May 2011 - The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood

[Melissa]

Aloha wrote: "It might be too late to mention this since you have your system all set up, wouldn't it be better to title the thread with the title of the book? When I go into a forum, I find it handy to be able..."


It's never too late. You have made a very good suggestion. I think we could easily add the book title to the thread title. During the period of selecting books the thread could be just the month and year, then after the book is selected, the moderators can easily add the book title.

I'll do so to this thread, and unless David, the other fine moderator, objects . . . well, we can consider it the latest improvement in the group!

[Aloha]

Thanks, Melissa! :o)

[Aloha]

I'm halfway through Chapter 15: New News Every Day. So, is the glut of information bad or good? Stay tuned for the author's conclusion! I personally love the availability of information.

[Adam]

Kathy wrote: "I have a copy of The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood. Hopefully someone else found a copy so that we can compare notes."

I just got this book, I can't wait to read it.

[Aloha]

I'm done with the book. After such a great rev up with details about the history of language and events that lead to the development of the computers, it was a little wrap up about the internet phenomenon. I kind of wanted more drama about that. That would have made the book probably about a thousand pages, which, I think, publishers frown upon. I want to write a review on this, but I have Ayn Rand books to write reviews about, which is starting to fade from my memory. I guess I better start with this book before it fades from my head to be replaced with more glut of information.

[Adam]

haha yes indeed. I have read a number of books this year and haven't reviewed any... I would like to sit down and catch up on that at some point. Especially Atom, by Isaac Asimov. What a superb non-fiction book!

[Aloha]

I checked my books in all formats. I have Asimov from A-Z, but no Atom. Hmpf! It does look like a great book.

[Adam]

Yeah, I had to read it for the Intro Quantum Physics class I was taking last semester. It really helped in understanding a lot of the material.

[Aloha]

I better get that book, then, since I'm interested in Quantum Physics. Thanks for the recommendation.

[David]

Aloha, after you write a review, let us know about it; put a link to your review in this thread.

Here is a link to my review.

[Aloha]

I will, David. Thank you. I got a good chuckle from your review.

[Tim]

I'm about halfway through The Information. I have found it sometimes fascinating, sometimes difficult. I especially enjoyed learning about the history of telegraphy. The book's organization seems a bit postmodern-- jumping from one subject to another. I guess I prefer something more linear.

[Patricrk]

My e-book library surprisingly came through with the book.(It is short on science selections, long on vampire stories). It was hard to put down (turn off the computer and go to bed, you have been asleep in a sitting position long enough that the computer screen saver has come on)

Near the end the book has the phrase "We find ourselves overwhelmed by all the things that words might mean." That is how I felt about this book, it is so overwhelming in its showing that the world is information. Everything from biology to nuclear physics can be looked at as information flow.

It was nice to read about early forms of communicating over distance and of the characters of some of the scientists. It would have been nice to have more on some subjects but I guess that is why there are are 85 pages of notes and bibliography before the index.

[loafingcactus]

I am about 25 percent of the way through the book. I have been strongly influenced by Jacques Ellul's The Technological Society and reading with that particular filter available this book can be seen as a kind of horror story. Or not. The question that is opened is: Is written communication something that humans due, and therefore participating makes us more human, or is it something technologic that is unnatural Nd takes away from our humanity? My first instinct is to say that is depends on how you use it; it can be either. Ellul would call BS on that, pointing to how it changes how people think, and say that the technology and not the human is always in control. Thoughts?

[David]

Loafingcactus wrote: "Is written communication something that humans due, and therefore participating makes us more human, or is it something technologic that is unnatural Nd takes away from our humanity? My first instinct is to say that is depends on how you use it; it can be either. Ellul would call BS on that, pointing to how it changes how people think, and say that the technology and not the human is always in control. Thoughts? "

I remember reading in The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood that writing is necessary, in order to have deductive reasoning and syllogisms. Societies that are illiterate do not understand syllogisms. (For example, it is said that Homer's works--handed down across generations orally--do not have syllogisms.) On the other hand, even illiterate individuals who live in literate societies do understand syllogisms.

[Jimmy]

Major premise: Loafingcactus is a cool name.
Minor premise: Jimmy wishes his name was cooler.
Conclusion: Jimmy wishes his name was Loafingcactus.

[loafingcactus]

:-) Thank you!

[Aloha]

I would say writing is an indication of a civilized, complex society. I don't see how it could take away our humanity, unless being human means being simplistic and caveman like. I also read in The Information the passage David indicated. The written word allows information to last beyond the oral, therefore lasting through time. It also allows information to be analyzed and restructured into something else entirely. These symbols of our thought can not only allow us to transmit from symbols to concrete objects, but from symbols to pure abstract concepts. Because the written word allowed us to have deductive reasoning and syllogisms, we're able to perform intricate functions.

[Jimmy]

I guess we could say that writing isn't "natural" but I guess neither is speaking. Both had to be learned over time. I agree with Aloha, which is also a cool name, that we can't go back to a "state of nature." That can't be much better than control by technology.

[Aloha]

Thanks, Jimmy. My real name is cooler than that. :o)

[Betsy, co-mod]

I started out loving The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood. It was well written, wide-ranging, and very informative. I was learning things almost every page. But when I finished it, I felt vaguely disappointed.

Here's my review.

[Cheryl]

I've read the first two chapters - liking it but wondering where he's going. I'll read your review, Betsy, when I'm done, as I do want to finish and don't want to be discouraged by what I suspect disappointed you.

[loafingcactus]

I have put up my review.

By the middle of the book, an idea of Schrodinger is presented which is one possible response to Ellul: that life is an anti-entropy machine. However, that also leads to a kind of determinism which Ellul would not like (but which Schrodinger was very comfortable with; the book states that he mocked the idea of "life force").

I thought that the history of the term "gene" was well done and should be required reading of all biological science students (a little bit of philosophy of science should be and too often is not, alas).

I agree that the last chapter of the book was weak, though the awkwardness of explaining what we do with information today reflected the awkwardness of previous generations making their explanations. The conclusion was very, very weak given all the history the author had to work with and what he had just covered himself.

[Tim]

I had to push myself to finish the book. I enjoyed the historical and biographical accounts in the book, the information theory not so much.

[Cheryl]

I'm struggling just with the sheer size. It's too heavy to read in bed and I can't seem to concentrate during the day!

[Betsy, co-mod]

I'm so glad I read it on Kindle, even though the illustrations were not great. Hang in there, Cheryl, and remember that nearly half of it is notes and index, so you may be closer to finished than you think.

[Cheryl]

Tx! I'm also frustrated by how much irrelevant biographical stuff there is - it's the same thing that bothered me in Bryson's tome.

But I do like the bits that do show up about the effect of the technical developments on people's way of thinking - for example the woman who tried to get the telegraph operator to saurkraut to her son, because after all he did 'send' troops to the front and 'carry' messages.

Did anyone read the notes? I recall another popular science book I read had its notes & errata online. I thought that was a great idea - sorry I can't remember which book.

[Cheryl]

Found it: Mean Genes: From Sex to Money to Food: Taming Our Primal Instincts.

[Betsy, co-mod]

Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "I'm also frustrated by how much irrelevant biographical stuff there is..."

That's one of the things I liked most about the book. And how some of the same characters keep showing up.

[Cheryl]

heh - to each her own, eh? In any case, I'm still working on it. I do wish he'd given credit to Susan J. Blackmore and her book The Meme Machine in that chapter though - great book!

[Cheryl]

Interesting bits, I agree - for example the explanation of the jungle drums. I just don't think my time was well used to struggle through all the parts I didn't understand, and to discover no real point or theme or new information at the end. I agree it would have been helpful if he'd told us what the tune was - the Macarena makes sense I suppose.

I definitely wanted more about the Flood of Information that is the Internet. I wanted more systematically delineated science. I do have one question - see next post please.

[Cheryl]

Here's a condensation of my review - my question about p. 180 refers to a bit near the end of the Entropy chapter:

There is a good section about how people adapted to the telegraph - although you can 'send' troops to the front or 'carry' messages, you cannot send a dish of saurkraut to your son.

There were a few more good bits, like the quick clue that we need to remember to think not of "'... a gene for X,'" but "instead 'a genetic contribution to the variation in X.'"

There were many more exasperating bits, for example not telling us, even in the notes, what his allusions and resources were.

And see p. 180, where there's some mathematical stuff that says H=?? and then compares it to S=??. Now, not only do I have no idea what those symbols (for which I substituted the question marks) are, I have no idea what S and H represent. Nor does he tell us. Do you know?

Notes, index, and bibliography were not helpful. Lots of trees could've been saved if he'd put those online.

In fact, the whole book wasn't helpful. One or two chapters, tightened up and edited [for comprehensibility] by a member of the general public, would have made good essays. Other than that, I've no idea what we're supposed to get out of the book as a whole. I'm both frustrated and disappointed.

[Betsy, co-mod]

NPR did an interview this morning with Gleick about The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood. You can listen to it here.

I suspect it's mostly a rehash of the book. I didn't listen to it. Started to, but it appeared to be about 35 minutes long. I don't think I can stay awake that long. :o)

[Aloha]

Sorry, I have not been getting notifications from here. I thought the book was a terrific history on the transmission of information throughout history. The idea of information is so broad, I thought it was great that he was able to trace it the way he did. I loved how he started with the basics of drums and oral language, the effects of the written language on the thinking process, to the organization of the meaning of words, to the telegraph. I was surprised that he was able to tie in entropy and genetic coding to the whole thing to culminate in the development of the internet. I thought it was engrossing from beginning to end, although I wish the end about the internet could have been extended with more information. This book had everything I was interested in except for the visual arts.

[Kenny]

Betsy wrote: "NPR did an interview this morning with Gleick about The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood. You can listen to it here.

I suspect it's mostly a rehash of the book. I didn'..."

Thanks for that. I've had this one on my to-read list since I heard about it. Finally go it from the the library (waiting list took a while) but am enjoying as I've been fascinated with information most of my life.