September 7, 2009

Daemon, by Daniel Suarez

Great book!

It’s not often that I’ll start out a blog review like that…but this book really surprised me. The story was extremely well thought out, the characters likeable (or not, as appropriate), and the action kept the story moving along.

Now, I have to preface this by saying that this is a Geek novel. There are very specific references to computer hardware and protocols that would probably turn off non-Geeks. Fortunately, I am a Geek (Badge #L33T ;-), and I appreciated this book all the more for the accuracy of the technical details. Suarez is himself a computer security-type Geek, and that comes through in the detail of the book. It was like he was talking both of my primary languages (English and Geek).

Would this book appeal to non-computer types? Maybe. My wife is interested in reading it based on the parts of the book I’ve described. She’ll probably just gloss over the technical stuff that she wouldnt’ find interesting, which is probably fine. It’s not critical to following the story. In fact, you could probably remove it and the story would be fine. I could easily see a movie being made from this novel and the writers/director leaving out the technical details to increase mass market appeal.

So what is so appealing? It’s a typical What If? scenario. What if a computer genius invented a program (the “Daemon”) that could evolve and adapt to new scenarios to meet whatever goal was programmed into it? What if that program was spread across the Internet and couldn’t be eradicated by virus cleaners? And what if the creator of the program was a mad genius bent on changing social norms based on advanced technology?

That’s what this book is. It’s an excursion into a computer doomsday scenario–the typical AI takes over the world–but with so much thought put into it that you find yourself wondering if the Daemon is such a bad thing. Of course, killing people, which the Daemon has no problem doing, is bad…but is targeting evil corporations that make millions by swindling others, is that a bad thing?

That’s the cool part here. Imagine an evil corporation that is run by several generations of a single family and has a small board governing it. Who’s to stop that company from preying on the poor, the weak, the gullible? If it’s a private company, there’s no way to buy youself in. The best way in the door is through the computer. Take over the company’s computers, hold all of its information–and therefore, money–hostage…and you can do what you want with them.

And now, what if the creator was dead so that there’s no legal repurcussions possible and noone to tell you how to turn it off.

On top of that, throw in some other really cool, geeky stuff:

  • A virtual reality that controls the meatspace
  • Self-driving and autonomous cars
  • Secrets to accessing the daemon’s virtual world hidden in maps in First Person Shooter games.

All that raving being said, there are a couple of bad points…but are they really bad? One, there’s a twist at the end that was a bit annoying. Two, that twist–and a couple of other important points–sets up the forthcoming sequel. I’m thrilled that there’s a sequel planned, but it feels like this book is too dependant upon it. I wanted a more definitive conclusion to this book.

Some have compared this book to some of Michael Crichton’s work…I guess that’s fair. But the two things I like better about this book than I do most of Crichton’s work are that 1) the technology is more accurate/believable (which I’m sure some will dispute) and 2) I don’t get the technophobe/”the world is going to end if I use a toaster” feeling that I always get from Crichton (particulary Prey). Of course, I’ll keep reading Crichton since they fall into my favorite genre…but given two books on my nightstand, I’d pick up the Suarez one first!

Daniel Suarez is definitely on my NewBookAlerts list!

February 15, 2009

Is God a Mathematician? by Mario Livio

Filed under: Science — Tags: , — david @ 7:26 pm

There’s a new book out titled Is God a Mathematician? by Mario Livio. The Washington Post has a short review of the book and a link to the first chapter here.

The main premise is a discussion that has been going on for since (at least) ancient Greece…is mathematics devised by humans or an integral (no pun intended) part of the universe? This is a particularly interesting question to me since I pursued a Math degree in addition to my Creative Writing degree.

Many people don’t realize that this is actually a very challenging question. On the “human creation” side of the argument is the thought that is mathematics was universally perfect, then man wouldn’t have to revise and update his understanding so frequently. On the other side is the argument that while humans are still learning to properly define many mathematical concepts, there have been far too many that have been properly hypothesized long before they could be, and eventually were, proven with advanced technology.

Personally, I fall firmly on the universally defined side for many reasons, but primarily the following. First, if humans invented math, why would we create fundamental constants like Pi to be irrational numbers that our brain can’t even comprehend? The point here is that the human mind is not designed for the math we see around us every day (no to even mention at the universal or quantum levels). Second, as technology advances more quickly, more and more existing theorems are proven. The initial theorem is derived simply based on the math and then real-world experience proves the theorem out. That would be extremely rare if the real-world didn’t behave based on the mathematical principles we believe it does. Third, this question, to me, falls squarely in the “If a tree falls in the woods…” question. It wasn’t too long ago that many thought this was a silly zen conundrum…everyone knows that the presence of a person does not affect the world around us. However, with recent advances in knowledge of quantum physics, we’ve learned that a human perception can, in fact, change reality. However, we know that this only applies at the quantum level, not at the macro level at which we live. Since this macro level at which we live has been around far longer than humans have, it only makes sense that there is some set of laws, mathematics, governing it which does not depend upon human perception. Even at the quantum level where” reality” can be influenced simply by observation, there must be some underlying set of rules which apply when no human is present. Those rules depend entirely on a set of precise mathematical laws providing consistent results to an infinite number of calculations.

I haven’t gotten to read this book yet, but I plan to soon. I have added Mario Livio to my New Book Alerts list as I’ll be curious to see how he can follow this up. Anyone out there read this yet? (I know that it’s only been out for a week, but you know how us math types are…)