Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (9676)	1/24/2006 5:18:41 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541482

"A Shocker: Partisan Thought Is Unconscious By BENEDICT CAREY Liberals and conservatives can become equally bug-eyed and irrational when talking politics, especially when they are on the defensive. Using M.R.I. scanners, neuroscientists have now tracked what happens in the politically partisan brain when it tries to digest damning facts about favored candidates or criticisms of them. The process is almost entirely emotional and unconscious, the researchers report, and there are flares of activity in the brain's pleasure centers when unwelcome information is being rejected. "Everything we know about cognition suggests that, when faced with a contradiction, we use the rational regions of our brain to think about it, but that was not the case here," said Dr. Drew Westen, a psychologist at Emory and lead author of the study, to be presented Saturday at meetings of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology in Palm Springs, Calif. The results are the latest from brain imaging studies that provide a neural explanation for internal states, like infatuation or ambivalence, and a graphic trace of the brain's activity. In 2004, the researchers recruited 30 adult men who described themselves as committed Republicans or Democrats. The men, half of them supporters of President Bush and the other half backers of Senator John Kerry, earned $50 to sit in an M.R.I. machine and consider several statements in quick succession. The first was a quote attributed to one of the two candidates: either a remark by Mr. Bush in support of Kenneth L. Lay, the former Enron chief, before he was indicted, or a statement by Mr. Kerry that Social Security should be overhauled. Moments later, the participants read a remark that showed the candidate reversing his position. The quotes were doctored for maximum effect but presented as factual. The Republicans in the study judged Mr. Kerry as harshly as the Democrats judged Mr. Bush. But each group let its own candidate off the hook. After the participants read the contradictory comment, the researchers measured increased activity in several areas of the brain. They included a region involved in regulating negative emotions and another called the cingulate, which activates when the brain makes judgments about forgiveness, among other things. Also, a spike appeared in several areas known to be active when people feel relieved or rewarded. The "cold reasoning" regions of the cortex were relatively quiet. Researchers have long known that political decisions are strongly influenced by unconscious emotional reactions, a fact routinely exploited by campaign consultants and advertisers. But the new research suggests that for partisans, political thinking is often predominantly emotional. It is possible to override these biases, Dr. Westen said, "but you have to engage in ruthless self reflection, to say, 'All right, I know what I want to believe, but I have to be honest.' " He added, "It speaks to the character of the discourse that this quality is rarely talked about in politics."" nytimes.com

To: Lane3 who wrote (9676)	1/24/2006 5:37:21 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 541482

A buck a track seems very reasonable to me. Not to me. Compare the cost of a DVD. Also they are planning to raise the cost for popular hits. Most of that buck goes to the record company and RIAA. Most of that fraction does not go to the people who actually made the music. A CD might be comparable in price but the costs are higher. With most of the revenue and none of the distribution costs going to the record company a buck strikes me as too expensive. But than I supose those who care the most about the cost (if say they don't have a lot of excess money but want a large music library to be available) probably just download it for free. The free downloads could exert downward pressure on the price (lowered demand if the price is high), or upward pressure (the record companies may figure that the additional demand from going to say 50 cents per song or even 25 cents might not be that great. At or below 25 cents and with no DRM I would probably download hundreds of songs from the legal download sites. At 50 cents, or maybe even $1 with no DRM I'd consider it. At $1 (or more) and with DRM limiting my use (and also taking up computer resources) I'm not a customer. I haven't made any illegal downloads in a long time either, and I don't purchase many CDs. Mostly I just listen to the radio in the car now. Tim