User Profile

I read the Finnish translation of the book by Jouni Kuurne (couldn't find that specific edition on Goodreads).

The book describes in detail how media conglomerates wield unjustifiable power over the minds of people. The book was written at a time when the Internet was still a relatively small enterprise, but still managed to foresee many of the issues we're dealing with today, regarding the entertainmentization of news, shock tactics when seeking for largest possible distribution, and the centralization of media technology.

The tone of the book is somewhat bitter, written by someone who has worked their entire life in journalism, only to see it devolve into something reserved only for tabloids back then. The things have gotten only worse since the writing of this book, which makes me wonder if the path we're on currently is any better.

The takeaway from this book is that receiving information is a deliberate act and it should be done with care and wisdom, and not rely on overtly emotional sources or only those that make us feel good. And that's something the media conglomerates have managed to weaponize against us, the entire attention economy and social media. What a sad state of things.

Wow... This must've been probably the most interesting book I've ever read.

The latter parts of the book concern more of the details of quantum science, time-relativity and entropy, which I found rather hard to follow at places, but I don't think it's a fault of the author, as the subject matter is by its very nature difficult.

I got some very important insights, especially related to understanding the nature of emptiness in Middle Way Buddhism, and realizing what impermanence and lack of intrinsic existence really mean in this context. The author uses many elaborate examples to bring the more theoretical concepts to life, making it easier to process.

The main takeaway from this book was to appreciate reason and knowledge and temper them with kindness and compassion, for we live in a painfully broken world, where supply of either seems low. The realization of how we are constantly in a flux, can help to understand the processes of both technology and humanity, bridging the gap.

An incredible journey, Ghost in the Shell is full of intrigue and action and it took me only about a week to get through with my slow pace of reading. Ghost in the Shell illuminates adventures of a secret police organization called Public Security Section 9, which is assigned on different cases, ranging from assassinations to political intrigue and infiltration. A theme most widely explored here is how the society will change when almost everyone has a "cyberbrain", which effectively connects all people together via communication media, and implications of widespread prosthetics, meaning entire bodies can be swapped at will.

As a disclaimer, I'm a huge fan of the 1995 animated film and the original Stand Alone Complex anime (2002-2005), and after diving deep into the manga version, I'd consider it an essential reading for anyone in any shape or form interested in cyberpunk or the philosophical implications of cyberization.

Ghost in the Shell synergizes quite well with the other stuff I've been reading recently (on Buddhism, quantum mechanics, societal changes upon industrial revolution...) and makes me wonder how every book I seem to pick up reminds me of something else I've been reading, talk about special interests... Might have to look into John Neumann, which was recommended in the margins of the ending of the story, just to fill in the gaps.

It was a heavy read, partly because of an unfamiliar topic, but also because towards the end I found Linkola's cynicism and misanthropic attitude a little exhausting.

On some topics Linkola is very prescient and at certain points his frustration is justified - many of the issues pointed out have been present and known since the 1960s, but nothing has been done to alleviate the problem in 60 or so years. Linkola is extremely knowledgeable on topics most closest to him, especially biology and ecology.

But then come the other topics, where he'll resort to plain demagoguery and edgelordism, like the multiple instances of praising totalitarian governments unapologically. He seems to be nostalgic for a perfect world that probably never existed as he envisions it. I don't for example think the idea that medieval feudalism was somehow better on the environment, really stands up for the scrutiny. After all, Western Europe's deforestation started during the Roman occupation and continued deep into medieval times.

Linkola has a somewhat mythological status in Finland, but I don't think he lives up to what he (or his most fervent follower cult) has set himself to be.

In conclusion, I did enjoy parts of the book, some parts of it were thought-provoking, and the rest of it reads like bad forum posts.