It's recently come to my attention about the poor quality of the paper being used for books being published. I've been horrified by the toilet paper quality of the recent hard cover releases these days. This is not a good omen for the publishing industry. I'm aware of the need for "environmentally" safe material or cost cutting methods being used, but the bottom line is people in my opinion will be turned off from reading good books (if indeed they are good books being treated poorly by the publishing houses.)because the paper quality is so poor it doesn't add up to want to plonk down hard earned cash for such shoddily produced material. Just my opinion but I don't think I'm alone in thinking this way.
A more pressing concern is something I've been thinking about since the introduction of the ebook reader like the Amazon Kindle. I'm wondering if Barnes and Noble or Borders is aiming for an agreement with Jeff Bezos (Amazon founder) to subsidize the production of tailor made Kindle ebook readers for their customers? This is speculative on my part...but this would open the door for a new kind of competition...signing up big name authors to pen books exclusively for the Kindle books financed by deals with Amazon.com and/or Barnes and Noble?! I don't think this is something to sneeze at both financially and possibly even philosophically.
The recent improved version of the Kindle DX model (bigger size) opens the door for an eventual release of a full color version down the road. I'm positive this will happen eventually but could be bad news for old time publishers of books. They could definitely see a drain in their financial portfolios should this happen down the road. Why? Very simply, the Kindle and other clones would make it cheaper for the consumers to buy titles they normally wouldn't look at provided the distributors make sweetheart deals with the publishing houses to stock up subscription models exclusively for that particular make of e-book reader.
On the business side...this sounds interesting and opens the door for lucrative deals for the publishing houses starving for new sources of income in these tough economic times. But philosophically...this could be problematic in terms of fairness to the customer and for free exchange of ideas in general. If publishing houses get to hoard up authors and book exclusives with e-commerce sites like Amazon and Barnes and Noble...this may begin to sound alot like monopoly anti trust concerns could crop up. The raason I believe this could be a disturbing trend is that authors would be pressured to sign up for only a certain publishing house because only that publishing house would be able to release their books to the public...based on a deal with either Amazon or Barnes and Noble.
I believe this should start a discussion about the technology of the Kindle book and the implications for the future of book reading and the public. I think it may be time to have people discuss making an "open source" ebook reader to avoid these potential pitfalls for the publishing industry for both the reader and the publishing houses. Making an "open source" ebook reader would help stifle these attempts at information control by the publishing houses and the technology industry in particular. Nobody should be allowed to have a monopoly on the source of reading and how people read their materials. Just my opinion.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Problems using a Thesaurus
Is it my febrile imagination or do we have a dearth of really good reference materials to rely on? Take for instance the thesaurus. I'm going to stick to the tried and true which in my opinion revolves around printed definitions on plain old paper. Besides using the ordinary dictionary we can get access to a thesaurus. Thesaurus means "treasure house" in Greek and it's proven to be an accurate description of this useful resource.
Unfortunately the drawbacks to using this asset becomes manifest when we look at it more closely. For instance the number of reliable versions of the thesaurus is very low. There are some references pertaining to looking up associations...namely The Synonym Finder, Bartlett Rogett's Thesaurus, Webster's New World Thesaurus and the Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus.
If you look more closely you'll find any of the titles I mentioned have problems listing descriptive associations. The most prodigious effort in this realm has to be awarded to The Synonym Finder, first published back in 1978 and has since become an established source of finding a rich array of words to substitute commonly used phrases. One issue surrounding this thick tome is the plain acknowledgment by the publishers of the arbitrary listing of synonyms to various entries. This becomes problematic for the writer and speaker because without a careful listing of words to choose from it becomes difficult for the user to decide which one to use.
This issue raises the unanswered question: who decides which word has the correct shading for a particular meaning? The lexicographer? The speech writer? The author? In light of this ambiguity it becomes paramount to look at these books more carefully. Another issue with The Synonym Finder is the lack of a cross reference. This becomes imperative in case the user can't locate the correct synonym in the main body of the book. This is yet another quandary because the editors choose not to list enough entries. Many times the word you pick to use is not listed but is mentioned in the index. This can help you find a better word listing to follow to find the right definition.
Try finding "incumbent" as a main entry in a lesser known paperback thesaurus. You probably won't find it. Blurbs listed on the back covers boast huge numbers of synonyms listed inside their references...but they usually don't warn the user to the lack of quality headwords to look up. Fortunately The Synonym Finder has a very large quantity of entries to choose from...nearly 70,000 words. Others, like the new Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus lists only 15,000. Unless your vocabulary is unusually prodigious you'll have a hard time locating the right word. The bottom line is it pays to find a thesaurus that lists enough headwords to select your favorite synonym.
Exposing these shortcomings to the thesaurus shouldn't discourage the user from using one. It should enlighten the individual to realizing their unique issues and overcoming them by using multiple sources. The more reference materials there are...the better choice the person will make when deciding on the right expression. So, happy synonym finding.
Unfortunately the drawbacks to using this asset becomes manifest when we look at it more closely. For instance the number of reliable versions of the thesaurus is very low. There are some references pertaining to looking up associations...namely The Synonym Finder, Bartlett Rogett's Thesaurus, Webster's New World Thesaurus and the Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus.
If you look more closely you'll find any of the titles I mentioned have problems listing descriptive associations. The most prodigious effort in this realm has to be awarded to The Synonym Finder, first published back in 1978 and has since become an established source of finding a rich array of words to substitute commonly used phrases. One issue surrounding this thick tome is the plain acknowledgment by the publishers of the arbitrary listing of synonyms to various entries. This becomes problematic for the writer and speaker because without a careful listing of words to choose from it becomes difficult for the user to decide which one to use.
This issue raises the unanswered question: who decides which word has the correct shading for a particular meaning? The lexicographer? The speech writer? The author? In light of this ambiguity it becomes paramount to look at these books more carefully. Another issue with The Synonym Finder is the lack of a cross reference. This becomes imperative in case the user can't locate the correct synonym in the main body of the book. This is yet another quandary because the editors choose not to list enough entries. Many times the word you pick to use is not listed but is mentioned in the index. This can help you find a better word listing to follow to find the right definition.
Try finding "incumbent" as a main entry in a lesser known paperback thesaurus. You probably won't find it. Blurbs listed on the back covers boast huge numbers of synonyms listed inside their references...but they usually don't warn the user to the lack of quality headwords to look up. Fortunately The Synonym Finder has a very large quantity of entries to choose from...nearly 70,000 words. Others, like the new Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus lists only 15,000. Unless your vocabulary is unusually prodigious you'll have a hard time locating the right word. The bottom line is it pays to find a thesaurus that lists enough headwords to select your favorite synonym.
Exposing these shortcomings to the thesaurus shouldn't discourage the user from using one. It should enlighten the individual to realizing their unique issues and overcoming them by using multiple sources. The more reference materials there are...the better choice the person will make when deciding on the right expression. So, happy synonym finding.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
I found a brand new chess opening to use. It's pretty much by accident how I found it but I was searching through YouTube and found a curious lecture called "The Polar Bear System". This chess opening is based on The Bird's System championed by English chess master Henry Bird.
What I find exciting about this system is it doesn't require knowledge of theoretical tomes of moves to succeed. Just basic chess playing and some knowledge of how to respond to Black replying to the set number of moves in the Polar Bear System as it's called. The set moves are f4,Nf3,g3,Bg2,0-0,d3,c3 and Na3.
This unusual setup allows White to play against virtually any opening system Black chooses to respond with. The only opening this system is not prepared for unless you spend time studying is the From Gambit. Unfortunately, I've found by playing on Freechess.org that guests who respond to 1.f4 sometimes reply 1...e5...inviting a transposition to either the King's Gambit or into the From Gambit proper with 2.fxe5. I haven't had much success playing against Black who reply with moves from the From Gambit...but that's because I really haven't had time to study the From Gambit.
I think I'll purchase the e-book The Bird's System from Evcryman Chess site and re-learn the From Gambit before getting too deeply involved with the Polar Bear System.
I'm getting comments from players when they face the Polar Bear System saying it's very interesting and I'm fearful the experts will seize the moment and learn all about this new subsystem in The Bird's System and soon I won't be able to play against them anymore. :(
Anyway...I'm having alot of fun playing fast matches using 10 minute increments for both sides. What's really interesting is no matter how good Black is...the pawn storms from White become overwhelming and Black sometimes hang pieces. This has happened several times already and I've seen a tremendous increase in the white knight's power vs. the bishops in this one. The knights in The Polar Bear system are lethal.
I've learned from losing in this opening system not to post the light squared bishop on the g2 square if Black innocently plays Nc6 early in the game. If Black plays this move early in the game...my best response is to play d3 and open the diagonal for the white squared bishop to B5. Once I get the chance I should immediately play the bishop to B5 putting pressure on the c6 - e8 diagonal. Unless Black wastes a tempo on protecting the pawn structure by Bd7 to prevent me from ruining it I shouldn't hesitate in exchanging the White bishop for the knight on c6. The resulting pawn structure for Black makes it virtually impossible for him/her to respond effectively on the Queenside while White makes serious inroads on the kingside.
The resulting positions are very interesting and forces experienced players to think very carefully how to play against you with Black.
What I find exciting about this system is it doesn't require knowledge of theoretical tomes of moves to succeed. Just basic chess playing and some knowledge of how to respond to Black replying to the set number of moves in the Polar Bear System as it's called. The set moves are f4,Nf3,g3,Bg2,0-0,d3,c3 and Na3.
This unusual setup allows White to play against virtually any opening system Black chooses to respond with. The only opening this system is not prepared for unless you spend time studying is the From Gambit. Unfortunately, I've found by playing on Freechess.org that guests who respond to 1.f4 sometimes reply 1...e5...inviting a transposition to either the King's Gambit or into the From Gambit proper with 2.fxe5. I haven't had much success playing against Black who reply with moves from the From Gambit...but that's because I really haven't had time to study the From Gambit.
I think I'll purchase the e-book The Bird's System from Evcryman Chess site and re-learn the From Gambit before getting too deeply involved with the Polar Bear System.
I'm getting comments from players when they face the Polar Bear System saying it's very interesting and I'm fearful the experts will seize the moment and learn all about this new subsystem in The Bird's System and soon I won't be able to play against them anymore. :(
Anyway...I'm having alot of fun playing fast matches using 10 minute increments for both sides. What's really interesting is no matter how good Black is...the pawn storms from White become overwhelming and Black sometimes hang pieces. This has happened several times already and I've seen a tremendous increase in the white knight's power vs. the bishops in this one. The knights in The Polar Bear system are lethal.
I've learned from losing in this opening system not to post the light squared bishop on the g2 square if Black innocently plays Nc6 early in the game. If Black plays this move early in the game...my best response is to play d3 and open the diagonal for the white squared bishop to B5. Once I get the chance I should immediately play the bishop to B5 putting pressure on the c6 - e8 diagonal. Unless Black wastes a tempo on protecting the pawn structure by Bd7 to prevent me from ruining it I shouldn't hesitate in exchanging the White bishop for the knight on c6. The resulting pawn structure for Black makes it virtually impossible for him/her to respond effectively on the Queenside while White makes serious inroads on the kingside.
The resulting positions are very interesting and forces experienced players to think very carefully how to play against you with Black.
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Chess and Fischer Random
This is my first blog and I'm going to use it for publishing my thoughts on Chess and Fischer Random. I've been studying and playing chess for about half my life and only now have I come to the conclusion that Fischer Random is the only true test of one's ability to playing this pastime.
I've recently been forced to throw away many of my old books because of fire hazard concerns...and many of the books I've been forced to give up were from my chess collection. Opening theory books, game collections were a large part of the backlog of books I had to throw out. It was with a heavy heart...believe me. With many of those books consigned to the garbage bins...I've been plagued by thoughts of not being able to defend against sharp variations in the Sicilian Defense, King's Indian, Nimzo-Indian, the French, and a whole host of other well known chess openings I've learned over the years.
However, I've adopted a new way of thinking on chess thanks to the study and appreciation of Bobby Fischer's advancement of a new form of chess. Now regardless of what one thinks of Bobby Fischer and his political rantings...one still has to appreciate the genius of his chess thinking and what it has done for the game in general. Now Bobby Fischer has given the world a new form of chess that clears the cobwebs of theory and allows players to concentrate on the game.
The brilliance to Bobby Fischer's invention on the game of chess is the concept of randomizing the initial chess piece setup. With this fresh new approach...the game suddenly gains a new vista upon to start fresh. Suddenly opening theory is thrown out the window and one has to play the game from the first move without prior knowledge to help one through the thicket of dangers.
The benefits to me became immediately apparent. Now I no longer needed to possess those huge thick tomes of opening knowledge. I've been freed from the necessity of keeping up with "theory" as per articles in Chessbase Magazine and such. I haven't given up completely on "classical" chess though. I've instead...gotten two chess books that condenses all opening theory in cogent form using a special series of openings one can use regardless of how the opponent responds. These books have recently been published...one called "Openings for White, Explained" and "Openings for Black, Explained".
These two books are great because they are the only two books in the entire chess market that literally shows diagrams without being run off with thickets of chess notation that would test one's memory skills. Each variation is immediately followed by a diagram allowing you to see just where one stands. You can then visualize where you are in the game. This allows you to plan ahead more forcefully than you would if you had to struggle and "imagine" what the board looks like after squished chess notation in the margins. Every new variation included in the book carefully shows a diagram after the notation is given. This is an approach I've never seen in any of the countless other books out there in the market. Not even Gary Kasparov's Great Predecessors books are like this.
Anyway...these two books are more than enough to keep me on the level with classical chess because they allow me to follow an approach that forces my opponent to respond in a way I'm able to anticipate. Now that's better than trying to memorize reams of opening theory and getting confused by the maze of variations just to get to the middlegame...let alone the endgame. Just my two cents on the state of chess today and the benefits of Fischer Random.
I've recently been forced to throw away many of my old books because of fire hazard concerns...and many of the books I've been forced to give up were from my chess collection. Opening theory books, game collections were a large part of the backlog of books I had to throw out. It was with a heavy heart...believe me. With many of those books consigned to the garbage bins...I've been plagued by thoughts of not being able to defend against sharp variations in the Sicilian Defense, King's Indian, Nimzo-Indian, the French, and a whole host of other well known chess openings I've learned over the years.
However, I've adopted a new way of thinking on chess thanks to the study and appreciation of Bobby Fischer's advancement of a new form of chess. Now regardless of what one thinks of Bobby Fischer and his political rantings...one still has to appreciate the genius of his chess thinking and what it has done for the game in general. Now Bobby Fischer has given the world a new form of chess that clears the cobwebs of theory and allows players to concentrate on the game.
The brilliance to Bobby Fischer's invention on the game of chess is the concept of randomizing the initial chess piece setup. With this fresh new approach...the game suddenly gains a new vista upon to start fresh. Suddenly opening theory is thrown out the window and one has to play the game from the first move without prior knowledge to help one through the thicket of dangers.
The benefits to me became immediately apparent. Now I no longer needed to possess those huge thick tomes of opening knowledge. I've been freed from the necessity of keeping up with "theory" as per articles in Chessbase Magazine and such. I haven't given up completely on "classical" chess though. I've instead...gotten two chess books that condenses all opening theory in cogent form using a special series of openings one can use regardless of how the opponent responds. These books have recently been published...one called "Openings for White, Explained" and "Openings for Black, Explained".
These two books are great because they are the only two books in the entire chess market that literally shows diagrams without being run off with thickets of chess notation that would test one's memory skills. Each variation is immediately followed by a diagram allowing you to see just where one stands. You can then visualize where you are in the game. This allows you to plan ahead more forcefully than you would if you had to struggle and "imagine" what the board looks like after squished chess notation in the margins. Every new variation included in the book carefully shows a diagram after the notation is given. This is an approach I've never seen in any of the countless other books out there in the market. Not even Gary Kasparov's Great Predecessors books are like this.
Anyway...these two books are more than enough to keep me on the level with classical chess because they allow me to follow an approach that forces my opponent to respond in a way I'm able to anticipate. Now that's better than trying to memorize reams of opening theory and getting confused by the maze of variations just to get to the middlegame...let alone the endgame. Just my two cents on the state of chess today and the benefits of Fischer Random.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)