There are few tech publishers out there more respected than O'Reilly & Associates. Their funky yet witty animal covers have delighted me since I first picked up Unix in a Nutshell (still a personal favorite) at the age of 15. So when we heard that there was a new geeky magazine out there, aptly called Make, we were, of course, quite fascinated. Especially with O'Reilly's latest line of Hacks books, we thought that perhaps this magazine idea had some potential. But then, we're software engineers and so some new geeky magazine that talks about things like hacking your Gmail account and clever iPod tricks was right up our alley. But while this is a fun magazine to flip through in the store, I cannot seem to sign up for a subscription. Despite the fact that it's a quarterly magazine, the ticket price is as substantial as a Nutshell book at $15 an issue. Perhaps my husband likes the idea of modifying an old VHS player with a food chopper adapter, creating a programmable catfood dispenser like that out of Back To The Future, but I'd rather give the VCR to goodwill and get the tax write-off. Too many of the stories are just too... nerdy for my geekgirl interests. And yes, there is a difference between nerd and geek. But Make is trying to attract both audiences.

Funny enough, the other magazine we've had our eyes on is called Mind. My father works in the neurology field with a speciality in epilepsy. He also has a warped sense of humor. I remember once back in high school, when he picked me up after classes and placed a wooden box in my lap as we drove off. I asked, "What's this?" as I fingered the latch. "A human skull", he replied. Of course, I thought he was joking until I flipped the lid. His department Secret Santas are always interesting, one year he even got a brain-shaped jello mould. How cool is that? I don't understand why my mother refuses to use it... So when Scientific American spawned a periodical focusing on topics like consciousness, intelligence & cognition, we were excited to see what they'd share. Both Shane and I find such topics as how thought processes work and how people justify behaviors fascinating. But while we sometimes find interesting articles in Mind magazine that are easy to understand, often with clever illustrations, the majority of the topics read like some Time magazine article - too fluffy for me, but then I like reading quality science materials like Nature magazine. It seems to me that many of the Mind article authors report on findings that are often not even particularly recent, and while they may do a fantastic job in explaining the concept to the layman, they don't add anything new - they don't often make it clear how well established a concept is within the scientific community - is it a new idea? A theory, well-accepted or otherwise? What are the ramifications of this knowledge? What can we learn from it? How can we apply this knowledge? Mind articles excel when it comes to explaining these mind-concepts, but sadly lacking when it comes to drawing any new or interesting conclusions about them.

Posted by sorsha on January 20, 2006 6:46 PM | Permalink