Status Updates From What the Dog Saw and Other ...

Around two thirds into the book I have to say that I'm really enjoying it. Except for the first two essays, all the other have been really interesting and though provoking. So I'm not sure if the first two are not that good or maybe I was not paying enough attention.

I found the last few essays far more interesting. I really liked the new perspective on the Enron case: everything was in plain sight but nobody could see it. People didn't see it was a fraud because they didn't have the expertise, or even worse no one really payed attention to the company's books. I think this essay (as interesting as it was) is the one less connected to the idea of "what the dog saw".

After reading the essay that gives title to the book, I see what the author meant with "what the dog saw". This essay goes into dog psychology, so it does explain what the dog saw. However, I think the equivalent perspective isn't as developed in other essays. It seems to me that the common theme is actually the people that saw what others didn't and not what the audience (the dog) saw from that people.