Some pretty good Book summaries in here. h/t @mtmdev_ 👏

My fav ones from the list
✔️Poor Charlie's Almanack
✔️Zero to One
✔️The Millionaire Next Door
✔️Surely You're Joking, Mr.

1⃣ Poor Charlie's Almanack (on Charlie Munger).

Having the actual book and referencing it often is the best option, but checking out these tidbits doesn't hurt.

https://t.co/eG6CswDGWo
2⃣ Zero to One by Peter Thiel.

Great review of an excellent book that's very useful for anyone interested in Tech/Innovation.

https://t.co/jZ51eiqXCx
3⃣ The Millionaire Next Door by Thomas J. Stanley and William D. Danko.

This is one of the best personal finance books for a good reason.

https://t.co/szUiwlzack
4⃣ Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! by Richard Feynman.

https://t.co/YoiFXOsxrz
5⃣Meditations by Marcus Aurelius.

I have seen this book recommended by tons of people over the years. Looking at the quick summary, I can see why. Have to check it out sometime soon.

https://t.co/GrHllyOnAB

More from Ram Bhupatiraju

More from All

https://t.co/6cRR2B3jBE
Viruses and other pathogens are often studied as stand-alone entities, despite that, in nature, they mostly live in multispecies associations called biofilms—both externally and within the host.

https://t.co/FBfXhUrH5d


Microorganisms in biofilms are enclosed by an extracellular matrix that confers protection and improves survival. Previous studies have shown that viruses can secondarily colonize preexisting biofilms, and viral biofilms have also been described.


...we raise the perspective that CoVs can persistently infect bats due to their association with biofilm structures. This phenomenon potentially provides an optimal environment for nonpathogenic & well-adapted viruses to interact with the host, as well as for viral recombination.


Biofilms can also enhance virion viability in extracellular environments, such as on fomites and in aquatic sediments, allowing viral persistence and dissemination.

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x