This will finish the "what do you read this summer" posts.

Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire by James Wallace and Jim Erickson is basically a Bill Gate biography up to about 1993.  It focuses mainly on Bill's interaction with computers in general and then Microsoft specifically, but it also includes not necessarily Microsoft related information about Bill.  I think it is a good source of "how did Microsoft get started" information...if you are looking for that type of info, that is.

The Interpretation of Financial Statements by Benjamin Graham and Spencer Meredith is a primer on common financial terms.  If you aren't too familiar with how financial statements work or what their line items mean, this book is a good place to start.

Richard Clarke's Against All Enemies was quite the conversation piece last year when it was released.  It is a first person account of the counter-terrorism efforts of the United States government over the last 20 years or so.  As Clarke says himself in the book, it is written form his perspective, but that aside, it provides a glimpse of where we stand and how we got to where we are.  If Clarke's account of Clinton's efforts are to be believed, it also gave me a bit of respect for him.

The Supreme Court by William Rehnquist is a detailed history of the United States Supreme Court up to the (almost) present day.  Like All the Laws but One, it is written for those without a background in the law.  It explains the history, the purpose, and the day-to-day operations of the Supreme Court.  It was a very interesting read and I am saddened that he is no longer around to write similar books in the future.

Apple Confidential 2.0 by Owen Linzmayer is a history of Apple from its founding to about 2003.  For the most part I found it very informative, though two things stood out as annoying.  First is the style of the book.  Rather than taking a time line approach, the author takes a topical approach and then does that topic chronologically.  This makes the book a bit disjointed.  For instance, if you have never heard of "Copland" (and I hadn't), you have to wait till near the end of the book to understand how it fits in the time line.  The other thing is that, though the author is critical of Apple general and Steve Jobs specifically, he often makes incorrect claims about market share, product performance, and the like.  It's not annoying Apple fan boy literature, but it isn't exactly unbiased either.  Then again, it's hard to find a book on either Apple or Microsoft that feels unbiased.

It's My Party, Too: The Battle for the Heart of the GOP and the Future of America by Christine Whitman was of interest to me, because she was the governor of New Jersey when I lived there.  The book describes Whitman's opinion on what it means to be a Republican, where the party stands right now, and where it needs to go.  It was an interesting read, though I think her logic is flawed in many cases.  One major instance of this is brushing aside issues such as gay marriage and abortion as though her position is the only logical and acceptable one.  If such things were so obvious, the issues wouldn't be hotly debated as they are.  That aside, it is an first person account of roughly the last 50 years of Republican politics.

For the last little while, I've intended to review the books I've read lately.  Of course, I was so involved with reading the next book that I never quite got around to it...until now.

The first book on my list is Shadow of the Giant by Orson Scott Card.  I made the mistake of reading Ender's Shadow a few years ago, which resulted in my getting hooked.  I subsequently read Ender's Game, Shadow of the Hegemon, and Shadow Puppets.  The long awaited Shadow of the Giant is the final book (I hope!) in the Shadow series.  It was quite the page turner for me.  The scenarios are a little contrived (as they are in the other books), but plot is more engaging.  If you've read the others, I'd certainly recommend reading this to round out the series.

Next up is The Dark Side of Camelot by Seymour Hersh.  Hersh has become a favored author of mine, which is a bit odd.  He writes, presently, for the New Yorker to which I once subscribed.  When I was a subscriber, however, I hardly read it.  Hmm.  Anyway, this is written in sort of a "tell all" biography of John F. Kennedy.  I got the impression after reading Chain of Command that Hersh was anti-Republican.  I think now that he is simply a blunt muck-raker and will point out flaws he finds in either party.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins is somewhat of an odd choice for me.  I read it, because it appeared to be a book about an insiders' view on world economic trends.  It turned out to be a not-too-thrilling auto-biography.  Perhaps I'm a victim of the economic machine that Perkins describes, so his book is lost on me.  At any rate, it wasn't too inspiring.

The late William Rehnquist's All the Laws but One is a history of US civil rights in war time.  Rehnquist takes a balanced look at the needs of the government to protect the people in time of war and at the rights of the people that government is there to protected.  It is a scholarly work but one that is suited for a common, non-lawyer audience.

Antonin Scalia's A Matter of Interpretation, however, is a work that is likely more suited for lawyers.  While much of it made sense to me, I can't help but think I missed some points due to my lack of background in the law.  The format of the book is Scalia's view on how the laws should be interpreted, followed by response by four others, followed by Scalia's counter-response.  I make note of this, because I expected this was a single author text when I got it.

J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was better than its predecessor Order of the Phoenix but still left a bit to be desired.  The plot felt contrived just as it did in Order of the Phoenix.  For instance, I couldn't help but think that Harry and Dumbledore didn't meet too often, because it would have threatened the plot flow.  In reality, however, I think they would have met together more frequently, shared more information, and accomplished much more.  This is fiction, however, so it is still a must read for those who have trudged through the first five books.

Rich Dad's Prophecy by Robert Kiyosaki is a book I picked up at an airport on a return flight from North Carolina last year.  Shortly after returning home, it settled on my bookshelf and began collecting dust.  Like other books in the Rich Dad series, it is a guide to money management.  It warns of an impending stock market crash as a result of mandatory stock sales in ERISA-based retirement accounts in the coming years as baby boomers hit retirement age.  The goal of the books isn't doom and gloom but rather awareness and preparedness.  I'm not sure that I subscribe to Robert's logic, but I recognize he's richer than I am by a long shot and is worth listening to.

Potential Revenge of the Sith spoiler alert.

Much has been made of the overt allusions between the Sith and the George W. Bush administration and Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith.  My only issue with this is that no such allusions exist.  I think it would be easier to produce evidence of Matrix Reloaded bashing albinos.

I have a hunch about the hubbub, but let me digress for a bit.  Back in high school I wrote 10 or so papers dealing with literary criticism.  I'd go and find the mythological, historical, and biblical allusions, the rhetorical devices, and so forth.  I'd then paint my opinion of the author's intent based on the allusions, devices, etc.  The one thing I want to emphasize here is that what my papers claimed and what the authors' opinions really were didn't have to match.  It was entirely possible that I was mistaken, that the overtones really were coincidence, that an editor had modified the original text, or whatever.

Back to the Sith...my thought is that Lucas, and his own words confirm this, wrote a story that follows historical precedents regarding dictatorships or warfare.  Is there a comparison between Spartacus's Crassus and Star War's Palpatine?  Absolutely.  Both were conniving politicians who subtly and violently came to power exterminating their opponents as they went.  I'm not so sure this sounds like a picture perfect W to me.  Is there a comparison between Anakin's (now Darth Vader) line "If you are not with me, you are my enemy" and Jesus Christ's line "He that is not with me is against me" (Matthew 12: 30)?  Absolutely.  Both refer to a mindset that is common in time of war (Anakin's war was political, and Christ's was spiritual).  This does parallel W's statement about the war on terror, but I think it is more likely that W was alluding to Christ's statement, so even if Lucas was alluding to Bush he was indirectly alluding to Christ.

All in all, I think that Star Wars was abstract commentary on human nature and not focused on any specific government or time period.  Certainly the ideas Lucas addressed as causes of dictatorship - pride, lust, envy, and greed - are as old as humankind and not new since W took office.

For the non-Mormon readers, I thought I'd post a small scale glossary of missionary terms that I'm likely to use.  This is certainly not exhaustive and is molded by my personal experience.  The reason I decided to post this now is that I have been cooking up a blog post for the last few days that draws on an experience from my mission.  For greater understanding of this and future posts, I thought I'd provide some definitions.

Missionary - Worthy and desirous Mormon men aged 19-25 and women 21-30 (? forgot the upper bound) can be full time missionaries.  Men's missions are for 24 months and women's for 18.  The title for a man is Elder and for a woman is Sister.  Most missions are proselytizing though humanitarian aid-only or other service-only missions exist too.  Missionaries are volunteer only and are not materially compensated for their time.  Typically, the missionary and his/her families pay for the missionary's support in the mission field.  There is also a church missionary fund that ensures all missionaries have funds for the necessities - housing, food, etc.

Mission / Mission field - this the place where a missionary works.  The mission name is a specific place but the term "mission field" is a general term.  For instance, I was a missionary in the Russia Moscow Mission, so for me Moscow, Russia and a few other nearby cities were the mission field.

President - each mission is headed by a mission president and his wife.  They are the priesthood authority for the missionaries and the top of the chain of command, so to speak.  The president's title is President and his wife's is Sister.

Assistant to President (AP) - typically, the mission president has two APs from the rank and file elders.  Their function is at the president's discretion.  Typical tasks for APs include - the top of the chain for gathering weekly statistics, training (missionary skills and language (for foreign missions)), and event organizing (conferences and other large scale meetings).

Zone Leader (ZL) - a mission is divided up into one or more zones.  Each zone has a zone leader who is similar in function to an AP but only for the scope of his zone.

District Leader (DL) - a zone is divided up into one or more districts.  Each district has a district leader who is similar in function to an AP but only for the scope of his district.

Area - a district is divided into one or more areas.  An area is a geographical location within a district where a single companionship of missionaries work.

Companionship - missionaries typically serve in pairs (though sometimes in threesomes).  A pair of elders or a pair of sisters are called a companionship.  Companionships are not mixed gender.

Trainer - when new missionary enters the field, his first companion is his trainer.  The trainer's responsibility, along with the standard duties he/she has in the area, is to train the new missionary in missionary skills and to help learn the language if it is a foreign mission.

Senior companion / Junior Companion / Co-companion - generally, the senior missionary (the one who has been in the field the longest) is designated as the senior companion while the other is the junior companion.  Senior companion is a title (like DL, ZL, or AP) and can be given to the companion with less time in the field.  If the two companions are not united in their opinion of what to do, where to go, etc., the senior makes the final call.  Some missions have co-companions or co-senior companions.  Here, there is no tie breaker vote, so to speak.

Stats - missionaries keep weekly stats on their activities.  These include metrics such as total proselytizing hours, non-proselytizing service hours, number of first time contacts, number of baptismal commitments, number of baptisms, etc.

Transfers - roughly once a month, new missionaries enter the field.  This is also the time when in the field missionaries might be assigned to new areas.  Transfers occur differently depending on the mission (more than anything how they happen is a function of the geography).  The one thing that is common is this - the assignments for companionships, areas, and leadership change during Transfers.

Office staff - the function of the mission office is dependent on the president.  Typically, the office takes care of things such as missionary apartments (when rent is due, the contracts, etc.), transfers transportation (getting to different cities or countries some missions span countries), cars (if applicable), referrals, membership records, etc.  The office staff take care of the day-to-day grunt work, so that the other missionaries can focus on proselytizing.  Office staff is often made up of two to four companionships of either elders or senior couples (that is, a husband and wife couple).

Thanks to amazon.com and the magic of ebooks, I spent most of the last day reading Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. (unlike yesterday, I now know that Da Vinci is not spelled DaVinci).  For the ten people out there who've not read it or been told what it contains, consider this a spoiler alert.

Overall, I liked the book.  It was adventurous, pseudo intellectual, and generally playful.  One of the main points, however, struck a nerve.  I speak, of course, about the sacred feminine so often referred to in the text.  First, let me state what I understand to be the author's point, then I'll state what my issues are based on that understanding.

The Priory believe in the sanctity of women, their innate ability to produce life.  They exult them, as did many religions prior to Christianity, as goddesses.  They believe that man's (the gender, not all humankind) ability to commune with Deity happens only via woman.  In short, woman is divine and man partakes of that divinity via union with woman.

The reason that I take issue with this line of thought is this - despite the numerous overtones and undertones of balance - yin / yang, male / female, black / white - humankind, the Priory perspective is not balanced.  The female is divine and the male is not.  That seems more than a little unbalanced to me.

What I would consider balanced is this - believing in the sanctity of man and woman, that woman cannot produce life without man nor can man without woman, that ultimate communion with Deity (creating life, thus becoming a creator like unto Deity) for man requires the woman and for woman requires man.  If one is divine, then so is the other.  If one is not, then neither is the other.  This is balanced.  This more correctly reflects the difference between man and woman.  Each needs the other to be whole.

This in no way is meant to disparage woman or the sacred feminine but simply to recognize that woman is only half of the equation.  Had the text reflected this as well, I think the ideas that seemed radical would have been much easier to swallow.  Then again...it's only a work of fiction, perhaps Brown was after a good thriller and not trying to be an ideologue.

I think I'll have to put up a page devoted to the books I've read / am reading.  I just finished 7 Habits of Highly Effective People this week and figured I'd read The DaVinci Code for a change of pace.  There are two points that I want to make about 7 Habits.

First, I'd say that some of the supporting arguments feel a bit contrived (perhaps that's just my skepticism), nevertheless the points are valid.  I think perhaps the most striking thing I'll remember from the book was near the beginning when discussing integrity.  The basic idea was that if you don't act with integrity, in time, everything you say or do will be viewed sceptically.  I have, arguably, a suspicious nature but for some people significantly more so than others.  There are some people I won't trust to be honest about anything unless I have at least one other source to verify the claim.

Second, it's very idealistic.  There are things that would be difficult to pull off.  Covey even acknowledges this himself.  At one point he says that if you practice this (I believe it was habit 5 seek first to understand then to be understood) others will likely feel you are trying to manipulate them.  (That's something I can well relate to, since I've heard it often against me and other missionaries.)  He recommended explaining what you were doing before doing it.  Something like - I'm trying out a recommended practice from the 7 habits...

I definitely think it was worth the time to read it.  It reminded me of another Covey book, Spiritual Roots of Human Relations, which I started reading back in high school.  One of these days I might even finish it.  :-)

I finally finished Kenneth Pollack's The Persian Puzzle today.  It is a book about US-Iranian relations.  It gives a brief look at the Iran over the last several thousand years, then focuses on the past fifty years or so.  It concludes with Pollack's advice, for lack of a better term, for US foreign policy with Iran.

One reason I'd recommend this book is that as a result of it, I have more respect for both Presidents Clinton and Bush (W) than I had before.  Regular readers of my blog know my feelings about Bush, and those who know me personally know that I feel similarly about Clinton.  I found this book to be unbiased, notwithstanding that it was written by a US citizen and non partisan.  If you're looking for a good read, check it out.

Now it's time for me to get back to 7 Habits, Code Complete, and Expert C# Business Objects...

I've been playing with Money for a few days.  Overall, I'm happy with it, but there are some annoying items.

• A good deal of text is not selectable.  I should be able to select any text (especially account info, amounts, payee names, etc.) and copy it elsewhere.
• If you select "Online Registration" from the About dialog, you can't close it without registering.  There's no "x" to close it.  There's no cancel button.  Not even alt+F4 works.
• It includes items that a common person wouldn't consider as income as income items.  I'd guess that if I make a credit card payment, that most people wouldn't consider the credit of that payment to my account as income.  I realize that it is from an accounting perspective, but I'm not interested in GAAP here.  I just want to know how much money I have coming in from work (e.g. what regular people consider income).

On the upside, they fixed a huge bug that previous version had (the last version I used was 2002).  If you have more than one account with a financial institution, Money is OK with that now.  In the past, I had to play games to make Money happy because I had two cards from one lender.