Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

REVIEW: "Gideon", Russel Andrews (Peter Gethers/David Handler)

Expand Messages
  • Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Tr
    BKGIDEON.RVW 20010105 Gideon , Russel Andrews (Peter Gethers/David Handler), 1999, 0-345-43478-1 %A Russel Andrews (Peter Gethers) %A Russel Andrews
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 23, 2001
      BKGIDEON.RVW 20010105

      "Gideon", Russel Andrews (Peter Gethers/David Handler), 1999,
      %A Russel Andrews (Peter Gethers)
      %A Russel Andrews (David Handler)
      %C 101 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10003
      %D 1999
      %G 0-345-43478-1
      %I Ballantine/Fawcett/Columbine Books/Del Rey
      %O http://www.randomhouse.com/BB BB@...
      %P 466 p.
      %T "Gideon"

      This is a serviceable thriller. Reasonably convoluted plot, although
      not, perhaps, as surprising as the authors might think. And, as is
      prone to happen with collaborations, there are minor, but annoying,
      inconsistencies in the story and the characters.

      (It's also just a little bit difficult to suspend disbelief about a
      single hunter who can track people all over the South, especially when
      the prey can swap driving and sleeping shifts, and the predator is
      driving a large vehicle with a silly and identifiable logo on the
      side. And then there is the dependence on the police being stupid
      enough to miss things like huge differences in times of death, and
      even wrong bodies.)

      Take the technology, for instance. Communications technology, and
      particularly the Internet, plays a large role in the book, but it
      seems oddly unimportant. For one thing, most of it doesn't start
      until half way through the narrative. For another, while few overt
      mistakes are apparent (and some actual Web pages are used), no
      fundamental understanding of the technology is evident.

      Oddly, although the book is clearly based on recent concerns over
      concentration of telecommunications ownership and Internet
      communication is used a lot, the bad guys don't seem to care about
      owning a piece of the networked world, concentrating on the
      traditional media. Not that this is unrealistic. The top black hat,
      rather obviously a combination of Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner, is
      only doing what most of his real life media baron colleagues are
      doing: staying as far away from the anarchic Internet as possible, and
      pretending it is a kind of television service with a great many
      channels. But an Augmon On Line could have added a lot of creativity
      and spice to the book.

      In addition, the authors have a very US-centric view of international
      corporations. True multinationals like the one in the book would
      definitely have an easier way to get around the problem of a ban on
      direct dealings with certain foreign countries.

      Turning to satellite services, there are a few problems.
      Geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) is certainly preferred for broadcast
      satellites, but it is far from the only game in town. And it wouldn't
      be necessary to have a gang of illiterate peasants build a high tech
      launch facility in French Guiana: the European Space Agency has a very
      nice one there, used quite regularly. In any case, even if you did
      manage to build a site and launch a rocket in secrecy it wouldn't
      remain a secret very long. Rockets are noisy, flashy things that can
      be detected exceedingly easily. Various interested parties check up
      on these things, not least because there are less than a dozen
      unassigned GEO slots left, and nobody is going to stand idly by while
      somebody pirates one.

      Coming down to earth (if you'll pardon the expression), an 800 number
      still has to be assigned to a given phone line, even if the fax
      machine you want to use is installed in a computer. In any case, an
      800 number is definitely not "non-area-specific," as Canadians and
      other non-US residents know all too well. A cell phone is not
      untraceable: as soon as it is turned on in a service area the position
      is known to within a few miles, and, in urban areas, usually much
      closer than that.

      In these highly wired days it is odd that anyone who can track down an
      email address for a non-acquaintance would be so lax as to endanger a
      close friend by using an identifiable email account to send a highly
      dangerous message. Even without getting into anonymous remailers,
      surely such a person would know about the various Web based free email
      services, which allow anyone to create an essentially untraceable
      account within seconds.

      But when they really want to hold secure communications, they turn to
      instant messaging (IM). This is really laughable. First of all,
      while journalists are now starting to work fairly heavily with the
      Internet and while some will undoubtedly have greater skills in this
      area than others, it simply isn't true that every large news
      organization has a "hacker" on staff, particularly the mythical system
      breakers who are supposed to be able to break into bank and credit
      card databases at will. In addition, being able to crack a system is
      no indication that you can secure one. As Gene Spafford points out,
      being able to pour sugar into a gas tank teaches you nothing about
      auto mechanics. Mostly, though, instant messaging just isn't very
      reliable. Email is asynchronous, and generally gets to the recipient
      eventually. IM requires both parties to be online, with clients
      active, at the same time--and on the same system. This is one of the
      reasons that most "by the hour" computer rental places wouldn't have
      IM installed. The other reason is that instant messaging systems are
      notoriously insecure. One popular IM system has had password, trojan,
      and other security problems in a never ending stream ever since it
      started. Another major player has deliberately opened buffer overflow
      holes in its own client program--apparently in an attempt to avoid
      compatibility with other systems. Using IM for secure communications
      makes about as much sense as posting your confidential messages on
      random billboards.

      The final "get the baddies to incriminate themselves" denouement lacks
      some detail. However, it makes up for many of the prior mistakes by
      being creative, effective, using technology well, and being
      technically correct.

      copyright Robert M. Slade, 2001 BKGIDEON.RVW 20010105

      ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
      rslade@... rslade@... slade@... p1@...
      My mind not only wanders, sometimes it leaves completely.
      http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.