Final review: Yeah, definitely not super impressed. The book really doesn't seem to have a thesis. The math section was kind of a fun thought-experiment but didn't really "prove" anything, in my opinion. I did enjoy the totally random passionate treatise on the Innocence Project and problematic incarceration rates in the US though. And there are definitely some fun tales told in the book.
It kind of feels like the syllabus for some kind of second-year elective that would be really fun to take but at the end of the term when you're reviewing for the exam you realize you're just left with an assortment of facts and stories; you didn't really learn anything substantial.
Interim review: I'm currently halfway through this book, and here's what I think so far. It's definitely an interesting topic, and it's reasonably well-written (even the math parts are easy to follow), but I have some problems.
1) In the first section he defines flukes and coincidences as different things (a distinction I agree with in this context), and then proceeds to use examples of flukes as illustrations of coincidences, so what was the point?
2) He seems to imply that until Cardano's Liber de ludo aleae was published in the 17th C, no one had ever even thought about the math behind chance, probability, and gambling. Just because no one else had published a paper on it doesn't mean some clever tavern-keeper hadn't spent hours idly doing sums while watching people play dice, I think.
3) He obviously talks a lot about odds, probabilities, etc. He also explains the weak law of large numbers, whereby in a large enough sample every possibility, no matter how improbably, is "bound to occur." And then he also points out that every thing that happens is governed by physical laws and can actually be predicted if we have fine enough tools. And he doesn't seem yet to see that these things seem to contradict each other.
Basically, at this point I don't know what he's trying to prove, and I feel like at the halfway point I should have a sense of where it's all going. I don't know if he's trying to prove that there's no such thing as coincidence, or that everything is just random chance, or what. I'll get back to you when I finish the book.