1006G备考日记 by pluka——Pursuit of simplicity（谢幕）

plukaUID：2721764

12.26 COMMENT
NOTE

the dog-eared卷角的（书等） list.
If time and money is no problem, they can use brute-force methods that simply try every combination of letters, numbers and symbols until a match is found. That takes a lot of patience and computing power, and tends to be the sort of thing only intelligence agencies indulge in. 
upper- and lower-case letters：大小写字母encryption：编密码
brute-force methods：暴力手段
a mnemonic:记忆的，记忆术
To be on the safe side, however, his dog-eared list of passwords will still go with him.

COMMENT
This article impress me with its subtle humor when mentioned the most common way Europeans and Americans set their passwords(sth like '123abc' and 'abc123' really arouses my echoes and smile~). I myself too, stick to the same set for most of the websites, and commit the sin that will surely be whiped by many safty experts: I store all my passwords, usernames and corresponding websites(even important ones as my credit card account) in a text file on my computer. One hacker attack, and I lose my private online sovereignty……

Well informed of the dangers as I have, seldom have I worried those potential yet remote risks. After all, I'm only one in obscurity among numerous anonymous net-users. The large quantity obscures personal features and any possible attention-drawning characteristics, leaving us feel safe with the belief that hackers won't be interested in me and won't be even notice me~

This belief, in my eyes, is in most cases both true and necessary. We are living with constant risks on lose of privacy: cellphone records, public camera, internet supervisor software, or even endless gossips. As most of the invasions do only slightly or untangible harm to our nomal life, I assume it's all right to be more tolerant. Those who that too serious about it may possibly suffer from a even higher risk of hypertension. Learning to live with compromised privacy, in fact, is a staple in modern society.

plukaUID：2721764

122# 豆腐店的86
嘿嘿，一起加油~~

趁着今天居然还有点时间剩，做做精华帖笔记。
这一篇是以前就拜读过的、使徒大人（偶像呀偶像）的精华帖~！再来摘一摘笔记好了。

改作文指南
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-670640-1-1.html

关于结构。
“所谓结构，就是文章的组织，行文套路，好的文章结构清晰，各部分的要素对应完整，且相互之间关系紧密，过度连贯。
“well-focused， 重点明确，所有的论证紧密围绕分论点展开，分论点能有效支持中心论点。
“well-organized，组织完善，即能把各个论点和它的论据以有效的方式进行连接和分析。
“clear transitions，过度明确，文章有明确的连接词，逻辑关系清晰，并列、递进、因果能够找到标志。”

关于论证。
“如果把议论过程比喻为一个攻城的过程，那么分析原因就是之前不断的施加压力，让守军疲惫不堪，而例子则是致命一击，二者相互依靠，没有分析例子不能有效发挥作用，没有例子分析会显得空洞。”谨记呀谨记！
“深度往往跟论点立意有关，论点深度深、立意高，则对更多的事情有普适性，相应的说服力也会很强，如果深度浅、立意低，则容易被局限住思路，也会被反驳者轻易找到反例。”

关于逻辑。
“区别逻辑学，我们所关注的AW中的逻辑主要集中在
1 并列——组织文章结构，同时作用于支持论点
2 递进——组织文章结构，逐步作用于支持论点
3 转折——组织文章结构，统合文章思路
4 因果——联系文章论证，将文章的推理合理化
5 类比、对比——强化论证，丰富论证手段”
脑子里有点概念，自己写的时候也会更清晰。
=====================================
Naiba369 AW修改提高法 1《庖奶解狗》【真是案例版】
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=252994&extra=&highlight=&page=1

常见推理\逻辑错误（经典啊！）：
“1。强词夺理（begging the question）2。无关问题（red herring）3。推不出来（non sequitur）4.虚假困境（either-or）5.一面之词(stacked evidence) 6。在次之后，因此之故（post hoc）7.仓促概括（hasty generalization）8.人身攻击（ad hominem）9.偷还概念（inconsistent connection and extension）10.道德连坐（guilt by association）11.搭斜坡（slippery slope）12.转移话题（extension）13。制造虚假需求（create false needs）14.利用从众心理（bandwagon appeal）15.待定假设（problematic assumption）”

将抽象问题具体化，举反例、深入论述，才能够清晰易懂且发展重复。

这篇改得很强大……
====================================
Naiba369 AW修改提高法 2 《庖奶解鼠》之开门见山 同主题2(issue36) 的开头
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=254041&fpage=1&highlight=%2Bnaiba369
关于开头，最基础的是明确观点。在这个基础上，提示下文。再进一步，如果能够做到不被自己绕进去（也不绕别人进去），分析题目的背景、复杂性，做出初步推断。
====================================
Naiba369 AW修改提高法 3 《庖奶解鼠》之“言之有用” 点评so猫之issue8
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=254181&fpage=1&highlight=%2Bnaiba369
“这里要提到的是：当你的能力不是说不出东西，而是控制不了字数的时候，你就要好好想想，我写的每一句话，是不是都有其相应的作用。当然这种话，易说难做，但绝对要有这么一个意识―――在写的时候，不断问自己，我写这句话是干什么？是深化主题？还是加强说服力。只有当你具备意识了，以后才能提高” 心有戚戚焉。
另，要坚决杜绝思维过分跳跃。
===================================
Naiba369 AW修改提高法 4 《庖奶解鼠》之“寻找事例” 点评so猫之issue186
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=254224&fpage=1&highlight=%2Bnaiba369
主要注意点在于，切忌说理不举例！
官方评分标准提到举例的时候用的词是"or"，但由于咱们水平还不够高，没有光凭说理就能让人死心塌地的三寸不烂之舌，只好老老实实地每次都举出例子，把“or"当成"and"吧！
Naiba的系列作文修改都很相当认真，敬佩中。

plukaUID：2721764

开始过argu题库了，刚刚分析了10道，最棘手的是那种漏洞遍地不知道怎么组织攻击的。翻到了草草带Die组的帖子，刚好，先瞧瞧有啥能蹭到的~
眼看2009就要过去，AW之期越来越近，啊……
12.26

plukaUID：2721764

12.27 COMMENT
I lost my tongue on this topic...

Poor in knowledge of art and auction as I am, I see mainly the changeable and unpredictable prices that sometimes so high-flying as to surpass the top estimate easily. It may be interesting to dig more through the numbers and see why those fluctuations occur.
Contemporary financial background of bidders, of course, influence a lot. As mentioned in the article, with tight budget, collectors are willing to pay high(even higher than at other time) for worthwhile masterpieces while discard other works that count for little. For them, those reputed paintings, porcelains and other brilliant pieces are tantamount to valuable assess with a promising potential of appreciation. Stock them, and you get a good bargain.
What intrigues me, however, is why some pieces out of others gain great fame and adoration. Aplenty of artistis live in obscure for lifetime yet rise to be heros or idols decades or even hundreds years later. The recognition for their works, in my eyes, is more or less a matter of good fortune. Those pieces must first survive the time--not necessarily must they undergo the so-called time-test but may simply be stored in dim and messy rooms, remaining untouched---until one day somebody swept the dust and discovered their beauties. This process involves many uncertain factors such as changes in social values and fads, current worship, and perhaps most important, the status of the appreciator.

zhengchangdianUID：2563082

123# pluka

看你的comment 真的很舒服~~不过我很好奇的Google了一下“online sovereign”，点开网页后，发现好像没有别人这么用过...

plukaUID：2721764

123# pluka  

看你的comment 真的很舒服~~不过我很好奇的Google了一下“online sovereign”，点开网页后，发现好像没有别人这么用过...
zhengchangdian 发表于 2009-12-27 23:53

额……话说其实俺是随手用的……看来不能太随便！谢谢指出！

plukaUID：2721764

呜……又到早上了，时间过得真快……
看了又八童鞋的楼，感慨ING……俺要不要也背篇文章啥的？回去翻time……
下线单词去也~
12.27

plukaUID：2721764

12.28 COMMENT
Despite the downturn, entrepreneurs are enjoying a renaissance the world over, says Adrian Wooldridge.

They mobbed business heroes such as Azim Premji.（If you say that someone is being mobbed by a crowd of people, you mean that the people are trying to talk to them or get near them in an enthusiastic or threatening way.）
They also engaged in a frenzy of networking.  
The aspiring entrepreneurs did not just want to strike it rich; they wanted to play their part in forging a new India. 

...Keynesian economists, working hand in glove with big business and big government...(If you work hand in glove with someone, you work very closely with them.)
But perspectives have changed in the intervening decades, and Schumpeter’s entrepreneurs are once again roaming the globe.

====================好句太多，不摘了，直接记录======================
Since the Reagan-Thatcher revolution of the 1980s, governments of almost every ideological stripe have embraced entrepreneurship. The European Union, the United Nations and the World Bank have also become evangelists（福音传道者）. Indeed, the trend is now so well established that it has become the object of satire. Listen to me, says the leading character in one of the best novels of 2008, Aravind Adiga’s “The White Tiger”, and “you will know everything there is to know about how entrepreneurship is born, nurtured, and developed in this, the glorious 21st century of man.”
This special report will argue that the entrepreneurial idea has gone mainstream, supported by political leaders on the left as well as on the right, championed by powerful pressure groups, reinforced by a growing infrastructure of universities and venture capitalists and embodied by wildly popular business heroes such as Oprah Winfrey, Richard Branson and India’s software kings. The report will also contend that entrepreneurialism needs to be rethought: in almost all instances it involves not creative destruction but creative creation.
The world’s greatest producer of entrepreneurs continues to be America. The lights may have gone out on Wall Street, but Silicon Valley continues to burn bright. High-flyers from around the world still flock to America’s universities and clamour to work for Google and Microsoft. And many of them then return home and spread the gospel.
The company that arranged the oversubscribed（过多订购的） conference in Bangalore, The Indus Entrepreneurs (TiE), is an example of America’s pervasive influence abroad. TiE was founded in Silicon Valley in 1992 by a group of Indian transplants who wanted to promote entrepreneurship through mentoring, networking and education. Today the network has 12,000 members and operates in 53 cities in 12 countries, but it continues to be anchored in the Valley. Two of the leading lights at the meeting, Gururaj Deshpande and Suren Dutia, live, respectively, in Massachusetts and California. The star speaker, Wipro’s Mr Premji, was educated at Stanford; one of the most popular gurus（古鲁，领袖）, Raj Jaswa, is the president of TiE’s Silicon Valley chapter.
The globalisation of entrepreneurship is raising the competitive stakes for everyone, particularly in the rich world. Entrepreneurs can now come from almost anywhere, including once-closed economies such as India and China. And many of them can reach global markets from the day they open their doors, thanks to the falling cost of communications.
For most people the term “entrepreneur” simply means anybody who starts a business, be it a corner shop or a high-tech start up. This special report will use the word in a narrower sense to mean somebody who offers an innovative solution to a (frequently unrecognised) problem. The defining characteristic of entrepreneurship, then, is not the size of the company but the act of innovation. 
A disproportionate（不成比例的） number of entrepreneurial companies are, indeed, small start-ups. The best way to break into a business is to offer new products or processes. But by no means all start-ups are innovative: most new corner shops do much the same as old corner shops. And not all entrepreneurial companies are either new or small. Google is constantly innovating despite being, in Silicon Valley terms, something of a long-beard.（这表达太可爱了） 
This narrower definition of entrepreneurship has an impressive intellectual pedigree（血统，家谱）going right back to Schumpeter. Peter Drucker, a distinguished management guru, defined the entrepreneur as somebody who “upsets and disorganises”. “Entrepreneurs innovate,” he said. “Innovation is the specific instrument of entrepreneurship.” William Baumol, one of the leading economists in this field, describes the entrepreneur as “the bold and imaginative deviator from established business patterns and practices”. Howard Stevenson, the man who did more than anybody else to champion the study of entrepreneurship at the Harvard Business School, defined entrepreneurship as “the pursuit of opportunity beyond the resources you currently control”. The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, arguably the world’s leading think-tank on entrepreneurship, makes a fundamental distinction between “replicative” and “innovative” entrepreneurship.

Five myths
Innovative entrepreneurs are not only more interesting than the replicative sort, they also carry more economic weight because they generate many more jobs. A small number of innovative start-ups account for a disproportionately large number of new jobs. But entrepreneurs can be found anywhere, not just in small businesses. There are plenty of misconceptions about entrepreneurship, five of which are particularly persistent. The first is that entrepreneurs are “orphans and outcasts”, to borrow the phrase of George Gilder, an American intellectual: lonely Atlases battling a hostile world or anti-social geeks（做低级滑稽表演的人） inventing world-changing gizmos（小发明） in their garrets（顶楼）. In fact, entrepreneurship, like all business, is a social activity. Entrepreneurs may be more independent than the usual suits who merely follow the rules, but they almost always need business partners and social networks to succeed.
The history of high-tech start-ups reads like a roll-call（点名） of business partnerships: Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak (Apple), Bill Gates and Paul Allen (Microsoft), Sergey Brin and Larry Page (Google), Mark Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskovitz and Chris Hughes (Facebook). Ben and Jerry’s was formed when two childhood friends, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, got together to start an ice-cream business (they wanted to go into the bagel（百吉饼（先蒸后烤的发面圈）） business but could not raise the cash). Richard Branson (Virgin) relied heavily on his cousin, Simon Draper, as well as other partners. Ramana Nanda, of Harvard Business School (HBS), and Jesper Sorensen, of Stanford Business School, have demonstrated that rates of entrepreneurship are significantly higher in organisations where a large number of employees are former entrepreneurs.
Entrepreneurship also flourishes in clusters. A third of American venture capital flows into two places, Silicon Valley and Boston, and two-thirds into just six places, New York, Los Angeles, San Diego and Austin as well as the Valley and Boston. This is partly because entrepreneurship in such places is a way of life—coffee houses in Silicon Valley are full of young people loudly talking about their business plans—and partly because the infrastructure is already in place, which radically reduces the cost of starting a business. 
The second myth is that most entrepreneurs are just out of short trousers.（很年轻？） Some of today’s most celebrated figures were indeed astonishingly young when they got going: Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Michael Dell all dropped out of college to start their businesses, and the founders of Google and Facebook were still students when they launched theirs. Ben Casnocha started his first company when he was 12, was named entrepreneur of the year by Inc magazine at 17 and published a guide to running start-ups at 19. 
But not all successful entrepreneurs are kids. Harland Sanders started franchising Kentucky Fried Chicken when he was 65. Gary Burrell was 52 when he left Allied Signal to help start Garmin, a GPS giant. Herb Kelleher was 40 when he founded Southwest Airlines, a business that pioneered no-frills（不提供非必要服务的） discount flying in America. The Kauffman Foundation examined 652 American-born bosses of technology companies set up in 1995-2005 and found that the average boss was 39 when he or she started. The number of founders over 50 was twice as large as that under 25. 
The third myth is that entrepreneurship is driven mainly by venture capital. This certainly matters in capital-intensive industries such as high-tech and biotechnology; it can also help start-ups to grow very rapidly. And venture capitalists provide entrepreneurs with advice, contacts and management skills as well as money. 
But most venture capital goes into just a narrow sliver of business: computer hardware and software, semiconductors, telecommunications and biotechnology. Venture capitalists fund only a small fraction of start-ups. The money for the vast majority comes from personal debt or from the “three fs”—friends, fools and families. Google is often quoted as a triumph of the venture-capital industry, but Messrs Brin and Page founded the company without any money at all and launched it with about $1m raised from friends and connections.（人脉通达可用connected）
Monitor, a management consultancy that has recently conducted an extensive survey of entrepreneurs, emphasises the importance of “angel” investors, who operate somewhere in the middle ground between venture capitalists and family and friends. They usually have some personal connection with their chosen entrepreneur and are more likely than venture capitalists to invest in a business when it is little more than a budding idea.
The fourth myth is that to succeed, entrepreneurs must produce some world-changing new product. Sir Ronald Cohen, the founder of Apax Partners, one of Europe’s most successful venture-capital companies, points out that some of the most successful entrepreneurs concentrate on processes rather than products. Richard Branson made flying less tedious by providing his customers with entertainment. Fred Smith built a billion-dollar business by improving the delivery of packages. Oprah Winfrey has become America’s richest self-made woman through successful brand management.
The fifth myth is that entrepreneurship cannot flourish in big companies. Many entrepreneurs are sworn enemies of large corporations, and many policymakers measure entrepreneurship by the number of small-business start-ups. This makes some sense. Start-ups are often more innovative than established companies because their incentives are sharper: they need to break into the market, and owner-entrepreneurs can do much better than even the most innovative company man.
Big can be beautiful too
But many big companies work hard to keep their people on their entrepreneurial toes. Johnson & Johnson operates like a holding company that provides financial muscle and marketing skills to internal entrepreneurs. Jack Welch tried to transform General Electric from a Goliath（歌利亚） into a collection of entrepreneurial Davids. Jorma Ollila transformed Nokia, a long-established Finnish firm, from a maker of rubber boots and cables into a mobile-phone giant; his successor as boss of the company, Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo, is now talking about turning it into an internet company. Such men belong firmly in the pantheon（万神殿、伟人祠） of entrepreneurs.
Just as importantly, big firms often provide start-ups with their bread and butter. In many industries, especially pharmaceuticals and telecoms, the giants contract out innovation to smaller companies. Procter & Gamble tries to get half of its innovations from outside its own labs. Microsoft works closely with a network of 750,000 small companies around the world. Some 3,500 companies have grown up in Nokia’s shadow. 
But how is the new enthusiasm for entrepreneurship standing up to the worldwide economic downturn? Entrepreneurs are being presented with huge practical problems. Customers are harder to find. Suppliers are becoming less accommodating. Capital is harder to raise. In America venture-capital investment in the fourth quarter of 2008 was down to $5.4 billion, 33% lower than a year earlier. Risk, the lifeblood of the entrepreneurial economy, is becoming something to be avoided. 
Misfortune and fortune
The downturn is also confronting supporters of entrepreneurial capitalism with some awkward questions. Why have so many once-celebrated entrepreneurs turned out to be crooks? And why has the free-wheeling culture of Wall Street produced such disastrous results? 
For many the change in public mood is equally worrying. Back in 2002, in the wake of the scandal over Enron, a dubious energy-trading company, Congress made life more difficult for start-ups with the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation on corporate governance. Now it is busy propping up（撑起） failed companies such as General Motors and throwing huge sums of money at the public sector. Newt Gingrich, a Republican former speaker of America’s House of Representatives, worries that potential entrepreneurs may now be asking themselves: “Why not get a nice, safe government job instead?”
Yet the threat to entrepreneurship, both practical and ideological, can be exaggerated. The downturn has advantages as well as drawbacks. Talented staff are easier to find and office space is cheaper to rent. Harder times will eliminate the also-rans（落选之马败者落选者） and, in the long run, could make it easier for the survivors to grow. As Schumpeter pointed out, downturns can act as a “good cold shower for the economic system”, releasing capital and labour from dying sectors and allowing newcomers to recombine in imaginative new ways. 
Schumpeter also said that all established businesses are “standing on ground that is crumbling beneath their feet”. Today the ground is far less solid than it was in his day, so the opportunities for entrepreneurs are correspondingly more numerous. The information age is making it ever easier for ordinary people to start businesses and harder for incumbents to defend their territory. Back in 1960 the composition of the Fortune 500 was so stable that it took 20 years for a third of the constitutent companies to change. Now it takes only four years. 
There are many reasons for this. First, the information revolution has helped to unbundle（分类交易分类定价） existing companies. In 1937 Ronald Coase argued, in his path-breaking（开创性的） article on “The Nature of the Firm”, that companies make economic sense when the bureaucratic cost of performing transactions under one roof is less than the cost of doing the same thing through the market. Second, economic growth is being driven by industries such as computing and telecommunications where innovation is particularly important. Third, advanced economies are characterised by a shift from manufacturing to services. Service firms are usually smaller than manufacturing firms and there are fewer barriers to entry.
Microsoft, Genentech, Gap and The Limited were all founded during recessions. Hewlett-Packard, Geophysical Service (now Texas Instruments), United Technologies, Polaroid and Revlon started in the Depression. Opinion polls suggest that entrepreneurs see a good as well as a bad side to the recession. In a survey carried out in eight emerging markets last November for Endeavor, a pressure group, 85% of the entrepreneurs questioned said they had already felt the impact of the crisis and 88% thought that worse was yet to come. But they also predicted, on average, that their businesses would grow by 31% and their workforces by 12% this year. Half of them thought they would be able to hire better people and 39% said there would be less competition.
=======================================================
COMMENT
For me, this article is thought-provoking. Representing the current craze for entrepreneurship, it elicited my first thought that this planet is now ruled by commercialism. Everything goes with a little price tag. Every man has one, too. Our capability and value is judged and realized largely, if not all, by cash(or cheque, stock, option, power, whatever you thought, be it can transfered into cash). Whether this trend is inspiring or devastating has gone through numerous debates(and I don't won't to add one here), yet the truth is: comfortable or not, you have to live with it. In the movie Wall Street,Gorden Gekko said,"Greed is good." These words, it seems, suits this roaring world best.

I'd like to say more, yet something pulls me stop right at the last sentence...anyway, no more interesting to write down except my compliments on the vivid language, clear structure and discerning contents. Excellent one! Learn sth about entrepreneurs now and about beautiful and precise wording as well.

plukaUID：2721764

逛论坛，做笔记
===========
AW实战格式、语法提醒版
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=396659&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D52
1.AW五段式。不管是issue还是argu的写作，段落上我们通常都是经典的五段式，开头、主题三段、结尾。时间和精力容许可以发挥更多段落，但我个人倾向于对每段的观点分析的更为透彻一些。
4.引用别人的话要用引号，双引号比较正式，但是单引号也被接受，引用的时候要注意，中文的格式是XX说：“……。”但是英文的格式却是Mary says, “….” 注意一下冒号和逗号，空格分别在逗号和后半部分的引号后面。
常见语法错误
2.定语从句错误。很多同学参加GRE考试的时候，写作功底已经比较不错，但常常句子一写长，问题就暴露出来，很漂亮的定语从句往往总是忘记把主句写完整，成了”千年悬句“。
3.But、However滥用。读过GRE阅读的一定知道But、however等转折词后面才是文章的中心、作者的观点，是出题点。我们部分考生通常会比较随意，或者说自身就不是很自信，一不留神就写了一个but，记住But转折中心思想，慎用！
4.改了这么多同学的阿狗,很多人都写evidences,evidences...实际上evidence不可数!这个词的使用频率很高,大家一定要注意.这种错误太基础啦.
5. last but not least.这个是口语表达,AW文体正式,lbnl这个短语尽量避免^^
6. 好,最近又有了新问题.很多人在argument举例的时候,前面刚刚一个may/perhaps/possiblility,完了马上一个,in fact,..明明就是举假设的说明,后面紧跟一个"实际上".估计大家想表达"实际上事实可能是这样..."的意思.但是往往举例就不只一个,我们想表达的意思也是-包含题目所给的可能,还有其他的可能.这样不定的情形,最好少用in fact.就逻辑而言,和实际的情况可能不太相干,事实只有一个.可能有点钻牛角.呵呵。不是真正的、唯一的实际情况就别用in fact~
================================================
中国人要注意的学术文章的写作注意要点
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=290433&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D52
1。避免使用反问句、设问句。特别是作者也没有答案的问题。问题倒是可以的问，但是要有问有答，与论点相关。
2。避免集中使用"Be"动词，包括is, are, has been, have been, etc. "Be" 仅仅表示一种状态，例如："i am here", "you are there". 对于母语者来说，"Be"动词其实就是写在纸上，而没有任何感情色彩。所以应该尽量避免成篇累牍地使用。无夏版主也提到过，嗯，要记得~
3。尽量避免重复使用单词或者词组。特别是近距离集中在某一两句话里使用。
4。避免使用从句套从句的超长句子。
5。避免陈词滥调等废话。
其实都是挺基本的提点，不过正因为基础，所以更不能忽略。
===============================================
关于AW文章中能否出现I we you等词汇的实验报告v1.0！
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=167440&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D52
额……其实这篇的笔记，我只是想说，imong太幽默了！;P
实验结论：
完全可以出现we系列，I系列，you系列词汇，但是不主张使用you系列。
各系列的使用频率在绝对值上都不应该太高。
嗯，还有augment用第一人称比较少。

plukaUID：2721764

明天早起上课，今天不能熬夜= =（我恨周二和周四）
下雪了，寒气突然就冒上来了，手脚也开始冰冷（我恨冬天）
晚上Q群气氛很崩坏（嗯，我爱崩坏）
于是心情还是很不错的。
放假三天有家不能回，宅在宿舍啃书本，泪目……
12.28

plukaUID：2721764

12.29 COMMENT
NOTE
And in the final lines of his densely but skilfully packed account of faith from the viewpoint of evolutionary biology, Nicholas Wade recalls the place where he first felt sanctity: Eton College chapel.
The “beauty of holiness” in a British private school is a far cry from the sort of religion that later came to interest him as a science journalist at Nature magazine and then the New York Times.
...witnessed religion at its most primordial when he went to Australia in 1836.
he sides with（站在同一边） those who think man’s propensity for religion has some adaptive function.
Among evolutionary biologists, this idea is contested. 
Groups which practised religion effectively and enjoyed its benefits were likely to prevail over those which lacked these advantages.
Of course, the picture is muddied by the vast changes that religion went through in the journey from tribal dancing to Anglican hymns. The advent of settled, agricultural societies, at least 10,000 years ago, led to a new division of labour, in which priestly castes tried to monopolise access to the divine, and the authorities sought to control sacred ecstasy.
Above all, by promoting moral rules and cementing cohesion, in a way that makes people ready to sacrifice themselves for the group and to deal ruthlessly with outsiders. 
==============================

COMMENT
Consistently have I found religion, anthropology and archeology entrancing. Their quests are either intangible or remote;their methodology involves both large-scale operation like excavation and subtle distinction of the texture of fabric or minor finding on the coner of a premordial mural;their fruition, drawn reasonably and logically from every detail, seems sometimes extremely unthinkable and fantastic. Those works combine observation and speculation, solid confirmation and wild venture, timid introspection and bold prediction in such a way that differ greatly from other scientific subjects. 

Once I wondered how a empyreal spiritual quest can be studied in material way, I mean, in a way based on solid tangible matters and achieved through down-to-earth reseach. Gradually, then, I realize the impulse behind. Materialism do reveal sth: all spirits, whatever the scopes or participators, stem from this very material world. Art and religion come from brain, and brain comprises cells; soul and heart thus enter the realm of science. 

In the belief of the inherent connection between spirit and material, my mind echoes with the idea of faith's funtion suggested by Mr Wade. Anyway, nothing comes for nothing, and all have their reasons to exist. 

This article presents an intriguing topic. It elicits some ideas, and this would be good for issue writing~

plukaUID：2721764

早上七点就爬起来了，结果就是到了晚上撑不住……
也该开始找找ISSUE的素材了，光看新闻不够呀，找本书来看才好。以前看罗素做过笔记，不知道还翻得出来不……奈何不是西方哲学史（个人觉得最无聊的一本，当时看的直打哈欠= =|||），不过，额，貌似这本对ISSUE应该会最有用……sigh……
看了马丁路德金的狱中信，果然对ISSUE17很有启发。
12.29

plukaUID：2721764

12.30 COMMENT
NOTE


pointed to the pending（未决的） attack.
He said he had ordered government agencies to give him a preliminary report on Thursday about what happened and added that he would “insist on accountability at every level,” although he did not elaborate.
The president’s withering assessment of the government’s performance could reshape the intensifying political debate over the thwarted terrorist attack. 
The debate has escalated（论战升级） since...
But he spared little in his sharp judgment（评语依然尖锐？） about how a known extremist could be allowed to board a flight bound for the United States after his own father had warned that he had become radical. 
potential catastrophic breach of security（拿来跟‘恐怖主义’替换着说挺方便的）

COMMENT

What I see is a chaotic political quarrel mixed with eager exculpations and ruthless fires nurtured under a receding presidential influence. Mr Obama rushed to a statement of "system failure" too early, and such haste came not for the first time. Earlier this year, at the issue concerning the black professor arrested without evidence, his cursory comment(police are stupid) provoked enough objection and criticism. One might expect the president to be more mature and considerate, yet this anticipation failed. While Republicans spare no effort trying to prepare their way for the midterm election in 2010, the president's power and charisma seem to be fading and the prospect for Democrats is not a one that shines: almost surely an urgly time ahead. 

As for counterterrorism, uncertainties and tensions abound. The ultimate goal, of course, will be clear up existing malicious groups and cut off any recruitment. Yet this goal might be too ambitious to current systems. Mr Obama mentioned the out-dated equipment on relating department; besides, the theory needs to be renew. One of the characteristics of Terrorisim is that it never stop at one stage but keep on evolving, adapting itself into various environment and penetrating borders and fences. So must counterterrorism. A worldwide unity might achieve this, but only at the price of hard struggle and balance which, desperately, requires a commanding leader fully in control. 

Here we return to the same question: will Mr Obama be tough enough to stand all up? The answer matters not only Democrats but the world.

plukaUID：2721764

抱Bela和fana~
其实都是很久以前看的，完全木印象了= =|||

plukaUID：2721764

tomorrow is another day.
没有别的好说的，今天继续头晕，但是受到刺激，于是决定不能再晕了。（来回摸着同学的笔记本，真想沾点灵气啊……她怎么能把一本书都抄了一遍……）
草草说，argument题库前两遍要快速的过，我还在磨磨蹭蹭地列提纲= =||| 好~不列提纲了加快速度~
觉得自己的状态还很需要调整，要再沉下去一点才好，现在感觉还有些飘飘的，无论是备考期末还是AW……
12.30