Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (40578)	4/23/2004 12:36:49 AM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 793955

I just ordered Stephenson's two latest. 17th century bills of exchange, yowza! Just my cup of tea. :) amazon.com Also, an edition of the original Confusion de Confusiones in the same volume as Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. amazon.com BTW, I noticed you posting from Cafe Hayek earlier. cafehayek.typepad.com The blogger is at GMU Dept. of Economics. My older son is signed up for two economics classes there this summer (Intro Micro and Intermediate Micro), and waitlisted for another (Intermediate Macro). Not to mention matrix algebra, whatever that is. Very nice to have a free market economics department within walking distance. Another GMU econ blogger: marginalrevolution.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (40578)	4/23/2004 9:48:20 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793955

Got into Stephenson a couple of months ago and can't let go. "Salon" has a great interview with him. Bless you. I keep checking his books out of the library, reading a 100 or so pages and getting bored with his overly verbose stuff. But one of his had me completely enthralled; forget which one. So I keep coming back. And he keeps turning out the large volumes. I'm skimming my way through the Bush-Saudi book, House of Bush, House of Saudi. I checked it out of the library just to see if it was a predictable conspiracy type and if so, to do a very fast read and turn it back in. So far it's not. More an overlapping interests argument with a fairly thick bit of connecting the dots. I've just started it so I can't make a recommendation. But I keep reading.