Rating: 
Summary: Un-putdownable read.
Review: I bought this book after reading the blurb and am glad I did so. This book introduced me to ideas that I had never thought of, carried upon an interesting story line that made it hard to put down. I look forward to his next book.
Rating: 
Summary: Great book, Few flaws.
Review: There is so much good to say about this book that I couldn't type it all now, so I'll relate the only flaws that I saw that weren't answered for in the book itself.1.) The author doesn't take red/green colorblindness into consideration. 2.) The book was not marketed as a "Science Fiction" novel. While not an actual flaw in the writing of the book, this caused me a delay in finding the book of over a year after it was recommended to me. That's all, other than that, it was one of the best spec-fic novels I've ever read. The Truth Machine certainly rates in my top five Science Fiction novels along with Neuromancer, Stranger In A Strange Land, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, and the Illuminatus! trilogy.
Rating:
Summary: Phenomenal! Best sci-fi book of the year.
Review: A riveting story, and very very original. Tons of interesting ideas, and characters you really believe in. I couldn't put it down. I've never done an Amazon.com book review, but I just had to for this one. The best that hard sci-fi gets!
Rating:
Summary: A fascinating journey into a paradoxical 21st century.
Review: Halperin's "Truth Machine" is a fascinating journey into a paradoxical 21st century that will leave you questioning the benefits and consequences of not only a world seemingly without deceit, but a world where deceit can be controlled by those with power. The author did a wonderful job of making the story feel more like history than a premonition of the future with his documentary "article clippings" at the beginning of each chapter; and even though the characters were under-developed and the writing a bit dry at times, I thought the book was written perfectly from the vantage point of our ficticious author, a computer. There is a definite style transition in the last pages where the writing is performed by an actual human being rather than the computer we come to know so well throughout the book. As far as story-telling goes, I think it ranks up there with Orwell's "1984" concerning a prediction of future times, although it lacks much of the symbolism and other literary devices that make "1984" a timeless piece of writing.
Rating: 
Summary: Clear and credible - to a point
Review: The book "The Truth Machine", even with several logic flaws and a general literary awkwardness, is a brave attempt to offer one scenario of a technologically dominated future. More books of this type need to be written and critiqued in order for us to form a clearer picture of what the future may hold in the way of dangers and opportunities. The more that people engage in such a dialogue about the future, the better our prospects are for democratic control of such a future. In this respect, I found it refreshing that the author would be brave enough to reveal such a scenario. The author writes from the point of view that he is actually a very advanced computer, capable of imitating the writing style of its owner. This he apparently uses in order to cover a documentary-like approach to the plot that is rather lackluster literarily. However, I can excuse this as a book that is intended not for its form as much as for its content. It is not easy to take into account enough factors to make any such scenario or model of the future multi-dimensional. There are so many interacting factors that one will err either on the side of irrelevancy if one tries to be too all-inclusive of facts, or on the side of oversimplification if one paints the picture with too large a brush. The author has gone to great lengths to try to take into account such complexities, and it is notable. On the other hand, the omissions are glaring to anyone looking at the book both critically and objectively. The main character Pete Armstrong in the book is given so much intellectual influence and power that it strains the limits of one's credibility. Similarly, the notion that Pete's only intellectual equals are his deceased brother Leonard and his evil nemesis, is equally far-fetched. While there are individuals such as Einstein, Gandhi, and Lincoln that can single-handedly change society for the better, Pete's intellectual prowess is so overstated by the author as to iconize him in a way that makes this prowess seem something more than human, consequently something less than real. The treatment of his character by the author is a bit more realistic and complex than the treatment of his intellect as an isolated feature of his character, but again, the author's attempts to make him seem larger than life result in creating someone who seems less than lifelike. At the end of the book, society's worst fear is that Pete (and only Pete) will undo his invention by coming up with an algorithm (in his sleep) that allows this machine to be circumvented. Mind you, it is assumed that no one else will ever be able to come up with such an algorithm. Such an assumption is highly unrealistic. The characters of David West and Diane Hsu are similarly "too perfect". David is granted too much credibility, his intuitive instincts too much credit. The one time he believes he made an error in judgment, he ends up instead sounding like the old cliché that goes, "I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken." The reader is left feeling that these characters somehow lack something of the complexity we call "human". As the plot unfolds, the public officials in general are more esteemed by society than any such equivalent persons whom we presently know in our society. This actually points to the underlying premise of the book, which, stated simply, amounts to a belief that outer technology can actually cause people to become better human beings inside. Upon examination, the reason for this premise becomes increasingly clear: The author believes that all reality, including that which we call consciousness and even "self-consciousness", is created by external factors alone. This, however, conflicts with any definition of self-consciousness as an internal sense of "I" within the organism. Early in the book the author vicariously (through Pete) explains away all near-death experiences as the defense mechanisms of a dying brain, and confirms this belief later in the book through the "scientific discoveries" he projects. Therefore, according to the author, even self-consciousness is an event "created" by outside factors alone. This flaw I believe is the exact reason why and point where the book goes astray from any but the most reductionistic world view. To my way of thinking, truth is an individual pursuit involving introspection and subjective experience, certainly much more complex than a mere Boolean value that can be verified or negated by even the most sophisticated EEG. When we use the word "truth" instead of "fact" we are dealing with intangibles and matters of opinion, certainly nothing that a machine can second-guess with 100% accuracy. The notion that such a machine, accompanied by no corresponding changes in the way our children are raised, can cause an already violent society to reform itself into an honest and gentle society, is ludicrous. The author even goes as far as to suggest that the death penalty itself, contrary to any current statistics, is a deterrent to violent crime when it becomes ubiquitous and is applied evenly. This I consider a "law-and-order pipe dream": if we lock enough people and the right people away, society will improve. What about all the factors that made these individuals aberrant to begin with? Are these not to be considered? If this author had written a book before the creation of the television, would he have articulated an equally sanguine scenario about the wonderful device that single-handedly turned society into a literate and informed group? Were the truth machine to exist, would the government actually pay for it, or would the lawmakers form the basis of the opposition against such a device? Consider the number of politicians who are untruthful and seek to exclude themselves from any regulation that necessarily involves them. I would logically surmise that government would be the last to incorporate this invention into their way of doing business.
Rating:
Summary: Caused me to rethink religious tenets in scientific terms.
Review: I read The First Immortal and loved it, so I got this one right after. I love "hard" (i.e. scientifically plausible) science fiction, and these two are by far my favorites to date. Very stimulating and entertaining story with underlying messianic themes of judgment, punishment, even resurrection. Can't wait for the movie!
Rating:
Summary: The Truth Machine was the best book I ever read.
Review: Feel free to email me. I can't wait to read The First Immortal
Rating:
Summary: Not what I expected
Review: The Truth Machine was good, but I expected much more. I purchased this book based on the customer reviews and was a little dissapointed. I guess my expectations were too high. The story was well written, but a little simplistic. The characters were kind of weak and the plot a little unbelievable. I read the book during my vacation and although I wasn't quite moved, it was a fun read.
Rating:
Summary: Great premise, but weak characters
Review: The premise of this book is fascinating. Halperin does a great job of exploring the intellectual and philosophical ramifactions of a society without deceit. This alone makes the book worth reading. The characters, on the other hand, are not developed enough for the reader to care whether they personally succeed or fail.
Rating:
Summary: English project leads into a new grasp of humanity.
Review: I was persuaded to read this book by my biology teacher for an english project, and I loved it! Sure the english project was a bomb but i read the book multiple times and find Mr. Halperin' insight absolutely fascinating. He has done his research! GREAT BOOK WITH GREAT CHARACTERS AND GREAT PLOT!
| 
