迷失在的南極大陸的台灣黑熊

很多MM都愛喝茶，因為茶葉含有的多酚和其它營養物質，可以美顏抗衰。不過，愛喝茶不代表會喝茶，喝茶中的一些習慣其實一點都不利健康，甚至會惹來疾病和癌癥。下面，小編告訴你喝茶的12個致命誤區。

愛喝茶 注意避開這12個誤區

　　喝茶不僅是我們的傳統飲食文化，更是我們抵抗衰老的飲食妙招。茶葉中含有的多種抗氧化物質與抗氧化營養素，可以幫助我們養顏抗衰。

　　但是，喜歡喝茶並不等於你會喝茶，有的人喝茶時容易犯下一些飲食誤區，今天愛美網小編就為你盤點你最常犯的喝茶誤區。

　　誤區1：愛喝濃茶

咖啡不僅可以提神，還可提昇記憶力。科學家在一項有100多名參與者的研究中發現，學習課程結束後不久服用一粒咖啡因藥丸可以改善他們回憶圖像的能力。

　　參與者被要求確認室外或室內的圖像目標，5分鍾後服用咖啡因藥丸或安慰劑藥丸。研究人員事先提取參與者的唾液樣本，目的是分析他們的咖啡因水平，然後在接下來3小時和24小時後進行重復測試。第二天，他們向參與者展示一些圖像，其中包括和以前相同的、類似的以及隨機挑選的圖像。

　　兩組參與者都准確識別新的和舊的照片，但服用咖啡因藥丸的參與者可更好地發現相似圖像。研究人員指出，那些服用安慰劑藥丸的參與者錯誤地認為它們是前一天的原始圖像，這表示喝下咖啡至少24小時後咖啡因可提高某些記憶。《自然神經學》雜志刊登了這些發現。

　　加利福尼亞大學歐文分校的邁克爾-亞薩博士說：“咖啡因有助於鞏固長期記憶力。我們一直都知道咖啡因可增強認知能力，但從未在人類身上詳細研究它對加強記憶的影響以及它使記憶對遺忘具有抵抗力的作用。我們的研究第一次表明，咖啡因在24多小時後對減少遺忘具有特殊功效。”

　　研究人員表示，大腦識別兩個相似物體差異的能力意味著更高水平的記憶保持。亞薩說：“如果我們使用沒有相似圖像目標的標准認知記憶任務，就會發現咖啡因沒有影響。但如果使用大腦更難識別的圖像目標，咖啡因好像增強記憶力。”這項該研究和最早期表明咖啡因對長期記憶影響很小或根本沒有影響的實驗不同，因為看了圖像目標的參與者是在喝咖啡後纔設法記起這些圖像。

The four horsemen of mediocrity

Deniability--"They decided, created, commanded or blocked. Not my fault."

Helplessness--"My boss won't let me."

Contempt--"They don't pay me enough to put up with the likes of these customers."

Fear--"It's good enough, it's not worth the risk, people will talk, this might not work..."

Free Bird!

One of the things a creator can do as a service to the audience is let them know when it's safe to whoop, holler or applaud.

Often, we hesitate to spread the word and recommend something because it doesn't feel safe to do so. It's better to say nothing than it is to feel stupid.

Joining in on the standing ovation at the end of a Broadway play isn't some sort of callow sellout. It's actually a tradition that offers solace for the timid or uninitiated. Same as flicking your lighter and shouting for the band to play Free Bird... no one ever felt stupid for cheering for a hit when everyone else was doing it as well.

...different people differently

Don't teach your students as if they are a monolithic population of learners. They learn differently, they have different goals, different skills, different backgrounds.

Don't sell to your customers as if they are a fungible commodity, a walking ATM waiting for you to punch. Six of one are not like half a dozen of the other. They tell themselves different stories, have different needs and demand something different from you.

Different voters, different donors, different employees--we have the choice to treat them as individuals. Not only do they need different things, but they offer differing amounts of value to you and to your project. The moment your policy interferes with their uniqueness, the policy has cost you something.

We used to have no choice. There was only one set of data for the student body, one way to put things on the shelf of the local market, one opportunity to talk to the entire audience...

Who would be surprised?

When was the last time you surprised or delighted a customer, colleague or boss?

If you did, would it help?

Apple developed a tradition of secrecy largely because Steve saw the extraordinary value in surprising the audience. It creates a rare wave of excitement--remarkable is a byproduct of surprise. Today, they continue to work at the secrecy, as if that's the only element necessary to create surprise.

But of course, it's not.

How much does it cost you to avoid the feeling of risk?

Not actual risk, but the feeling that you're at risk?

How many experiences are you missing out on because the (very unlikely) downsides are too frightening to contemplate?

Are you avoiding leading, connecting or creating because to do so feels risky?

Feeling risk is very different than actually putting yourself at risk. Over time, we've created a cultural taboo about feeling certain kinds of risk, and all that insulation from what the real world requires is getting quite expensive.

Conference call hygiene

On behalf of the many who have suffered through pointless and painful conference calls, some general principles:

When in doubt, don't have one.
Everyone now knows precisely what time it is. Show up ten seconds early; one minute late is too late.
If you can't live with rule 1, can we live with this one? 10 minutes is the maximum length of a conference call. In, out, over.
If the meeting is only ten minutes long, good news, you have time to pull over, time to let the dog out, and time to give us your undivided attention.
If you're not planning on speaking, no need to attend. You can listen to the recording later if you need to, or we can send you 8 bullet points and save us all time.
While we're on the topic, audio is a truly powerful means of communication, and if you want to record your message and send it to all of us, I'm totally in favor of this. But don't confuse the one-way broadcast power of audio with a pretend meeting where you're talking and we're supposed to quietly listen in real time. That's not a meeting and all the trappings of a conference call detract from the thing you were trying to do.
Before you waste a thousand dollars of company time on another conference call, listen to Al's book for $4. Almost all conference calls that involve more than five people are either a lazy choice or a show of power, and should be eliminated. If you want to talk, for sure, please pick up the phone and call me.
If we work in the plant, we make widgets. And we expect that the making of widgets will be consistent, rational and done with forethought and a lack of waste. Many of us now work in a system that makes decisions, has meetings and markets ideas. The same kind of clarity and craftsmanship ought to exist here too.

This video is funny, because it's true.

Measuring nothing (with great accuracy)

The weight of a television set has nothing at all to do with the clarity of its picture. Even if you measure to a tenth of a gram, this precise data is useless.

Some people measure stereo equipment using fancy charts and graphs, even though the charts and graphs say little or nothing about how it actually sounds.

A person's Klout score or the number of Twitter followers she has probably doesn't have a lot to do with how much influence she actually has, even if you measure it quite carefully.

You can't tell if a book is any good by the number of words it contains, even though it's quite easy and direct to measure this.

【特約作家朱子】
休士頓火箭今年球季在沒有失去哈登、林書豪、帕森斯、阿西克四大主力情況下，簽下聯盟第一長人哈沃德，組成完美新陣容，也有機會成為西區三強之一。但火箭真正磨合仍需要時間和過程，這是一支年輕、有潛力球隊邁向成功必經之路。
我大膽預測，接下來追求完美的火箭還會有兩大伏筆等著操作，第一是交易阿西克，第二是換走林書豪。
從火箭目前的組合、陣容看來，阿西克勢必難以避免走上交易之一途，因為火箭把阿西克擺在板凳上，每場只能替補打15-17分鐘，這是一種浪費，而且阿西克擁有不錯的市場價值，應該會有不少球隊渴望引進這名有防守能力，籃板一流的中鋒。
再者，火箭也需要換來一名有投籃能力，可以拉開空間，能夠為哈沃德傳球和策應的強力前鋒，甚至可以換來一名更出色的控球後衛，組成更強大的後場陣容，這才是火箭完成籌建總冠軍球隊的必要過程。
阿西克上季場均10.1分、11.7籃板，他整季打滿82場，抓下聯盟最多的956個籃板。
對火箭來說，上個賽季阿西克的作用和功能、重要性並不亞於哈登，因此阿西克是火箭最有市場魅力的交易商品，一旦找到火箭合適的對象和買家，可以讓陣容升級、更合理配置，阿西克再穿火箭球衣的時間不會太長。
火箭必須處理掉阿西克的另一個原因是，阿西克不會投籃，他的作用和功能性，也將完全被能力更強大的哈沃德取代，阿西克只能當哈沃德替補，對戰力需要升級的火箭來說，絕對是個浪費。
火箭也無法讓阿西克、哈沃德同時上場，因為兩人同時上場，不但會讓火箭戰術變得更慢、更複雜，也會壓縮兩人的作用，影響團隊攻防節奏和效率。
當然，阿西克不想打替補，也希望被火箭交易，他已經不想跟哈沃德做為隊友，這個原因最終一定會成為火箭必須儘早處理的問題。
林書豪在火箭的角色和必須交易的迫切性，沒有阿西克那麼嚴重，一則是林書豪賣相不好，他不像阿西克有市場性，比較容易出手和找到相對買家，二是林書豪的位置與角色，還有貝佛利可以取代，瘋狂外線進攻有布魯克斯這個選擇，因此林書豪本季再進化，那是火箭福氣，萬一打不好或很平凡，林書豪可以被取代性很高，火箭不需要急著出手。
但，火箭當然希望可以換到更出色的控球後衛，更有明星味和外線能力，這才是火箭再升級成為總冠軍球隊第二條路徑，也是林書豪最終也會被火箭交易出去的原因之一。
仍不完美的火箭，接下來首先得適應哈沃德加入之後的新打法，更多的inside-out、強弱邊轉移，更多的擋拆，同時要安排阿西克的角色、定位、時間，接下來得評估林書豪和團隊之間的磨合程度、效率。上個賽季火箭習慣的快速跑轟、早攻、跳投、三分轟炸，都將因為哈沃德的戰術角色和擋拆，必須慢下來打，打慢球，打半場進攻，需要的是更多的耐心、經驗和默契。
阿西克遲早會被火箭交易出去，林書豪的命運也是一樣，這將是火箭戰力升級進化無可避免的方向。
【2013/7/24 聯合新聞網】
 
全文網址: 火箭想成功 要換掉阿西克、林書豪 | 深入報導 | 籃球風雲 | udn運動大聯盟 http://mag.udn.com/mag/sports/storypage.jsp?f_ART_ID=467873#ixzz2ipE0I18o 
Power By udn.com