[jammygit]

Its funny to read this today. I'm working my way through Atlas Shrugged and the utopia in the book is the opposite: pure self interest > greater good, and there is a 'for the public good' apocalypse taking place.

It seems to take a weird stance that self interest has to go hand in hand with productivity and free trade though, or else the sentiment is labeled anti-life or looting (or murder in later chapters). Its a bit of a strange argument, I'm not certain its as coherent as it is romantic.

Anyway, the book would not be nice about how it described a company that posted fake reviews.

[mads_ravn]

I remember reading it years ago and thinking it was a large collection of straw man arguments (and this is perhaps too generous as it implies that there are actually reasoning present; in fact the story is more along the lines of: “heroes leave society, society collapses”).

Given this, it is beyond me how much attention and how large a following the book has gathered.

[pferde]

It's more of "honest people leave society, society collapses". The heroism was coincidental, I find it hard to blame anyone for celebrating honesty.

[notahacker]

One of the notional heroes is intentionally wiping out his investors (which is OK, because every single one of them is a Very Bad Person) and another is a pirate. Whilst Stadler joining the State Science Institute is singled out as a particularly egregious example of villainy.

Takes an odd definition of honesty to conclude that it's a book about celebrating honesty...

[michaelmrose]

The book is written by someone whose self professed philosophy is badly argued nonsense. See objectivism.

If she could at least write entertainingly she could at least have done one thing right. As it stands she could have contributed more to society by selling hats. Even badly made ugly hats keep your head dry. Her books neither inform nor entertain.