0910G SPECTACULAR 备考日记 by 银落saya --[Into the fire] 樱花开了

银落UID: 2632560

和昨天一样。。。今天一天2A2I。。。爽。。。毕竟以后都是这个进度。。。不过每次写完之后就有种虚脱的感觉。。。语言依然是个问题。。。每次想举个例子。。一举就是一段。。。然后几乎没有时间去写更多的分析了。。而且每次用词都会想好久。。。T T。。。每天开始背economist算了。。。sigh。。。

呵呵。。。昨天米饭亲的留言让我好欣慰啊。。。谢谢谢谢。。。再加把动力。。~。。只可惜12号以后就要去上新东方。。。没有时间脱产了。。。总觉得会对考试有点影响。。。~。。希望新东方的作文都在上午。。。这样就可以不去。。在家里模考了。。》《。。。

ok。。。改issue真的是件比写issue更加虚脱的事情。。。改了三篇issue。。。累死。。。脑袋里的英语词汇几乎就快~0了。。呼。。。并且。。按照拼命深挖的原则。。。似乎issue7 那篇。。比较camera 和 written record的文章我怎么都觉得因为人们似乎因为太多的信息而造成无法进行深度的思考。。。所以需要camera这种可以把信息最直接呈现出来的工具来帮助他们来更好地获得最直接的record。。。而相对地。。written record这种需要人们从零散和抽象的信息来推理的方式往往会浪费大量的时间，并且很有可能还没有办法得出深度的思考。。所以人们觉得written record没有用了。。。但是。。不知道这样写会不会偏题。。。担心啊。。。要不我再写今天的第三篇issue吧。。。魔鬼啊。。

待会贴出自己的economist debate的 background的analysis吧。。~。。。今天看的比昨天做的sleep有用，copyright用在democracy 和law 上面都是很suitable的~。。

银落UID: 2632560

About this debateMusic fans are sued; Google is blocked from digitising books; people are prohibited from incorporating images, sounds or even cultural references to create new things. Copyright, first enacted 300 years ago, often holds back creativity and progress. It has adapted poorly to new technologies. The strength and duration of protection has expanded enormously. Does the system favour content owners above the public, for which it was designed?

Reference 参考资料

Internet regulation in France
Trois strikes and you're outApr 16th 2009 | PARIS
From The Economist print edition
红色就是好例子
Will France pass a controversial law against file-sharing?

Illustration by S. Kambayashi
HOLLYWOOD’s bible, Variety magazine, always refers to France as Gaul, a “land of wine, baguettes and amour”. （对法国的一个定义）But America’s media industry may soon start taking France more seriously. The French government is trying to pass a harsh new law that would cut off internet access for people who download pirated(盗版的) music and films. Media bosses reckon other countries might follow suit.

France’s proposed law would create a new government agency called HADOPI to police the internet on behalf of copyright owners. It would force internet-service providers (ISPs) to reveal the identities of users downloading copyrighted material, and would send them two warnings: the first by e-mail, the second by registered letter. If users continued to download such material, the ISP would cut off their broadband access for up to a year and put them on a blacklist to stop them subscribing elsewhere.

HADOPI was due to start sending out warnings in July. But on April 9th, in a surprise vote, the lower house of France’s parliament rejected the law. Only 15 members of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s ruling UMP party, which wrote the bill, turned up for the final vote, which is usually just a matter of procedure—both houses of parliament had already approved the law’s main elements. At the last moment a group of Socialist members rushed in to oppose it, resulting in a 21-15 defeat. According to Libération, a French newspaper, the Socialists had hidden behind heavy curtains in the entrance to the parliamentary chamber.

Opponents of the law hope this defeat might be enough to kill it. The low turnout by the UMP, they argue, suggests that many in Mr Sarkozy’s own party are afraid of backing a measure that is highly unpopular, particularly among young people.（民主的好题材，(*^__^*) 嘻嘻……考试的时候要是遇到了一定要用） Music and film companies, meanwhile, are confident that the law will eventually pass. Mr Sarkozy is determined to push it through parliament later this month. He first met his wife, Carla Bruni, a musician who has supported the law, at a presentation of a report on internet piracy by Denis Olivennes, former boss of Fnac, a retailer. Mr Olivennes’s report led directly to the HADOPI law.

Even if it is adopted, argues Pierre Kosciusko-Morizet, the head of ACSEL, a group representing French internet firms, the new law will be ineffective. Downloaders will sign up for anonymised and encrypted internet connections, he suggests, and will download content from people outside France, who are beyond the reach of the law. （我说。。这段不用在just law 和 unjust law，还有比它更合适的地方吗？。。赞。。copyright是个很好的题材啊。。。）

Germany, worried about privacy, recently decided against adopting a similar law. But Italy’s government has said that it might copy the French. Britain is thought to be moving towards something similar; last year it declared its intention to reduce illegal file-sharing by 70-80% in the next two or three years. Best keep an eye on goings-on in Gaul.

Baguette 法国棍子面包
Amour 男女关系
Broadband 宽带
Encrypt 加密 v。

Digital books
A new chapterOct 30th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Google strikes a deal with publishers to make more books available online

Fire up（生火，发怒） those scanners

TECHNOLOGY forces old laws to contort themselves in new ways.（既可以用在law上面，也可以用在科技上面><） The phonograph and radio threatened to wreck the idea of music copyright—then embodied in sheet music. But lawyers struck novel compromises between new media and old laws: collection societies were set up to pay composers and performers, and the market grew. On October 28th a similar breakthrough was announced for accessing books online.

Google has reached a settlement with groups representing authors and publishers, who had sued the world’s biggest internet company in 2005 for copyright infringement. Google has been scanning millions of books into digital form and making the text available online in small “snippets”, to answer users’ search queries. The company said this constituted “fair use” of the copyrighted material, since only a small part of the work was accessible. The Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild disagreed. The resulting legal fight was widely expected to end in a settlement, but it took a while to agree on the terms.

Under the deal, Google will pay $125m to compensate copyright holders and will set up a “Book Rights Registry” to pay authors and publishers for the digital use and sale of works—akin to the collection societies that send royalty cheques to musicians and songwriters. People will be able to buy digital books outright, or pay to access them by the page. A small part of each book will be free to consult. Google will take 37% of the revenue and 63% will go to copyright holders. Publishers and authors can opt out of the programme. Books no longer covered by copyright will be free.

The settlement, which must still be approved by the court, may encounter problems. Collection societies often fall foul of （与。。冲突， 可以替代conflict with）antitrust law and require special exemptions from legislators. And Google has in effect been granted a licence over almost all copyrighted works represented in the suit, giving it an overwhelming advantage in online-book indexing and retrieval, says Jennifer Urban, a copyright expert at the University of Southern California. That may increase competition concerns that are haunting the firm.

The agreement will apply only in America, but is likely to serve as a model for other countries. If successful, it will open up a new realm of knowledge online—and a new market.

Contort 曲解。。
Phonograph 留声机
Sheet music 活页乐谱
Infringement 违反 ===defiance
Snippet 信息的片段
Guild 协会

代表：embody \ represent \ mean \ stand for \ on behalf of \\
阻止：prevent \ discourage \ protect \ hold back \ prohibit \ limit \ restrict \ block \\

银落UID: 2632560

今天完成1I3A。。。对于argu实在是已经没有感觉了。。。只要是最近刚刚过过的文章时间可以缩小到22分钟左右。。。但是越来越觉得语言平乏。。而且字数越来越少。。。从以前的500不到一直到450都不到了。。。伤心。。。今天写借阅期和痘痘。。。学到两个词。。pimple和acne。。。以及。。。undue 和indefinite period。。。argu对于我来说似乎已经定性了。。。开头。。结尾。。中间的TS。。。唯一需要改写的中间逻辑段。。则是先引文章。。。然后说commonsense是怎么样的。。然后可能行。。然后说这样是不行的。。晕。。。其实最重要的部分就是common sense以及极度具体的反证。。。但每次都会没有具体的反证。。。甚至会忘记要去反证。。。要不就是语言仍然无法用最简捷的表述来表达心里面的意思。。。so 还是要在语言上下功夫。。。~

开始重新背诵新概念的句子。。。以前觉得简单。。现在倒觉得很漂亮。。。。但是。。问题是。。每次背过之后。。坐在电脑面前打issue的时候。。。为什么却没有一句可以想起来。。。伤心死。。。对于economist也是一样。。感觉白背了一样。。TT

好 依然 贴下每天必做的economist
Piracy
Look for the silver lining Jul 17th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Piracy is a bad thing. But sometimes companies can turn it to their advantage

Illustration by Claudio Munoz
“MERCHANT and pirate were for a long period one and the same person,”（挺有意思的表达） wrote Friedrich Nietzsche. “Even today mercantile morality is really nothing but a refinement（精炼） of piratical morality.” Companies, of course, would strongly disagree with this suggestion. Piracy is generally bad for business. It can undermine sales of legitimate products, deprive a company of its valuable intellectual property and tarnish its brand. Commercial piracy may not be as horrific as the seaborne version off the Horn of Africa (see article). But stealing other people’s R&D, artistic endeavour or even journalism is still theft.

That principle is worth defending. Yet companies have to deal with the real world—and, despite the best efforts of recorded-music companies, luxury-goods firms and software-industry associations, piracy has proved very hard to stop. Given that a certain amount of stealing is going to happen anyway, some companies are turning it to their advantage.


For example, around 20 times as many music tracks are exchanged over the internet on “peer to peer”（同等的） file-sharing networks as are legitimately sold online or in shops. Statistics about the traffic on file-sharing networks can be useful. They can reveal, for example, the countries where a new singer is most popular, even before his album has been released there. Having initially been reluctant to be seen exploiting this information, record companies are now making use of it (see article). This month BigChampagne, the main music-data analyser, is extending its monitoring service to pirated video, too. Knowing which TV programmes are being most widely passed around online can help broadcasters when negotiating with advertisers or planning schedules.

In other industries, piracy can help to open up new markets. Take software, for instance. Microsoft’s Windows operating system is used on 90% of PCs in China, but most copies are pirated. Officially, the software giant has taken a firm line against piracy. But unofficially, it admits that tolerating piracy of its products has given it huge market share and will boost revenues in the long term, because users stick with Microsoft’s products when they go legit. Clamping down too hard on pirates may also encourage people to switch to free, open-source alternatives. “It’s easier for our software to compete with Linux when there’s piracy than when there’s not,” Microsoft’s chairman, Bill Gates, told Fortune magazine last year.
这两段用在主观客观上似乎不错
Another example, from agriculture, shows how piracy can literally seed a new market. Farmers in Brazil wanted to use genetically modified (GM) soyabean seeds that had been engineered by Monsanto to be herbicide-tolerant. The government, under pressure from green groups opposed to GM technology, held back. Unable to obtain the GM seeds legitimately, the farmers turned to pirated versions, many of them “Maradona” seeds brought in from Argentina. Eventually the pirated seeds accounted for over a third of Brazil’s soyabean plantings, and in 2005 the government relented and granted approval for the use of GM seeds. Monsanto could then start selling its seeds legitimately in Brazil.

Innovators ahoy
Piracy can also be a source of innovation, if someone takes a product and then modifies it in a popular way. In music unofficial remixes can boost sales of the original work. And in a recent book, “The Pirate’s Dilemma”, Matt Mason gives the example of Nigo, a Japanese designer who took Air Force 1 trainers made by Nike, removed the famous “swoosh” logo, applied his own designs and then sold the resulting shoes in limited editions at $300 a pair under his own label, A Bathing Ape. Instead of suing Nigo, Nike realised that he had spotted a gap in the market. It took a stake in his firm and also launched its own premium “remixes” of its trainers. Mr Mason argues that “the best way to profit from pirates is to copy them.”（这是个很有趣的观点）

That this silver lining exists should not obscure the cloud. Most of the time, companies will decide to combat piracy of their products by sending in the lawyers with all guns blazing.（很生动的表达，不过似乎没办法用在文章里呢） And most of the time that is the right thing to do. But before they rush into action companies should check to see if there is a way for them to turn piracy to their advantage.

Mercantile 商业的

The moderator's opening remarksMay 5th 2009 | Mr Kenneth Cukier


Copyright strangles creativity. Copyright rewards originality. It is a nuisance to the public that unduly enriches a few people. It is the backbone of our knowledge economy that fuels progress. (极好极好的一句话，~。。可以用在A对社会很重要因为它推动了社会进步~。。摹写：Skepticism is the backbone of our creativity that fuels progress) Hate it, love it, break it, protect it; few people lack strong opinions about copyright and its place in society.

Copyright is just that—the right to make copies.（引出定义） Prior to the printing press there was no such thing. The act of duplication was so labour-intensive and imperfect that it was tolerated. After Gutenberg's technology made disseminating ideas easier and a better business, the act of publishing eventually became a matter of royal privilege (as much to control content as raise income). Books were expensive and quality was poor.

The introduction of copyright law 300 years ago was designed to liberate literary works by limiting the term of exclusivity before they entered the public domain for anyone to reproduce. Copyright was part of the march of capitalism and democracy against the power of monopolies and monarchies. It freed up knowledge and gave authors rights over their intellectual labour.

How things change. Today the system is regarded by many as a mechanism to unfairly restrict content in order to line the pockets of a few. Copyright's scope, duration and strength have expanded, even as new digital technologies have made it easier than ever for new works to be created. Does copyright still serve the public? Does it do more harm than good?

Our esteemed debaters are perfectly suited to wrestle with these issues. Supporting the motion is William Fisher III, a professor at Harvard Law School and the director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. He has long argued that the creep of copyright extracts a high but hidden cost to the public. Yet more than a trenchant critic, Professor Fisher puts forward thoughtful solutions, as in the book "Promises to Keep: Technology, Law, and the Future of Entertainment" (Stanford University Press, 2004).

His potent perspectives find their worthy adversary in Justin Hughes, a professor of intellectual property at Cardozo Law School, where he leads Cardozo's programme training Chinese officials in intellectual property. He helped craft America's copyright policies in the 1990s (and earlier clerked for the Lord President of the Malaysian Supreme Court in Kuala Lumpur). Professor Hughes is an articulate proponent of today's copyright system, noting that economic incentives are vital if society is to benefit from high-quality works.

What is certain is that the issues are only becoming more contentious. As increasing numbers of people feel encumbered by copyright, a subject that has long been the purview of specialists has emerged into the sunlight of the public sphere, such as this hallowed debating ground. It is only appropriate, too, since copyright is meant to benefit society. Can our debaters sway The Economist's online audience in favour of their positions?

Trenchant 敏锐的
potent 强有力的
Craft 制作
Adversary 对手
Purview 法律条项

The proposer's opening remarksMay 5th 2009 | Professor William Fisher


The copyright system has several important functions. It provides incentives for creative activities that otherwise would not occur and then facilitates public dissemination of the fruits of those activities. It gives creators fair rewards for their efforts. It protects the emotional bonds that many artists feel with their products. Most broadly, copyright laws, working in concert with （和。。合作）many other laws, help cultivate a just and stimulating culture. These are all worthy objectives. Unfortunately, the current copyright system does a poor job of advancing them. If it is to perform well, and in particular if it is to adapt to modern information technologies, it must be reformed in fundamental respects.

What's wrong? Here are a few of the problems:

Copyright protection lasts too long.
（开门见山，一针见血） In many countries, including the United States, copyright protection for a creative work now persists for the life of its author plus 70 years. It was not always so. Under the original American copyright statute, the maximum term was 28 years. Over the centuries, it has grown like Topsy. Commentators are nearly unanimous（一致的，无不同的） in concluding that the current term is much longer than necessary to provide appropriate stimuli for creativity or to protect authors' legitimate interests in the sanctity of their creations. Just one example: in the Eldred case, in which the most recent extension of the American copyright term was challenged (unsuccessfully) on constitutional grounds, a group of 17 economists (including five Nobel prizewinners) submitted a brief arguing that "it is highly unlikely that the economic benefits from copyright extension under [this statute] outweigh the additional costs". (Milton Friedman reportedly agreed to join the brief only on the condition that it include the phase "no brainer".)

Too many creations are protected. This problem derives primarily from a seemingly innocuous provision of the Berne Convention, a multilateral treaty to which most countries now adhere. Article 5(2) of the convention provides that "the enjoyment and the exercise of [copyrights] shall not be subject to any formality". Prior to the imposition of this rule, many countries required authors who wanted copyright protection for their works to comply with various formal requirements, the most important of which was the duty to attach a copyright "notice" (a "&copy;" or something equivalent) to copies of those works when they were first published. Works that did not comply with those requirements fell into the public domain. No longer. Now every email message, every blog entry, every snapshot—indeed, every creation that evinces a bare minimum of creativity and is fixed in some tangible medium—is automatically protected by copyright law, whether the author is aware of it or not.

Partly for the same reason, there is no comprehensive national (to say nothing of global) registry, enabling one to ascertain the owners of copyrighted works and the uses that those owners will and will not permit.

The net effect of these three features is that the copyright system is badly over-inclusive. Most creative works produced since the 1920s either are or might be subject to copyright protection. Someone who wishes to put one of those works to productive use (reprint an out-of-print novel, "mashup" a song, include a film clip in a new documentary) faces serious obstacles: first, in locating the copyright owner, and then in obtaining permission. Most give up without trying. One reason this is troubling is that today more than ever creativity is achieved through the incorporation and modification of pre-existing works. By needlessly locking up portions of our cultural heritage, we also needlessly curb cultural progress and opportunities for self-expression.

银落UID: 2632560

最近电脑前面。。手疼脖子疼。。。眼睛疼脑袋疼。。。
issue和argu害死人。。。我希望快点回到背红宝的日子。。。虽然其实是一样辛苦的。。好吧。。加油就对了。。

最近总是听MJ的歌。。。抒情的歌。。。很耐听。。。。

今天2A2I。。。但是所谓的i纯粹没有写好。。导致在45分钟之后花了两个小时去补救。。。累死。。。
然后改作文。。过了一些些argu的提纲。。

好吧。。。贴一点economist的debate。。。pro的我没有看完。。。TT

About this debateTechnology users are discovering that the proliferation of information tools, services, and channels makes managing their own personal and professional information increasingly difficult. A growing chorus of voices is sounding the alarm that information overload is diminishing people’s ability be effective. Are there better ways to manage (tackle, handle, take over, treat with, deal with，cope with) the vast amounts of information assaulting users on a daily basis (每天)? What is the right balance between new tools and information streams, on the one hand, and minimizing the impact of information overload on the other? Are people losing their ability to reflect rather than just react? （这句话的观点极赞。。。reflect 和 react 也很好的押韵了。。><）


Make it simpleOct 28th 2004
From The Economist print edition

“THE computer knows me as its enemy,” says John Maeda. “Everything I touch doesn't work.” Take those “plug-and-play” devices, such as printers and digital cameras, that any personal computer (PC) allegedly (代替so called) recognises automatically as soon as they are plugged into an orifice called a USB port at the back of the PC. Whenever Mr Maeda plugs something in, he says, his PC sends a long and incomprehensible error message from Windows, Microsoft's ubiquitous （omnipresent） operating system. But he knows from bitter experience that the gist of it is no.

At first glance, Mr Maeda's troubles might not seem very noteworthy (引人注意的). Who has not watched Windows crash and reboot without provocation, downloaded endless anti-virus programs to reclaim a moribund hard disc, fiddled with （idle with 玩弄，浪费） cables and settings to hook up （连接connect）a printer, and sometimes simply given up? Yet Mr Maeda is not just any old technophobic user. He has a master's degree in computer science and a PhD in interface design, and is currently a professor in computer design at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). He is, in short (in a nutshell), one of the world's foremost computer geeks.…


The moderator's opening remarksFeb 26th 2008 | Mr Daniel Franklin


Our first debate in this series involved a vital area of public policy. For this second debate the focus is firmly on the individual, and the impact of technology on our lives. The question at hand should make us all examine our own use of technology, and perhaps produce surprising answers.

We all use technology. Everyone reading or taking part in this debate is of course connected to the internet. For that, at least, let us be thankful.

But even as it opens up extraordinary new possibilities, is technology making our lives too complicated? I am able to write this opening statement far away from my desk, courtesy of （。。。的恩惠，可以用来代替benefit from）wireless connectivity, on a hotel veranda (阳台 走廊) overlooking the English Channel on a Sunday morning: miraculous simplicity! Yet my wife, whose birthday we are celebrating here, may view it differently: an unfortunate complication of her special day. This debate is about a question many of us grapple with （昨天看到的是wrestle with）on a daily basis.

Two dimensions of the issue emerge from the thoughtful opening statements. First, Richard Szafranski, a partner at Toffler Associates, raises the broad impact of technology on our environment: its contribution to global warming, the creation of new chemical compounds with uncertain impact on life and health, the invention of weapons of mass destruction. Surely, he argues, such things complicate our lives.

Second, and more palpably（可触知的）, there is the matter of the breakneck（极危险的） development of personal technology. Mr Szafranski argues that the abundance of this stuff is such that we suffer from "over-choice" as well as "surplus complexity": all those ring tones to choose from and personal devices to be baffled by. Far from simplifying our lives, choosing between so many options is hard and increasingly complicated work.

John Maeda, president elect of the Rhode Island School of Design, accepts that technology can add complexity to our lives, and we can all empathise with tales of maddening computer crashes and infuriating printer glitches.（相互对应的词组，crash and glitch, maddening and infuriating）
But, he claims, it also has the capacity to remove even greater complexity that existed beforehand: who wouldn't grapple with a fidgety (worry, upset) hearing-aid if in the end it overcomes deafness?. Furthermore, he believes, we are tech "explorers", experimenting and adapting technologies to our needs over time: he raises the prospect that we are entering a time of simplification, a "Renaissance of design-led development." In short, "the bad rap given to technologies today will be only temporary."

Where does the balance lie? That is what I hope this debate will clarify. Mr Maeda reckons there is 90% upside and 10% downside; Mr Szafranski, without putting a number on it, thinks it's the other way around. What do you think?

One last word before the debate begins. You have, rightly, on previous occasions looked closely and critically at the wording of the propositions. In this case, as Mr Szafranski notes, it might be objected that technology didn't "promise" anything, though I think it's probably fair to say that many people assumed (and tech companies routinely claim) that its purpose is to simplify not complicate. "It didn't work," asserts Mr Szafranski. Or did it?

The proposer's opening remarksFeb 26th 2008 | Mr Richard Szafranski


Standing back, we now can be fairly certain that （强过我总是用no one would deny）the science and engineering that enabled humans to create today's engines of industrialisation, electrification (电气化), physics（医术）, medicine, genetics and the appliances of the information age also added significant complexity to our lives. Technology warmed the planet（强过我一直用the world, us humans）, added pollutants to the atmosphere and oceans, affected life forms by changing the background magnetic field (including adding increased extremely low-frequency radiation), enabled nuclear weapons and created thousands of chemical compounds that can help or hurt life. (technology 对environment 的impact) One cannot conclude that the convergent effects（也可以用net effects 来表示><）—social, environmental, political, economic, legal, psychological—of these technological developments simplified living or our lives. Technology has failed to （始终用without。。。，。。。cannot。。。，忘记还有fail to 了。。果然很多简单的词被我遗忘了）simplify our lives.

Coping with the challenges caused by a warming planet will not be simple. Knowing the health effects—the effects on humans and other living organisms—of various pollutants and combinations of pollutants and appropriately dealing with them will not be simple. Understanding （以后句子可以直接用v+ing来开头）the biological consequences of changed magnetic fields and increased point and area sources of radiation is not uncomplicated. （三句排比句！！！）The problems associated with （pertinent to, related to, relative to, akin to, regarding to, with regard to, concerning with）nuclear weapons' proliferation are only less complex than the problems that would arise from the use of such weapons. And it becomes increasingly difficult to assay the interactions, the lag times and the health consequences of the chemicals we ingest (take in, inhale), even those we consume intentionally. Simpler lives? No.

Dealing with any one of these challenges is not simple; they are multi-dimensional and have converged and co-exist. "Technology"—shorthand for the fruits of science and engineering（这个形象很生动，缩写~，a shorthand for the fruit of ）—and its convergent unintended and intended (unwitting, unconscious) consequences have complicated our lives.

Take some familiar but trivial examples. The technologies that enable mass customisation（专用化）, the internet and wireless devices and their applications, but a small sample, cause humans two problems that complicate our lives immensely. First, over-choice. Second, surplus complexity. Over-choice describes（用于定义） the human response to alternatives and variations so numerous, so potentially satisfying and so complex that humans can no longer decide easily. "Surplus complexity" is unnecessary and unwanted complexity.

We—hundreds of millions of us and growing—embrace the very technologies that make our lives and our relationships more difficult and fill many of our waking moments with activity. We love—to the point of gluttony（贪食，暴食）—to communicate, play, invent, learn, imagine and acquire. Information technology has given us tools to do all of those anywhere and round the clock. We are awash in （目不暇接）the benefits that high-bandwidth fixed and mobile wireless communications, email, text messages, pictures, games, data and information give us, including instant access to thousands of products. The seductive（有吸引力的） ease with which we can engage in any and all of those activities, or quests or endeavours makes it difficult and stressful to not be overwhelmed by choices. Choosing takes time and our time is not unlimited. Devices and applications that save us labour in one area may merely allow us, and sometimes seem to compel us, to invest labour in other areas.

We say or hear, "I must do my email tonight, or by tomorrow I'll have over 600 to read." We want to buy a pot. Search on "pottery" and get 254,000,000 results. We want to find the John Li we met at a conference. Search on "John Li" and get 8,600,000 results. Do I do email, narrow the searches, eat dinner, pick up my laundry or call a friend? Because technology has spawned numerous complex variations I must repeatedly go through the act of evaluating and choosing — a labour of deciding. Technology has imposed the encumbrance（阻碍，hurdle）of over-choice on us.

Over-choice is made more likely and burdensome（累赘的） by the complexity resident in each of the choices that are presented to us. There are hundreds of choices within the seemingly simple one of getting a cellular telephone and choosing a provider and a plan. Some phones also are Pocket PCs with CDMA and GSM, video-players, music-players, web browsers, calculators and so forth. One must decide where and when the complexity becomes surplus. Choosing ring tones from among the surplus complexity evident in the thousands of tones available is almost unfathomable（深不可测的，无底的） over-choice.

银落UID: 2632560

AW在7月29号那天上午。。历经了两个半小时左右。。。终于在10半不到踏出考场的那一瞬间结束了。。。ISSUE说真的。。。没有什么感觉。。。写过。。。高频。。。不过由于复习的时候不是按照高频来复习的。。。而是和小越同志一起将前一百全都仔细列提纲这样准备的。。所以。。当时就是属于意料之外。。又情理之中的感觉。。。希望分数可以达到理想的目标。。~。。而对于ARGU来说。。。恩。。。绝对是低频。。。第88。。。当天回去就直接查自己这题是多少频的。。。竟然是100以后的了。。。不过。。。很庆幸对于ARGU来说。。。自己已经尽力了。。。每题至少看了两遍。。并且每一遍都好好地想了错误和他因。。。对于高频则是三到四遍。。。所以。。当时看到题目的时候。。。感觉特别熟悉。。。不过却记不起提纲。。。好在平时已经有了基础。。所以当场分析。。。然后再开始打字。。。最终落稿。。。

其实。。。对于作文真的感觉复习得并不充分。。。也许自己是个效率极低的人吧。。。大约4月中旬就开始准备作文了。。。然后。。。参考书的话几乎是一本本看过来的。。。从issue5.5研究了一个月。。。自己分类题库。。。然后开始背了几篇北美。。。然后有了些感觉。。。然后放弃模板。。。开始参考作文大讲堂。。。期间练过NEC的翻译。。。看过ECONOMIST的news和debate。。。然后自己也背过一些好词好句。。。看一些精华帖。。最后自己开始形成A的模板。。。组里的练习。。。感觉自己做的事情特别杂乱。。。感觉什么都做了。。但却又都只是做了些表面的功夫。。。sigh。。。所以这次就给了我经验。。。其实不管什么方法。。。只要坚持下去就会有成效。。。如果什么都去试。。。反而会没有效果。。。~。。。在12号开始每天还要去读新东方。。。然后为了给考试充分的模拟感。。。对于A和I都是限在25和40分钟里的。。。并且带着耳机。。。放着键盘声。。再放点音乐。。。这样。。可以抵消当时的紧张所引起的思想不集中和时间浪费。。。最后。。。A的话。。由于读书。。。最后模考的时候A是25分钟500+左右。。而且往往最后一段会写不完。。只能略写。。。对于I的话。。大约是40分钟750+左右。。。然后写完之后。。。完全记不起来自己写了什么。。ORZ。。。很无语。。。有速度。。。但是文字水平则因为速度的原因降到了四级左右。。可能还不如的水平。。。倒。。。不过。。。真的。。。考完就过去了。。。一切都安好。。。原来以为惊天动地的事情就这样注定着会到来。。。然后用一种波澜不惊的姿态亲临。。。最后不留痕迹地走过。。。像是一场梦一样。。。连自己都不禁要感伤一下。。。

接下来。。。则是最重要的笔试~。。

连背了两天的红宝。。。由于在AW之前已经背过5遍核心词汇。。。那个时候。。。每天10个小时全都是背单词。。。天昏地暗的。。。而且自己始终做不到那种扫两眼就过一页的速度。。。所以。。。每个单词都能背了才过去。。。所以。。。现在背起来。。。没有当时那么累。。。不过。。。毕竟中间隔了那么长时间没有看过红宝。。。sigh。。。为了AW。。。红宝就这样再没有看过。。。TT...。总之继续加油。。。要像草木的die组一样。。。以每天固定的进度展开。。。然后等核心的过完以后。。。就开始背难句。。。开始攻阅读了。。。然后每天过核心。。再背最新词汇和预测词汇吧。。。~。。。并且每天再看两篇economist上的technology。。。~》《。。。恩。。加油。。。坚持到底就一定可以的。。。

ps：话说。。今天上了寄托。。好吃惊。。。日志被加了那么多分。。。恩。。。感谢ing。。。某个会继续努力的。。~。。。

银落UID: 2632560

※Experience※
额外的小结，自己在大学两年里为了考G的一个大致的经验，这个是草木规定以外的，不过觉得既然写了，那么自己为G付出的，以及一路的外因内因也一并写了更加解气。sigh，文笔真的是很烂，可能很流水。
       从进入大学开始，就已经决定以后一定要去美国读研，而且也定了一定是先考G再考T，所以，在大学的两年里，那些所谓的职业培训，所谓的直研加分的活动就几乎没有参与过，考G和GPA就成为了我唯一的目标。不过，虽然目标清晰，但是，由于很久以前就听过很多人说G那种几乎不可攀登的高度，所以自己是计划了一个积累的过程而不是采用突击的方式来克服G的。
       由于很清楚自己的英语水平不好，所以，就开始买了本四级和六级的单词，决定先把最为基础的单词用整个大一的时间解决以后，再慢慢利用整个大二的时间来攀登G这座最高的山，最后在大三把G给攻克掉。但是出乎意料的是，只是四级的单词就花去了我整整一个大一的时间（不过在大一的时候也去读了中级口译），这大大超出了我原来的计划，我原以为成天在图书馆读英语的努力足以让我完成计划的第一步，却没有想到，还有很多很多的其他的因素都成为了阻碍。专业课的压力那么大—尤其是对于一个原本选了化学，连欧姆定律都只是了解，对于数学厌恶得一塌糊涂的自己必须整天面对高数a，线性代数，大学物理这样摧残人性的课，更甚，不仅仅是面对，还必须和那些众多的从外省来的强人争夺GPA的高低（我们学校的GPA是根据百分比来的，而不是成绩）；部门的活动那么多—因为觉得以后的PS里面如果可以有部门部长这类额外的bonus的话，也许可以多一点优势，所以作为干事的自己为了在大二可以留做部长，尽可能多地为部门做事，于是那些极度浪费时间，极度琐碎的事自己从来没有拒绝过，一直是义无反顾地去接受；社交人际开始变得复杂—同学们的关系再也不是那种固定的同桌前后，而是成为了必须要主动花时间去参与活动，去聊天，去一起唱歌一起演小品才能认识成为朋友的。这三点成为了我没有时间去读英语的主要原因，不过，既然意识到了，而且，既然已经用大一这整个学期去不停地改变，不停地去适应，那么也许这本身就是一种收获。
       于是在大一升大二的两个月的暑假里，自己同样为了在PS里可以有实习经历，去一个光纤的公司里去实习，然后利用上下班和在家里的时间开始背六级单词，用了一种记忆法（后来才知道和杨鹏的很像，不过我依然是采用慢慢积累，而不是速成的方式）来每天滚旧单词，背新单词，接着，一直经历过军训，到大二开学一个月后，自己终于把六级这本单词背了5~6遍（总的说是一遍，但是每个单词已经在第1，2，4，8，16，32天都再背了）。当然，学习上由于专业课，工作上由于每周的部长例会和很多自己部门内部的工作，人际关系上的复杂依然照旧，但是自己却渐渐能够平衡了，也许这就是自己在大一得到的收获。
        然后，自己没有直接去背红宝，而是买了本俞敏洪的一本词根词缀的书开始背，背得天昏地暗，原来以为有了词根词缀背单词可以更方便，没想到，越背越混淆，于是背完第一大部分—最常见的前缀（好像是这个名字），大二上就结束了。接着，自己正式进入了红宝的征程。那时自己对于红宝只有一个概念，就是只要单词背熟就没多大问题了（现在才知道这个是绝对错误的），所以，没有上过寄托，没有查过资料，没有买任何的其他书籍（杨鹏啊，陈圣元啊，那是完全没听到过|||）只是单纯地从起床到睡觉，除了上课吃饭，其他时间都在图书馆背红宝。一直背到今年的四月初，才终于把核心词汇过了6遍，和六级的记忆法是一样的。那时自己真是激动死了。感到前途一片光明。别的什么都没想。
后来偶然一次和前任部长—我亲爱的学姐》《（学姐在我大二的第一学期里去美国做交换生了，）交流了整整一个多小时，谈了考G的事情，很多细节已经记不得了，但是很清楚，她对我说“如果你这次的10G如果不考的话，那么你就和我一样要在大三下去考G了，那个时候你就知道除了课业压力之外，还会在出国留学和找工作之间犹豫不定，总之整天都会特别特别煎熬”，我说我红包还没有背完，她就告诉我说没关系，写作文是不需要红包单词的，六级就足够了，而且如果没有报名的话，就没有压力，没有压力，就不会尽力去准备G。我当时恍然大悟。
       我就从曾经偶然一次在朋友的校内上看到的关于考G的转帖上再次点击进去，知道了寄托这个网站，于是我开始下载资料，开始看精华，开始准备AW，刚开始看到草木的die组招新帖的时候，那个激动啊，却发现自己太晚了，没事，振作一下，继续开始自己的AW复习之旅，一直以来，自己不就是一个人学英语到现在吗？
        对于AW，我自己觉得，做了很多，但是不精，但是却和大一的经历一样，给笔试留了很多好的经验。
        我刚开始是看《issue5.5》，一上来就分析I，整个题库用自己可以想到的观点过了一遍，然后开始对pool进行分类。接着，看了seventeen的精华帖，开始背《北美范文》的文章，大概4-5篇左右。然后，看到了诸葛的一篇关于AW语言的练习贴，然后自己就开始每天翻译《北美范文》和《新概念》，并且开始看die组的成员分析的economist的debate，并且自己坚持每天都去economist上看一篇新闻，接着，每天都列提纲，每周跟着自己的小组写作文，改作文。后来，有段时间决定好好研究A，于是，I就放掉了一段时间，准备了三本本子，每一页在左边贴两题A的题目，然后在右边写错误，他因。又花了整整一星期来看debate和范文，以及论坛上的好文，列出了自己的A模板。在小组里，由于组长无故消失，于是由qtangtang作为组长，我和zyp作为副组长开始重新组了tsubasa的队伍，重新规划小组的活动。从四月下旬到考AW的7月29号，只有在期末考试的五天里没有看过AW，其他的任何一天都泡在AW里，最后连自己都觉得想吐了。七月初，自己刚考完期末，第二天就开始每天两A两I（那个时候是以die组的进度来复习的），不过，几天就放弃了，恢复到1A1I。然后12号开始上XDF，每天边上，边复习AW，和cnwzly一起列提纲，一直到考试那天。在考试前，自己A的题目每题至少已经过了两遍，并且错误，他因全都列过两遍，对于很多高频则是三到四遍，可以在25分钟里打完550左右。对于I则是将前100高频的都列好提纲例子，拼命背，然后在40分钟内打750+，不过I的逻辑我就不好说了。sigh，那个时候求速度和模考感。
       然后从考完AW，继续去XDF上课，结课后，休息了三天，重新拾起红宝，很多单词，那个脸熟啊，就是不知道它意思，TT，没事，继续背，然后，到现在~。。还在背TT。。。

Step one:
由于AW是自己先复习，买资料，然后边练习边看精华边调整，发现应该是先看精华，再定计划，下资料，然后开始练习调整，不断巩固精华。
所以对于“新手指南“、”超级入口”和“考试FAQ”是，把觉得能用的资料先下好了，然后看了一些前辈的高分经历（尤其是阅读）。
MS看得不透彻，继续看去TT。
Step two:
※Personal Statement※
1.为什么考0910G，为什么选择寄托一族的道路
      虽然一开始就打算考G，但是却从来没有确定过什么时候考，考0910G是因为学姐的一句“如果你现在不考，以后就和我一样了”以及“如果不去报名，那么就不会有动力来全力复习G”这两句话，接着回寝室想想自己两年以来的付出，放弃了那么多来为G做铺垫，毅然决然地决定考0910G，于是在报考的第一天连实验课都翘掉不去，就一直在电脑前面刷屏报名。
        对于寄托是因为在朋友校内的转帖上了解到得，上了寄托以后，觉得太强大了OO。而且觉得在组外跟着die组很有压迫感，自己的AW组也很团结快乐上进。
2.有什么理由可以加入笔试精英组
        我觉得，我最大的优点就是有毅力，不愿意放弃（特别是对于G）。比如，自己从初三开始，就开始写日记，一直到现在，自己每天坚持做一个小时的瑜伽，从高考结束也一直坚持到现在。不过，这两样在我准备AW的时候，就暂时中止了，TT，复习G的时间对我来说实在是太少太重要了。单词一本接着一本背，忘了就继续背，绝不放弃。
        在准备考G，为加深英语基础的时间里1.我成为了班里的逃课之王（TT我是个女生啊），而且逃课还是去图书馆看英语，最后竟然被辅导员找去谈话ORZ，不过，大二依然逃课去图书馆。2.我有段时间几乎割断了和同学之间的联系（早上六点起床去食堂背英语，寝室的同学还没起床；上课的时候逃课；回寝室的时候大约10点多，有一个同学已经睡了ORZ，然后洗漱，收拾东西，通知传达部门里的事务，发邮件，写作业，一点两点睡觉），后来被一个朋友特意拉了出去对我进行开导，才开始选择改变（他差点以为我自闭了，其实我也不愿意啊）。3.在AW的复习期，就是学姐的话产生了重大影响之后，我放弃了最喜欢的动漫（原来每周必看，几乎除了后宫每部动画都看的，每天必下载的动漫啊），决定10月24号之前就再也不在上面浪费时间了。4.复习AW期间，没有去逛过一次街，没有上过校内，上网就只有寄托，economist，和在线翻译，wiki，以及校园网（orz）。
         我觉得我对G的毅力和热情就是我加入笔试精英组的理由，并且可以每天给G6-7个小时，因为觉得开学初，专业课应该不会特别紧张，而且以前自己背红宝的时候几乎是一天都背单词的，应该可以达到这样的时间量。
3.在备考过程中自己最大的弱点，以及如何行之有效的去克服这个弱点
       自己最大的弱点就是，效率太低。每次背书，实在是困啊，而且老是走神，然后就在书架栏里走着背，后来发现自己会靠着书架打迷糊，然后就开始读出声，但是几天以后发现喉咙一出声就疼，作罢。很无奈，咖啡和茶叶这种东西对我似乎没用，三杯咖啡下去，还能倒头睡得极香ORZ。Sigh。现在，在家里，似乎可以好一点了。不过依然在寻找有效的方法，看过哦米饭日志上推荐的方法，可能听劲爆一点的音乐估计可以尝试下。
        其次的一个弱点就是，找不到平衡点，比如在专业课和英语之间，不是一心读专业，就是一心读英语，再比如玩和学习，如果决定了玩，那么一天都不愿意去读书，又比如吃饭，要么就只吃一点，要么就会暴饮暴食。Sigh，极度矛盾，感觉自己做事情很绝对，没有协调感和平衡能力。一直在找解决方法，只有不断地约束自己了。
        接着就是，容易自我安慰，而且安慰的东西自己还就真信了，比如，期末考试前两个星期，突然感到专业课的时间紧迫，然后我自我安慰得列了一张计划表，两天看电磁场，两天看概率统计等等，然后计划到后面，心里当下觉得，哇塞，时间充裕啊，还有时间可以玩呢，慢慢来，不急，结果，完全不是计划上的进度，在考试的当天凌晨，自己还在拼命的看书。Sigh，总是发生这种情况，ORZ，我还真是。。。现在就是尽量设计合理的计划，然后按时完成。
4.在接下来的七十天里，自己肯付出多少，能付出多少，会付出多少
         我觉得这个，很难回答，我不知道自己的极限在哪里，也不知道未来的七十天里会遇到是么样的状况和阻碍，然后我又会用什么样的方式去解决，一切都未知。我只是希望我考完G，走出考场的那一刻，我不会后悔自己没有尽力，我想在考完G的那一刻对自己说，谢谢你，你做到最好了。
      父亲对我说过，拿不到全奖家里没那么多钱给你去美国读书，我半信半疑，他说的时候有点严肃，有点开玩笑，但是，的确，不管结局如何，我不想让自己失望，也不想让父亲失望，我说我能做到，我相信自己。

※recommendation※
  这个。。似乎还米有找到人。。。尽力找去。。。

※AW心得※（牛人不必理会了）（不好意思，超出200了，觉得一写就停不下了ORZ）
       个人觉得，AW不可以完全按照精华帖说的那样，觉得这个好就照着这个做，觉得那个好就照着那个做，而是要选择一条最为适合自己的，然后一路做下去，而且在最初尝试的一段时间，会觉得完全没有长进，但是其实一直一直坚持下去，就可以看到量的积累产生的质变（可能我的经历是针对积累，而不是突击，个人特别不喜欢突击，虽然短期突破看起来很诱人）。
         然后分开说，对于语言，我很崇拜诸葛的那种翻译法，但是自己没有试到最后，不过有足够的时间的童鞋一定要去试，我还是觉得特别好，个人推荐去背economist的debate，正反方里面很多句子都特别适用于A的，而在开场的motion和background里面的很多语言和观点则特别适用于I。并且，背的东西不可以杂，而要精，因为考场的气氛里面，只有反复背过的东西才可能想得起来，如果只是背了1~2遍，在考场上就等于没有背过，而且A的模板一定要准备好，一是因为考场上你不可能临场写出比模板更好的表达，但是，切记，每段的逻辑错误的固定表达最多两句，并且是用来指出逻辑错误时才用的，在用他因和常识来推翻原文的时候，绝对要用自己的话，别用模板。
       对于逻辑，A的话，1.不要只找错误，而是要找出为什么它是错的，就是他因。在文章里面，犯的错用1到2句模板就可以了，我觉得rater判分就判在你的他因好不好。2.对于A的逻辑错误，我刚开始觉得有很多，比如时间不延续性，比如因果，比如两地差异，比如调查，但是后来我发现，所谓的逻辑错误大致地总结就只有一种，那就是因果，任何一种逻辑错误，其实都是一种因果错误，对于原文作者来说，都是“因为A怎么怎么怎么样了，所以应该怎么怎么怎么样了，或者可以怎么怎么怎么样了”。3.攻击错误的时候，绝对不要说它本身错了，而是要攻击文章里面将事实和结论连接起来的关系，这一点尤其是适用在survey和study上的，一般来说绝对不要攻击survey，而是在对一个survey无法支持结论的时候，攻击重点放在这个survey无法支持结论，而不是这个survey本身的缺陷。4.尽可能用文章里给出的背景和事实来攻击文章里的逻辑错误，这一点范文里面也很好的做到了，这样文章会显得特别有力，并且，要记住，让步的重要性，往往先让步，在攻击，可以做到万无一失，掷地有声，debate里面的论证几乎都是这样的，一段让步，一段攻击。强。5.要注意你找出错误之间的逻辑连贯性，我一般用的是两种，让步，以及并列。虽然很多错误的确可以使按照出现顺序来安排的，但往往还有一部分是需要我们重组的。I的话，我觉得第一段可以引申背景，然后在倒数第一第二句里面给出你的TS，这个peter writing里面草木也强调了。第二段到第四段全都是论证+例子。每一段往往开头是TS，然后给出一些解释，接着给出例子，记住，不可以单单给出例子，而是要把例子和你的TS之间用话给联系起来，这是关键，然后则可以引申总结，然后过渡下一段。段和段之间依然要有逻辑关系，并列或者递进，让步论证依然是王道。第五段则依然是总结，但是可以较为升华，但不要升华得过分，不然，rater会觉得你是一个新的观点却没有论证，这样会突兀。一篇文章下来五段是最为基本的，可以再五段的基础上加，并且，要注意副词和连词在文章里面的承上启下的作用，不然文章很生涩。
        最后提醒，I的难，大家都知道，但是，记住每一道题目都仔细分析，不停地问为什么，问到底，就会发现很多题目的本质都是一样的，所谓的分类其实就是根据这样分出来的，然后只要找确切的例子配上去，就可以了。而对于例子，建议不要杂，要精，要一个人可以cover一堆题目的那种最好了，例子不要愁找不到，去翻历史书，去查查renaissance那段时期，全都是人才啊，去wiki上面查一个人，这个人的背景里面就有一堆名人的名字链接啊。而A往往是大家觉得很好写的，但其实不是，我也不懂为什么大家会这么说，我倒是一开始就没觉得A简单，所以对于A的逻辑有的时候是分析得天翻地覆的，脑子都疼了，从一开始的每个逻辑错误攻击，到逻辑错误之间的连接问题，到模板的用法，到限时，甚至开头和结尾的写法也是自己一点一点摸索出来的。总之，努力对待就好，不要以为AW很简单，不要以为AW很难，用适合自己的方法去坚持就是王道。
       个人的备考经历一个都在日志上，一个则是在开篇的experience中的倒数一段。

※加分项※
1. 红宝书，AW之前核心过了六遍，现在在过第七遍
2. 那个AW考前调查
这个我考试的时候，作文之前的调查我做了，不过我还是很奇怪，我考试的时候做的调查草木你怎么统计呢？ORZ
3. 机经https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=622265&extra=&page=275
5.AW心得，这个，我只是考完后在日志上写了一点自己AW的总结和感想，这个算吗？
6.只做过tsubasa的副组长

恩。。终于完了。。缺了一篇recommend，花了一个下午的时间，本来打算背单词的，我想说，我不怕寂寞，不怕辛苦，既然只有自己陪自己的日子已经过了两年，那么接下来的70天更是一种坚持。在我身边的同学里，还没有一个同学和我一样在准备G，所以希望可以加入草木的组，能够认识一起为G奋斗的朋友，一起并肩作战。

艾尘草UID: 2591798

加油啊~

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

从你开这个备考日志起，就莫名得关注之。也不知道为什么。很奇怪的好感。也许是ID的缘故吧。
后来，考完AW，因为一些原因，完整得浏览过一遍日志，备受感动。
的确是很有毅力的MM，我敢说，你的ECO，读过的篇数和认真程度可能超过了DIES组的所有人，当然，比我，那更是超过更多了。
所以我看好你啦~
希望能在最后的70天跟MM一起加油、鼓劲、共进退~
\(^o^)/~加油~

cjluUID: 2448066

加油加油 一起加油~好佩服你毅力啊^^

草木也知愁UID: 2487572

you're in

welcome~

银落UID: 2632560

呵呵。二毛亲。好少在坛子上看到你的了。Q上也总是隐身捏。恩。其实。我也特别不愿意暂时终止瑜伽和日记的。刚开始的时候极度的不适应。不过日记的话。既然已经在寄托上很简略写的话。也算是一种补偿了。G对于我来说的话。的确就是一种超越。我想看看自己到底可以为了一件事情努力到多少。付出到多少。那个时候大一上XDF的中级口译。特别喜欢里面教阅读的慧瑾老师。她的课上的内容我已经记不得很多了。但是她从大学开始一直到留学的整个经历让我特别钦佩。几乎可能残疾。最后几经周折才恢复。然后跟着一名被她称为牛牛的牛人了解了G。每天晚上打开手电筒在被窝里被G。一直到第二天早上醒过来的时候手电筒都一直开着照在红宝书上。申请的时候遇到了国外怀疑中国G作弊的那件事。然后最后仍然是偶然地接到教授offer的。然后在国外也同样一个人奋斗。包括她选择区XDF做老师也一样是几经波折。然后就想自己是不是也可以像慧瑾老师一样为了自己的人生去拼搏到自己不会遗憾的程度。另一个影响自己的是父亲。父亲总是说他77年高考的时候。每天除了工作就是读书。拼了命的读。每天就只睡2个小时左右。我问你睡那么少怎么撑得住。他说那个时候就是有种一定要考取大学的力量支持着。其他什么都没有去想。他还告诉我那个时候读大学根本不是我们现在这样。那个时候图书馆是抢着占位子的。看电影都觉得浪费时间。老师说的每句话都特别在意。手边的参考书总是一摞一摞的。父亲特别爱说那段故事。我懂。这是因为那段时间是他全心全意付出然后获得成就的回忆。无论用多少辉煌的词语去形容都不会过分。所以我也要像他们一样。而G就是第一步。学姐对我说过。既然决定要出国。就绝对不要让一门考试来破坏你人生的计划。我很欣赏这样的豁达和信心。所以我会努力。我会不断地走下去。我要去美国去看另一个世界。我要让我父母为我感到骄傲。我要成为比父亲更加优秀的孩子。我要在自己走到人生终点的时候对自己的一生都没有悔恨。不过。G终究是G。在成为自己的超越之前。它依然是一门考试。所以。我告诉自己。日记以后可以继续写。瑜伽可以以后再练。但是G对我来说是唯一的一次。跨过它。我就在人生的路上迈出了一步。我可以放弃爱情。我可以放弃娱乐。因为那是短暂的隐忍。但是我不能放弃人生。那是我的梦想。》《。

不管怎么样。矫情也好。沉默也罢。总之每个考G的人心里一定都有自己的梦想。也一样有为了梦想去努力的毅力。其实我也很懒惰。我爱和朋友逛街。我也想去约会。我喜欢看动画。喜欢听音乐看自己喜欢的书。和自己的父母一起谈心。没有亲们想的那么有毅力。好几次都是。尤其是AW以后到现在这段时间。呵呵。不过。还记得之前贴过的哈佛校训里有一条。只要意识到了。就不算太晚。大概就是这么个意思吧。所以。好吧。明天再出去和同学吃顿饭。然后就开始努力了。和大家一起努力。很高心可以加入精英组和die组的很多成员在草木的带领下一起奋斗。之前一直担心自己可能进不了呢。既然草木说welcome了那就要更加努力》《。。

flear亲要加油。jessi姐要加油。米饭要加油。cjlu和亲的那位要加油。艾艾草（很想这么叫艾尘草亲）要加油。TSUBASA的每一位亲都要加油。所有考G的亲都要加油。恩恩。。加油加油。。

今天依然背单词。sigh。自从姐姐去澳洲以后。我对她父母简直无语。为什么我每天晚上都要作为她们之间的连线呢。？。QQ教了三个晚上都还是勉强。sigh。两代人的差距怎么这么大呢。？然后同学聚会。和朋友出去玩。约会去看画展。所有七月为了考AW而推迟的活动全都聚集在八月上中旬。完全没有办法投入背书阅读。所以明天吃饭回来以后要静下心。好好反省。估计明天的话。红宝核心词汇的第七遍在长达十几天的背诵后就快要结束了。希望不要拖到后天。|||。然后决定开始攻克最新词汇。再重新复习核心。开始看阅读。练习NO题的大致解题技巧了。恩。。加油加油。。现在继续去做老姐和她父母的长途连线了。。。ORZ。。。凌晨背背单词吧。。。~》《。。fightfight

fiefuytUID: 2303116

复习AW期间，没有去逛过一次街，没有上过校内，上网就只有寄托，economist，和在线翻译，wiki，以及校园网（orz）

---------以此自勉！

又一次被震撼到了，无以言表地感动，银落亲，加油，我看好你哦：）
PS:自责、羞愧中，觉得自己差得太远太远，这样的我是没有资格和你一起并肩作战吧······

银落UID: 2632560

TO flear: 好感动。。。凌晨和某只一起背单词。。。恩。。虽然某只背到一点就趴下了。。。TT。。悔过。。。间接导致今天果然没有完成第七遍的背诵任务。。拖延拖延。。又是拖延。。。反省去。。。

TO 猪猪：其实没有什么资格不资格的。。在G的面前。。我们都是勇士。。要知道还有很多人单是听了G的名字就放弃了尝试的。。所以我们都值得为自己骄傲。。缺点人人都有。。不要觉得自责羞愧。。我也很懒惰的。。真的。。所以需要同伴需要小组来约束。。然后一起奋进。。看了你的鼓励我很感动。。我也看好你的。。加油。。~》《。。

今天。。吃完饭。。继续做长途连线。。然后单词只背了二十多页。。好。。现在开始继续。。背到凌晨。。明天住到新家里面断网复习。。估计效果会好一点。。。挺住挺住。。

fiefuytUID: 2303116

银落要断网啦，我会想你滴：）
等着你收获多多滴归来呀，加油！

flearUID: 2533174

去新家复习...我有过这样的经历...寒假的某天，骑车小车，冒着大雨，揣着红宝，奔向新家...
但到了新家不会开空调...冻死...一边俯卧撑一边红宝...ORZ...加油加油~