The History of the Future by Blake J. Harris

The History of the Future: Oculus, Facebook, and the Revolution That Swept Virtual Reality by Blake J. Harris
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

The History of the Future tells the story behind the virtual reality (VR) company Oculus. The first three quarters of the book is largely about the people behind the building of the company, and the often harrowing process of getting it off the ground. The last part is much the opposite, about dissolution rather than building - specifically the exit of co-founder Palmer Luckey.

Starting up any company is a challenge, and focusing on virtual reality had extra hurdles since it had been tried before...and failed. From a present-day perspective, it's easy to forget that less than a decade ago, VR was considered to be either impossible or so expensive as to be useless to consumers. There is a ton of detail in this book about the difficulty that the Oculus founders faced in convincing anyone that they could actually make VR work, as well as some of the technical aspects that had caused that skepticism in the first place. In almost every case, the disbelief was overcome by getting someone to actually try their prototype, which from all accounts was good enough to make a believer of practically anyone who tried it.

Of course, simply having a good prototype isn't enough, so The History of the Future dedicates plenty of pages to the process of figuring out the logistics behind production of a product. Both in terms of the actual physical production process, and building a company that can make it happen. As with many start-ups, the question of how to pay for the whole process was a major struggle. Until Facebook came into the picture and bought Oculus, which more or less solved the money issues but brought along a whole different set of problems.

The last 25% or so of the book feels quite a bit different than what comes before, largely because it's about things coming apart. Luckey gets into trouble when he supports a pro-Trump political organization and it goes public in the media. Oculus and its founders are sued for infringement of intellectual property. Eventually, Luckey is let go from Oculus. This section is presented as Luckey being railroaded for his political beliefs, the company losing big money in court to a baseless lawsuit (though much of that was overturned on appeal), and Facebook using the situation as an excuse to get rid of Luckey and avoid paying him a large chunk of money due to him as an Oculus founder. It's hard to tell how accurate this depiction is, since it's basically just one side of the story. Whether it's the absolute truth or not, I have to say I wasn't particularly surprised. It's a cutthroat business world out there, and it doesn't take much of a misstep...real or overblown...to lead to a fall from grace.

Harris has gathered a ton of information from the individuals involved in this whole process. Not only about the facts of what happened and when, but the way those people were feeling at the time. I found the whole thing fascinating, because I'm interested in pretty much every aspect of the story: VR itself, the tech start-up culture, dealing with corporate acquisition, and the various interpersonal dynamics along the way. But it does make for a very long and detailed account that may be difficult to get through for someone who doesn't share all those interests. If you do, it's worth taking the time it takes to read through The History of the Future.

On the Come Up by Angie Thomas

On the Come Up by Angie Thomas
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

When an author's first novel is as good as The Hate U Give , it begs the question: was that success just a flash in the pan, a case of catching lightning in a bottle? For Angie Thomas, the answer is an emphatic No. On The Come Up is every bit as good as its predecessor.

On The Come Up follows Bri, a teenage girl in the poor and largely black Garden Heights neighborhood of Baltimore, as she tries to start off a rap career. She's got a whole lot of obstacles in her way, from her family's dire financial straits to racial tensions to breaking into a male-dominated rap culture. And she doesn't help her own case when she plays right into many of the stereotypes, both in her lyrics and her actions, while trying to point out the inherent biases.

If that sounds awfully familiar to The Hate U Give, that's because at the level of themes and social commentary, it is. The two books are set in the same world, share much of the same Garden Heights territory, and On The Come Up even references a few of the events in the first book. But the characters are very different, with their own problems, strengths, weaknesses, and motivations. The setting and themes may be similar, but this book tells its own story.

I hope Angie Thomas is planning to write a whole lot more. That's a bit selfish, of course, because I've enjoyed her first two books so much. But more importantly, I think her writing is providing a perspective that isn't shared nearly enough in popular writing. The wider she can share that perspective, the better.

The Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis

The Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I picked up The Fifth Risk thinking it would be about the Trump administration's hollowing-out of the administrative state by failing to fill key positions. There's some of that, but the book is much more about what the government does and some of the consequences should it stop.

Lewis splits the book into three main sections, each covering a major federal department: Energy, Agriculture, and Commerce. In each case, he goes out to talk to people about what those agencies actually do. Which is what you'd have expected the Trump administration's transition team to have done once the election was won, but was not the case.

I found the descriptions of the various departments fascinating. The mass of data collected by Commerce, the waste cleanup run by Energy, the nutrition programs in Agriculture: I'd sort of heard about those things but never in this kind of detail. And presented in an entertaining manner - Lewis knows his stuff and finds ways to make it all relatable and pulls in the personal touch with the various folks that provided the information.

The bottom line in The Fifth Risk is that these federal government programs (and presumably many others not covered here) are a key underpinning of our society, whether we realize it or not. And when the country's executive leadership is ignorant or uncaring, those programs are in danger of being taken over by oligarchs, cut down by budget cuts, or simply mismanaged into failure.

Captain Marvel (2019 movie)

Captain Marvel is a fun watch, like most of the MCU movies before it. Not the best, not the worst, but well executed. Certainly not worthy of the hate coming from the more misogynistic corners of the Internet.

If you've seen any of the promotional material for the movie, you already know pretty much what Captain Marvel is about. Just in this trailer alone you see that there's a woman with military background who somehow gets superpowers and hooks up with Nick Fury (beloved from lots of previous MCU movies) in the 1990s to do some kind of superheroing. And that's what happens - you will not be surprised by anything important in this movie. No "Infinity War" style twists in this one.

I'm a DC comics nerd at the detail level, but for Marvel I'm more at the "general knowledge" nerd level. She was one of my favorite characters in the Marvel Heroes MMO action RPG (may it rest in peace). So I know who Captain Marvel is, and some general stuff about her origin, but not chapter and verse of every little detail. Between that general knowledge and promo material like the trailer, I found the movie to move somewhat slowly as it went through lots of setup about the character. Par for the course with an origin movie, so I was prepared, but still a little boring.

The good news is that even knowing what's coming, Captain Marvel is still entertaining. I liked Brie Larson's performance, they did a good job cutting 25 years off Samuel L. Jackson's look, and the supporting cast does a fine job. (Particularly Ben Mendelsohn as the Skrull leader.) I loved the costume they came up with for her, except that silly mohawk helmet thing, but I suppose you have to give something to the traditionalist comics people. Lots of special effects eye candy, especially near the end. Which is only what I've come to expect from the MCU.

You're not going to miss the big themes of this movie. A determined woman overcoming "a girl can't do that" prejudice: not only do we see tons of this from the main character, you've also got her best friend, honorary niece, and even one of the top enemy fighters pounding that theme home. The fact that the timeframe is 20 years ago: if Blockbuster and Radio Shack isn't enough, there's all kinds of music and culture references scattered about. People aren't what they may first seem - spoiler territory, but it's everywhere. I have no problem with any of it, but be warned, don't expect subtlety.

There was a lot of hate for this movie across the Internet before it even came out, and that continued through the opening weekend. I'm happy to say those idiots were wrong; a female lead is just fine for a superhero movie (not that anyone who's seen Wonder Woman is surprised by that). I kinda wish the creators had gone further - imagine if they'd swapped roles for Larson and Lashana Lynch (who plays her black best friend). I bet the movie would be just as good, and would have caused even more coronaries among the kind of morons who hate on movies for who they feature.

I'd put Captain Marvel firmly in the middle of the MCU movie universe...solid effort that's better than some and worse than others. For an origin movie, it's hard to complain. And I really look forward to seeing Carol Danvers kicking some serious tail in future films.

Through Darkest Europe by Harry Turtledove

Through Darkest Europe by Harry Turtledove
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Harry Turtledove always writes a good story. Sometimes, there's an interesting message underneath as well. Through Darkest Europe is definitely one of those times.

Through Darkest Europe is an imagining of what might have happened if the tenets of modern Western civilization took root in the Middle East rather than Europe. The rise of science over superstition, industrialization, the Enlightenment...move all that to places like Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Turkey. Meanwhile Europe becomes a backwater that breeds unrest and discontent.

The book has plenty of references to different history and culture in this alternate world. North America is known as "The Sunset Lands" and makes "Pontiak" vehicles from "Arkansistan." Hitler had no place on the world stage, but there was an equivalently horrific Indian leader who slaughtered the Tamil people. Rather than feet or meters, measurements are made in cubits. Turtledove always spins an intriguing world, and this is no exception. However, the most notable thing about this alternate world is not the differences from reality, but the similarities.

Turtledove could have created a very different world with those assumptions, but instead he chose to make it very nearly a mirror image of our own. Islam and Christianity switch places, with terrorist followers of Thomas Aquinas taking the place of Muslim extremists. Italy is largely a mirror of our Afghanistan, with a weak central government holding onto Rome but little else. Christian extremists from all over Europe pour into Italy, bringing rebellion and assassination with them.

I like the switching of religious and cultural affiliation between the forces of order and terror. It makes the reader think more about the underlying causes of unrest. Turtledove makes it clear that the religion itself isn't to blame, in either case. You can use words from the holy books to support peace or war, order or chaos, love for your fellow man or hatred. It's the character of the people using those words, and the societal influences that shape those people, that makes the difference.

Through Darkest Europe isn't as epic as some of Turtledove's work (see Worldwar), but it doesn't need to be to accomplish its purpose: give the reader an opportunity to consider how unrest and extremism can rise from any culture or religion, given the wrong conditions. An important message, and I encourage others to read it for themselves.

Marshall (movie) and Young Thurgood (book)

Young Thurgood: The Making of a Supreme Court Justice by Larry S. Gibson
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I didn't know much about Thurgood Marshall outside what everyone learns in history class: civil rights hero, argued Brown v. Board of Education, later Supreme Court justice. At the local library, I came across a couple of ways to rectify my ignorance: the 2017 movie Marshall, and the book Young Thurgood by Larry Gibson. The book fills in much of the backstory that led to those great things, covering the first 35 or so years of his life. The movie is a dramatization of a rape case that took place in 1940, pretty much right after the time covered by the book. I read the book first, then watched the movie.

There's a lot packed into Young Thurgood about Marshall's early life, but two major themes stood out for me. First, Thurgood Marshall had an incredible work ethic. He was constantly busy with activities, whether those took the form of work or education or community service. Second, Marshall had a true belief in the importance of civil rights activism and put that above his own welfare. This is most clearly demonstrated in the way that he repeatedly took civil rights cases over more lucrative law practice options, despite his own tenuous financial position.

Beyond the details of Marshall's life, the other theme that struck me in reading Young Thurgood was just how pervasive racism was in the early 20th century. Everything from lesser pay to school restrictions to lynchings...reading example after example really drives home how bad things were only a century ago. We've still got plenty of work to do on this front, but it's also striking how much things have changed. And Thurgood Marshall had a large role in making those changes.

Young Thurgood isn't a novel; there's a lot of fairly dry recounting of history to get through. There's not a lot of excitement in the documentation of individual incidents, but taken as a whole, the book does a fine job of painting a picture of Marshall and the early 20th century.

The movie Marshall, on the other hand, struck me as very much the opposite - very entertaining, but light on the historical accuracy. It strikes me as extremely unlikely that Marshall would have been quite so high-handed with Sam Friedman as is shown in the film, for instance. Making Friedman carry his bags, really? Being cavalier about little things like changing radio stations or sending Friedman into the mud? It works for setting the Marshall-in-charge dynamic for the film, but I highly doubt the accuracy. But that's not surprising, in a film that's largely about showing Thurgood Marshall as a civil rights superhero. He deserves the acclaim, exaggerated or not. And I enjoyed catching references to many of the people that I'd just read about in the book.

I'm never going to be a Thurgood Marshall expert, but I feel like I know a little more now about the man and his work. Time well spent.

Street Freaks by Terry Brooks

Street Freaks by Terry Brooks
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

I feel like I've read this book before. Not in the "it's been so long I forgot about it" way, but in the "I've read something similar so many times that it all feels familiar" sense.

World-building: future cyberpunk. Lots of people with genetic modifications or cyborg parts, robots, and replicants...er, I mean synths. Giant corporations with immense power, conspiring with corrupt governments. Massive economic and social inequality. Environmental collapse, natural resources running out. It's not exactly like the Shadowrun or Blade Runner worlds, but it's close enough that I didn't get any real sense of discovering something new.

Plot: Kid with no clue narrowly escapes powerful forces to hook up with a rebellious group, eventually figures out what's going on and fights back. How many times have we seen this one? And in this particular case, the evil scheme plot device and bad guy behind it are so incredibly obvious from the fairly early chapters that it makes the characters look dumb for not seeing it.

Main Character: Ash, a naive kid at the center of something big, forced to come of age quickly. Spends his time learning about friendship, love, and how crappy the world can be. The plot of countless books, movies, and just about any other media form you care to name. Feels generic.

Style: supposed to be suspenseful. I say "supposed to" because once you recognize the archetype of the story, how much suspense can there really be? Ash isn't going to get killed off. You know he'll have some bad stuff happen, but it'll all work out in the end.

Now, I'm not saying that Brooks has completely failed with Street Freaks. He's a fine author who knows how to write; I didn't throw it down in disgust or anything. But I didn't feel like this book did anything special to set it apart from a ton of others in a similar genre, and it certainly didn't hide things well enough to engender any suspense. I'd much rather be reading sci-fi that's either attempting to break at least a little new ground, or pulls off a surprise. Street Freaks does neither.

Confessions of a Rogue Nuclear Regulator by Gregory B. Jaczko

Confessions of a Rogue Nuclear Regulator by Gregory B. Jaczko
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Pretty much every rational person has a healthy fear of nuclear weapons. Massively destructive and terrible long-term consequences. Nuclear power comes from the same dangerous forces, but we rely on technology and design to keep those forces in check. Jaczko makes the case in Confessions of a Rogue Nuclear Regulator that the system designed to keep nuclear power safe just isn't working.

Before I get into the main points of the book, let me first say that Jaczko has done a fine job of keeping a potentially dry subject entertaining. He includes plenty of personal anecdotes and first-hand descriptions of some pretty tense situations around events we're all familiar with - Three Mile Island, the Fukushima Daiichi disaster - as well as some near-misses that may not be as familiar - fire at Browns Ferry in Tennessee, flooding at the Fort Calhoun plant along the Missouri river. And he makes no bones about his own personal failings, either, especially his often adversarial and confrontational personal style. It's not a page-turner thriller novel, but the book is well written and kept me engaged throughout.

Jaczko makes two main points about the current state of nuclear power:

First, because the forces involved are so powerful, it's impossible to make nuclear power completely safe. We can develop elaborate safety measures that will reduce the risk to extremely low levels, but that risk is always there. This means safety measures have to be redundant, cover every known risk, be constantly updated against new risks, and strictly enforced. If you don't do those things, the risk very quickly becomes unacceptable. This is a pretty straightforward point and I don't think anyone would argue with it, though the definitely of exactly what is "acceptable" can be debated.

Second, none of that is happening as it should, because the regulatory system in place to ensure nuclear power safety is ineffective. In the current political environment, not just in the US but all around the world, putting a truly effective nuclear power regulatory system is simply not possible. This is a much more contentious point, but I think Jaczko makes a strong case. He cites repeated examples where regulators have been unable to enforce existing rules, or put into place important new rules, due to interference and delay by nuclear power providers. Those obstructions are enabled by political cover from officials who are beholden to the nuclear power industry. This is an example of regulatory capture: through political and economic influence, the nuclear power providers have taken control of the very processes meant to ensure that their product is safe.

The logical conclusion from those two points is that nuclear power should be eliminated, and that is in fact the position Jaczko takes. "Nuclear power is a failed technology"...no equivocation there. That is a very strong denouncement from a former head of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The argument isn't that human beings are unable to use nuclear power safely - while the risk is never zero, it can be reduced to acceptable levels. Rather, the constant pushback against updating and enforcing regulations required to maintain those low levels of risk means nuclear power won't be made safe. The issue isn't that we can't, it's that we won't.

I've long considered nuclear power to be a worthwhile alternative in the search to find alternatives to fossil fuels, but after reading this book I've changed my mind. Until we can either drastically improve technology to lower risk, or effectively address the regulatory capture concerns that Jaczko raises, nuclear power should be off the table. I don't see how the former is possible economically, or the latter politically. There are other clean alternatives, and though those have their own issues, they don't carry the same extreme risks as nuclear power.