Esqtimemit

Three River Tech Review Home

Quick review of ratings: Five Stars: Means Must Have. Worth killing for. Four Stars: Very close to being worth killing for, but is somehow flawed, Three Stars: Take it or leave it. Professional, but without passion or feeling. Two Stars: Should only be read for free at Borders or Barnes and Noble. One Star: Not worth reading for free at Borders or Barnes and Noble.

Hit Counter

Magazines:

MIT Technology Review

esquire.jpg (7851 bytes)

November Esquire
4.45 Stars out of Five

Don't let scantily clad Charlize Theron adroitly fingering her black bikini pants on the cover dissuade you, the November Esquire is chockful of cool tech reads without even the hint of fleshy, sinful distraction. Great science reporting this month, full of engaging human detail, tragic sideshows and a sense of wonder.

Subtitled "The Genius Issue", the magazine has very cool stories about a fusion reactor in New Mexico; stories of Americans with high Q's (So high they're in clubs beyond Mensa); and a portrait of Alan Guth, who I had never heard of before this story, who thinks the revolutionary thought that our universe is to other universes like galaxies are to other galaxies or: One among an infinity. Scary thing, though, is that the initial findings from sensors that have heard the faint echo of the Big Bang are proving his math.

Frankly, anyone who gives this issue of Esquire less than four stars is somebody who hasn't read it. There were a ton of well written, interesting highlights.

I think the best story I read had to do with an attempt to create working fusion in New Mexico. Just like the earlier nuclear explosions, the story explains they're not entirely certain that they're not going to blow everything up in the process. Or to quote the story: "And what if everything worked perfectly and they got a huge energy release that blew up Albuquerque itself? It was a scenario that had been considered at the highest level. As had something worse: What if people later wished that in fact, it had only been Albuquerque that blew up?"

Nice to know that blowing up half the continent, for a good cause no doubt, is considered an acceptable risk. But when you think about the potential of fusion--a clean inexhaustible energy source--it's probably worth it. And no I live in Pittsburgh which is far far away from New Mexico. Your sacrifice will be thought of as noble to we the survivors wise enough not to live in a state doing fusion experiments.

Not only that, aside from a decent history of Project Z--comparative efforts, the ideology of the science efforts so far, the driven personalities behind the project, etc.-- there are also good looking photos interspersed throughout, some of them remind me of those classic shots of a calm, seated Tesla drowned in swirls of electricity.

The other story that caught my eye (among many) had to do with profiles with actual folks with high IQs. The one with the highest, one Christopher Mike Langan, has an IQ of 195, looks like a big beefy Hell's Angel. The guy is massive. On page 144 you can see him riding his Harley with no hands. He's working on the theory of everything. In case you didn't know, that's the theory Einstein couldn't solve before he died--at least as far as I can understand it. But Mike thinks he's got a handle on it. There's another, Gina LoSasso, IQ 164, who would like to clone herself because "I would know how to raise me to my full potential." Not an idle threat since her PH D is medicine related. Real life Good Will Huntings, with life stories just as compelling.

Now, there's even more stuff. There's the aforementioned profile of Alan Guth who looks as if he's going to prove that ours is just one unverse, orbiting around other universes. Furthermore, if I understand the math correctly, we can see only a fragment of the universe we're in, like seeing the edge of a drop of water in the ocean. Now, call me square, but I think that's interesting.

But there's more. There's a story about a guy who takes smart drugs and gives us his own personal results. There's a map of the United States that points out where all the tech meccas are. There's a profile of American genius that includes scientists like Bill "Java/Jini" Joy and Linus "Linux" Torvalds and some other guys, deserving guys actually, like Beck and Hoopster Allen Iverson.
Bottom line: If you are at all interested in science or technology, then the November issue of Esquire is a must read.

November 8th Time
4.5 out of 5 stars

(Note: No longer on stands, but you can still link to the stories at Time's Website.)

Really imaginative bioweapons, nanoprobes that remove toxins and dispense drugs into the human bloodstream, and the commercialization of germline therapies are just some of the Future Shocks that Time Magazine (?) explores this week. Part one of its Vision series, each part will focus on an area of science. Let the fanciful, unrealistic yet completely entertaining extrapolation begin.

This first section out of five focused on the topics of health and planet and if this is any indication I’ll be buying Time for awhile. To be frank, Time is usually the kind of magazine I avoid because it simply isn’t that interesting. It doesn’t take a point of view on issues that scream for perspective, or even bias. It’s always well written but most of what they write doesn’t interest me. Furthermore, they don’t write about issues in depth and as a weekly it isn’t timely, so why bother..?

I won’t be avoiding Time during this series, however. I had a difficult time putting it down it was so interesting. Not only did they call in the big guns to write short pieces about topics they were pretty much experts in (For example, Peter "jaws" Benchley wrote a piece about p shark extinctions) they even threw in a fiction piece by Caleb "The Alienist" Carr. It’s part one of a five part serial. It sort of feels like nice cyberpunk, or a sunnier naīve version of Bruce Sterling. (They have published fiction before. It was a Neal Stephenson story about encryption and finance.)

I found the article What New Things Are Going to Kill Me to be, well, terrifying. It was written by Hot Zone author Richard Preston who explains that biotoxins should be the weapon of choice for the terrorist or underfunded nation of the future. In fact, Preston speculates about combining this horrifically sturdy microorganism found in the Antarctic ("This bug can live in a blast of gamma rays that is the equivalent of thousands of lethal human doses….radiation so strong that it cracks glass.") with the anthrax virus. "From a bioweaponeers point of view, the future is bright".

Gosh, Rich…I sure hope future inductees into the Aum Cult or Columbine imitators with a passion for chemistry hadn’t thought of that. Otherwise, you’ve just given them a sterling new idea. Let me state for the record that if I’m poisoned by such a toxic substance I will use what’s left of my decaying, pus-filled shaking hands to type up a very angry email to your editor—if he hasn’t already been shipped off world yet to plagueless New Earth. You know Rich, there’s a group of nanotech writers who won’t broach certain plotlines because they’re so completely horrible it can’t be risked that a Dr. Evil type would get a hold of them. Kind of wish you’d look up the bylaws and join that club, Rich.

Other highlights for me had to include the quasi fictional story about a health clinic in the future that gets away with germline enhancement—which resonates with those unfortunate nazi-inspired eugenic overtones—by better marketing: "Organic Enhancement" is what its called in the story. If you don’t understand why people would object to something like implanting genes in your child that would prevent cancer or shoot their IQ past 200, then I strongly suggest you rent the film "Gattaca".

Yet other cool topics that struck my eye turned out to be new methods to kill cancer. Some of the new methodologies sound quite exciting. Best quote had to come from a researcher who said " ‘This was all a dream five years ago,’ marvels John Minna." Other topics covered of interest: speculation on the end of sex, global warming, and stem cell research.

A must read this week if you’re interested in science and technology.

You know, the rest of the magazine had some good points as well. They did a wonderful cause and effect story concerning money and how it influenced recent big votes in congress. What was gutsy is that they named "Time Warner" as a significant soft money player. I’m surprised that it wasn’t censored or underplayed. Then again, it was clearly the best news story they had and it didn’t make the cover. Not only that, they’re not doing a five part series on the corruptive influence of big money. I won’t hold my breath for a pro Open Access editorial either. (Time Warner gave big money to folks in congress to stop it.)

mitcover.jpg (12817 bytes)

November/December MIT Technology Review
3.98 out of 5 Stars

Anyone who’s anybody in the fields of software, biotech, materials science and hardware—and under the age of 35—gets profiled in this, the no doubt laboriously researched latest issue of MIT’s Technology Review. With the aid of a distinguished panel of 20 or so judges that included both professors and entrepreneurs, they selected the 100 most promising scientific talents on Earth, presumably.

What’s also interesting is that they ask all of these cutting edge scientists what they think the future will bring in their various specialities. Nanotech looks like it might come to fruition within our lifetime and computers will be made more from more durable materials and tons of other interesting speculation.

You’ve probably heard of some or most of these people before if you follow tech and science information. Jerry Yang and Linus Torvalds make the cut of the TR100. Big shock there.

Here are several of the less famous names who stood out for me:

Nicola Hill: She’s working on a principle called Spintronics, which, aside from sounding vaguely cool, roughly means using the spin of electrons as an information storage device. According to the article, her research might have applications for quantum computing. Her research background in both chemistry and physics proves something that I’ve always thought: People who excel in nanotech will be able in a variety of disciplines.

Hideo Mabuchi and Isaac Chuang: Both of these guys are at the forefront of the aforementioned quantum computing. Hideo’s claim to fame is that he’s working on ways to view quantum actions, or those spooky actions at a distance that Einstein wrote about. If Hideo is successful, it could lead to the first generation of quantum computers. Meanwhile, Isaac has built a basic two bit quantum computer. He’s also run database searches and simple algorithms. He’s also funny. If memory serves me correct, this is the same guy who was quoted in a special Business Week that he’s built "The world’s largest quantum computer."

Natalie Jeremijenko: I must say in a politically correct way that the women were pretty well represented in this elite tech group. I might also say that in a politically incorrect way that I found some of them to be quite hot. Natalie burns. I had a hard time figuring out what it is that Natalie does but she sure does some cool things. Here are just a few of the cool tricks that Natilie, self acclaimed technoartist, has pulled off: "She shot a documentary of Silicon Valley from a remote controlled spy plane, concealed camaras in teddy bears to record children’s expressions and installed a motion detecter near the Golden Gate Bridge to count suicides (17 in 100 days)" I have a morbid curiousity about that film. Did anybody try to stop these folks?

Eric Winfree: If quantum based computing isn’t bizarre enough, how about DNA based computing? Here’s a guy who really wants to create Blood Music. He thinks he can get DNA samples to actually construct matter a molecule at a time. His DNA computer also sounds a lot like quantum computing in that you could get the bits to be two states at once.

The rest of the issue is pretty decent as well. It features the usual lot of cool shorts, robotic space workers, and essays. It’s not one of the better issues I’ve read but it is solid.

Lcommodo consequat.

Duis te feugifacilisi. Duis autem dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit au gue duis dolore te feugat nulla facilisi. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci taion ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex en commodo consequat. Duis te feugifacilisi per suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex en commodo consequat.