Tim O'ReillyReseñas

True stories of travel into the hidden territories of the human spirit and heart.

This book is like reading about the history of computers and the Internet. Some of it did feel like a bit of self promotion and this book felt crazily long for the content. I got to a point where I couldn't read every word and ended up skimming through many sections. There is some good content hiding within. 2.75/5

Szemléletformáló könyv. Majdnem abba is hagytam a 100. oldalon.

No most rólam tudni kell (illetve nem kell, de azért elmondom), hogy ugye a humántudományokban vagyok valahogy otthon. A reáltudományokat mérsékelten tudom felfogni, de azért alapvetően érdekelnek. Viszont van két dolog, amitől tényleg lekapcsol az agyam: az üzlet meg az informatika. És hát ez a könyv az első 160 oldalban nem más, mint kéjelgés nyílt és zárt forráskódú szoftverekben meg start up üzleti modellekben. Egy merő szenvedés volt olvasni. De el kellett fogadnom, hogy O’Reilly a jövőről akar térképet készíteni, és ha valami egészen bizonyosan lesz a jövőben, az üzlet és informatika. Ha akarjuk, ha nem. Mert hát én is szívesen nézegetek olyan mémeket, amelyek a közösségi oldalakba belepistult fogyasztói társadalmon élcelődnek, de ébresztő! Ezeket is mind a facebookon találom meg!

Aztán egyharmadnyi alapozás után a szerző rátér a lényegre, és elkezdi összekötni az addig elmondottakat nagyívű ideájával: azzal, hogy miképp alakulhat át, vagy alakuljon át a kormányzat, a gazdaság és az oktatás, hogyan kéne reflektáljon a megváltozott körülményekre, és mit kénytelen vagy ajánlatos átvenni az olyan új szemléletet meghonosító multiktól, mint az Amazon, a Facebook, a Google vagy az Uber*. Nem pusztán arról van szó, hogy az algoritmusoknak és az internetnek nagyobb szerepet szán, hanem egy újfajta gondolkodásmódot is kívánatosnak tart: olyan, platformalapú „hibrid ember-gép intelligenciának” látja (szeretné látni) a jövőt, ahol az internet végtelen információt szív magába, és gondoskodik arról, hogy a különböző igények a felületen mint semleges piactéren találkozzanak, és kielégítsék egymást. Ez ugye alapvetően eltér a jelenlegi kormányzati gyakorlatoktól, ahol az állam mindent irányítás alatt akar tartani, korlátozott számú szolgáltatást nyújt, a nép meg, ha eszi, ha nem, nem kap mást – inkább egy végtelenül decentralizált mátrixra emlékeztet, amiben a kormány egyetlen feladata összehozni azokat, akik meg tudják oldani egymás nyűgét-baját. Természetesen ez egy végtelenül nyitott rendszer, ami az információ szabad voltán alapul, mert O’Reilly meggyőzően bizonyítja, hogy a szabadon felhasználható információ az, ami garantálja az innovációt, és ezáltal azt is, hogy a felmerülő problémákra gyors és hatásos válaszok szülessenek. (Arról nem is beszélve, hogy a demokrácia alighanem az információ szabadságával kezdődik, az ember szabadsága – ami amúgy is egy elég komplex és definiálhatatlan fogalom – csak ezután következik, ebből eredeztethető.)

Ebből talán úgy tűnik, a szerző optimista, de ez nem így van: egyszerűen O’Reilly nem a technikai fejlődésben találja meg a mumust, ami elpusztítja a világot, hanem magában a rövid távú gondolkodásban. A gyors haszonszerzés vágya ugyanis olyan algoritmusokat teremt, amelyek tényszerűen katasztrófába sodorhatják az emberiséget, ugyanakkor a valós problémák megoldására kialakított számítástechnikai innovációk alkalmasint megmenthetnek minket – és igazából csak az emberen múlik, hogy melyiket választja. Mondjuk a helyzet nem rózsás, főleg mert a szerző úgy látja, már van egy legyőzhetetlen, átláthatatlan, az emberen túlnövő rendszer, ami rabszolgaságba dönthet minket, de ez nem valamiféle Mesterséges Intelligencia vagy Soros György rokonainak és üzletfeleinek reptilián közössége, hanem maga a piac. És ha ezt a piacot uralmuk alá hajtják az olyan szoftverek, amelyek a részvényesek kielégítésére vannak pozicionálva, a munkaerőt pedig kiküszöbölendő költségként kezelik (meglehet, ez már meg is történt), akkor ez szakadékot robbant a leggazdagabb 0.001% és a többiek közé, ez pedig előbb-utóbb társadalmi összeomláshoz vezet. Paradox módon ez ügyben O’Reilly Trump megválasztását reménykeltőnek tartja, no nem azért, mert lát valamit titkos tudást felcsillanni eme úriember tekintetében, hanem mert Trump sikere azt is jelenti (sok egyéb mellett), hogy a hagyományos politizálás nem tartható, és ha egyszer valaki lerombolta ezeket a falakat, akkor utána könnyebb akár ellentétes irányú radikális döntéseket is hozni. Hm, hát legyen igaza. Az biztos, hogy radikális szemléletváltás nélkül megyünk mind a lecsóba. Már hogy ezt mondja O’Reilly. És bizony meggyőzően mondja.

Adtam volna rá öt csillagot is, mert revelációim támadtak a könyv nyomán, és ezek feledtették velem az első 160 oldalt. Csak hát picit idegesített, hogy a szerző az Amazon, illetve a Facebook vezetőit mindközönségesen Jeffnek meg Marknak szólítja. Tanács azoknak, akik hiteles és elfogadható módon akarnak jövőmegmentő tervekről írni: ne tegezzétek a milliárdosokat.

Amúgy meg azt hiszem, én még radikálisabb vagyok O’Reillynál is. Ugyanis a komplett magyar politikai elitet most rögtön lecserélném egy algoritmusra. Rosszabb egyszerűen az nem lehet. Így belegondolva még egy sima üres Excell-táblázatra is. Egy aknakereső játékra. Mire nem?

* Fontos hozzáfűzni mindehhez, hogy O’Reilly a fenn említett cégeket nem etikai oldalról vizsgálja, hanem színtisztán az üzleti modelljüket tartja megfontolandónak. Nem hallgatja ugyan el erkölcsi vétségeiket, de azért lássuk be, a morális hiátusok (vagy nevezzük genyaságnak) nem a start up cégek privilégiumai, a Tesco, a General Electric vagy a Mercedes ugyanúgy hajlamos áthágni a szabályokat a haszon reményében.

يتناول هذا الكتاب تطورين تقنيين على وجه الخصوص هما المنصات البرمجية والخوارزميات، وكيف أصبحا اللبنة الأساسية لجميع التقنيات الجديدة تقريباً. فيحكي قصتها باختصار من البدايات المتواضعة إلى التأثير العالمي، آلية عملها، تطبيقاتها، وكيفية التعامل مع أي مشاكل قد تنشأ - أو سبق أن نشأت - بسببها.

إن الكتب البرمجية الصادرة عن دار النشر التي تملكها شركة المؤلف معروفة جيداً في الوسط الهندسي، وكان لي منها فائدة كبيرة خلال دراستي الجامعية، وربما لهذا أساساً اندفعت لقراءة الكتاب.
بشكل عام يمكنني القول أنها قراءة مفيدة بلا شك، ولكن غير مشبعة.

I don't get Twitter, after reading this book I understand it a little better but still don't really see the attraction to the service that because of it's limitations (160 characters, no RSS feeds anymore) forces users to learn or guess at abbreviations to understand what people are talking about. I'm not a facebook user either but that's more about privacy concerns then obections to the service. I'm on Google because Google already had my info through gmail, blogger, docs, calendar. But I wanted to understand Twitter and this quick read helps with that and to be fair to Twitter and Tim O'Reilly I'm going to try his guaranteed method. Been at it 3 days now and while I not as confused, I haven't really been entertained or as informed as G has in the same time frame.

This is from the first chapter

Try it for three weeks or your money back—guaranteed!
People often say that they dip into Twitter once or twice and don't get it. Which is
understandable since the real value of Twitter becomes evident only after you've followed
a few accounts for a while and have absorbed their rhythms.
If you're having trouble seeing what all the fuss is about, try this tactic:
follow at least a few promising accounts, and then for three weeks, log into Twitter daily
(ideally using one of the life-changing programs we describe in Chapter 2), catch up on
messages and click around for five to ten minutes. Every few days, make sure to check the
trending topics (described in Chapter 2). Finally, spend 30 minutes one day running a few
searches (also described in Chapter 2) to see what you can learn from the discussions on
Twitter.
At the end of three weeks, you'll have spent five hours total giving a fair shake to the most
important new communications tool we've seen since email. (If it still doesn't work for you,
pass this book along to a friend.)

If your interested in learning about social media in general or Twitter in particular I'd recommend this book

As an avid twitterer, I felt this book would come in quite handy for me. I pretty much have the basics of the microblogging site down to a science, but there's always a little bit more to know...

As an avid twitterer, I felt this book would come in quite handy for me. I pretty much have the basics of the microblogging site down to a science, but there's always a little bit more to know...

As an avid twitterer, I felt this book would come in quite handy for me. I pretty much have the basics of the microblogging site down to a science, but there's always a little bit more to know...

I came across a quote attributed to Frank Herbert and I tried to find the source to validate it before sharing - I don't like to consciously perpetuate misinformation. The research led me to this book, which I'm surprised I hadn't read yet. Well, not too surprised...I have read a lot of other books since its publication, quite a few from O'Reilly's publishing house. A large part of this is devoted to analysis of Herbert's most famous work, Dune, of course, but O'Reilly also looks at his first novel and others with similar depth of analysis. O'Reilly says in his Preface,

To my mind, the most fundamental judgment to be made about a novel is not as a work of art built to abstract standards, but as an act of communication. What does it say to the reader? How does it touch him?
[...]
One criticism that I have made of Herbert throughout this book is that he walks a narrow line between entertainment and didacticism. In his best work, such as Dune, the story itself is the message; the concepts are so completely a part of the imaginative world he has created that the issue of didacticism never arises. Ideas are there to be found by the thoughtful reader, but one never stumbles over them.

No stumbling on my part, at least with that novel.

Of course, he hits on one of my criticisms of non-fiction writers:

One word about the mechanics of this book: notes for all references follow the end of the text and are identified by page number and a few words from the relevant passage. No superscript numbers appear in the text. This format is intended to enhance the readability of this study while retaining the full critical apparatus.

I detest that, and find it a weak intellect that finds small superscripts indicating a reference disrupting to readability. Not that O'Reilly's intellect is weak...clearly it is not, but that is laziness, and sometimes deliberate laziness. Rant off.

On science fiction as an informative, rather than predictive medium, Herbert says: "if I'd been born in my grandfather's time, I'd have made my grandfather's mistakes. There's no doubt of it. I just don't want to make my grandfather's mistakes today." and O'Reilly quotes Samuel Delaney: "Science fiction is the only area of literature outside poetry that is symbolistic in its basic conception. Its stated aim is to represent the world without reproducing it."

On Herbert's science fiction, O'Reilly said

One such demand--providing an opportunity for his readers to engage their consciousness--is the building up of images from the unusual cues Herbert supplies. In the Dune trilogy certain kinds of scenes--confrontations, love, tragedy--are invariably accompanied by the same background images, colors, or smells. For instance, whenever dangerous confrontations occur, the color yellow is present. Herbert says, "By the time you're well into the book, if you tell them that there was a yellow overcast to the sky, they're sitting there waiting for something bad to happen. 'There is also consistent attention to who sees things. Point of view is always deliberate. "I treat the reader's eye as a camera," Herbert says. There may be a generalized view of a scene, which is followed more and more by a concentration on the area in which the action is going to happen.

That quote I was trying to source? Per O'Reilly, "Herbert has said that the function of science fiction is not always to predict the future but sometimes to prevent it."

His comment on the work of Huxley and Orwell can equally well be applied to his own: "Neither Brave New World nor 1984 will prevent our becoming a planet under Big Brother's thumb, but they make it a bit less likely. We've been sensitized to the possibility."

We learn in this a little of Herbert's life. On his one year at the University of Washington: "I wasn't interested in a degree. I was always interested in writing. I looked on schools, especially the higher levels, as a kind of cafeteria line."

We learn of Herbert's (and O'Reilly's) fascination with, even deification of, psychology. From Under Pressure:

"Ramsey . . . allowed himself an inward chuckle at the thought of the two commodores guarding Dr. Richmond Oberhausen, director of BuPsych. Obe could reduce them to quivering jelly with ten words."

Mind you, the novel was published in 1952...mind control silliness abounded in the spy literature. And in the military, it seems.

Dune has psychological currents, as well as ecological and political and

Recalling the origins of Dune, Herbert says: It began with a concept: to do a long novel about the messianic convulsions which periodically inflict themselves on human societies. I had this idea that superheros were disastrous for humans.

Herbet used that theme in many of his novels. And there are many parallels of history and culture that readers of Dune will no doubt notice, some obvious (Arabic), some less (twelfth century Hashishins):

For instance, [Herbert] describes the use of Arabic derivations for the Fremen language primarily as a means of focusing the reader's imagination:
If you want to give the reader the solid impression that he is not here and now, but that something of here and now has been carried to that faraway place and time, what better way to say to our culture that this is so than to give him the language of that place.. . . That oral tool--it has its own inertial forces; it's mind- shaping as well as used by mind.

In Dune, there are allusions to something called the "Butlerian Jihad". O'Reilly thinks the original idea for that came from a fear of computers "in our own culture":

In an article written for the San Francisco Examiner in 1968 (admittedly a number of years after Dune), Herbert imagined a look back in time from 2068 and prophesied a similar revolt in our own immediate future: Prominent in 2068 history books is the account of the violence at the turn of the century when people revolted against computer control. Computer stored data (growing out of the old National Data Center) had been used to harass and persecute those whose views didn't conform with those of the majority. In the bloody revolt, most computers were destroyed, their data erased.

O'Reilly no doubt knew of the 1970 film, "Colossus: The Forbin Project", when he wrote this, and there were the later Terminator and Matrix films, uncounted novels all capitalizing on that as a fear. Herbert "solved" it by codifying it in a distance past of his novel.

On the ecology of Dune and the lesson it teaches, O'Reilly says, "Ecology deals not with isolated effects, but with systems." His italics. Look how many in leadership positions today do not understand climate change and cite weather as reasons to dismiss.

On some of the politics of Dune sometimes lost to readers, O'Reilly says that the charisma and loyalty embodied by the Atreides code are tools of statecraft just as the the fear and propaganda of the Harkonnens. Herbert describes:

You gain insights into the moral base upon which Paul makes his own decisions. All of this is couched in a form which makes Paul and his people admirable. I am their advocate. But don't lose sight of the fact that House Atreides acts with the same arrogance toward "common folk" as do their enemies. I am showing you the superhero syndrome and your own participation in it. The arrogant are, in part, created by the meek.

I think that word choice misguided and a product of Herbert's time. The arrogant may be empowered by the meek, but I think they create themselves.

Now, O'Reilly spent some time with Herbert on his Bene Gesserit. He says "Much of the Bene Gesserit technology of consciousness is based on the insights of general semantics, a philosophy and training method developed in the 1930s by Alfred Korzybski," noting that Herbert studied general semantics about the time he was writing Dune. O'Reilly says

Korzybski's argument was that people confuse words with the things they represent, and that as long as they do so they are trapped by the assumptions and old "semantic reactions" of their language. [And that...] We violate what Korzybski called the "consciousness of abstracting" every time we say "This is a rose," rather than "This is called a rose."

Herbert and Korzybski was a disappointing revelation (Robert Anton Wilson was another adherent, though a giant in his own mind, couldn't hold a candle to Herbert's writing.) I'll refer the reader to Martin Gardner's Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science for more, but Gardner had this to say of Korzybski's "Bible of general semantics", Science and sanity:

It is a poorly organized, verbose, philosophically naive, repetitious mish-mash of sound ideas borrowed from abler scientists and philosophers, mixed with neologisms, confused ideas, unconscious metaphysics, and highly dubious speculations about neurology and psychiatric therapy.

Garner said the Count (Korzybski) used the word "semantics" so broadly that it became meaningless. Herbert (and it seems O'Reilly) bought into a crank whose semi-pseudoscience had already began fading on his death in 1950.

On a (not labeled as such) transcendental theme in Dune, O'Reilly observes

By the end of the novel, Paul is irresistible. Courageous in the face of great odds, skilled in ways that science-fiction readers dream of, mystically wise, and buttressed by myths thousands of years old, he is eminently believable both as a messiah and as a hero. The question remains, however: If Paul were intended to demonstrate the error of faith in messiahs and superheroes, why was he rendered SO effective as both?

O'Reilly points to Dune Messiah and Children of Dune for the remainder of "the message".

One note from the analysis of the novel Destination: Void (prequel to the eventual Pandora Cycle trilogy), a character has solved a computer problem (essential to the theme of the book) that traditional logic had failed to solve up to that point.

Herbert's respect for improvisation reflects his country upbringing, with its emphasis on self-reliance in the use of technology. He still sees technological pragmatism as one of the most important things about America. In a public appearance, he reported a conversation with an engineer in Pakistan. The Pakistani described the difference between American and Soviet engineers in charge of foreign-aid projects: The Soviet would stand back and supervise the operation from a distance, while the American would roll up his sleeves and show them how it was done.

I'm an engineer that likes to "roll up his sleeves", though I much prefer to coach than show.

The first book I bought for myself was Dune Messiah, at a school book fair in 1972. My parents gave me a dollar and Dune was $1.45, I think, while Dune Messiah was $0.95. No surprise, though short, without the context of Dune it was quite confusing to his 11 year old.

"Dune Messiah was the hardest book of the three to write," Herbert says. "It had to be short, because it had to point forward and back. It had to begin turning the whole process over."

I have more notes on Children of Dune but I'll stop here with this

Herbert himself says, "The only consistency I demand of my story is that it be internally consistent."

Internal consistency is important to me, as a reader, as well.

I lost interest in Herbert's later works. I've never finished his original Dune series - never got through Heretics of Dune. I grew and he diminished, beginning with Children of Dune, but Dune and Dune Messiah I've never outgrown. Maybe I've yet to grow into them.

Good biography of the author of my favorite science fiction novel.

Great for both novice and self-proclaimed experts...there is definitely something for everyone in this guide to enhancing your Twitter experience

A little dated (a number of sites referenced are gone, and Twitter API has changed over time) but full of advice and tips on how to use Twitter to find things, promote things and learn.

I really loved Tim's philosophy on life when I heard him on Tim Ferriss's podcast. I like elements of this book too in as much as it gives a different perspective on how to change things so the future can be better. Unfortunately the problems he describes are those of human behaviours, and whilst it makes sense to think of creating jobs in future for people instead of focusing purely on shareholder returns and money he gives no practical steps on how we might do this in a pragmatic fashion. I am not a cynic but using moral arguments to get society to change for the better seems like a low probability strategy. It is however a good read just on the basis of his different take on money, economics and what is valuable.

This is a great book that is wide ranging discussion of many aspects of digital tech, enriched and deepened with the autobiographical perspectives of a pioneering mover and shaker of the internet, who helped come up with the terms Open Source, Web 2.0 and the maker movement.

Tim O'Reilly offers big picture perspectives on Artificial intelligence, algorithms, augmented workers, worker replacement by robots, and a lot more. I found the book hard to put down. Great read

While O'Reilly is a publisher of tech books, this book is aimed for a lay audience and is eminently readable.

I did an hour interview with Tim and it was a blast.

Lots of stuff. I skimmed this, really, just so I'd know what was in there. Lots of good sections for me to read when I need it!

Covers basics well. Highly recommended!

The thing is, Twitter just isn't that hard.

So, for example, an ordinary person just shouldn't need a section like the first in this book, devoted to setting up an account. (If you do, maybe someone else should be managing your company's social media presence. Possibly the person who turns on your computer for you in the morning.) O'Reilly and Milstein follow up this section with a chapter devoted to rewrites of the most unnecessary sections of Twitter's online documentation, describing the kind of things you'd otherwise learn by simply using Twitter for a week.

Much of the rest of the book presents the kind of "advice" effectively lampooned by Naomi Dunford in her blog post, "Twitterati Douchebags and the Stoning Of The Infidel". Numbers don't matter. Share information. Send great @replies. Plus five sections about retweeting (somehow, I didn't realize how difficult that was while I was doing it).

Still, there are enough bright points here to earn a three-star review. Chapter two ("Listen In") provides links to a number of interesting Twitter-related web services, most of which I hadn't heard of. And Chapter Six ("Twitter for Business: Special Considerations and Ideas") is definitely the book's strong point: It's a collection of tips for businesses or organizations hoping to use Twitter for marketing or outreach, most of which aren't painfully self-evident to anyone who's used Twitter for a few weeks. The authors provide useful advice for coordinating multiple Twitter accounts, tracking clickthroughs with the URL shorteners that support this feature, and ensuring the company's account is findable.

Overall, not a worthwhile read, but there's not much better out there, so far as I can tell.

A good, compact, but not too shallow introduction to Twitter. Twitter and everything that surrounds it change so quickly that some things are already outdated, 6 months after publication date. But that's not really a problem: the book just deserves a reprint.

Not really useful as a reference, but good to flip through when you're bored. Nice odds and ends. You'll pick up a few things.½

Better advice than I had expected, although of course it is outdated almost as soon as it was printed. Something here for almost everyone, from beginner to power user. Advanced power user, maybe not. Would love to see the accompanying website updated regularly with new suggestions.

This is a great little book. I'm new to Twitter so I found everything in the book really interesting and helpful. I'm no longer hesitant to tweet. After all, my messages will be seen at most for about five minutes.

The book is well organized, comprehensive, pretty (love the colors and the birds) and fun (the writing allows for newbies to make mistakes). This is a book I'm hanging on to. It'll be a good reference because it has other links I'll probably find useful the more familiar I become with Twitter.

In its time, the definitive reference on UUCP for geeks everywhere...

Recently, I purchased The Twitter Book by Tim O'Reilly and Sarah Milstein. It is a must purchase for any one thinking about using Twitter or anyone already using Twitter. It is full of lots of great tips and suggestions on using Twitter. I learned a lot from it. I was going to write a long review of the book but others have already done that. I purchased the print version and the e-book version. So far, it is the only book where I have done that. I have been reading the e-book on a two monitor set up with the book on one screen and my web browser in the other. Go out and buy it from O'Reilly.

Very useful½

My Unix is a little lopsided: I don't know much about security or administration, but I can edit the hell out of plain text files. I'm a programmer, not an admin, so that's what I spend my time doing. I learned Unix from this book, writing shell scripts and one-liners to automate my work. I recommend this book to anyone who intends to Actually Do Stuff on the Unix command line.

This is the UNIX tutorial I wish I'd had when I started. I've probably given away more copies of this book than any other.