1006G[REBORN FROM THE ASHES组]备考日记 by Fancy——no pain no gain

fancywwUID: 2583671

TOPIC: ARGUMENT131 - The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.

"The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni."


自己先分析一下题目。
                             F                                    O
dumping                         no                  dumping     no
drilling within 20 miles   no                   drilling        no
fishing                           yes                 fishing within 10miles    no
fish population↓                              fish population: no change
=>blame on fishing not pollution
=>=>abandon F's, adopt O's

1.这个论证最大的问题就是结论得出是建立在两个毫不相关的比较上,我觉得这是可以在首段就指出的。至于F和O的情况是有可能会不同从而导致Speaker的推断会错误，则可以找出好几点，我觉得找出1-2点来批驳就好。比如，drilling的范围差异。
2.批驳作者无理由地否定了pollution的可能性。pollution虽然不会来自于dumping，但也有其他来源，如drilling；
3.批驳作者没有考虑到其他可能导致fishing↓的原因，如气候、洋流等；
4.让步，即使是fishing导致的，0与F不同可能会导致O的regulations对F完全不适用。


In this argument, the author concludes that the Tria Island should abandon its regulations and adopt Omni's in order to restore its fish populations and protect all of its marine wildlife. To support his conclusion, the author cites the example of Omni Island which has regulations that ban fishing. However, the argument suffers from a few flaws.

To begin with, the author assumes too hastily that the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters should blame on overfishing.
Firstly, there are many other nature factors which would influence the fish population, such as water temperature, spaning season, extreme weather phenomenon and so forth.  Secondly,the author fails to prove that the banned actions have not happened. If the water is polluted, the fish population will probably decrease. （这句话有点费解）Besides, the oil may also float from other place. All these sceranios, if true, will undermine the author's conclusion that overfishing should be responsible for decline in fish populations.  （这段批驳Speaker没有考虑到其他可能性）

In additon, even assuming that overfishing leads to the decline in fish populations, the author falsely concludes that Tria should follow the example of Omni. The author overlooks the differences between the two Islands. There might be disparity in Island weather, water quality, fish sorts and so on. These defferences will make Omni's regulations unsuccessful in Tria. What's more, the author doesn't prove that the fish caught in Tria is within 10 miles of Tria, which will undermine the conclusion. （让步）

Further more, even assuming that the Omni's regulation will success in Tria, the argument still has some flaws. First, the Omni's regulations might not be the best one. There are may be better ones such as stricker ban on dumping. Second, the Omni's regulation cannot guarantee to protect all the marine wildlife.  （再让步——是否有必要呢？）

To sum up, the author fails to substantiate his conclusion that Tria should adopt Omni's regulations. To support his conclusion, the author should provides more information.

展开还可以再充分一点。多练练应该能上450的。
至于最后一个“再让步”的必要性我比较疑惑，嗯……多看看再来思考吧。

fancywwUID: 2583671

35. The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia. "Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia." ------------------ 分析：S：member of aspirin->treat headaches          foods are rich in S                                 ===>correlate: headaches↓in 20 years (report)          food-processing add S (↑) plus: new use of S……>（the use of S in food-processing↑）……>number of headaches in M↓ 1.错误因果“correlate” 2.report可以质疑 3.忽略了括号中的环节 4.让步，即使前面都对，普遍对特殊（M） In this summary the author concludes that the number of headaches suffered by average citizen of Mentia will continue to decline. To justify this argument, the author show me some evidence that many foods are naturally rich in salicylates(S), which are similar to aspirin, a medicine used to treat headache. Moreover, the author cites a twenty – year study, amid which the average number of headaches is reported declining. However, close scrutiny of the argument reveals many logical and statistic problems that will without doubt render it unconvincing. （我才看了三篇，加上自己以前也写过不少类似开头，都有点受不了了，可见这种开头有着非常严重的模板印记，不论措辞如何不同） To begin with, the author’s argument relies on a hasty assumption that S is the very factor leading to the decline of the number of headaches. However, no certain proof has been shown to confirm this connection.（前面这句纯属套话，没有把错误点说透彻，就开始急于考虑possibility了） There is a high possibility that it’s some other chemicals that added in foods curing the headaches, but not S. And it’s also possible that even though S is curing the headaches, the consequence is not apparent enough for a survey to check out.（这两个possibility想的不好,不是很有利的反驳了这个错误的因果，如果要考虑头痛减少的可能原因，可以说：生活水平的提高，健康意识的加强；S的添加量是否足以治疗头痛） Even if the connection between the use of S and decline of headache is confirmed, the author fails to show the details of the twenty-year study to prove it representative. First, the number of people who has taken the survey is not given. Perhaps the sample is too small to be considered valid. Furthermore, the situation of these sample people is also unknown. It’s possible that the symptom of the headache of the people is not severe enough, and that it’s some other factors resulting in the recovery of their headache, even that it’s cure all by themselves. （这段个人认为还不错） Even if the two factors that will lead to the failure of the argument are both proved, the author still cannot prove that the trend of using S as preservative will continue. It’s totally possible that all the companies tend to give up using S as preservative for some reasons, like recent discovery or governmental restricts. Or perhaps, there will be some other chemicals found to be more efficient than S as preservative, which will without doubt result in the decline of using S.（这段也还不错） In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stand in many facets. （又上套话了）Firstly,（用在这里有点令人晕乎） to strengthen the argument, the author must show me more evidence to prove that it is the S which added as preservative that cure people’s headache, not other chemicals. Secondly, to convince me, the author also have to show more details about the twenty – year study to prove it representative. Finally, the author also have to give adequate evidence to show that the tendency of using S as preservatives will continue. Without ruling out all the other possibilities, the argument will never convince me. 这种结尾吧，也说不上不好。哎，怎么说呢。。。

fancywwUID: 2583671

TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.

"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."

                          S--nonprofit                                      M--profit
average stady:      2D                                                       6D
cure rate:                  2                       >                              1
employees/patient:  more                                           fewer
complaints:              few                                                   ?
====>treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is more economical and better

提纲：
1，在医院时间长短不能说明治疗质量
2，治愈比率同样不能说明治疗质量
3，医院有更多工作人员不一定能提供更好服务
4，投诉少不能说明服务好

基本就是批驳这四点，找的很准确。在别人的基础上改~我的习惯，呵呵。


先分析下你的提纲，的确题目有说到这4点，但是这4点并非全部来支持high quality的，实际上题目也有在最后一句提到过be economical. 此外我们在分析所谓的quality的时候，最好不要笼统的宣称blabla是为了提高quality.毕竟quality也是有很多种的，比如服务，器械，营业人员的水平，环境是否清洁等等。
所以作者的理由应该是这样：
1.医院治愈时间长短和治愈比率，作者实际上是想说的“医术”和“医疗器具”的优势
2.作者提到的是more employees per patient，而不是单纯的more workers.这个里面是有很大的猫腻的，大家应该一眼就开出来
3.抱怨是面对的服务质量

（分析很精准呀，关键是指出了speaker给出理由背后的猫腻，揭穿了它实际想传达的东西。这点很重要，学习了。）



There are several facets are questionable in this argument. At first, the stayed time is not a good indication about the quality of treatment. Secondly, the cure rate can not indicate about the quality about the hospital. Thirdly, more employees for per patient could not ensure a better treatment(这里应该还有一个总员工人数的问题) for the patient. Finally, few complaints were received about the service does not demonstrate all the other people are satisfied with the service. So, the assertion which the author concluded in the argument is unreliable.(属于直接列举型的开头，1，2两个点可以合并一下。毕竟你后文当中1，2其实也是合并写的)

To begin with, the author has tried to make us believe that the Saluda hospital (SH) could provide better quality treatment（漏了个and） because the average length of a patient's stay and the cure rate there is shorter than Megaville Hospital (MH).Lacking information about what kind(the extend.毕竟你下文说的仅仅是slight illness和serious disease) of illness the patient have got, the author can not confidently draw any conclusion about(of) the quality about the two hospitals. Maybe the patients who visited to SH have some slight sickness, and people may choose(这个属于合理的他因，说明所有重病患者都比较倾向于大医院) the big hospital like MH to cure some serious disease like cancer, or AIDS, and that kinds of sicknesses are not easy,even possible to heal.(这里少掉一个比较致命的东西，估计你后文也有这种情况：没有提到这种可能的他因对作者立场的关键性负面作用. 你的结论是the author can not confidently draw any conclusion，为什么can not?你提到了他因，但是为什么这种他因能够支持你的话，反对作者的？这个是需要说清楚的) （so the author cannot judge that S is of better quality than M from the average length of patient's stay and cure rate——是少这么一句话吗）

Another question about the argument is that though there are more employees for per patient of SH than MH, the author can not make sure that every patient will be provided a better service. For the simple reason that we don't know the jobs of those employees, there may be some of them are bus drivers or cooks in cafeteria(这个是不合理的，大医院同样会有这些雇员，而且只多不少。这里的关键性入手点应该是per patient.实际上如果小医院本来就没什么生意，而大医院经常人满为患，自然小医院平均员工多一些)（一针见血地他因分析呀）. They can do nothing to help patient restore. Granted that all the jobs the employees worked are helpful to the patients. We don't know whether they are loyal to their occupation（这里同样有问题，loyality或者preoccupation,都不是所谓的“critical strike”，它们和你要提到的quality of service关系不大。关键的在这里：小医院可能没有大医院那么如此全面的医疗人员分布。比如麻醉师，比如操作X-Ray的。）. So the author generated the conclusion too hastily. (排开他因不合理以外，整段话的论述很不充分，除开TS句，就全部是他因了。然而我们的目的"并不是为了找他因，而是为了批作者的话"，所以自己的说理和逻辑分析，才是predominance) （很多时候我们都只顾照它因了，反而找了很多不太相关甚至不太合理的他因；相反，应该从author自己的话中找可能存在的矛盾）

Finally, the data about complaints about service of SH could not ensure us (that) SH provides better service. Because we don't know, how many patients have been the two hospitals respectively to cure some sicknesses, and what fraction of them has reported a complaint. May be the quantity of the complaints of SH is less than that of MH. But the fraction may be larger(这是啥意思...这里的关键点是可能很多病人不满但是没抱怨吧，直接讲出来就行，没必要去扯什么分数，老米这种逻辑思维单纯的肯定不会明白你在说什么). Granted that both the quantity and fraction of the complaints received by SH is less. The author can not convince us that all the other people are satisfied with the service.（最后一句，不知道是时间问题，还是你的思维问题，属于画蛇添足了，如果不能确定充分论述，那么就放掉这个点，拿出一个point但是不说清楚，就会成为败笔。花时间去找10个weak point把它们一一列举，不如花同样的时间把两个点彻底的讲清楚。） （这段是么怎么讲清楚）

In conclusion, this argument can not be taken seriously as it stands. To strengthen it, the author should provide the detailed information about what kind of illness the patients have, what jobs do the employees worked for, and the exact proportion about the received complaints of all the patients.（结尾不改，个人习惯～）

版主大人的思路果然就是高人一筹呀。。。。。受启发了

fancywwUID: 2583671

周五报名时，脑子进水了，第二城市居然选了成都，是最近太想回家了吗。
第一次考的时候都只选了北京，哎，花了四百块冤枉钱去换地方，还不知道北京还有没有合适的。
不想再像今年那样4月底才考了
不过这次还是做决定晚了，没有狠下心要考。
明天等着查邮件吧，rp呀~就爆发一次吧！希望我能有3月的考位！

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.22]

To be honest, I had paid little attention to Obama's health-care reform bill. And I do not know much about how the American Senate works. So I cannot fully understand some of the points in the article. In this case, I did some Wikipedia job, and here is my brief extract to help fellows like me to understand the article better.


The debate over healthcare reform in the United States centers around questions of a right to health care, access, fairness, sustainability, and quality purchased by the high sums spent.

The mixed public-private health care system in the United States is the most expensive in the world, with health care costing more per person than in any other nation, and a greater portion of GDP is spent on it than in any other.

A study of international health care spending levels in the year 2000 found that while the U.S. spends more on health care than other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the use of health care services in the U.S. is below the OECD median by most measures. The authors of the study concluded that the prices paid for health care services are much higher in the U.S.

The U.S. is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.

In spite of the amount spent on health care in the US, according to a 2008 report, the United States ranks last in the quality of health care among developed countries.The World Health Organization (WHO), in 2000, ranked the US health care system 37th in overall performance and 72nd by overall level of health (among 191 member nations included in the study).

Whether a universally accessible health care system should be implemented in the U.S. remains a hotly debated political topic.

A fundamental problem in evaluating reform proposals is the difficulty of estimating their cost and potential impact.

Another impediment to implementing any reform that does not benefit insurance companies or the private health care industry is the power of insurance company and health care industry lobbyists in the United States.

Public opinion on health care reform suggests a high percentage desire reforms; however, do not want to see their taxes raised.

There have been a number of different health care reforms proposed during the Obama administration to improve the U.S. health care system.

These include variety of specific types of reform ranging from increased use of health care technology through changing the anti-trust rules governing health insurance companies and tort-reform to rationing of care. The Obama administration has suggested a package of reforms, as have several Congressional legislative proposals.

fancywwUID: 2583671

第四次作业——读后感第五篇

TOPIC: ARGUMENT159 - The nation of Claria covers a vast physical area（可以作为反驳依据）. But despite wide geographic differences, many citizens are experiencing rising costs of electricity（rising的原因是否一样？）. A recent study of household electric costs in Claria found that families who cooled their houses with fans alone spent more on electricity than did families using air conditioners alone for cooling. However, those households that reported using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electricity than those households that used either fans or air conditioners alone. Thus, the citizens of Claria should follow the study's recommendation and use both air conditioners and fans in order to save money on electricity.
fan>are conditioner>fan&airconditioner===>air conditioner&fan:to save money on electricity

In this argument, the author recommends both using air conditioners and fans as an effective way of saving money on electricity. In order to justify it, the author cites a survey that different families being diverse in the way of cooling the house spend different money on electricity. However, close scrutiny of the statistic and the line of reasoning reveal that it is not convincing.

A threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the survey. Lacking of assurance and information about the randomness and relative size of the survey' sample, the author cannot convince me the conclusion of the survey is reliable. As the author mentions, the nation of Claria covers a vast physical area, without enough large sample, so it is entirely possible that the survey is not representative of the real situation of Claria. Moreover different place will have different temperature and the price of electricity, without comprehensive consideration these factors, I strongly doubt the reliability of the survey. The dubious survey undermines the follow conclusions which rely on it.
（一开始就批调查似乎不太有力。并且反驳不够到位，虽然说到了地域很大，有地域差异，没有进一步举出可能存在的差异）

Secondly, the author asserts different way of cooling the house causes the decrease of electricity consuming just because they happen together. Obviously, the evidence for the casual relationship is too vague to believe. Furthermore, to satisfy the same requirement, common sense informs us air condition costs more electricity than fans. Thus, there must be other reasons causing the decrease of the electric consumption. The most reasonable one is that the expense for air condition is so money-consuming that the citizens would like to tolerate the hot weather rather than pay for it.
（这段其实谈到了两点，一是用电扇和空调与用电量的高低并不构成因果关系，这个我觉得是这个argue的关键点，应该好好批驳一下这个非因果。二是与常识相比这个结果矛盾。但作者前提不已经承认了这个调查的结果吗，怎么又在反驳呢，有点没看懂）

Even though the author can substantiate foregoing assumption and assertion, I still cannot accept his/her recommendation because the author overlooks other factors contributes to the amounts of electricity. As we know, for a family, facilities of cooling the house take little part of electricity. Computer, lights, television, fridge and so forth cost more electricity. Thus it is possible that even though the method of saving electricity recommended by the author works, it makes little contribution to the total electricity consuming so that we cannot see the change on
spending money. Furthermore, if the electric consumptions of other factors increase, it will not save the money, strongly contradicting to the conclusion of the author.
（反驳结论的可行性，这点大家都会想到吧）

To sum up, the recommendation suffers from statistic and logic flaws causing that it is not warranted. In order to strengthen it, the author should provide the compelling evidence to prove the reliability of the survey and the casual relationship between the way of cooling their house and decrease of electric consumption. Additionally, the author should also provide appealing evidence to prove the total electric consumption will decrease.


最近argue看多了觉得有点迷惑了，那几个问题基本上大家都能找到，并用一套一套的模板组织成华丽丽的语言，但总有种隔靴搔痒的感觉，就是没有直击问题的本质。而问题的本质是什么？怎样组织才合理？这正是我迷惑的地方。

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.21]

comments：
The article mainly concerns on the "new normal" state of the world economy after crisis. It casts doubts on Friedman's String Theory. It says that the world economy can hardly go back to the level before the crisis, or the level it should reach without the crisis. It gives advice on how the government, banks and companies should do.We should learn from the past lessons like Japan's bubble year.

Mr. Fisher puts tow sentences that mean a lot. The first is:overinvestment and overspeculation…would have far less serious results were they not conducted with borrowed money.”  And the second one is:"I fancy that over-confidence seldom does any great harm except when, as, and if, it beguiles its victims into debt." although my major has little relation to economy, and I do not know much about economy, I think that things like overinvestment and overspeculation always accompany with debts. And when people are over-confident, they tend to ignore how much they have borrowed, because they always thought that they could make more and pay the debt.


vocabulary：
Epicureans:
of or relating to one devoted to sensual pleasure
Saddle:
a : to place under a burden or encumbrance  b : to place (an onerous responsibility) on a person or group
Shenanigan:
1 : a devious trick used especially for an underhand purpose; 2 a : tricky or questionable practices or conduct ? usually used in plural  b : high-spirited or mischievous activity
Ruminate:
1 : to go over in the mind repeatedly and often casually or slowly; 2 : to chew repeatedly for an extended period
Catch on:
1 : to become aware  : LEARN;  also   : UNDERSTAND; 2 : to become popular
Sanctum: a sacred place
Exchequer: 国库  Treasury：财政部
Hobble： to move along unsteadily or with difficulty;  especially   : to limp along
Harbour:
1 a : to give shelter or refuge to  b : to be the home or habitat of  *the ledges still harbor rattlesnakes*;  broadly   : CONTAIN;   2 : to hold especially persistently in the mind
Shutter:
to close by or as if by shutters  *corporations shuttering their production plants
Unstuck:
brought into a state of disarray, discomposure, or incoherence   
Mothball:
a condition of protective storage (樟脑丸->保存，封存)
Atrophy:
decrease in size or wasting away of a body part or tissue;
Infrastructure:
the system of public works of a country, state, or region
Reckon:
count,estimate,compute;
Trajectory:
1 : the curve that a body (as a planet or comet in its orbit or a rocket) describes in space
2 : a path, progression, or line of development resembling a physical trajectory
Travail:
1 a : work especially of a painful or laborious nature  : TOIL  b : a physical or mental exertion or piece of work

fancywwUID: 2583671

12.23 XDF的助教培训太折腾啦，整整一天呢，晚上还来个小测，回来还要写toefl作文
我怎么就不是GRE助教呢？哎。。。
还好这周末培训就结束了

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.23]&[12.24]


Mr Kaplan's argument:
View 1:
Contrary to public perception, CEO pay has not gone up in recent years. In fact, the average CEO pay (adjusted for inflation) has dropped since 2000, while the pay of other groups hasincreased substantially.
Fact 1: It is useful to
understand how CEO pay is measured.
Fact 2:While
average CEO pay has declined, the pay of other highly paid groups has
increased.
Complements: Why is the pay of these other groups relevant for CEOs?
View 2:
Critics also argue that CEO pay is not tied to stock performance. Again, that is not true.


Ms Minow's arguments:
Incentive compensation rewarded executives for the quantity of transactions rather than the quality of transactions.
Example 1: Let us look at ground zero of the subprime mess, Countrywide, where Angelo Mozilo made more than $550m during his time as CEO.
Example 2: the CEO, Aubrey
McClendon



My comments:
what a wonderful and exciting debate. The both sides give reasonable and seemingly convincing data or analysis of facts, which almost make me confused.

Mr Kaplan mainly focuses on the general situation. His argument is derived from the two opposing reasons. He firstly refutes the saying that executives are over paid with data and facts. Compared with itself, CEO pay has not gone up in recent year. And compared with other highly paid groups, the CEO pay has gone through a huge decline. Then he emphasized why CEO pay is relevant with other groups. This explanation justifies his comparison between CEO and other highly paid groups. So he concluded that technology, globalisation and scale appear to have increased the market value of these groups. CEOs have not done better and, by some measures, have done worse. Secondly, Mr kaplan refutes the opposing view that CEO pay is not tied to stock performance. Based on his observation,  the typical CEO is paid for performance. And he also denies that CEOs control their boards and earn high pay through this control and not performance.

Throughout Mr Kaplan's arguments, he incisively defends his position by fighting back the opposing views. But he does not stop at this. He furthers his argument by with some explanations of the doubts people may have. Although I do not understand the data and graph very well, I think he does a quite persuasive job.

About Ms Minow's argumentation, she mainly uses two extreme and representative examples. But she indicated that there are much more evidence like this. In the two examples, she also focuses on two points: how the CEO pay is decided, and whether the CEO pay is decided by their performance.In the two examples, the behaviour of the two CEOs and the compensation commettees is really quite inappropriate or even misappropriate . Anyway, to make her argument more convincing, I'm looking forward to read her comments on the seven deadliest sins of executive compensation.


Vocabulary and Useful expressions
Tether: to fasten or restrain by or as if by a tether
Bandit: an outlaw who lives by plunder;  
hedge fund
managers:
Crunch: [n] a tight or critical situation: as  
a : a critical point in the buildup of pressure between opposing elements  : SHOWDOWN  b : a severe economic squeeze (as on credit)  c : SHORTAGE  
Bail out: 1 : to parachute from an aircraft
         2 : to abandon a harmful or difficult situation;  also   : LEAVE, DEPART
Galore:  ABUNDANT, PLENTIFUL;  used postpositively
Thrash:1 : to separate the seeds of from the husks and straw by beating  : THRESH
2 a : to beat soundly with or as if with a stick or whip  : FLOG  b : to defeat decisively or severely  *thrashed the visiting team*
3 : to swing, beat, or strike in the manner of a rapidly moving flail  *thrashing his arms*
4 a : to go over again and again  *thrash the matter over inconclusively*  b :
the subprime disaster:次贷危机

I argue below that...
Note that...

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.26]

My Comment

After reading of the article, the novel of Dan Brown--Digital Fortress immediately came to my mind. In the book, the United States' National Security Agency owns a code-breaking machine--TRANSLTR. It is a very powerful machines that can basically compute and break any code and password. So the American government can have the access to almost all the encoded information. The novel raises the issue of government surveillance of electronically stored information on the private lives of citizens, and the possible civil liberties and ethical implications using such technology.
We may feel violated for government's surveillance on our private information, but at least they will not interfere with and harm with justified right and interests. However, if such technology was used illegally by some intruders like the article suggests, it could bring really serious consequences.

Well,fortunately, the present code cracking softwares like  "L0phtCrack" or "John the Ripper" seems not so powerful as the TRANSLTR. By the way, I think the name " John the Ripper", which is obviously from '"Jack the Ripper", is quite vivid but also chilly.

Then the article gives us some bad examples and advice on managing your password safety. To me I often use two set of password, a simple one and a relatively complicated one. On one hand, the simple password is used in some less important situations such as different BBS. Nowadays, we have to register and login in order to read the information we need on some BBS. But some of them I do not go often, and I used to forget the registered name and password. So now I use the same name and login password. It really saves me a lot of trouble. On the other hand, the complicated password contents numbers, letters, and symbols. This one is often used as email, QQ, MSN, and on-line bank passwords. In this way, I avoid to keep different passwords in a notebook, which, as the article says, is also an unsafe way.

The article mentions some softwares to manage our passwords. But there are still potential dangers: if your master password was leaked or forgotten, you would get into huge trouble. In my view, I would rather not use such softwares, at least for now.

In conclusion, the article indeed reminds us the importance of password safety, and gives us some good points about setting our password. The modern technology provide us with some sort of convenience; however, the same level, or even more serious troubles are coming along with it.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.24][12.25]

My Comment:

Today's rebuttal statement makes me even confused. The main reason is that I barely know the economic terminology and regulations in the USA. Even if I googled them out one by one, it quite difficult for me to put them together in order to figure something out of them. So please allow me to make some irrelevant or even silly comments on this debate.

First of all, according to my observation, there data about the pay of CEO of recent years are not on the same scale. Mr Kaplan adjusts the income of CEO with inflation, while Ms Minow gets her conclusion from the actual pay.

Besides, Ms Minow is mainly attacking the CEO compensation plan. But her argumentation impresses me with reasons, which needs further evidence like data or example. And at this point, I think Mr Kaplan does a better job. At least, his argumentation seems convincing, with quotes and cites from others.

Well, maybe I have had a false impression about their debate. The truth is the economy terminologies and unknown people and strange organizations make me totally lost. Anyway, I will reread the article and ask help from my friends who study economy.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment][12.27]

Vocabularies:
Clutter: a crowded or confused mass or collection
[V] to fill or cover with scattered or disordered things that impede movement or reduce effectiveness  *a room cluttered with toys*
Buoyant: having buoyancy: as  a : capable of floating  b : CHEERFUL, GAY  c : capable of maintaining a satisfactorily high level
Edwardian: of, relating to, or characteristic of Edward VII of England or his age;  especially   of clothing   : marked by the hourglass silhouette for women and long narrow fitted suits and high collars for men
Christie's is a leading art business and a fine arts auction house.
Sotheby's is the world's third oldest auction house in continuous operation.
Consign:1 : to give over to another's care
2 : to give, transfer, or deliver into the hands or control of another;  also   : to commit especially to a final destination or fate  *a writer consigned to oblivion*
3 : to send or address to an agent to be cared for or sold
intransitive verb  ,  obsolete   : AGREE, SUBMIT
Cornish: of, relating to, or characteristic of Cornwall, Cornishmen, or Cornish

My Comment:

After finishing the article and back to read the title, it seems quite perplexing. Well, we can put the title aside for a while, and see what the article tells us about firstly.

The article mainly describe a recent trend of art market, that is the taste for clutter and realism. I did not find and accurate definition of Clutter, which, obviously is a form or genre of art. So according to the article and the meaning of the word itself, Clutter is an art style characterized by disorder, crowded mass, fuss, or something like this. Comparing to the novel, avant-guard art works, Clutter is old-fashioned and sentimental. As to Realism, needless to say, is also and old-fashioned art genre. However, the contemporary art market has a curious focus on such art styles besides the pursuit for novelty. And the auction performance at the Christie's and the Sotherby's justifies it.

Then the article cites the words of Mr Mason to explain why this phenomenon seems reasonable. According to him, the inflation provides good opportunity for art dealers to change there less valuable money at hand into quality like paintings. This is a worldwide trend, and it does not restrict to paintings, but also other arts like Chinese porcelain.

To demonstrate this trend, the article gives representative examples of three painters and their high-priced auction: John Atkinson Grimshaw, Spencelayh, and Laura Knight. Their works all share the style of oldfashioned-looking.

Well, back to the title, I think it means that the old-fashioned art works rejuvenate now and may become even more valuable than those paintings seeking for innovation in the future.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[第四次作业--评argument--6]

TOPIC: ARGUMENT163 - The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.

"In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham."


结构：
Old town hall: too small;  cost a lot to heat and cool;  
New building: energy efficient; large; rent out some of the space
==>tear down old building and build a new one==>save a considerable amount of money
思路：
too small—>在里面工作的人是否已经感觉到不舒服了，还是作者自己的臆想？—>是否真的需要一个 new large city hall？
energy efficient: 到底少多少？由于新建筑的空间大，所以energy耗费不一定比旧建筑少；
出租多余空间—>会不会合算？有没有人来租？租金足不足以盈利？会不会影响市政厅正常的工作？这些考虑欠周到。
century old building：有没有考虑到老市政厅的历史和文化遗产意义？
能够节省 a considerable amount of money：是不是真能这样？新建筑面积更大，能源消费会更多，不一定就能赚大钱。

Citing the comparison between the old hall and new hall, the author comes to the conclusion that on the purpose of saving money, Rockingham' century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building. However, this argument is based on a series of unproven (unproved) assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands. （把批驳重点放在作者的unproved assumption上面.）

One such assumption is that the new hall will save energy. Even though the new one will be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot, the author ignores the fact the new hall is far larger than the old hall. In which case, the overall costs of the new hall would be no less, perhaps more than the energy costs of the old hall. Unless the author could provide exact data to demonstrate the (difference of the total amout of energy consumption between old and the new building) new hall can really save energy, his assumption is dubious.

The author's claim that building to build the new hall will save a considerable amount of money is open to doubt. (这点应该算是这个argument总的需要被反驳的地方，作为一个分点应该不够妥当吧)On the one hand, tearing down the old hall and building the new hall is considerably money-consuming. The author does not inform the exact amount of money needed; maybe it might lead the town council to budget strain. On the other hand, the author mentions some of the space could be rented out to generate income. However, people might not be willing to rent the hall, in which case, the town would not get any revenue. In short, without providing solid evidences that building new hall would save money, the author's proposal is unpersuasive.

Finally, as the current hall is century-old, it might have historic values. For example, the old hall might be a famous tourist site of town, which attracts thousands of tourists every year. Or perhaps, the old hall might have certain special meaning in the local residents' minds. They might regard the hall as the symbol of the town. If either of the cases is true, the old hall's merits far outweigh the new one's advantages.（这一点其实并不是重点，这里个人猜想的部分太多了）

All in all, this argument relies on certain unwarranted assumptions and therefore specious at best. To convince readers to accept his/her conclusion that replacing the old hall with new one, the author should provide information on whether the new hall will save energy and save a considerable amount of money, and last but not least, the old hall' historic values.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[第四次作业--评argument--7]

TOPIC: ARGUMENT137 - The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.

"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to icrease, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."
WORDS: 416          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009/3/9 16:28:42

argument结构：
Facts: 1. residents seldom use M river for recreational activity.
         2. residents like water sports
         3. complaints about the quality of M river
         4. plans to clean up M river
inference of the author:
1&2&3=>(没有考虑到他因，导致接下来的论证都有可能错误)5. residents seldom use M river because of its bad water quality
4&5=>（没有考虑计划实施的效果）6.recreational use of M river is likely to increase
6=>（没有考虑公共设施目前的状况，或许已经比较好了，无需改善）city council need to increase budget for improvenments the publicly owned lands alone the M river

In this augument, the author drew the conclution about the increase of recreational use of the Mason River, after his/her seemingly convincing procedure of reasoning, and suggested the City council to increase the budget for the improvement of lands along Mason River. As far as I see it, this argument omits some sunbstential information, and therefor suffers some logical fallacies.

To begin with, the author falsely established a causal relationship between the complaint about the quality of the water and the seldom using of the nearby River for recreational activity. Although the two things happened simultaneously, but there are pobably many other reasons for seldom using of the water, too. （很生硬的模板痕迹）For example, in the city there is a swimming pool, which supplies a good service and has new infrastructure. So the residents prefer going there to siwmming in the river. Like swimming pool, other places, such as park and artifical lack, will attract people as well. Without providing us the information about other places in the city, the author's assumption is invalid.

In addition, can the annoucement about cleaning up Mason River by the agency make the use of river increased?（这句语法有问题） Even assuming that the residents seldom use the River, because they worried the quality of the water, a promise about cleaning up cannot make the river really clean at a short time. The environmental restore will take a relative long time, as we know. Moreover, the author did not tell us the detail of the cleaning plan. When does begin it, and how does the agency put it into practice? So the author's conclution about a increase of use of the water lacks credibility.

Last but not least（这个短语不好）, the author's suggestion is also doubtful（这个说法太不确切了）. Even if the river can be cleaned up, it is not clear that why the council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the lands along the Mason River? Can this plan represent the residents' real will? It is entirely possible that a majority of residents want to keep these lands wild as before, so that they can get a real relax in the nature. The author did not show the oppinion of the residents, therefore the final suggestion may be not proper.

To sum up, in this argument, the evidence is not enough to support waht the author maintained. To strenghten, more information, such as a introduce of the city, a detailed plan about cleaning up the river and a poll about the improvement of lands, are necessary.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[第四次作业--评argument--8]

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 475          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009/3/6 17:32:50

argument结构：
facts:
1.Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy
2. especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low
3.New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore
4. especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high.
inference：lack the fact:
5. the efficiency of the new technologies is the same or better than the old ones. (time, purity)
6. the expenditure of updating the equipment with new technologies is acceptable
without 5&6，the author cannot infer 7. that most of the factories prefer the new technologies, and adandoned the old technologies for the new ones.
conclusion：
we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly

可以看出这个作者根本就没有论证的过程，直接蹦到了结论。中间忽略了好几个必须的facts，而这几个facts都是作者认为理所当然的，但其实并非是这样，而是都需要事实支撑的。有可能事实就与其摄像不符合。


Comparing the new technologies with the traditional ones, and then based upon the superiority in electricity reducing of the former, the author thus predicted an optimistic perspective of the new copper-extracting skills. However, to prove those hypothesise requires more work of reasoning and more relative background evidences.

To begin with, the author might intensively conceal the purity of copper proceeded and the expenditure of replacing new equipment. Primarily, the quality of the products should not be overlooked. Admittedly, for its important influence in earning profits, cost should be considered as an important factor in comprehensive judgment of new industrial skills, whereas the quality and quantity of the products are even more decisive in determining practical value of certain new technology. As is self-evident, one industrial innovation could be broadly accepted only when its manufactures satisfied customers. （前面谈的好空呀,感觉没必要，可以直接进入正题）If, for example, the new process of copper-extracting technologies failed to extract more pure copper, factories would never be willing to accept new technologies although the traditional one expends more electricity. In addition, the technical costs are undeserved slipped. When the CEO of one copper-extracting corporation endeavor to decrease their daily cost of energy, the primary consideration of him/her would be how much should he/she pay for the new equipment? If the costs of exchanging equipment, for instance, are much higher than the spending of extra electricity, one would require great act of will to eliminate old equipment. Since the expectation of the author established mainly in wide spread and broad using of the new industrial skills, he/she should not neglect the possibilities mentioned above.

What is more, the effects of the new technologies to environment as well face the similar challenge.(这一点有点扯远了吧) Are those new industrial skills detrimental to ecosphere? There might be opportunity that the equipment utilizing those technologies would release great amount of detrimental gases or polluted water to our living circumstance. Actually, if certain new technology will be harmful to our generations, it would never be actualized. Since the author rashly skip this possibility while focus merely on the power saving, the optimistic perspective he/she expecting might never emerge. True, new revolutionary industrial technology rarely failed to influence our daily lives, nonetheless, before verifying its practical influences, the positive anticipation is somewhat too hastily.

Last but not least, the author failed to take into account that there might be other alternative possibilities to reach out to the purpose of energy saving. （这点也有点不相干吧，作者是在论证“新技术会带来省电”，而不是说“为了省电我们必须用新技术”，所以这个“考虑不全”的方法在这里并不是太实用吧）Do there exist any chemical compounds that could accelerate the copper-extracting action? As is known to all, appropriate catalyst could lower the temperature required in chemical interactions and therefore reduce the cost of electricity.

In sum, were there detailed background information demonstrating quality of the products and cost of the machine, particular description convincing the essential impact to circumstance, comprehensive deduction excluding other possible approaches, the expectation of the author would be more rational