hugo@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA (Peter Su) (04/21/85)
I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. Pete -- --- Peter Su ARPA: hugo@cmu-cs-gandalf.arpa UUCP: ??? ---
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (04/24/85)
In article <262@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA> hugo@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA (Peter Su) writes: >I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I >have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if >possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. Try Moe's. -- Richard Mateosian {allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) (04/27/85)
> I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I > have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if > possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. > > --- Peter Su > > ARPA: hugo@cmu-cs-gandalf.arpa I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. I agree that its the sort of book you'd rather have in hard than soft-bound, but two years after reading it, I'm not sure I'd agree that it's all that "wonderful". For one thing, it's harder reading than many college textbooks, and for another, it struck me that LOTS and LOTS of what he was trying to say was just a bunch of fluff and trying too hard for effect. -- Gary Benson * MS 232E John Fluke Mfg Co Inc * POBox C9090 Everett WA USA 98206 -_-_-_-_-_ {ihnp4!uw-beaver} {decvax!microsoft} {allegra} !fluke!inc -_-_-_-_- This area reserved for line-eater output [ ] Thank you.
hopp@nbs-amrf.UUCP (Ted Hopp) (04/28/85)
> > I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I > > have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if > > possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. > I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. I bought a hardcover version at B. Dalton about a year after it came out. I don't know if it is still being published in a hardcover edition. > I agree that its the sort of book you'd rather have in hard than soft-bound, > but two years after reading it, I'm not sure I'd agree that it's all that > "wonderful". For one thing, it's harder reading than many college > textbooks, and for another, it struck me that LOTS and LOTS of what he was > trying to say was just a bunch of fluff and trying too hard for effect. I agree. It is very difficult reading. (Perhaps that is why it got such good reviews :-).) Also, it struck me as being "too cute". For instance, too many of the examples of recursion (figures, structure of a chapter, structure of a sentence, etc.) seemed to be put there so the reader could get warm fuzzies discovering all the variations, with apparently no expository or other motivation. I wouldn't even think of comparing this book to a college text. (C.S. text, that is; it may be good "art", although I don't think so.) There are way too many holes in the presentation, and the lessons to be drawn from his material are not stated clearly (if at all). For instance, I found the theme of the ambiguity (or was it the definition?) of the term "intelligence" using the behavior of the ant colony particularly weak. Is he trying to say that mechanical responses (can) give rise to intelligent behavior (whatever that is), or that intelligent behavior IS some set of mechanical responses, or what? It struck me as an apology for the field of Artifical Intelligence, which I found slightly offensive. Being not entirely naive on the subject, I feel he didn't make the case (whatever it was). Not that he was necessarily wrong, but he sins through overstatement and oversimplification. (Quite an assertion on my part given the complexity of his book! :-)) He brings to mind, through his failure to follow it, the advice I once got on effective presentations: always state the weaknesses of your case before someone else does; it lends you credibility. To be fair, Hofstadter does state from time to time that there is a lot about AI that we don't know, but he doesn't acknowledge that what we do know about intelligence may be wrong. Another example of the weakness of his presentation is his explanation of the value of idealized models of reality. He points out that ideal models reveal patterns that might otherwise remain hidden. What he completely misses is that most of our knowledge actually comes from examining the DIFFERENCES between behavior predicted by an idealized model and actual behavior of a system, not by examining the idealized model itself. (This thesis was examined by Herbert Simon in the late 50's and the 60's when he started studying notions of causality. See Simon's collection of papers, "Models of Discovery".) Since Hofstadter's book is almost entirely an examination of formal (idealized) models, I find it a poor study of intelligence. As you may have been able to tell by now, I wasn't exactly thrilled with G.E.B. It was difficult reading, didn't hang together (self- reference is too broad a theme for his book the way he wrote it), and was technically inaccurate (principally through omission). It was entertaining in many places, but it was too much like reading flawed "pop science" ("Gee! We can do this, too....") to have been actually enjoyable. -- Ted Hopp {seismo,umcp-cs}!nbs-amrf!hopp
cas@cvl.UUCP (Cliff Shaffer) (04/28/85)
On the contrary, GEB definately WAS published as a hard-back. My father has a copy. I have only seen it in paper recently, though. Cliff Shaffer ...!rlgvax!cvl!cas
rl@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Robert Langridge%CGL) (04/29/85)
<--- >> I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. >> >I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. My hardcover copy is dated 1979, published by Basic Books, NY at $18.50. Look up Books in Print in your local library or bookstore to see whether it is still available. Mandatory mini-review: There are enough gems in GEB to justify wading through a lot of verbiage. I initially thought that what it needed most was a good editor, to cut it to about 1/2 to 2/3 the present length. On rereading from time to time I find enough of interest in the parts I thought should have been eliminated to convince me that I was wrong, and that one must get used to Hofstadter's style. Anyone read his new book? Bob Langridge (UUCP: [...]!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!rl) Computer Graphics Laboratory (ARPA: rl@ucbvax 926 Medical Sciences or University of California langridge@sumex-aim) San Francisco CA 94143 (Phone: +1 415 666 2630)
muffy@lll-crg.ARPA (Muffy Barkocy) (04/29/85)
<comment by Ted Hopp that he could not see GEB being used as a textbook>. At San Francisco State University, it was indeed used as a textbook this semester. I am not sure which class, but I believe the topic was concepts of Artificial Intelligence. Muffy
jsgray@watmath.UUCP (Jan Gray) (04/29/85)
This wonderful book *was* published in hardcover (I have a copy). The publisher was Basic Books. [Every once in a while, BTW, UW offers a philosophy course on GEB...] Jan Gray (jsgray@watmath.UUCP) University of Waterloo (519) 885-1211 x3870
sjs@u1100s.UUCP (Stan Switzer) (04/29/85)
In article <582@tpvax.fluke.UUCP> inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) writes: > > I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I > > have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if > > possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. > > > > --- Peter Su > > I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. > > I agree that its the sort of book you'd rather have in hard than soft-bound, > but two years after reading it, I'm not sure I'd agree that it's all that > "wonderful". For one thing, it's harder reading than many college > textbooks, and for another, it struck me that LOTS and LOTS of what he was > trying to say was just a bunch of fluff and trying too hard for effect. > > -- Gary Benson GEB was, indeed, published in hardcover. My copy was, at least. I liked it as I was reading it, but it was later that I became annoyed with it. Maybe it was the endless and pointless Scientific American "Metamagical Themas" column; maybe it was the slew of Eastern-Philosophy/ Quantum-Physics books that began to fill the bookstores; maybe it was the fact that the book was too clever (a whole chapter whose only point was to lead up to a pun "All in one swell floop"). Unfortunately, if the book had any fatal flaw, it was not that it was too difficult, it was that it was too "popular." In particular, I truly wish that after having read this tome I would have really understood Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. It just wasn't there (but read Raymond Smullian's "The Lady and the Tiger"). The book just didn't get deep enough into formal systems to properly deal with Incompleteness. What it lacked in depth, however, it made up for in breadth. However, I know biologists who are not too impressed with the book's Biology, and mathematicians not to impressed with its Mathemetics. The Philosophy, well, that's a topic to itself. The Philosophy in GEB could only have arisen in California. Just as with the Incompleteness Theorem, the Zen is not presented well. I mean, analyzing Zen is the paradigm of futility. While I have no personal antipathy toward eastern philosophy, and in fact am rather inclined toward Taoism, this silly approach to Zen really bugs me. To Hofstader, the main attraction of Zen is that the koans are just SO clever. Yes, there was a lot of fluff, and yes, too much was for just for effect. On the positive side, however, I really enjoyed some of the cleverness. Look in the annotated bibliography under "Gebstadter." The entry goes something like this: Gebstatder, Egbert B., "Copper, Silver, and Gold: an Indestructable Metallic Alloy," Acidic Books: A formidable hodgepodge: turgid and confused, yet remarkably similar to the present work.... Clever, yes, but too true. By the way, I have never actually met anyone else (face-to-face) who has really read GEB cover-to-cover (and is willing to admit it). --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stan Switzer | "A good book is hard to find, and a hard book ihnp4!u1100s!sjs | is good to find." -- Mae West, sort-of.
avolio@decuac.UUCP (Frederick M. Avolio) (04/29/85)
Lots of people *do* like the book. And it *did* win *the prize*.
So, it must be good, eh? By the way, it was used as a text -- at
least the year before publication it was -- at Indiana U (the Hoosiers
not the one in Pennsylvania!). Darned if I can remember the name of
the course, though I took it way back when...).
--
Fred Avolio {decvax,seismo}!decuac!avolio 301/731-4100 x4227liang@cvl.UUCP (Eli Liang) (04/30/85)
> <comment by Ted Hopp that he could not see GEB being used as a textbook>. > > At San Francisco State University, it was indeed used as a textbook this > semester. I am not sure which class, but I believe the topic was concepts > of Artificial Intelligence. > > Muffy you're joking... GEB, used as an AI textbook? Why? To prove Hofstadter is really just a computer program like Rachter? -eli -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Eli Liang --- University of Maryland Computer Vision Lab, (301) 454-4526 ARPA: liang@cvl, liang@lemuria, eli@mit-mc, eli@mit-prep CSNET: liang@cvl UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!cvl!liang
paul@umich.UUCP (Paul Killey) (04/30/85)
> it struck me that LOTS and LOTS of what he was > trying to say was just a bunch of fluff and trying too hard for effect. You said it ... that book could have been a few hundred pages shorter. I could never really see what its appeal was, myself.
paul@umich.UUCP (Paul Killey) (04/30/85)
> [Every once in a while, BTW, UW offers a philosophy course on GEB...]
What!!!!!???? Well, Bach and Escher were among the leading philosophers
of their respective times, I guess. What is in that book??
Or, does UW offer a class that covers the ideas expressed in the book by
the author?rose@sdcsvax.UUCP (Daniel Rose) (04/30/85)
>I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. >When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. It definitely was published in hardcover. I know, because when I got my copy (late 1980) it was _only_ available in hardcover. Everyone I knew who had it, had it in hardcover. >...two years after reading it, I'm not sure I'd agree that it's all that >"wonderful". For one thing, it's harder reading than many college >textbooks, and for another, it struck me that LOTS and LOTS of what he was >trying to say was just a bunch of fluff and trying too hard for effect. While some parts were certainly difficult, others were fun, thought- provoking, and often entertaining. I especially liked the anecdotes about Ramanujan (sp?), Turing, etc. As far as it being fluff, I've heard this criticism from both philosophers and CS people (I was an undergrad phil. major), and it seems to me that people who feel this way are taking Hofstadter more seriously than he himself intended. I've heard him speak, as well as reading some of his other articles, and I've come to the conclusion that he was not trying to prove anything with GEB; he was just sharing some of his favorite interests with people. While I have my own criticisms of the book, I think it achieves this goal admirably. Dan Rose sdcsvax!rose
colonel@gloria.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) (04/30/85)
> > I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I > > have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if > > possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. > > > I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. Well, I've seen it in boards. I think Vintage originally published it that way. Why not check _Books in Print?_ "It seems to be badly out of order. It makes pointless excursions into nonsense at least half the time. If it belonged to me, I would give it away immediately to someone like you, Crab. But of course it doesn't belong to me." -- Col. G. L. Sicherman ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel
training@rtech.ARPA (Training account) (04/30/85)
> > I was wondering if anyone knew where to get this book in hardcover. I > > have never seen it in this form, but would like a hardcover edition if > > possible. It is a wonderful book, by the way. > I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. It WAS published in hardcover, by Basic Books. You can probably get a copy at any good used book store, or by writing to Basic Books. (I think they're located in New York). Robert Orenstein Relational Technology
wjr@x.UUCP (Bill Richard) (05/01/85)
[] > I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > When I got my copy, I don't remember ever seeing it that way, at least. ... > Gary Benson * MS 232E John Fluke Mfg Co Inc * POBox C9090 Everett WA USA 98206 > -_-_-_-_-_ {ihnp4!uw-beaver} {decvax!microsoft} {allegra} !fluke!inc -_-_-_-_- The first edition I saw was definitely a hardcover. The trade paperback came out later (>= 6 mo. maybe). I don't know where to find a hardcover edition today though, sorry. -- ---- William J. Richard @ Charles River Data Systems 983 Concord St. Framingham, MA 01701 Tel: (617) 626-1112 uucp: ...!decvax!frog!wjr
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (05/01/85)
In article <582@tpvax.fluke.UUCP> inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) writes: > >I'm not certain, but I don't think it was ever published as a hardcover. > I have it in hardcover, purchased 6/22/79. -- Richard Mateosian {allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
schaefer@bgsuvax.UUCP (Stephen Schaefer) (05/01/85)
[SOME SITES STILL DO HAVE THE LINE EATER BUG!!!!!!] I was given my copy of GEB in the late fall of '80, and hardcover was all that existed. At the time, I was wishing for a paper edition, since I couldn't afford the $15+. (I finally convinced my parents to get me an early Xmas present.) It's a nostalgia book for me. Holmes [by Doyle!] also remains fun.
benson@dcdwest.UUCP (Peter Benson) (05/01/85)
(I am not sure I want to get into this discussion, but here
goes ...)
GEB is cute and turgid and funny. I did read it cover to
cover BUT I did not understand everything I read. If I had
demanded that of myself I would not have finished. I am not a
formal systems heavy-weight or a biologist or a philosopher,
so I can't judge the worth of the book in those domains.
Inter-disciplinary work is hard to do in such a way that
purists accept it. So be it. Hofstadter brings together a
lot of stuff I had thought about for years. Better than that
he thought about it better than I have. I liked the book
and I am looking for an attractive woman who also read it
so we can get together and talk about it.
So there.
--
_
Peter Benson | ITT Defense Communications Division
(619)578-3080 | 10060 Carroll Canyon Road
decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!benson | San Diego, CA 92131
ucbvax!sdcsvax!dcdwest!benson | myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeff Myers) (05/01/85)
> > Unfortunately, if the book had any fatal flaw, it was not that it was too > difficult, it was that it was too "popular." In particular, I truly wish > that after having read this tome I would have really understood Godel's > Incompleteness Theorem. It just wasn't there (but read Raymond Smullian's > "The Lady and the Tiger"). The book just didn't get deep enough into > formal systems to properly deal with Incompleteness. > > By the way, I have never actually met anyone else (face-to-face) who > has really read GEB cover-to-cover (and is willing to admit it). > > Stan Switzer They are difficult to find. I like GEB, and I also like the presentation of the Incompleteness Theorem. I found his way of attacking something fairly difficult to explain rather fruitful. It definately helped that I had majored in Math, tho. jeff m
inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson) (05/02/85)
> > Lots of people *do* like the book. And it *did* win *the prize*. > So, it must be good, eh? By the way, it was used as a text -- at > least the year before publication it was -- at Indiana U (the Hoosiers). > > Fred Avolio {decvax,seismo}!decuac!avolio 301/731-4100 x4227 *** REMESS THIS AGE WITH LINES *** Pardon', Messieur, but just because something wins a prize is no indicator of its merit. After all, they gave John Wayne an Oscar, didn't they? And while lots of people may have liked the book, I submit it takes either an extremely arcane sense of humor to appreciate it, or else you're seeing the "groupie" effect in action. Used as a text? So what? At the University of Wisconsin (GO BADGERS!) you can take a course called "Poetry for Engineers" that uses some real *garbage* as texts. Everything you have said is not a statement of any intrinsic merit in Hofstader's book -- all you say is that it won a popularity contest. So did the floozy who took on the football team in high school. Face it: the book is inaccessible, says nothing really except perhaps, "why is there air?" and goes nowhere. Metamagical Thema indeed! -- Ensign Benson -Space Cadet- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-The Digital Circus, Sector R-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
scott@gargoyle.UUCP (Scott Deerwester) (10/31/85)
I and a friend once spent a good part of an afternoon figuring out the the Hebrew inscription at the beginning of the book was a selection of a few verses out of Genesis in an ancient Hebrew script... printed upside down. -- Scott Deerwester Graduate Library School University of Chicago ...!ihnp4!gargoyle!scott UUCP scott@UChicago.CSNet CSNet scott@UChicago.ARPA ARPA