>On Aug 25, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> > And isn't it more fun to praise _As I Lay Dying_ than to proclaim its
> > inferiority to War and Peace.
>
>I would agree with this, but it's really fun flaming a book that sucks.
>
>Doug
This pan cracked me up on a couple levels:
From: Rob Slade Sent: 12 September 2002 04:46 Subject: [techbooks] REVIEW: "Pearl Harbor Dot Com", Winn Schwartau
Dear Winn,
Thank you for the copy of "Pearl Harbor Dot Com." In recognition of this book's demonstration of your deep personal commitment to recycling (and at least you admit that this story started life as "Terminal Compromise": many don't) I was going to reprint my original review, but I suppose that wouldn't be fair to anyone.
You have tightened up the writing considerably. With age, and a few more books under the belt, comes grammar, eh?) However, I still note "refuse" for "refuge," a semicolon for "that," "hesitancy" for "hesitation," and a whole lot of redundancy. And what is with your fetish for "Glen Fetich"?
Your characters are a little more interesting and consistent, although Miles Foster (and most of the other technical people) still seem to be geek wish fulfillment.
The plot has more tension, but it is still *way* too convoluted. You've got a whole shoal of red herrings (and you know what they say about old fish after a while) and a ripped-out wiring closet full of loose ends.
Even disregarding a computer system that will crack Blowfish and AES in seconds, and the wonderful, mythical lethal virtual reality feedback bug, I still have some technical bones to pick with you. Why does a power outage shut down a battery operated radio? Carbon dioxide does not suck oxygen out of the air. And my son-in-law is a pilot on that type of aircraft, and has had power failures at exactly that point in the flight (the latest due to a lightning strike). My grandchildren aren't orphans yet.
I couldn't ignore your "virus" now, could I? In having it burn out a printer port, were you trying to resurrect the old "Desert Storm virus" canard? I recognized the old timing based video burnout trick and the somewhat debated issue of excessive diskette read head travel (neither was ever used in a virus). But, for crying out loud, if you sold three hundred million "infected" programs, why would you need a virus? And if you distributed that many copies of malware, you think nobody would notice? (Yes, OK, "Windows." Partial point to you. But people are finding bugs in it every day.)
I agree with your basic point: the general public should be more aware of the weaknesses in the technology that controls so much of modern life. But you don't strengthen your argument by making enough mistakes that it looks like you don't understand it either.
copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993, 2002 BKPRHRDC.RVW 20020628