Saw this at a local bookstore, and thought it looked really interesting. Currently in line with a copy; anybody read it?

Yes

>Yuval Noah Harari
Names like that, as well

Has anybody actually read the fucking book?

>wanting the opinion of someone who reads shitty books

>judging a book by its cover

Nothing wrong with this

>judging a book by its announced theme, its reviews, the popularity of its author, or anything other than the cover
:/

Holy shit all of you fucking kill yourselves, pure cancer.

>redditor gets triggered

>homo deus

*tipt fedoram*

I think this is the worst thread I've ever seen on this board. Nothing but vapid greentext and no actual discussion.

Good contribution

Nobody on Veeky Forums reads anything if it's not on a chart, ya dunce

I read Sapiens, it's full of info, but it's pop-sci and thus too sensationalised. The author isn't objective enough (I thought it was just muh humans and the contending opinions on contentious matters, but he literally injects his own opinion and it annoyed the fuck out of me), and considering this book is about the future, well, I can't imagine it being an improvement on that. From what I remember he said industrialisation was a mistake and we should have remained nomadic hunter gatherers.

However intrusive and bizarre his opinions might have been, were they at least interesting to read?

>Neuromancer

The sequel is better.

Reddit tier genre pulp, not even memeing

...

Not for me, though they might have been if they were presented in a better way, rather than sensationalized conjecturing. Some people eat that shit up though, it's why it's a best seller

the title means homo god

is it true, is god a homo?

Bumping... though I'm hoping for more actual conversation. I was curious about this book, too

lol

K E K
E
K

Neuromancer is crap, yeah. The prose is so awful it makes Dick seem like Joyce and the characters so vapid that you could replace them with any other generic protagonist and nobody would notice.

this

>Neuromancer
>Crap
I would have said it was among the upper echelon of sci-fi works out there. The setting is captivating, the language and street talk is dense and very new (for the time it was written).

Reading Sapiens now. I agree that it's too sensationalised. I think it may server, however, as a good starting point if you're interested in the humble beginnings of mankind.
And yeah, it seems like he deems neolithic revolutions to be mankind's biggest mistake. One of the claim he makes is that foraging bands were better of than farmers. There is some truth in that, mind you, but overall, while he bases his opinions on some scientific theories (a bit cherry-picking though), it's mostly his opinion.

This should be the next Veeky Forums collaborative writing project

I read the other book by him, about humankind hitory. It was really okay on a pop sci level.

Where is the line drawn between pop-sci and... an actual science book, I guess?

Example of real science books?