Summary of “If You Only Read A Few Books In 2018, Read These”

If you don’t read the book, at least please read about it.
How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer by Sarah Bakewell The book is spectacular.
Given the divisiveness that we are facing as a society - that became painfully clear in 2016 - this is one of the most urgent and important book you need to read next year.
It’s also easy to be disillusioned by politics right now but for me, getting lost in these Lyndon Johnson books has been a helpful and educational process.
Mr. Eternity by Aaron Thier / The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas These books really have nothing to do with the events of 2016 but they are long and entertaining and they will make you forget your problems for the next 12 months.
Because the actual book is a 1,200 page epic of some of the most brilliant, beautiful and complicated storytelling ever put to paper.
What a book! When I typed out my notes after finishing this book, it ran some 3,000 words.
Like to Read?I’ve created a list of 15 books you’ve never heard of that will alter your worldview and help you excel at your career.

The orginal article.

Summary of “If You Only Read A Few Books In 2018, Read These”

If you don’t read the book, at least please read about it.
How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer by Sarah Bakewell The book is spectacular.
Given the divisiveness that we are facing as a society - that became painfully clear in 2016 - this is one of the most urgent and important book you need to read next year.
It’s also easy to be disillusioned by politics right now but for me, getting lost in these Lyndon Johnson books has been a helpful and educational process.
Mr. Eternity by Aaron Thier / The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas These books really have nothing to do with the events of 2016 but they are long and entertaining and they will make you forget your problems for the next 12 months.
Because the actual book is a 1,200 page epic of some of the most brilliant, beautiful and complicated storytelling ever put to paper.
What a book! When I typed out my notes after finishing this book, it ran some 3,000 words.
Like to Read?I’ve created a list of 15 books you’ve never heard of that will alter your worldview and help you excel at your career.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Edward Snowden: ‘The people are still powerless, but now they’re aware'”

Edward Snowden has no regrets five years on from leaking the biggest cache of top-secret documents in history.
In response to a question from the Guardian about the anniversary, Fleming said GCHQ’s mission was to keep the UK safe: “What Edward Snowden did five years ago was illegal and compromised our ability to do that, causing real and unnecessary damage to the security of the UK and our allies. He should be accountable for that.”
Others in the intelligence community, especially in the US, will grudgingly credit Snowden for starting a much-needed debate about where the line should be drawn between privacy and surveillance.
The former GCHQ director Sir David Omand shared Fleming’s assessment of the damage but admitted Snowden had contributed to the introduction of new legislation.
Ross Anderson, a leading academic specialising in cybersecurity and privacy, sees the Snowden revelations as a seminal moment.
Erson, a professor of security engineering at Cambridge University’s computer laboratory, said: “Snowden’s revelations are one of these flashbulb moments which change the way people look at things. They may not have changed things much in Britain because of our culture for adoring James Bond and all his works. But round the world it brought home to everyone that surveillance really is an issue.”
“The Snowden revelations were a huge shock but they have led to a much greater transparency from some of the agencies about the sort of the things they were doing,” he said.
Developers at major technology companies, outraged by the Snowden disclosures, started pushing back.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Set a ‘Rejection Goal’ and It Might Just Lead to Success”

If you’re an artistic type, or a writerly type, or even just someone who’s looking for a job, you may have found rejections to be so painful that you’ve just stopped applying for things.
What if you set rejection as a goal? That’s what writer Kiki Schirr did at the beginning of this year: She resolved to get 100 rejections by the end of 2018-to apply for anything and everything that interested her, even things that she thought were beyond her grasp, and to treat each rejection as evidence that she was pursuing her goal.
The first rejection rolled in on January 12th. But by the end of May, she’d tweeted that she might have a hard time reaching her goal-because so many of the anticipated rejections were actually acceptances.
Maybe treating rejection as a pure numbers game can inoculate you against the agony of many tiny defeats.
If you’re suffering from undeserved low self-esteem, Kiki’s success story might knock some confidence into you-sure, you might get 100 rejections, but maybe, just from sheer luck, you’ll get 10 acceptances along the way.
Even though I don’t know Kiki-maybe she’s super-skilled in all areas and failure was never a serious option-she’s definitely made me re-think my whole approach to rejection.
Is it possible to take the sting out of it, the sense that each “No” is a referendum on your worth? Maybe treating rejection as a pure numbers game can inoculate you against the agony of many tiny defeats.
Once a few rejections roll in, they will stop being such a big deal.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Yoshua Bengio’s Deep Thoughts on Deep Thinking”

One of the things that surprised me when researching Deep Work was how rare it was to find examples of smart people talking coherently about the process of effective thinking.
This is why I was pleased when a reader recently pointed me toward a video interview with computer scientist Yoshua Bengio – one of the big names in machine learning.
“There is also something to be said about concentrationto really make big progress in science you also need times when I can be very focused and where the ideas about a problem, and different points of view, and all the elements sort of fill my mind. I’m completely filled with thisthat’s when I can be really productive.”
“It might take a really long time before you reach that state”.
The best researchers in my field of theoretical computer science, for example, tend to be those who have the drive, brain power and flexibility to read other peoples’ papers constantly to spark a new recombination or extension that advances the field – an exhausting process.
” when you can really start seeing through things and getting things to stand together and solvingnow you can extend science, now when things are solid in your mind you can move forward.
Our culture likes to emphasize eureka moments, but we often miss the hard, patient work that goes into preparing the mind to generate breakthroughs.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Transform Your Life By Transforming Your Habits”

Where you are in your life is a result of your habits.
How do you do that? Before we get into that, I want to clarify my statement: Habits change your life, but they do not guarantee success.
Because that’s what “The habits of millionaires” type of articles and books tell us.
Look, I can talk to you about the habits that have changed my life habits all day long, but that’s not helpful.
Deciding if a habit is worth it to you is critical to forming new habits.
There were many reasons I failed, one of them is that I always tried to form a million habits at the same time.
Remember: We form habits to transform our lives-to make things BETTER. Check off your habits daily.
One day, you’ll be surprised by how much your life changed by such, seemingly, small habits.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Tech’s Two Philosophies – Stratechery by Ben Thompson”

Even though Apple’s developer conference is still a few weeks away, I think it’s safe to say that the demo of Google Duplex at yesterday’s Google I/O keynote will go down as the most impressive of the tech conference season.
In Google’s view, computers help you get things done – and save you time – by doing things for you.
Zuckerberg, as so often seems to be the case with Facebook, comes across as a somewhat more fervent and definitely more creepy version of Google: not only does Facebook want to do things for you, it wants to do things its chief executive explicitly says would not be done otherwise.
The Messianic fervor that seems to have overtaken Zuckerberg in the last year simply means that Facebook has adopted a more extreme version of the same philosophy that guides Google: computers doing things for people.
Pichai, in the opening of Google’s keynote, acknowledged that “We feel a deep sense of responsibility to get this right”, but inherent in that statement is the centrality of Google generally and the direct culpability of its managers.
There is certainly an argument to be made that these two philosophies arise out of their historical context; it is no accident that Apple and Microsoft, the two “Bicycle of the mind” companies, were founded only a year apart, and for decades had broadly similar business models: sure, Microsoft licensed software, while Apple sold software-differentiated hardware, but both were and are at their core personal computer companies and, by extension, platforms.
Aggregators, on the other hand, particularly Google and Facebook, deal in information, and ads are simply another type of information.
Still, that doesn’t make the two philosophies any less real: Google and Facebook have always been predicated on doing things for the user, just as Microsoft and Apple have been built on enabling users and developers to make things completely unforeseen.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Diderot Effect: Why We Want Things We Don’t Need”

Shortly after this lucky sale, Diderot acquired a new scarlet robe.
The philosopher soon felt the urge to buy some new things to match the beauty of his robe.
The Diderot Effect states that obtaining a new possession often creates a spiral of consumption which leads you to acquire more new things.
Why We Want Things We Don’t NeedLike many others, I have fallen victim to the Diderot Effect.
I recently bought a new car and I ended up purchasing all sorts of additional things to go inside it.
After getting my shiny new car, I found myself falling into the same consumption spiral as Diderot.
Mastering the Diderot EffectThe Diderot Effect tells us that your life is only going to have more things fighting to get in it, so you need to to understand how to curate, eliminate, and focus on the things that matter.
When you upgrade to new electronics, get things that play nicely with your current pieces so you can avoid buying new chargers, adapters, or cables.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Hackers stole a casino’s database through a thermometer in the lobby fish tank”

Darktrace CEO: Hackers are increasingly targeting unprotected ‘internet of things’ devices such as air condition systems and CCTV to get into corporate networks.
In one incident, a casino was hacked through the thermometer in its lobby aquarium.
LONDON – Hackers are increasingly targeting ‘internet of things’ devices to access corporate systems – everything from CCTV cameras to air-conditioning units.
The “Internet of things” refers to devices that are hooked up to the internet to allow live streams of data to be monitored.
Nicole Eagan, the CEO of cybersecurity company Darktrace, told the WSJ CEO Council in London on Thursday: “There’s a lot of internet of things devices, everything from thermostats, refrigeration systems, HVAC systems, to people who bring in their Alexa devices into the offices. There’s just a lot of IoT. It expands the attack surface and most of this isn’t covered by traditional defenses.”
Robert Hannigan, who ran the British government’s digital spying agency GCHQ from 2014 to 2017, appeared alongside Eagan on the panel and agreed that hackers targeting internet of things devices is a growing problem for companies.
“With the internet of things producing thousands of new devices shoved onto the internet over the next few years, that’s going to be an increasing problem,” Hannigan said.
“The problem is these devices still work. The fish tank or the CCTV camera still work.”

The orginal article.

Summary of “Why trying to be too efficient will make us less efficient in the long run”

It’s an appealing vision, but there’s a downside to all this efficiency, says scholar and writer Edward Tenner, author of The Efficiency Paradox: What Big Data Can’t Do. “Trying to be ultimately efficient at all times will succeed in the short run,” he says.
“But in the long run, you would be damaging your efficiency.” Tenner isn’t a Luddite, and his book doesn’t suggest renouncing efficiency and Big Data.
In the long run, you would be damaging your efficiency.
Then you talk about “Continuous-process efficiency” versus “Platform efficiency.” What’s the difference between these two?
People in the Elizabethan times and even in the Middle Ages didn’t have the concept of efficiency we do today.
Platform efficiency is wonderful, and I’m not at all condemning it, but one of the unfortunate consequences is that it has tended to attract investment capital away from much harder things.
One of the interesting things about American culture is that even the subcultures that pretended to disdain efficiency – like Southern planters – ran on the principle of trying to squeeze as much profit as possible from enslaved labor and from the soil.
By removing so much trial and error and productive mistakes, platform efficiency can lock us into existing patterns.

The orginal article.