【每日阅读训练——速度越障6系列】【6-18】

daisyの小夢想

呵呵 我们有VIP练习专区了 真开心~~

How to 'Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish:" Fixing Steve Jobs Commencement Advice


计时1
With just about every Apple product I’ve bought, from my first Mac—a 512, I go way back almost to the beginning—to the iPad2 I got last week, just opening the box filled me with optimism. In my hands was this great new thing that was really going to change my life; happiness, organization, efficiency, and, yes, even a little coolness were just around the corner. Sometimes, like with my iPad, even before turning it on I’d marvel at the sleek contours and fully expect that I too would soon feel myself to be a sleek hipster riding the crest of the future.
But, it was not to be. While these devices have changed how we all live in so many ways, my feelings always adapted to the new functions and experiences so that soon I pretty much felt like the same me I’d always been. Of course, there’s always some residual hope that maybe all that happiness would come with the next upgrade.
Same thing with loss. We adapt. Shock, sadness, grief all dissolve in time, like a drop of oil in soapy water. That doesn’t mean those feelings aren’t meaningful and painful, they surely are. It’s just that they won’t last. Since saddened by Steve Jobs’ tragically early death, I’ve been watching public grief and thinking about what will last, what do we get to keep after we emotionally adapt to the loss of a creative visionary, what remains after the flickering touch-screen memorial candles go out and the make-shift memorials in front of Apple Stores are cleared to make room for more commerce.
(字数 267)
计时2
What will last is what works, and what of his works is more than just the “insanely great” things he built. He didn’t just leave stuff, he left inspiration. And of a particular kind. Steve Jobs inspired people to make things work. And in that spirit of making it work and thinking about what will last, I’m going to take his now iconic 2005 Stanford commencement address and, well, fix the psychology. I’m going to do to it what he did with so many prototypes: make it work (links to full speech at end).
He memorably closed his speech by advising graduates to follow the advice Stewart Brand offered when Brand finished the final edition of The Whole Earth Catalog: “Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.” Great advice. Psychologically sound, and with inter-generational poetry.
But how to do it? How to stay hungry, stay foolish? Framed by his brush with death, he advised his listeners to make the most of our time on the planet. He counseled eager graduates to look in the mirror each morning and ask themselves whether or not they were living the life they wanted:
“When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: “If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you’ll most certainly be right.” It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: “If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?” And whenever the answer has been “No” for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.”
(字数 283)
计时3
However moved and inspired I was—and am—by his comments, when I put on my geek hat and read this as a procedure to follow rather than just inspiration, I find that it might just not be the best way to achieve the goal. We need to fix the algorithm and really ask whether anyone would really be able to “Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish” by checking in with themselves each morning during water rituals. And the answer is, probably not. In fact, he got the psychology wrong in two important ways, ways that are easy to fix and, once fixed, can help make his inspiration last beyond the immediate moments of either techno-optimism or sadness and grief.
The first problem is doing an existential audit in the morning before what is being audited actually happens. We’ve learned that people are terrible predictors of their own happiness. Trying to say in advance whether or not one would want to do what one is about to do is an activity that will inevitably yield profoundly unreliable information. It’s biased by what psychologist Daniel Gilbert has called the “impact bias,”  i.e., our human tendency to predict (imagine?) that future emotional experiences will be more intense and last longer than they really will.
What this means on the positive side of the emotional ledger is that we expect experiences—like that new iPad2 or that new job or that ice cream—will make life feel better than it really will. You may be looking forward to knocking it out of the park at an afternoon meeting, but the prediction will feel better and last longer than the actual experience.
（字数 276）
计时4
And we do this with negative feelings as well, often to our detriment. In fact, sometimes the most satisfying, richest experiences are those that have significant “start-up costs.” Perhaps you avoid completing some mundane task because you expect doing it will feel much worse than the experience of actually doing it will prove to be. Then you get stuck in a loop of procrastination. Or, you choose not to engage with some potentially meaningful experience, preferring the quick-and-easy instead, because you predict getting started will be much more difficult than the actual experience proves itself to be.
Luckily, there’s a fix. A much better strategy for staying hungry, staying foolish would be to evaluate your day at the end, to ask Steve Jobs’ question in the past tense: “If today were the last day of my life, would I be grateful to have done what I did today?” Of course, memory is not perfect. But it is more accurate than imagination.
Second, isolated introspection is an over-valued and highly unreliable road towards self-knowledge. You really don’t want to look in the mirror as a way to conduct your existential audit. Learning how many days of not being grateful are too many is pretty much impossible when it is just you and your reflection. Psychoanalysts (Eisold) and cognitive scientists (nicely reviewed in recent books by DiSalvo and Herbert) have described how our minds use various strategies, biases, and heuristics to make our way in the world. And these processes make the mirror one of the last places where you should look for self-knowledge.
（字数 262）
计时5
For example, we overestimate the importance and power of recent experiences. You might have had a pretty great day.  But if it ends with a frustrating, annoying experience, the recency of that experience might lead you to think the entire day was sort of a wash. Another bias is that we overestimate the value of those experiences that are most perceptually salient. We act as though the loudest is the truest. So, even if you had a pretty great day, a loud argument with a loved one might cause you to undervalue an interesting day spent in the flow of good work.
Again, there’s a fix. Don’t do it alone. Any existential audit that has a chance of being appropriately accurate needs a partner. Self-knowledge happens in dialogue, not isolated introspection. Sometimes, because of language, that other person does not need to be there in the flesh. They can even be present as the author of a book, or an imagined reader for those who like to write. Sometimes it can even be in an interior dialogue with an imagined other. But sooner or later, you’ll need intimate dialogue with an actual other person if you want to know yourself.
So, listen to Steve, he really knew what he was talking about: “Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.” Just don’t do it all alone by looking in the mirror in the morning. Instead, find and engage others about your day.  Ongoing dialogue about your sources of gratitude is where you’ll find the information you need.
（字数 253）


From Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddessig/2011/10/07/how-to-stay-hungry-stay-foolish-fixing-steve-jobs-commencement-advice/







Commemorating China’s 1911 revolution
From Sun to Mao to now
Uncomfortable comparisons for an authoritarian government


ONE hundred years ago on October 10th, a mutiny in the central Chinese city of Wuhan triggered the collapse of China’s last imperial dynasty. In Taiwan, which separated from the mainland in 1949 after a civil war and still claims to be the rightful heir of the republic founded in 1911, the anniversary will be celebrated with a parade, including a display of air power. But in China there are mixed feelings. The country is spending lavishly on festivities, too. But its ruling Communist Party is busily stifling debate about the revolutionaries’ dream of democracy, which has been realised on Taiwan but not on the mainland.
China and Taiwan have long disputed each others’ claims to be the heir of the 1911 revolution. Sun Yat-sen, regarded as the revolution’s leader, is officially revered on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. As usual around the time of the anniversary, a giant portrait of him was erected on October 1st in Tiananmen Square, opposite that of Mao Zedong (both wearing Sun suits, as they were known before their rebranding in Mao’s day). But the Communist Party’s efforts to play up the occasion have revealed its nervousness.
In late September, a film about the revolution, “1911”, starring Jackie Chan, a kung-fu actor from Hong Kong, was released. Officials trumpeted the movie but ticket sales have been lacklustre. The film carefully avoids dwelling on the sweeping political reforms initiated by the final imperial dynasty, the Qing, which precipitated its own overthrow. A popular television series, “Advance toward the Republic”, that focused on those reforms and was aired in 2003, was cut by censors before the series finished, and banned from rebroadcast. One scene showed Sun addressing politicians six years after the 1911 revolution with a lament that “only powerful people have liberty”. Echoes of China today were clearly too unsettling for the censors.
In the past year, officials have tried to stop discussion of the 1911 revolution straying into such realms. In November 2010 the Xiaoxiang Morning Herald, a newspaper in south China’s Hunan Province, got into trouble with the censors after publishing a supplement on the revolution. It quoted from a letter written by Vaclav Havel in 1975, when he was still a Czech dissident, to the country’s communist president, Gustav Husak: “history again demands to be heard”. The newspaper did not explain the context, which was Mr Havel’s lament about the Communist Party’s sanitisation of history. It did not need to. Its clear message was that the democratic demands of 1911 could not be repressed forever.
In recent months, upheaval in the Arab world has made officials even more nervous. In April they banned a symposium on the revolution planned by students at several leading universities in Beijing. A website advertising the event said that it aimed to look not only at “inspirational revolutionary victories” but also at things “hidden deeper” concerning democracy.
Two weeks ago the authorities suddenly cancelled the world premier of an opera, “Dr Sun Yat-sen”, which was due to be performed by a Hong Kong troupe at the National Centre for the Performing Arts close to Tiananmen Square in Beijing. “Logistical reasons” were cited, but Hong Kong media speculated that some of its content—including its portrayal of Sun’s love life—was deemed to be out of line.
But the authorities are not letting their political worries spoil a spending opportunity. In Wuhan, where the revolution began, they announced plans to splurge 20 billion yuan ($3.1 billion) on 1911-related exhibitions and on a makeover for the city. The Manchu emperor abdicated in February 1912, ending over 2,000 years of dynastic rule. Officials in Wuhan, and elsewhere, have been keeping quiet about the orgy of violence against Manchus that accompanied the upheaval (see article).
Some Chinese scholars say the revolution did little for China except to usher in chaotic warlordism, followed by authoritarian government. Such accusations have some merit. China did indeed slide into disarray, warlordism and insurrection after 1911. Any hopes of a democratic republic were overwhelmed by efforts to bring the country under control, which the Communist Party achieved in 1949. Li Zehou, a Chinese intellectual, has stirred debate in recent years by arguing that China should have given the Qing reforms more of a chance.
The Communist Party maintains that the 1911 revolution was justified, but finds itself in a quandary. Another star-studded film released earlier this year to mark its own 90th birthday stirred audiences in an unintended way. The film, covering the period from the revolution of 1911 to the Communist Party’s founding in 1921, prompted numerous comments on Chinese internet forums about the lessons it offered for rebelling against bad government. Interesting idea.


From The Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/21531524

fox0923

沙发~~~
1'01"
1'03"
1'00"
1'20"
1'55"
去吃个饭~~可以“stay foolish”，可是没法“stay hungry”~~

UlysessHope

速度占座！洗澡回来做题
------------------------
实在是读不下去啊。。。我明天读 一定一定
-------------------------
1,30
1,11
1,10
1,13
摁错没计时

通篇看上去没生词，一读感觉生词还是挺多的，看来我词汇还不够 额

南瓜0729

哈哈 狐狐真可爱      占座 最近网不给力 我默默的读。。。

bananazoo

占位~

phoebe0624

深夜占位，嘿嘿

1'21"
1'07"
1'09"
1'17"
1'13"

抓抓sandra

今天又木有时间读了。。T T好悲伤。。
明天一定要来读daisy的~~嗷~~

daisyの小夢想

各种占座偷懒的孩子~~~全体向糊糊学习^^

yuantengxuanwu

占位再读
1'07
1'13
1'09
1'08
1'02
from sun to mao to now
one hundred years ago, qing dynasty collapsed in wuhan and there was the democracy cummunity. it spent lots of money in the ceromony and people were not satidfied with it.
the leader of it was sun, and the counterpart was mao.
a film 1911 about a revolution acted by jakie chen was released in hongkong, the content of the film.
the official put some kind of  inhibitions to the film.However, it echoed much from the public.
people's response and thinking.
in recent years, the arab countries has some troublesome upheavels.
hongkong officially cancled the film about the sun.
wuhan spent 20billion to do a makeup for the city .
historians evaluation for the revolution.
summerize the history mentioned and the recent events.

q1weruqt

我占位子