence. To paraphrase V.S. Naipaul, a writer’s being is the sum of his work, and to understand a writer, you need to understand his writing.

Some writers even translate the work of others. Murakami translated Fitzgerald. Franzen translated Kraus. I have a weekly goal of rewriting – word for word – a famous short story or essay. I’ll share the details in a future post; it’s something Ben Franklin used to do.

Priority #3 is to read the advice of good writers. Their advice is not without cliche and repetition. As with any creative act, there’s a mystery which can’t be explained.

However, there are articles worth sharing. Despite each writer’s unique style and background, there is one consistent message: pick the right words, put them in the right order, and do so with a purpose.

Here’s a list:

Literature is not like music; it isn’t for the young; there are no prodigies in writing. The knowledge or experience a writer seeks to transmit is social or sentimental; it takes time, it can take much of a man’s life, to process that experience, to understand what he has been through; and it takes great care and tact, then, for the nature of the experience not to be lost, not to be diluted by the wrong forms. The other man’s forms served the other man’s thoughts. – V.S. Naipaul

Unlike learning Chinese or living longer, “writing better” is hard to measure. But sometimes you just need to do something, and keep doing it, and eventually you’ll know.

1-Page Cheatsheet: Beta China by Hamish McKenzie

Beta China by Hamish McKenzieMore like a half-page cheatsheet since the book is only 65 pages ($1.99 on Amazon). I enjoy Hamish’s writing for PandoDaily – he asks bold questions and provides clear, often contrarian answers.

Also, this is my 100th post. I wish we’d gotten here sooner.

Boilerplate about China’s long history of innovation

The Chinese were the world’s earliest practitioners of chemistry, a study fueled by the Taoist search for the elixir of life. And they were the first people to produce silk, a skill they acquired as early as 1300 BC.

The first people to print paper money? That was the Chinese, too. Around AD 1000, they invented gunpowder, which they used for fireworks.

Chinese technology products are often clones; as a result there are many competitors

“C2C,” meaning “copy to China.” Benjamin Joffe, a China Internet consultant, has cheekily called it “innovation arbitrage.” China is home to thousands of Facebook clones, Twitter clones, Groupon clones, Yelp clones, eBay clones, Amazon clones, Quora clones – pretty much any Internet business you can think of.

At one point, Tudou (a leading YouTube clone) had as many as 500 competitors. “If it was just YouTube, there’s no way it could have survived.”

After cloning, Chinese companies use “micro-innovation” (known as 微创新) to add unique features; this micro-innovation is sometimes copied by the original victims

While it started life as a direct Twitter clone, Sina Weibo grew and mutated until it became more like an amalgam of Twitter and Facebook, allowing comments on each post and having more of an emphasis on pictures.

Another Silicon Valley company, however, doesn’t appear to have been so shy about taking inspiration from Sina Weibo. “When Google+ was launched, I was looking at it, I was like, ‘That’s a copy of Weibo,’” van der Chijs says.

China is known for innovation in technology business models

Tencent was among the world’s first adopters of the free-to-play model, with fellow Chinese companies Giant Interactive, Shanda, and NetEase among the other pioneers. South Korea’s Nexon had been doing it even earlier. Years later, Zynga would adopt the exact same approach

There are innovation challenges from cradle (education) to grave (Confucius)

In present-day China, innovation is neutered by an education system that emphasizes conformity over creativity, a Confucian ideology predicated on hierarchy and obedience, and the low value placed on intellectual property.

The big tech companies – known as BATS for Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, and Sina – stifle startups

Until recently, their preference was to raid the best talent from startups, copy the most successful products, and move on. They already controlled most of the distribution channels and could quickly push their own versions of products out to their existing user bases, which number in the hundreds of millions.

BATS have an eye on overseas growth with the aim of competing in America

For companies such as UCWeb, Xiaomi, Baidu, and Tencent, it makes sense to get a headstart in emerging markets, particularly in Southeast Asia, where huge numbers of people are coming online through their mobile phones, and where the existing Internet infrastructure is relatively immature. […] Among them, the countries of Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Singapore have a total of more than 430 million inhabitants, and their economies are rapidly improving.

Tencent is the one Chinese company that is willing to strike out for more distant shores, and it has an eye firmly on the grandest of prizes: America. The idea of conquering the US carries great currency in China, not only because it is a rich market with enormous commercial potential, but also because it represents the ultimate status symbol.

That’s it, folks. Hope you learned something! Got any book or article recommendations?

Previous 1-page cheatsheets include:

Thanks folks! Here’s a list of all 1-page cheatsheets, and a list of all books!