For me, the only thing this book proves is that in the post-Soviet Ukraine, the homeless can be subjected to exploitation and forced loss of dignity for a small sum of money. The degrading conditions of the people could be shown without having the photographer subject the people to further degradation. By the way, this was the most poorly bound book that I have ever received. Upon the first (and last) reading, groups of 10-20 pages were coming out in handfuls. Not a problem - I threw it away.

First thing is first. Book is in colour. Did I not read that? Do not know, was expecting B&W. Second, 400 pages of which I believe 50+ were provactive and made me think. Provactivity was why I bought the book, and why I suspect others did/will too. Wanted to be woken up from my slumber: to know what it is really like over there. But 50/400 pages is not a high ratio, hence my 3 stars. (To be honest, some of the photos I felt I could've taken myself.) Notwithstanding this, there were some shots that demanded a reality check. How wealthy we are in the Western World...

The photos in this book are provocative and thoughtful - but definitely not for everyone. Case History is 400+ pages of Ukraine's poor and homeless - most in various stages of undress. Mikhailov comes through and does an excellent job of depicting certain aspects of the downfall of the Soviet Union - his photos are thoughtful and emotional - but often disturbing. View his other works before spending the money. Not for the weak of stomach!

Even though the fifth edition of this book was published in 1961, this book still gives a useful and brief introduction to probability. However, if you're going to buy a book to learn statistics or probability, I would suggest a more recent book. They may not be as brief and concise as this, but newer books would be more up to date. One interesting thing about the Gnedenko/Khinchin book is their examples and problems, which involve things such as the production of artillery shells, or hitting targets with cannons. It is a very welcome change from the traditional, but obvious examples that use decks of cards or dice. Also, it says things about the audience for whom this book was originally meant, and the relevant topics of the time of the cold war. Still, I suggest a more recent text.

One can only wonder how this book ever made its way to Australia. "Inside the Kremlin Walls" purports to tell the story of one year in the lives of a group of Brezhnev-era Muscovites. In reality, it is a ham-fisted attempt to "expose" the Soviet political system as being run by a bunch of deceitful, murderous yobs. This is probably true, as far as it goes, but for good measure the book heaps scorn on those duped, red-loving, fellow-travelling, American liberal journalists. While the author is a genuine, ex-Soviet journalist who had an affiliation with the Central Committee of the Communist Party, the book seems more a product of another committee: the 1950s US House Un-American Activities Committee. In fact, the book seems hardly to have been written by a Russian at all. The factual errors in it are astounding: 1. The author makes the nonsensical statement that the Spanish Civil War was the result of a Spanish Communist rebellion against the Franco government. It was, of course, Franco and the rightist forces in Spain that rose up against the Republican socialist government. As a Party functionary, Mr. Vinokurov should certainly have known that.

2. The Russian word "vor" (thief) is mistaken for the word "bor" (pine forest.) This results in the Soviet leadership living in a place called "Silver Thief" instead of "Silver Pine Forest." Thus, it was either a deliberate attempt to associate Soviet leaders with the word "thief", or the product of someone's not altogether familiarity with the Russian language.

3 Finally, the Soviet-era President is identified as Viktor Podgorny. Actually, his given name was Nikolay!

Is it possible that a journalist who had worked at "Pravda" could have made these egregious mistakes? No matter the origins of the book, it seems to have earned a well-deserved obscurity.

this book left much to be desired. hoping for an interesting discussion on two captivating subjects, i was thoroughly confused and annoyed. this book was very, very difficult to read. in addition to the difficulty of getting through this sludge, there were far to many grammatical mistakes. tread lightly