Second Group of Books I Read in 2025

Reading Period: March 23 - Present

1. History and Utopia (P), by Emil Cioran

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/455488.History_and_Utopia

2. The Conscious Mind (P), by David Chalmers

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/144960.The_Conscious_Mind

3. Elantris (A), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/68427.Elantris

4. The Hope of Elantris (A), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10852065-the-hope-of-elantris

First 10 Books I Read in 2025

 Reading Period: January 01 - March 23

1. The Holloway Guide to Equity Compensation (P), by Joshua Levy

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/48753169-the-holloway-guide-to-equity-compensation

    Simple book, very comprehensive overview of startup equity. I've been increasingly applying my financial expertise to the world of startups, and this was certainly a useful resource.

2. The Moral Circle (A), by Jeff Sebo

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/213395476-the-moral-circle

    Jeff and I have a different set of arguments regarding digital minds. His are inherently probabilistic. If there is only a one in 1,000 chance of digital consciousness, isn't the scale big enough that this issue should be one of our top issues? This thinking is fair, and entirely rational, but I tend to avoid it in my own writings. Why? Well, I think it sort of anchors the audience into thinking that digital consciousness is unlikely. In reality, we have no idea, and there don't seem to be obvious reasons that consciousness must be a biological phenomenon. 

    

    Jeff also states that "morality is a marathon, not a sprint." I think this is certainly true, and thus it is unfortunate that we may have so little time before AGI. Which means we have to get moving! One last point on the book's content: Jeff states that how we treat silicon beings during our time in power may shape how they treat us during their time in power. For a few technical reasons I think this is incorrect, and somewhat of an unfortunate anthropomorphization. To expand on this, I mean that AI alignment is either going to work or it won't, and misaligned AI are unlikely to "punish" humans who treated digital minds poorly, any more than they are to "reward" humans who are emphatic towards digital minds. For this to happen would require creating a form of AI that to me seems unlikely, and if we can instill that sort of empathy in AI, have we not likely solved the alignment problem? Still, there may be some interesting ways in which this claim may be correct in a roundabout way. Perhaps focusing so clearly on empathy and treating AI development with the care that would be required to develop conscious beings (instead of calculators) is really the safest path forward for everyone.

   Regardless, Jeff is an inspiration. I met him a few days before reading this book, and I would say that it is quite impressive that Jeff can stand in front of a crowd and talk about such "radical" ideas. His ability to press so far into caring about the "bots" not only keeps me going, it fueled me in the first place.

3. Venture Deals (P), by Brad Feld

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11865558-venture-deals

    Pretty incredible guidebook, filled to the brim with useful content. What matters in a term sheet? Economics and control. What's the deal with early-stage financial models? The only thing to know with certainty is that they will be wrong. Is a bridge loan a bridge to the next round? Or is it a pier that drops into the ocean? These questions, and a lot more, are all answered. The informal language is a massive benefit. For example, Brad states that "if you care about information rights for your shareholders, you are nuts. You should run a transparent organization as much as possible in the twenty-first century. If you can't commit to sending your shareholders a budget and financial statements, you shouldn't take on outside investors." Such clarity of communication is the books biggest strength, especially since the topic in general is so dense. Well worth the read, possibly multiple times if you work in the space.

4. Neural Networks and Deep Learning (P), by Michael Nielsen

 Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24582662-neural-networks-and-deep-learning

    Many instances of something seeming extremely complex, but are actually just explained by simple but powerful set of ideas. Michaels book guides us through all of these simple but powerful ideas. It is interesting to think through perceptron mathematics and gradient descent, but what I found most interesting was observing how my own mental model of neural networks changed during my reading of this book. It is hard to really start visualizing the process of backpropagation, but once you begin to, it becomes pretty strikingly straightforward. Probably the most interesting topic in the book came up late, when Michael discussed sort of the reason scale was so surprising. Occam's razor was at work in deep learning initially, when people were trying to stay small and create the most optimal solution. Turns out, more compute and more data simply make the models better, who knew? Also, the concept of universality is interesting. Basically, no matter what function we want to compute, there is a neural networks that can do the job. I'd recommend this book to anyone with even a slight interest in deep learning.

5. Langchain Crash Course (P), by Greg Lim

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59713693-gpt-3

    Not worth the read. I was interested in learning more about Langchain, but I would have been better served reading five minutes worth of online documentation instead. 

6. GPT-3, by Shubham Kublik

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59713693-gpt-3

    Given how much time I've actually spent with LLMs, this book certainly wasn't worth the read. It was essentially a basic overview of how to use the OpenAI API, circa 2022.

7. Chess Story (P), by Stefan Zweig

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59151.Chess_Story

    Damn, this was shockingly good. Not many authors can cram a moving storyline, compelling characters, and a thought-provoking ending into a book that is less than one hundred pages. Stefan more than succeeded here. The ending battle of wits between Czentovic and Dr. B. displays such raw psychological intensity that it stands with some of the best fiction. Certainly worth the read.

8. The Mom Test (P), by Rob Fitzpatrick

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/52283963-the-mom-test

    A fairly short and simple business book. The mom test: ask questions to your customer in a roundabout way that avoids false positive (“oh that’s a nice idea sweetie. I’d certainly buy a cookbook app that you made.”). The book is filled with handy tips, such as: “People know what their problems are, but they don’t know how to solve those problems” and “if they haven’t looked for ways of solving it already, they’re not going to look for (or buy) yours.” Probably only worth reading if you haven’t already read a ton of business books.

9. Bluets (P), by Maggie Nelson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6798263-bluets

    This book was certainty interesting. I was a bit thrown off by the random, sharp sexuality, but I don't believe there was much that was out of place in this book. It was an intriguing, experimental book that I'm sure many would enjoy. That being said, it was not for me. Through no fault of my own, and through no fault of Maggie, I simply didn't connect with this one. The last few sentences of the book are incredible, but I actually think it is worth otherwise skipping altogether. Here is the end:

    "I want you to know, if you ever read this, there was a time when I would rather have had you by my side than any one of these words; I would rather have had you by my side than all the blue in the world. But now you are talking as if love were a consolation. Simone Weil warned otherwise. 'Love is not consolation,' she wrote. 'It is light.' All right then, let me try to rephrase. When I was alive, I aimed to be a student not of longing but of light."

10. Managing Oneself (A), by Peter Drucker

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2477223.Managing_Oneself

    I'd skip this, read something like High Output Management instead.

Last Five Books I Read in 2024

Reading Period: May 24 - December 31

1. Discrete Mathematics and its Applications (P), by Kenneth Rosen

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1800803.Discrete_Mathematics_and_its_Applications

    In preparation for a placement exam, which if I passed I would have tested out of a Discrete Math course at the University of Chicago, I ended up reading a majority of this book. Unfortunately, the exam did not work out and I ended up having to take the course anyway, during which I re-read nine of the thirteen chapters multiple times. This meant that I did hardly any other reading over the summer, and also that I now have a pretty good handle on the topics covered in discrete mathematics. I would categorize this book as tough, but fair. The material is fairly challenging, but it is clearly an excellent introduction to the mathematics that underpin computer science. I would guess that there aren't any "better" books on the subject, but I also think it is clear that there are better ways to learn the subject than through a textbook. 

2. Situational Awareness (P), by Leopold Aschenbrenner

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/214290546-situational-awareness

    Probably the most thought-provoking book I have read in quite a few years. Leopold is clearly intelligent, and in general I share his outlook in broad strokes. I think he is too overconfident, as many, many others claim that scaling LLM architecture is not going to result in AGI. Leopold seems to think it isn't even a question. I listed to a podcast recently with Francois Chollet, the creator of Keras, who insists that LLMs struggle to generalize regardless of scaling. Leopold strongly disagrees, without proof, and claims that AGI by 2027 is the most likely scenario. Leopold claims to be in the "inner circle" of AI capability development, and he that he knows everyone of importance in the AI race, or at least is separated by no more than one mutual connection. He sees his previous investing prowess (longing NVIDIA in 2023 and shorting the market before COVID) as proof of his ability to call events, and he leans on his one-year tenure at OpenAI on their superalignment team for insider credibility. Leopold was let go by OpenAI and is now starting his own investment fund, at the ripe age of 22. He is too brash and overconfident in his writing, to a degree that I think harms his greater points. I don't trust someone who worked at an AI lab for a year when draws a straight line on a few data points and tells me that a curve is exponential, and I would guess that readers not ingrained in the same quirky social groups as Leopold won't buy many of his claims either. Personality quirks aside, what Leopold did with this book is extremely impressive.

    First off, I think he legitimately changed my opinion on a few things, especially his points about the importance of avoiding a close AI race between the US and China. Leopold states that "superintelligence is a matter of national security, and the United States must win." Also, he rightfully points out that AI research will be the first main target of automation. Once we get AGI, why waste time with any area of development in the world except AI research, if more AI research will make smarter models that have better judgement? In addition, Leopold find the idea of Silicon Valley CEOs deploying superintelligence as rightfully ridiculous, and has extremely insightful views on the competitive dynamics within geopolitics and how history will likely repeat itself. I find his views as innovative as they are terrifying, but I think he is more or less correct. He is also fearful of AI use by totalitarian regimes, as he states:

"A dictator who wields the power of superintelligence would command concentrated power unlike any we’ve ever seen. In addition to being able to impose their will on other countries, they could enshrine their rule internally. Millions of AI controlled robotic law enforcement agents could police their populace; mass surveillance would be hypercharged; dictator loyal AIs could individually assess every citizen for dissent, with advanced near-perfect lie detection rooting out any disloyalty."

    Leopold is a geopolitical realist, and he has his head firmly grounded in the history of war and competition we have seen play out over humanity's lifespan. I think perhaps the only downside of this book from a utilitarian perspective is that it could "wake up" China to the race dynamics happening, but it is probably more important that the dynamics of the new cold war be realized by those in the US early, even at this risk. What I find strange about this book is that I think Leopold might have crazy foresight. Sure, it could all be brash, youthful arrogance, but some of these ideas make almost too much sense. I am not going declare this book prophecy. But if Leopold is as smart as he thinks he is, he might as well be a prophet. 

3. The Picture of Dorian Gray (P), by Oscar Wilde

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5297.The_Picture_of_Dorian_Gray

    "To get back my youth I would do anything in the world, except take exercise, get up early, or be respectable." One of the wittiest books I have ever read, and an altogether pleasant read. Lord Henry is certainly the funniest character, who goes on frequent tirades such as the following: "men marry because they are tired; women, because they are curious; both are disappointed", and "anybody can be good in the country. There are no temptations there." Lord Henry's view on women is what you would classify today as boomer-humor, as in "women, as some witty Frenchman once put it, inspire us with the desire to do masterpieces, and always prevent us from carrying them out," and "the only way a woman can ever reform a man is by boring him so completely that he loses all possible interest in life." Lord Henry believes that only the rich and interesting have social value, as "even the cardinal virtues cannot atone for half-cold entrees." 

    Lordy Henry mentors Dorian Gray, a beautiful and empty man who says things like: "I have never searched for happiness. Who wants happiness? I have searched for pleasure." This book, overall, is half witty banter between Lord Henry and others and half Dorian Gray doing bad stuff both because of and in spite of his beauty. This book took me a while to get through despite its short length, but I think it is well worth the read if you like Oscar Wilde.

4. Number the Stars (A), by Lois Lowry

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/47281.Number_the_Stars

    A surprisingly good book, especially since it is only 137 pages. The book follows a young girl named Annemarie during the Nazi occupation of Denmark during WWII. Annemarie's family is assisting with the hiding of their Jewish neighbors and their transportation to an unoccupied Sweden, and the entire narrative is thus displayed through a 10-year old girl's perspective. I have a hard time disliking anything WWII related, and this was no exception. I learned a lot, and the subject matter was moving. I'd certainly recommend reading.

5. The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas (P), by Ursula K LeGuin

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/92625.The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas

    Incredibly good short story. It really hits on a very interesting, profound set of moral questions. Everyone should read this, perhaps multiple times. I'd like to hope that I would be the sort of person to walk away from Omelas.

First 10 Books I Read in 2024

 Reading Period: January 1 - May 24

1. The Well of Ascension (A), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/68429.The_Well_of_Ascension

    In a tragic start to my year, I read the first Brandon Sanderson book that I really did not like. Granted, I listed to the entire audiboook during an ultramarathon, and frankly I wasn't in the best mood during the 36-hour race in which I did not sleep a second. Still, I am certain that I would have disliked the book regardless. The plot was slow, the characters were not interesting, and Brandon breaks his own rule: characters should be smart and act in logical ways that don't endlessly frustrate the reader.

    Historically, many television romances with poor writing fall victim to the same tropes over and over again. The most common one that frustrates me is some easily-fixable miscommunication that is dragged out endlessly in order to create conflict between characters. Every time, this simple mis-communication could be solved with ten seconds of dialogue (example: "oh that was my cousin that you saw at my apartment! Not my ex-girlfriend! I get how you were confused, but here's a picture of her as proof). Horror genres often offend me for similar reasons. Often a main character will shoot a "bad guy" once in the stomach, and, without any checking or proof, the main character will walk away and assume that the bad guy is dead. Of course, they are never correct. Still, the worst horror-trope is when characters trust obvious villains that anyone with a single brain cell would be suspicious of. I find myself screaming a the screen, yelling "the guy literally looks exactly like a vampire! His fangs are dripping with blood!" Still, from time to time I enjoy this. Especially if the intent of the writers is to provoke such a reaction. The audience is supposed to be "in-on-it" for most horror films, expecting dumb characters who communicate horribly, make terrible decisions, and trust obviously untrustworthy people. But frankly, I expect more from Brandon Sanderson. 

    A microcosm of my dislike of this book is displayed clearly in relationship between Vin and Zane. Zane is the worst character Brandon has ever created, and this character dynamic is easily the most unbelievable and frustrating idea of his as well, for all of the lazy "trope" reasons listed above. I don't honestly have a lot to say positive about the book, except for the fact that the ending was executed well. But a good ending cannot sway my opinion of the 80% of the book that didn't resonate.

2. Never Finished (A), by David Goggins

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/63079845-never-finished

    Also tragic. Simply not a well written book, and there was no content in here that wasn't already covered in much more impactful fashion in Can't Hurt Me. Honestly, David comes off very poorly in this book, seeming like more of a braggart and injury-prone masochist than before. Unfortunately, I feel like his character display in this book makes his previous book worse and less psychologically impactful.

3. Warbreaker (A), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1268479.Warbreaker

    Thank the God Emperor! An actually great book, and Brandon Sanderson back in true form! Words cannot express how happy I am to read a very solid addition to the Cosmere, especially after my last read. The worldbuilding is well executed, the characters are engaging, and everyone acts logically! Sure, the characters make pretty grave mistakes that are hammed up a bit, but these mistakes are in character and certainly more interesting than frustrating. The romance is great, the mystery is intriguing, and man do I love Lightsong the Bold. Excited for the next read.

4. The Coming Wave (A), by Mustafa Suleyman

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/90590134-the-coming-wave

    Awesome book. My central disagreement is regarding Mustafa's insistence that the superintelligence-related risks of AI are overdone and not really worth worrying about. Also, he is fairly dismissive of AI consciousness and general alignment issues, and he is much more focused on near-term risks and the eventual power struggle that will cloud AI development. I strongly agree with the magnitude of AI progress that Mustafa insists will happen. He claims, "over the next ten years, AI will be the greatest force amplifier in history." Still, he sort of sees a path towards decentralization, as many of the current AI products (such as Chat GPT) are in the hands of millions of users. According to Mustafa, everyone has access to the best smart phones in the world, and everyone has access to the best chatbots. He extrapolates from here that this trend will continue, and people will continue to maintain somewhat equal access to the smartest AIs. This, in my opinion, is  clearly wrong. The idea that everyone will have an AGI in their pocket, and thus small actors will be able to attack the state with cyberattacks and drones, is in my opinion the wrong issue to think about. In reality, all roads lead to centralization, as there are winner-take-all dynamics at play with whoever controls the smartest AIs.

    Let's take a look at China. If Alibaba developed ASI, and it was swiftly controlled by the CCP, it is hard to see how individuals will maintain access to AIs that in any way rival the ASI. If the CCP is willing to curb the human rights of millions of people, why would they not do the same for billions? Or trillions? Mustafa seems to think AI progress is going to be fairly linear, in that biomedical advances and other technologies will play a huge role in this "coming wave." As Yudkowsky says, AI is not the "new electricity," its something smarter than you. In my opinion, AI is really the only relevant driving force of the future, all of Mustafa's other points pale in comparison to anything that gets past the point of AGI.

5. The Yellow Wallpaper (A), by Charlotte Perkins Gilman

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/286957.The_Yellow_Wall_Paper

    Interesting read, although very short. I wanted to kickstart my reading again after taking a lot of time off for studying, and this was a good window back into good fiction.

6. A Guide to Starting Your Hedge Fund (P), by Erik Serrano Berntsen

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25180966-a-guide-to-starting-your-hedge-fund

    Not really that great of a book for many reasons. This book is a technical guide to starting a hedge fund, complete with detailed legal instructions and various marketing/management guidelines. Starting a hedge fund is basically the same as starting a mutual fund company, and there is a huge overlap between the two (performance attributions, marketing material, legal structure). The main difference is simply the strategy implemented, and the way in which risk is measured. As I figured, the greatest obstacle is fundraising, a part of the business most would love to avoid.

7. The War on the West (A), by Douglass Murray

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58838847-the-war-on-the-west

    Eh, really not worth the read. Douglass sets out to defend the West's honor and crush the silly liberal opposition to Western history, culture, and progress. I think he makes a lot of valid points, but his argument style is needlessly confrontational in order to steer off the reader's boredom. He also has some bad arguments. For example, in his discussions of BLM and hate crimes, he lists out an extensive number of anecdotes of hate crimes that were faked. This is to point out that racism is overblown and that white liberals suck, which may or may not be true. But Douglass doesn't have the numbers and/or evidence to back any of this up. His anecdote-based-argument is destroyed by a single example, such as the racist attack in Charlottesville where a white supremist drove a car through a crowd, killing someone. All it takes is a few of these sort of examples and Douglass's credibility evaporates. He just needs better arguments or a more interesting topic.

8. The Hero of Ages (A), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2767793-the-hero-of-ages

    Honestly, not my favorite Sanderson novel but miles better than the previous book in the series (The Well of Ascension). The end nicely wrapped up the Mistborn series, a series that I found pretty lackluster start of finish. Still, this endpoint to the trilogy was certainly the best in the series, and there are a few moments that stick out as really cool. The action was great, and some of the bad plot points were wrapped up in the previous novel, so we didn't have to sit through any more of the horrors of the Vin and Zane romance. 

9. The Secret History (P), by Donna Tart

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29044.The_Secret_History

    Donna is a very good writer. Still, this book is entirely too long for what it was. I read the first 250 pages about a year ago, and for the life of me could not bare to attempt the next 250 pages. I finally mustered up the courage to power through, and after all was said and done I felt pretty underwhelmed. The book follows a group of college students who study classic literature and language under the wing of a professor named Julian. Julian says things like "I'll tell you what the classics are. Wars and homos." and "Beauty is rarely soft or consolatory. Quite the contrary. Genuine beauty is always quite alarming." The students are all really weird, and from an outsiders perspective I was hoping the whole time that  they all got hit by a bus. The drama is sort of interesting, I just wished the book was way more fast paced. There are some good throwaway lines I liked a lot, such as "Love doesn't conquer everything. And whoever thinks it does is a fool." But overall I just don't think this was that good of a story, and I wouldn't recommend the book.

10. When Breath Becomes Air (P), by Paul Kalanithi

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25899336-when-breath-becomes-air

    Similar to The Last Lecture, this book follows a man who has a terminal illness and decides to chronicle his life and his thoughts on life and death before he passes away. Paul is a decent writer and his story is moving, but I wish he had a more completed book that had more philosophical musings. The prologue, for example, is excellent. The next part of the book chronicles his life and career as a doctor, and the end section is meant to chronicle Paul's diagnosis and his outlook moments from death. Unfortunately, I don't think he really had time to write anything super insightful at the end, and the book is thus mostly full of tales of Paul's life as a doctor (which are interesting and made me confident that I would never enjoy anything in the medical field). Maybe I demand too much from the terminally ill, but I think there are many ways these sorts of books could be made more powerful and thought-provoking.

Eleventh 10 Books I Read in 2023

Reading Period: December 1 - December 31

1. Number Go Up (A), by Zeke Faux

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/123276708-number-go-up

    Interesting read, I liked it better than Going Infinite for sure. I think it humanized SBF in a way that made me really feel for him, despite Zeke's massively pessimistic view on crypto. Maybe I just relate more to cynics, but I really enjoyed the way that Zeke blatantly dunked on blockchain technology at every opportunity. Zeke portrays the cryptocurrency space as way more toxic, fraudulent, and hilarious than I remember, and his quick jabs at the weird and eccentric hustlers at places like Tether made this an entertaining read. Still, I think his bias went too far, to the point of being uninformed. He repeats over and over again that this technology is untraceable, which is laughably far from the truth especially in 2023. He makes a good point when he digs into how completely the promise of crypto has failed the unbanked, poverty-stricken people of the world, but I think he reads too much into how crypto has paved a path for evil. Even in a crypto-less world, there are still going to be compounds where individuals are tricked into slave labor and forced to scam others. Maybe crypto makes scamming marginally easier, but the dark world of blackmail and forced labor would thrive regardless.

    Zeke is a good journalist. He presents himself as the reasonable man in a world full of weirdos, which at some level he is (especially in the midst of a Bitcoin conference). But I think he plays this hand too much, to the point where it harms the reading experience. Still worth the read, as long as you don't take Zeke as seriously as he takes himself.

2. The Master and Margarita (A), by Mikhail Bulgakov

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/117833.The_Master_and_Margarita

    Thoroughly entertaining book. I really enjoyed exploring Mikhail's hilarious and thought-provoking Russian world of devils and chaos. There was a lot going on and many characters, from Pontius Pilate, to Margarita the witch, to Satan, and it was a bit hard for me to keep track of it all. I probably missed some satirical references and Russian-specific humor, but overall enjoyed the book a lot.

3. The Sunlit Man (P), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/60531420-the-sunlit-man

    As I say every time, the man does not miss. Great characters, great worldbuilding, fantastic story. Just another great addition to the cosmere.

4. Sapiens (A), by Yuval Noah Harari

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23692271-sapiens

    I tried reading this book a few times and finally just crushed the audiobook during one of my long weekend runs. This was a pretty solid book, and I was pleasantly surprised by Yuval's very objective, scientific, and nihilistic outlook on humanity. The lens he uses to look at the world is extremely interesting, and I'm really glad to have read the book. Some of his arguments are purposefully biased, but I don't think that detracts too much from the book. Yuval is trying to be thought-provoking, and in that he succeeds.

5. Existentialism is a Humanism (P), by Jean-Paul Satre

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51985.Existentialism_is_a_Humanism

    This was certainly interesting. Jean-Paul is an existentialist. He believes that there is no God, and thus "everything is permissible." He believes this makes humans free, as we are no bound by some great "causality" that determines our lives, and our circumstances cannot be blamed for our lives as a result. So, stop hiding behind your excuses, and write that book. Because history and the world will remember that regardless of your background, you not doing something just results in not doing something. A life where you don't take advantage of this existential freedom is one of wasted potential.

 

   "For existentialists there is no love other than the deeds of love; no potential for love other than that which is manifested in loving. There is no genius other than hat which is expressed in works of art; the genius of Proust resides in the totality of his works; the genius of Racine is found in the series of his tragedies, outside of which there is nothing. Why should we attribute to Racine the ability to write yet another tragedy when that's precisely what he did not do? In life, a man commits himself and draws his own portrait, outside of which there is nothing."

    I don't really agree with Jean-Paul in a lot of ways. I feel like the beauty of a nihilistic outlook is really only displayed in the works of Emil Cioran, and everyone else (Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Satre) kind of takes a wimpy way out. There is something badass about saying that nothing matters and everything is permissible, and then refusing to try to draw some form of "meaningful" conclusion about it. Regardless, when reading this I didn't really understand Jean-Paul's take on life and freedom. This example is not his argument, but I don't like when philosophers say things like "only once we recognize that there are no rules can we truly be free." Either everything is predetermined and humans have no agency, or not. I don't really see an in-between, and I don't think being "clued-in" to some philosophical ideas changes your objective ability to navigate life in a now "meaningful" way. I wish these writings went a bit deeper, but I at least have an idea of how Jean-Paul thinks. And I just love existential philosophy, so I'll take all that I can get.

6. The Devil Finds Work (A), by James Baldwin

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/743831.The_Devil_Finds_Work

    James is an incredible writer, and there are certainly flashes of brilliance in this book. However, the essays are for the most part commenting on books and movies that I have not seen, and thus I am quite sure I missed the context of a lot of them. Probably one of James's least accessible works.

7. Parkinson's Law (P), by Cyril Parkinson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1448236.Parkinson_s_Law

    Parkinson's law is the observation that the allotted time given to a task is precisely the time it takes to complete the task. This mostly relates to government bureaucracy, as officials want subordinates who are incompetent (and thus not a threat), and officials enjoy making work for other officials. This book is a satire, a comedic journey through a variety of topics such as government committees, retirement, and cocktail parties. Cyril uses overly complex mathematical equations to state how to navigate the bizarre world we live in, and his dry humor and wit makes for an entertaining read. The book is pretty slow at points, but if you are at a dead-end job or liked Bullshit Jobs, this is a decent read.

“The defect in the intelligence test is that high marks are gained by those who subsequently prove to be practically illiterate.”

8. Less Than Zero (P), by Bret Easton Ellis

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9915.Less_Than_Zero

    The Los Angeles counterpart to the New York of Bright Lights, Big City. Full of empty, vapid, morally deficient characters who don't do a whole lot. The book is a slow-moving chronicle of rich eighteen year-olds who turn to drugs, sex, and kidnapping and torture, not to feel something, but rather because their existence is meaningless and so is life. Warning: this book has some very, very messed up scenes. The worst I have read. But I think they added to the theme. This book isn't perfect, but it is very hard to put down and very thought provoking.

    The book opens with the line "people are afraid to merge on the freeways in Los Angeles." Towards the end of the book, the narrator says: 

"Before I left, a woman had her throat slit and was thrown from a moving car in Venice; a series of fires raged out of control in Chatsworth, the work of an arsonist; a man in Encino killed his wife and two children. Four teenagers, none of whom I knew, died in a car accident on Pacific Coast Highway. Muriel was readmitted to Cedars-Sinai. A guy, nicknamed Conan, killed himself at a fraternity party in U.C.L.A."

    This theme of the book is shown in the contrast between these statements. The world is full of horrible things: violence, rape, and death. Life is scary, and terrifying events surround us at all times. Despite all the tragedy and terror that permeate the lives of others, we choose to ignore most of it in order to function. Thus, what really scares most people is something small and stupid like merging onto a highway. The narrator says that "it's less painful if I don't care." He lives a meaningless life of total apathy and cowardice, just like all the other characters. 

    I saw this book as a pretty interesting criticism of LA culture. One character is told "you're a beautiful boy and that's all that matters," and then later, the narrator is told "you're a beautiful boy, Clay, but that's about it." The characters are all materialistic and empty, and they just disappear into whatever hedonistic desires they fancy at any moment. I'm sort of really into these 1980's novels tied to a particular city. They resonate with me for some reason, so I'm going to look for more.

9. Post Office (P), by Charles Bukowski

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40409718-post-office

    Sort of an interesting read, I can't tell if  I liked it or not. The main character is the author's alter ego, Hank. The story is a bit motivating, as I was disgusted by Hank and his life. Hank's meaningless job is displayed as especially frustrating. The narrator says: "well, as the boys said, you had to work somewhere. So they accepted what there was. This was the wisdom of the slave." Part of the triumph of the book is that Hank breaks out of the cycle, finally quitting his monotone job where he wasted his life. Overall, I have pretty mixed emotions. I may read a few more of Charles's books to fully form an opinion.

10. Ethan Frome (P), by Edith Wharton

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5246.Ethan_Frome

    Sort of a hilarious way to end my reading year. This book is considered a classic, but it is also widely hated. The main character is an idiot, a sort of weak, cowardly individual who is in love with his wife's cousin. The book's ending is pretty nonsensical and certainly not my favorite, but I overall had a soft spot for the story. It's good, not great, and definitely a conversation starter. 

Tenth 10 Books I Read in 2023

Reading Period: October 23 - November 30

1. Training Essentials for Ultrarunning (A), by Jason Koop

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27040062-training-essentials-for-ultrarunning

    Solid overview of ultramarathon training tips. Jason is clearly an expert in the field, and I think he is probably right in that runners should see ultrarunning in the same light as they view any other sport. Sure, the numbers are big and scary, but athletes still need to be rigorous planners and focus heavily on recovery. I plan to use some of Jason's advice in my upcoming endeavors, as I am sure it will be useful.

2. The Haunting of Hill House (A), by Shirley Jackson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/89717.The_Haunting_of_Hill_House

    After watching the television series, I decided to give the book a try. Overall, I think it was pretty much what I expected. Not the scariest story that I've ever read, but there were some creepy moments that probably made it worth the read. The horror genre as a whole has probably progressed in a much more existential and violent fashion since this book was published, so it's possible that this book was worth all the hype at the time.

3. Glock (A), by Paul Barrett

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12254079-glock

    Well, if you are interested in this history of the Glock, this book is for you. I'm sort of navigating my way through this strange genre of firearm history, and this was a pretty solid addition. The book is very detailed and well researched, but I would skip unless you like this particular niche.

4. The Gun (A), by C.J. Chivers

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7775851-the-gun

    Very intriguing book that chronicles the making of the first automatic firearms and follows through to the impact of small arms in modern day conflicts. The AK-47 is the real standout of the book, with probably half of the book chronicling the history and impact of the AK. This book is just as niche as Glock, but I found the knowledge way more applicable and interesting. Probably my last book about guns, although I did enjoy this short detour.

5. Between Two Fires (A), by Christopher Buehlman

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13543121-between-two-fires

    Metal. That is the best word I can think of describes this book. Angels and demons fight over the fate of humanity, while a knight and a little girl cross the plague-ridden countryside on a quest to turn the tide of the war. It's a little strange to see Christian mythology transformed in such a way, and there are certainly horrifying, dark scenes that I will probably remember for a long time. Do not read if you are very Christian or easily offended. If you are ready for some twisted, medieval ass-kicking, I suggest you take the day off, turn up the death metal on your stereo, and strap in.

6. Going Infinite (A), by Michael Lewis

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149105520-going-infinite

    I sort of agree with the critics that Michael missed the point here. First off, it is not clear to me at any point in the book that Sam Bankman-Fried, known as SBF, is intelligent. Sure, he was apparently a somewhat successful trader at Jane Street (despite posting a $300 million loss), but what separates him from another weird, autistic oddball who goes to MIT and gets an entry level job quant trading? SBF being a sour, pessimistic weirdo who sleeps on a bean bag chair does not make him a genius, regardless of the temporary dollars to his name (which appear to have been gained through a delicate mix of luck and fraud). In terms of being a tycoon, what exactly was so great about his crypto strategy or his business execution? After picking up pennies through arbitrage, it seems that the inefficiencies of the crypto market largely disappeared and Alameda research struggled immensely. FTX was clearly a failed company, a point that Michael totally missed. The lack of accounting, compliance, and safety infrastructure at such a company is more than incompetence, it is a straight up unethical breach of fiduciary duty. Sure, people gave him money. They did this despite him playing video games all day (instead of doing anything actually useful to protect his investors), but getting away with this does not make him smart, it just means that VC's are dumb.

    I am an effective altruist. I go to conferences, I've met a lot of people in the space, and thinking about EA topics takes up an astounding amount of my time. I've had lengthy conversations with Jane Street employees who have met Sam, and I've met amazing individuals who actually have made an awesome impact on the world. Frankly, it's a community that constantly inspires me and motivates me to be a better person.

    Sam, all things considered, was probably the least effective altruist that has ever existed. In addition to severely harming the movement, he was very clearly not "effective" at prioritizing or doing a simple "expected value" calculation, despite Michael's constant insistence that SBF only thought in these terms. The sheer amount of money spent on ridiculous, unplanned real estate alone, money that could have saved many lives, points to this fact. The idea that FTX should not have a robust and complete accounting system is far from "effective" or "intelligent." The thought that Sam somehow did not play an instrumental part in stealing customer funds to try to double down on getting back in the green on trading profits, shows very clearly that he was more than just naïve. Personally, I am of the opinion that Sam was a known liar and scam artist who contributed great harm to society. Maybe his justification was actually to one day (but when? Like seriously when was he going to do all of the good?) donate his empire, but as Michael points out, there were clearly ways he could have done so (Alameda borrowing, risk controls, etc.) without leaving himself exposed to such incredible downside risk. 

    Risk management is probably the most important part of being a good trader. Clearly, SBF will go down in history as one of the worst, despite a totally stacked deck. I am seriously astounded that Alameda lost so much money despite a scorching hot bull market in where SBF could sell vaporware and borrow infinite money from customers. 

    Overall, I don't think that this book was particularly good. It was clearly rushed, with the first half written before the scandal and the second half written in a half-baked attempt to bring the story to the present day. I would have enjoyed a much deeper conversation on the fiduciary duty that a business owner has to his or her clients, a discussion of how exactly SBF fit into the EA narrative, and a more complex look into where the client money actually went (instead of Michael's halfhearted accounting). Oh well, maybe another book will do the story justice.

7. Shadows for Silence in the Forests of Hell (P), by Brandon Sanderson

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25072517-shadows-for-silence-in-the-forests-of-hell

    Not my favorite Brandon Sanderson book, but certainly not bad. A lot more disturbing than his other books, and the horror element really threw me for a loop. I think the story and characters were still pretty good, but I don't think it's really comparable to his other books or novellas. The Emperor's Soul is still his best novella by a pretty wide margin.

8. Utilitarianism (P), by John Stuart Mill

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/584637.Utilitarianism

    Pretty interesting read, especially given my Effective Altruist bent. John states the utilitarian line: good things promote happiness and bad things promote the opposite of happiness. Then, he digs in much deeper and makes some important contributions to the philosophy. For the most part, this book is John explaining how consequentialism is the backbone of most moral philosophies. He states that being virtuous has a strong utilitarian backing and explanation, but the utilitarian position simply takes it one step further and states that there are important things besides virtue. I've always felt that utilitarianism and individual liberty were dissimilar, and I felt that my personal "gluing" of them together required some stroke of brilliance in order to avoid cognitive dissonance. Well, turns out John is sort of a legend in both camps and a staunch defender of both.

    John states "to have a right, then, is I conceive, to have something which society ought to defend me in the possession of. If the objector goes on to ask why it ought, I can give him no other reason than general utility." His point is that without individual rights, the human experience cannot possibly be one of happiness and flourishing. If we can be deprived of our happiness and freedom at any moment, what is it worth? John states that individual rights are a "security no human being can possibly do without; on it we depend for all our immunity from evil". Basically, a world where everyone uses their own personal utilitarian calculus and tramples over each other to reach the "greater good" is a horrifying place, and the optimal society is likely one that champions individual rights and freedoms, but does so in the name of the greater good. What irony! 

    Probably my favorite contribution of John to utilitarianism is his distinction between beings with different mental faculties. He says that "a being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and is certainly accessible to it at more points, than one of an inferior type, but in spite of these liabilities, he can never really wish to sink into what he fells to be a lower grade of existence." The better wording of this is as follows: "it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is because they only know their  own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides."

    I think most Effective Altruists choose to ignore this to too large of a degree. It is clear to me that there is some sort of intrinsic "utility" to higher level forms of thinking. Call this what you want, elegance, beauty, artistic brilliance, deep romance, etc., but some form of "intelligence" tips the calculation between happy pig and sad human. "Happiness" as a measure and even "well-being" are sort of over-rated, in my opinion, and I wish I had a greater read on how to calculate that missing part of the equation. We, as humans, know this intrinsically. Sure, we can shut off all of our curiosity and inject Soma into our veins 24/7, but some part of that is convinced that this world would be suboptimal. For others, but for us as well. Figuring out why is the essential struggle of the utilitarian movement. 

    

    John states that "next to selfishness, the principal cause which makes life unsatisfactory, is want of mental cultivation." He claims that our inability to satisfy our curiosity and fill in our gaps of knowledge leads to a sort of mental unhappiness. I found this really relevant to my life, as I definitely have chosen to take the trade of thinking and stressing about events outside my control (AI alignment, nuclear war, other EA stuff) quite constantly, instead of just chilling out and enjoying my time with video games and fiction books. Still, I don't regret this trade, and I don't think I'll ever fall onto the side of relaxation and bliss. Happiness, in my opinion, is a silly target to have. I feel like I would live another wasteful life if I didn't try to do a lot of good with the one life I have, regardless if I could have been "happier" otherwise. Thinking about the hardest and most distressing topics is something I probably do too much of, but I don't see another path forward. We recognize we could maybe be happier if we were ignorant, but choose not to, for the benefit of others. That is the true struggle, and the true beauty, of being a utilitarian.

9. The Most Dangerous Game (P), by Richard Connell

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/157076.The_Most_Dangerous_Game

    Pretty short book, detailing a stranded sailor who is hunted by a murderous Russian on a deserted island. Better than I expected, and worth the hour or less read for sure.

10. Nothing Personal (A), by James Baldwin

    I really like James's writing. This is his shortest book, and my main problem was actually more related to the reader of the audiobook than anything else. The narrator talked at length about how James's writing relates to modern events like the election of Trump and white supremacy. Which is fine, it's just not really what I signed up to listen to. I'd rather have stuck to the nuanced and elegant takes that James delivers.

Ninth 10 Books I Read in 2023

 Reading Period: October 2 - October 22

1. Notes from Underground (A), by Fyodor Dostoevsky

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/49455.Notes_from_Underground

    Right up my alley, that's for sure. Still, it is hard to judge this novel without having a better understanding of the entirety of Fyodor's work. While this book was great, and I loved the philosophical and self-reflective content, it is certainly not enough to cull my appetite. After getting a taste of what Fyodor is able to do, I'll certainly seek out more. Maybe then my thoughts, outside of "wow I love this," will become clearer.

2. As I Lay Dying (A), by William Faulkner

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/77013.As_I_Lay_Dying

    Not for me. I'm sure there are some people who love this sort of stream of consciousness writing style and rugged "realist" plot. For me, it all felt overdone, boring, and tacky. I'd rank this as one of my least enjoyable reads, probably in the bottom two or three books I've read in my life.

3. The Pearl (A), by John Steinbeck

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5308.The_Pearl

    Honestly, I thoroughly enjoyed this book. The plot was pretty simple and there's not really a complex lesson to take away, but the writing quality was solid. John is pretty talented, and I figure I should tackle his better known works before the end of the year is up.

4. The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict (A), by Martin Bunton

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17070375-the-palestinian-israeli-conflict

    Given my immense level of ignorance about one of the world's most complicated and distressing issue, I figured I'd start small with this audiobook by Martin. Now, I feel much more informed about the historical context of the Israel/Palestine conflict, but I am no more resolved on the solution. Recent tragic events in Israel have brought this conflict to the forefront of world news, so I will likely be diving deeper into my thoughts over the coming months.

5. On Liberty (P), by John Stuart Mill

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/385228.On_Liberty

    Thoroughly interesting read. John discusses the struggle between liberty and authority. He states that the "will of the people" is a synonym for "will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people," and that oppression of minority opinion by this group must be avoided. Society itself can be oppressive, imposing rules and practices that can infringe on individual rights. Thus, "there needs protection against the tyranny of prevailing opinion and feeling." This is a really good argument against aggressive law making, and in favor of laws that blanket protect individual rights. The will of the majority of the current generation should not dictate the freedom of future generations!

    John is very motivating. He claims that the great renaissances in art and science have one thing in common: they defy authority. They push boundaries, not only cultural and societal, but also religious and moral. It's a waste to refuse to follow your independent, innovative thoughts just because other people might disapprove. Conformity, according to John, can shove it. In our world, the main question people ask is: what have other people in my position done? And they use that answer to guide their lives. What a waste!

    There are a few other points I'd like to mention. First, John states that "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." If people have sound minds, which can be persuaded and changed, you have no right to force them into anything. Second, a lot of our current views (this was written in 1859) are silly. In some court systems, jurymen who refuse to profess a belief in God are barred from testifying, because some are convinced that atheists are liars. John rightfully points out that this is self-defeating, as you are left with the atheists who are actually willing to lie, and exclude the honest ones. Somewhat randomly, John has some interesting quotes on Christianity. I'll end with these, but not first without reiterating that this was an extremely insightful book.

"Christian morality (so called) has all the characters of a reaction; it is, in great part, a protest against Paganism. Its ideal is negative rather than positive; passive rather than active; Innocence rather than Nobleness; Abstinence from Evil, rather than energetic Pursuit of Good: in its precepts (as has been well said) "thou shalt not" predominates unduly over "thou shalt.""

"All Christians believe that the blessed are the poor and humble, and those who are ill-used by the world; that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven; that they should judge not, lest they be judged; that they should swear not at all; that they should love their neighbor as themselves; that if one take their cloak, they should give him their coat also; that they should take no thought for the morrow; that if they would be perfect, they should sell all that they have and give it to the poor. They are not insincere when they say that they believe these things. They do believe them, as people believe what they have always heard lauded and never discussed. But in the sense of that living belief which regulates conduct, they believe these doctrines just up to the point to which it is usual to act upon them. The doctrines in their integrity are serviceable to pelt adversaries with; and it is understood that they are to be put forward (when possible) as the reasons for whatever people do that they think laudable. But any one who reminded them that the maxims require an infinity of things which they never even think of doing would gain nothing but to be classed among those very unpopular characters who affect to be better than other people. The doctrines have no hold on ordinary believers—are not a power in their minds. They have an habitual respect for the sound of them, but no feeling which spreads from the words to the things signified, and forces the mind to take them in, and make them conform to the formula. Whenever conduct is concerned, they look round for Mr. A and B to direct them how far to go in obeying Christ."

6. The Old Man and the Sea (A), by Ernest Hemingway

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2165.The_Old_Man_and_the_Sea

    Name a more iconic duo than a man and his fish. You can't. Overall, I enjoyed this book. I saw the deeper meaning as the struggle between life and death, and the futility of it all. Being able to draw my own conclusions, and not have to take a literature exam after, probably led to me liking this book far more than the general public.

7. American Gun: A History of the U.S. in Ten Firearms (A), by Chris Kyle

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16248264-american-gun

    Some people I work with love history, especially the history of American firearms. I figured I'd venture out from a point of complete ignorance, to at least knowing why the M1 Garand was such a significant rifle and what exactly a 1911 is. This book allowed me to accomplish this, but I don't think it was particularly good in any other sense.

8. Israel: A Concise History of a Nation Reborn (A), by Daniel Gordis

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28693693-israel

    This book was a supremely good overview of the history of Israel. I felt that Daniel did a very good job focusing on the political conditions relevant to the creation of Israel and the subsequent military and economic conditions that led to Israel's survival in the region. I think that Daniel overstepped a bit, specifically in his desire to include random tidbits of Israeli movies, music, and art into his story. These injections felt forced and irrelevant, and I don't think added any truly useful information. Also, Daniel is a passionate defender of Israeli, and his bias shows clearly. His takes may very well be justified, but it is hard to not acknowledge that you a reading a very slanted view of Israeli history.

9. Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS (A), by Joby Warrick

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25241317-black-flags

    Incredibly interesting read. The most terrifying terrorist organization of the past century was not created in a vacuum. The specific events leading to the formation of ISIS, specifically the influence of US intervention in Iraq and the fallout from the Syrian war, were very fascinating. I found it interesting that the sheer brutality of ISIS and its terror attacks were a strong contributor to its rapid rise (radical Islamists bent on volunteering), but also led directly to its downfall. Carrying out terror attacks on Muslims and embracing true brutality gave the West and its allies moral license to destroy ISIS at any cost, which thanks be to god they did. Not a controversial take, but I really, really do not like terrorism.

10. The Sense of an Ending (A), by Julian Barnes

Link: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10746542-the-sense-of-an-ending

    Wasted potential. The beginning of the book was so interesting and engaging, but in the end the book fell flat. The confusing and non-reliable narrating frustrated me, but what was more frustrating was the lack of closure. I looked up different interpretations of the ending, and each one of them felt cheap and half-baked.