北美10月1，迎国庆. 革命尚未成功，仍需努力

holyxie

为感谢CD和同胞们的帮助，虽然这次没上7，但比原来大有进步。刚刚考完，现在放狗AA: 一个咖啡店做了个调查，调查的网址写在了收据的后面. 结果是只有178个抱怨本店的评价，而且咖啡店已经卖出30000杯以上咖啡，作者说顾客对我们很满意，所以不用提高服务和产品质量.
强烈建议大家看个nn的6分文章，思路完全符合In the givenmemorandum, the argument maintains a view that a review of procedures is notimportant to the goal of the travel company to maintain or increase the numberof passengers. To support this idea, the author of the argument points out thatonly 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on AA last year weredissatisfied with the baggage-handling procedures. The reasoning process isconvincing at first glance, with close examination, however, we can easily findout three logical flaws. I’d like to uncover how groundless this allegation isin the following paragraphs.
Obviously, the argument commits a logical fallacycalled either-or thinking. The argument above assumes that there are only twopossible results open to us----dissatisfied passengers who complained about thebaggage-handling procedures and satisfied passengers who did not file acomplaint. But there is no room for a middle ground. It is premature toconclude that those who didn’t file the complaint were indeed the satisfiedcustomers without any further investigation. What if these individuals had notime to file a complaint or they were unwilling to express theirdissatisfaction? If the author cannot provide the relative compelling evidencesto prove that the customers who did not file a complaint are indeed pleasedwith the AA’s procedures, the argument is weak and unpersuasive.
The second point worth talking is that the sampleraised in the allegation is insufficient. First of all, the author does notquote the total number of the passengers last year. For instance, if there wasa total number of 1500 passengers who traveled on AA last year, the 1000passengers in the sample are definitely sufficient. But what if there are over200,000 passengers who took AA last year? The data in the survey are so limitedthat they are not representative of the entire passengers under consideration.Furthermore, the author of the argument fails to provide affirmativejustification that the passengers in the sample are chose at random. Perhapsthese biased passengers were well chosen by the board of the AA in order todemonstrate the excellent baggage-handling service to the general public. Inthe absence of compelling information to justify how these passengers arechose, it is arbitrary to say that a review of the procedures is unimportant.
Finally, the argument assumed withoutjustification that background conditions have remained the same at differenttimes. As is the case presented in the argument, only a small fraction(lessthan one percent) of the passengers were unsatisfied with the luggage-handlingprocedures last year. This means an overwhelming majority of the passengerswere pleased with the procedure service. Nevertheless, the author of theargument does not necessarily prove that this phenomenon will inevitably happenin the near future. It is an unwarranted assumption for the simple reason thatthings rarely remain constant over extended periods of time.
In a nutshell, the argument omits several keyfactors; it is not sound or persuasive. If it involves the items discussedabove rather than simply illustrate several numbers in a survey, the argumentwould have been more thorough and compelling.

AI：作者说现在娱乐产业都以暴力为卖点,所以相关行业应该增加暴力内容来获得更好的收入
本人提供点思路,因为偶是hardcore video gamer，所以这篇文章我就写游戏中的暴力. 当然懂电影的可以写电影，或者美剧像CSI, THE WALKING DEAD之类的.
先说violence and gore在娱乐产品中非常收欢迎，特别是游戏啊之类的. 像EA这种公司原来都是做E级游戏的公司像模拟人生啊，极品飞车啊之类出名的，但现在卖不好了，因为大家都怎么不玩了.（ 我怎么知道？因为我是hardcore gamer）
可以说说EA的转型做了个游戏叫DEAD SPACE非常暴力，前所未有的.大家很喜欢. 其他公司都不用说了啊 mortal combat的啊 ,gta啊，god of war啊，gears of war啊，使命召唤啊，而且小孩都骗着大人要给他们买啊，因为不打这中游戏在学校当不了cool kid 啊，true story, 我成天打xbox live的时候都听到小屁孩在鬼叫，烦. 都是美国很流行的游戏，人人都玩，就是因为很爽很暴力. （PS;GEARS OF WAR 3 出来了我一直忍着没玩）
反面就说暴力会给人们行为上带来影响，让人产生暴力犯罪的想法甚至行为啊. 原来写过个research paper，很多科学家和评论家都说游戏不好啊，特别让孩子学坏，产生暴力行为啊啊. 特别是1994（记不清了) 美国高中著名的枪击案啊，射手都说自己崇拜希特勒和当时最流行的射击游戏doom（是毁灭战士，不是公爵，公爵叫Duke nukem）. 大家想了解的可以wikipedia一下. fuck baidu.
然后就自己写结论了.lol


数学; 感觉这次数学比上个月的简单多了，就记得3个题吧
1. 在一个数列中有21个数，n在里面，且n等于其中20个数的平均值的4倍，问n在这个有21个数的数列中占多少比例？
2. 7^15的各位数是什么，JJ出现多次啊
3. 一个产品的profit占cost的10%，现在提高到了占15%，cost不便，卖价格现在是92块，问原来卖多少？


阅读;
感觉这次阅读题比较难
一篇是关于经济增长和科技进步的，ITC公司和印度农民卖豆子的故事，jj里面有全文！！
一篇是关于拉拉什么狗屁女权主义的，文章不难，题目难.
一篇是descriptive and prescriptive(不记得是不是这个词的）的英文标准，关于正规书面与和口语的，文章很长，题目难度一般


语法;
感觉语法不算难
有道是什么
having done bla bla, XXXXXX having done部分划线
还有一道就是整句话，很容易排出3个答案，最后两个答案就是两个单词的区别，misnomer和misconception,应该选后者
一道关于第一个得诺贝尔文学奖的亚洲人，很简单，跟prep里面拿到jazz composer and blabla, somebody is bla bla to win之类的
其他的失忆中....想起再补


唉 虽然革命还未成功，偶再接再厉，月底再来一次，争取上7，各位同志们加油！
Good luck, may force be with you!
Peace out!

王小睿

good

思之如狂

辛苦楼主

zzhong

I thought you have to wait 31 days before you can take it again, NO?

zy352414882

the interval between 2 tests has to be one month?

sweetings

月底还能再来吖

kimFA35

LZ加油哦~有没有什么逻辑狗啊~

snsundl

北美真是各种机经啊，给力。。。10.15的来过

段小q

同10.15~楼主给力~~！！！

剪刀手小饼干

祝福楼主~~~~~