18 books
—
2 voters
Information Science Books
Showing 1-50 of 1,376

by (shelved 34 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.04 — 16,908 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 16 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.74 — 2,477 ratings — published 2007

by (shelved 11 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.42 — 4,829 ratings — published 2010

by (shelved 11 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.10 — 1,046 ratings — published 1997

by (shelved 9 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.34 — 1,145 ratings — published 1998

by (shelved 9 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.97 — 423 ratings — published 1999

by (shelved 8 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.39 — 8,604 ratings — published 1983

by (shelved 8 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.84 — 1,065 ratings — published 2000

by (shelved 7 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.87 — 29,493 ratings — published 2016

by (shelved 7 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.72 — 1,360 ratings — published 2005

by (shelved 6 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.63 — 163 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 6 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.93 — 3,826 ratings — published 1998

by (shelved 6 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.80 — 2,049 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 6 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.75 — 436 ratings — published 2007

by (shelved 5 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.79 — 5,473 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 5 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.47 — 834 ratings — published 2006

by (shelved 5 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.30 — 28,621 ratings — published 1999

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.67 — 2,323 ratings — published 2021

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.29 — 140 ratings — published

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.89 — 121,657 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.85 — 20,548 ratings — published 2014

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.79 — 204 ratings — published 2014

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.12 — 39,337 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.19 — 356 ratings — published 1981

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.71 — 792 ratings — published 2001

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.97 — 52,032 ratings — published 2012

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.09 — 921 ratings — published 2006

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.89 — 7,949 ratings — published 2010

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.28 — 405 ratings — published 2000

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.24 — 83 ratings — published 1992

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.89 — 32,452 ratings — published 2010

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.58 — 74 ratings — published 2008

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.52 — 234 ratings — published 2008

by (shelved 4 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.18 — 137 ratings — published 2000

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.89 — 3,815 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.36 — 198,421 ratings — published 2018

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.52 — 487 ratings — published 2002

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.00 — 3,838 ratings — published 2015

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.84 — 120,940 ratings — published 1998

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.41 — 445 ratings — published 2010

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.77 — 394 ratings — published 2015

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 4.11 — 3,449 ratings — published 2009

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.80 — 379 ratings — published 2014

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.35 — 942 ratings — published 2009

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.96 — 119,910 ratings — published 2007

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.93 — 12,382 ratings — published 2005

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.83 — 41 ratings — published 1998

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.77 — 3,637 ratings — published 2013

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.94 — 4,662 ratings — published 2011

by (shelved 3 times as information-science)
avg rating 3.90 — 795 ratings — published 1961

“If insolvency is not transparent or well understood, and if illiquidity is backstopped by the Federal Reserve, then why do bank runs commence? The answer is psychology. Some customers or counterparties come to believe a bank will not repay them so they pull their money out or close transactions as quickly as possible. They are not reassured by ... press releases or positive comments by management. Word spreads, the withdrawals accelerate, and within days, sometimes hours, the bank closes its doors. From there it's an open issue whether the lost confidence spreads to other banks, in a process called contagion. No amount of capital or comment can stop a bank panic; it has a life of its own.
...
Enter AI. The next bank run may be triggered not by human panic but by AI imitating human panic. An AI bank analysis program with deeply layered neural networks and machine learning capability (perhaps complimented by a GPT capacity to speak with human analysts) Could read millions of pages of financial data on thousands of individual banks, far more than any team of human analysts could review. It's training set of materials provides familiarity with the dynamics of bank runs, basically an emerging property of a complex dynamic system, along with historical examples, worst case scenarios, and defensive moves. Events like the gold corner of 1869, the panic of 1907, the Great Depression of the 1930s, and the S&L crisis of the 1980s would all seem as fresh as today's news. This system would reach the same conclusion as a human analyst — move first, get your money out fast, don't be the last in line.
The true danger is not that the machine thinks like a human — it's supposed to. The danger is that it can act faster and communicate with other machines.”
― MoneyGPT: AI and the Threat to the Global Economy
...
Enter AI. The next bank run may be triggered not by human panic but by AI imitating human panic. An AI bank analysis program with deeply layered neural networks and machine learning capability (perhaps complimented by a GPT capacity to speak with human analysts) Could read millions of pages of financial data on thousands of individual banks, far more than any team of human analysts could review. It's training set of materials provides familiarity with the dynamics of bank runs, basically an emerging property of a complex dynamic system, along with historical examples, worst case scenarios, and defensive moves. Events like the gold corner of 1869, the panic of 1907, the Great Depression of the 1930s, and the S&L crisis of the 1980s would all seem as fresh as today's news. This system would reach the same conclusion as a human analyst — move first, get your money out fast, don't be the last in line.
The true danger is not that the machine thinks like a human — it's supposed to. The danger is that it can act faster and communicate with other machines.”
― MoneyGPT: AI and the Threat to the Global Economy

“And better still, reference librarians served well in the role that the internet never did: They were the perfect bouncers at the door of bad information. Or, put differently, they were the best vectors to transmit truth.”
― Wanderers
― Wanderers