ScienceDaily (Aug. 3, 2012) ? In the cognitive sciences, the capacity to interpret the intentions of others is called "Theory of Mind" (ToM). This faculty is involved in the understanding of language, in particular by bridging the gap between the meaning of the words that make up a statement and the meaning of the statement as a whole.
In recent years, researchers have identified the neural network dedicated to ToM, but no one had yet demonstrated that this set of neurons is specifically activated by the process of understanding of an utterance. This has now been accomplished: a team from L2C2 (Laboratoire sur le Langage, le Cerveau et la Cognition, Laboratory on Language, the Brain and Cognition, CNRS / Universit? Claude Bernard-Lyon 1) has shown that the activation of the ToM neural network increases when an individual is reacting to ironic statements.
Published in Neuroimage, these findings represent an important breakthrough in the study of Theory of Mind and linguistics, shedding light on the mechanisms involved in interpersonal communication.
In our communications with others, we are constantly thinking beyond the basic meaning of words. For example, if asked, "Do you have the time?" one would not simply reply, "Yes." The gap between what is said and what it means is the focus of a branch of linguistics called pragmatics. In this science, "Theory of Mind" (ToM) gives listeners the capacity to fill this gap. In order to decipher the meaning and intentions hidden behind what is said, even in the most casual conversation, ToM relies on a variety of verbal and non-verbal elements: the words used, their context, intonation, "body language," etc.
Within the past 10 years, researchers in cognitive neuroscience have identified a neural network dedicated to ToM that includes specific areas of the brain: the right and left temporal parietal junctions, the medial prefrontal cortex and the precuneus. To identify this network, the researchers relied primarily on non-verbal tasks based on the observation of others' behavior[1]. Today, researchers at L2C2 (Laboratoire sur le Langage, le Cerveau et la Cognition, Laboratory on Language, the Brain and Cognition, CNRS / Universit? Claude Bernard-Lyon 1) have established, for the first time, the link between this neural network and the processing of implicit meanings.
To identify this link, the team focused their attention on irony. An ironic statement usually means the opposite of what is said. In order to detect irony in a statement, the mechanisms of ToM must be brought into play. In their experiment, the researchers prepared 20 short narratives in two versions, one literal and one ironic. Each story contained a key sentence that, depending on the version, yielded an ironic or literal meaning. For example, in one of the stories an opera singer exclaims after a premiere, "Tonight we gave a superb performance." Depending on whether the performance was in fact very bad or very good, the statement is or is not ironic.
The team then carried out functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analyses on 20 participants who were asked to read 18 of the stories, chosen at random, in either their ironic or literal version. The participants were not aware that the test concerned the perception of irony. The researchers had predicted that the participants' ToM neural networks would show increased activity in reaction to the ironic sentences, and that was precisely what they observed: as each key sentence was read, the network activity was greater when the statement was ironic. This shows that this network is directly involved in the processes of understanding irony, and, more generally, in the comprehension of language.
Next, the L2C2 researchers hope to expand their research on the ToM network in order to determine, for example, whether test participants would be able to perceive irony if this network were artificially inactivated.
Note:
[1] For example, Gr?zes, Frith & Passingham (J. Neuroscience, 2004) showed a series of short (3.5 second) films in which actors came into a room and lifted boxes. Some of the actors were instructed to act as though the boxes were heavier (or lighter) than they actually were. Having thus set up deceptive situations, the experimenters asked the participants to determine if they had or had not been deceived by the actors in the films. The films containing feigned actions elicited increased activity in the rTPJ (right temporal parietal junction) compared with those containing unfeigned actions.
Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:
Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by CNRS (D?l?gation Paris Michel-Ange), via AlphaGalileo.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Journal Reference:
Nicola Spotorno, Eric Koun, J?r?me Prado, Jean-Baptiste Van Der Henst, Ira A. Noveck. Neural evidence that utterance-processing entails mentalizing: The case of irony. NeuroImage, 2012; 63 (1): 25 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.046
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.
Traders and floor officials gather at a post on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange shortly after the beginning of trading, Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2012. The market wavered between gains and losses for much of Wednesday, yanked around by technical problems, an ambiguous statement from the Federal Reserve, and mixed reports on U.S. companies that made it difficult to decipher just where the economy is headed. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)
Traders and floor officials gather at a post on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange shortly after the beginning of trading, Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2012. The market wavered between gains and losses for much of Wednesday, yanked around by technical problems, an ambiguous statement from the Federal Reserve, and mixed reports on U.S. companies that made it difficult to decipher just where the economy is headed. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)
NEW YORK (AP) ? The European Central Bank on Thursday laid some of its game plan for tackling the continent's debt crisis, but markets wanted much more.
Stock indexes sank across the U.S. and Europe, the euro fell against the dollar and investors dumped bonds issued by the governments of Spain and Italy. Hopes had been high that the ECB would announce more immediate steps, considering the ECB president's pledge last week to do "whatever it takes" to keep the euro intact.
It was the second day in a row markets were disappointed by a lack of decisive action from a major central bank. On Wednesday, indexes closed lower after the Federal Reserve made only vague promises about its plans for reviving the U.S. economy.
"It's more jawboning, it's more copy and paste from last week," Kenny Polcari, managing director of the brokerage ICAP, said. "There was no definitive plan, and so all the hype and energy (Draghi) created last week is going to go down in flames today."
The Dow Jones industrial average was down 156 points to 12,815 as of 12:45 p.m. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 17 to 1,358. The Nasdaq composite index lost 23 points to 2,898. It was the fourth day in a row of losses; U.S. stocks haven't risen since the promise by ECB President Mario Draghi last week.
Draghi did commit his central bank to more action Thursday, saying it would make a new effort to buy government bonds to drive down borrowing costs for countries like Spain and Italy.
Investors thought the plan was short on detail. Draghi said that policymakers would work out more specifics in the coming weeks. Even with the lack of details, the ECB's willingness to buy more bonds sends a clear message: Europe's financial crisis is getting worse.
The yield, or interest rate, on Spain's benchmark 10-year bond jumped to 7.06 percent from 6.68 percent late Wednesday. The yield on Italy's 10-year bond rose to 6.29 percent from 5.85 percent. The 7 percent rate is a crucial flash point, because that's the rate at which other countries have found themselves unable to pay their bills.
To be fair, the ECB faces a Herculean task with no easy solutions. Whatever it does is sure to offend someone, and skeptics doubt that it has any weapons left in its arsenal that could make a big difference. Some of the weaker countries in Europe, like Greece, have been resistant to the spending cuts the ECB has tried to impose as part of a solution.
In the U.S., General Motors and Kellogg reported lower quarterly profits, which they attributed partly to Europe.
In other trading:
?Knight Capital Group, the trading firm that took the blame for a technical glitch that sent trading of dozens of stocks into chaos early Wednesday, lost more than half its market value. Knight's stock plunged $3.82 to $3.11. Knight said it would suffer a $440 million loss because of the trading problems.
?Abercrombie & Fitch dropped 15 percent and Aeropostale dropped 32 percent after both companies pre-announcing weak second-quarter sales. Abercrombie lost $5.29 to $28.75. Aeropostale lost $6.19 to $13.26.
?Bristol-Myers Squibb, the drug company, fell 7 percent after suspending a study of a potential hepatitis C treatment, citing patient safety issues. The stock lost $2.53 to $33.07.
?There were some positive signs about the economy but they got lost in the stronger maelstrom. Retailers including Target, Limited Brands and Gap announced that July sales had beat expectations. Shares of all three companies were up in early trading. Gap rose the most, climbing 9 percent, or $2.60, to $32.02.
New study: Running mechanics, not metabolism, are the key to performance for elite sprintersPublic release date: 1-Aug-2012 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Margaret Allen mallen@smu.edu 214-768-7664 Southern Methodist University
Sprinting performance isn't a factor of conserving energy; Rather, forces applied by the foot hitting the ground maximize all-out bursts of sprinting
Sprinters competing in the 2012 Olympics might assume their championship performance is the result of their fuel-efficient physiology.
But a new study disproves the classic scientific view that conserving energy maximizes performance in a sprinting event.
The study by biomechanics researchers Matthew W. Bundle at the University of Montana and Peter G. Weyand at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, demonstrates that metabolic economy is not an important factor for performance in events lasting 60 seconds or less.
In fact, just the opposite is true.
"That prevailing view is no longer viable," said Weyand. "Sprinters, if anything, are wasteful of energy. This is due to the biological trade-offs between faster muscle fibers that provide the large and rapid forces needed for sprinting, and slower muscle fibers that maximize metabolic economy."
Instead, the key to top-flight sprinting is to maximize how hard each foot hits the ground, which allows sprinters to translate musculoskeletal and ground reaction forces into swift motion, said Bundle.
"Saving energy is critically important for endurance, but not for sprinting, which our findings indicate is not energy-limited," Bundle said.
Metabolic energy available from sustainable, aerobic sources predominantly determines performance during endurance events by setting the intensity of the musculoskeletal performance that can be sustained throughout the effort, the study found.
For sprinters, Bundle and Weyand conclude the opposite is true.
"The intensity of the mechanical activity that the musculoskeletal system can (for a very short time) achieve determines the quantities of metabolic energy released and the level of performance attained," according to the study.
The authors reported their findings in "Sprint Exercise Performance: Does Metabolic Power Matter?" in the July issue of Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, http://bit.ly/ODvCrk.
Sprint performance variations are a function of external forces
The authors write in their study that athletic performance can be analyzed considering either the input to, or the output from, the skeletal muscles that serve as biological engines. Input is the chemical energy that fuels muscular contraction. Output is the force or mechanical power the contractions produce.
To analyze the mechanics of burst-type sprint activities, the authors said they drew on all-out running speeds and cycling power outputs of humans because of the abundance and quality of the data available and because the mechanical and metabolic contrasts between the two provide informative insights. The authors focused on durations of up to five minutes, particularly on efforts of less than a minute.
For both exercises, differences in sprinting performance were predominantly a function of the magnitude of the external forces applied because running contact lengths and cycling down-stroke lengths, as well as stride and pedal frequency, exhibited limited variations. Additionally, for both cycling and running, external forces applied during sprinting are believed to be consistently related to the corresponding muscle forces, regardless of the intensity or duration of the effort.
So what determines the maximum external forces the musculoskeletal system can apply during a brief, all-out sprint? And why do those forces decrease over the duration of the sprint?
The researchers assessed neuromuscular activation using a diagnostic procedure called surface electromyography to measure electrical activity in the activated muscle fibers. That assessment showed that neuromuscular activation increases continuously during all-out sprint cycling and running trials. More rapid increases were typical for the briefest trials that required the greatest forces. That indicates that all-out sprinting performances are highly dependent on duration because of the speed of musculoskeletal fatigue during dynamic exercise requiring large force outputs, the authors reported.
Sprint performance linked to mechanics of applying external force
Bundle and Weyand altered three independent variables to maximize the variation observed in sprint performance: Subjects were individuals with large differences in their sprint performance capabilities; all-out sprint trials spanned a broad range of durations from 2 to 300 seconds; and performance was compared across different modes of sprinting, namely cycling and running.
"The predictive success of our force application model, both within and across modes of sprint exercise, indicates that as efforts extend from a few seconds to a few minutes, the fractional reliance on anaerobic metabolism progressively impairs whole-body musculoskeletal performance, and does so with a rapid and remarkably consistent time course," the authors wrote. "In this respect, the sprint portion of the performance-duration curve predominantly represents, not a limit on the rates of energy re-supply, but the progressive impairment of skeletal muscle force production that results from a reliance on anaerobic metabolism to fuel intense, sequential contractions."
Conclusion of study departs from prevailing physiological paradigm
Since the muscular engines of humans and other animals are similar in terms of their metabolic and mechanical function, the findings likely apply to the burst performance capabilities of vertebrate animals in general, say the researchers.
###
Bundle is an assistant professor of biomechanics at the University of Montana. Weyand (http://bit.ly/M1jFLa) is an associate professor of applied physiology and biomechanics at SMU in Dallas.
Funding for the study came from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command and the Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center.
SMU is a nationally ranked private university in Dallas founded 100 years ago. Today, SMU enrolls nearly 11,000 students who benefit from the academic opportunities and international reach of seven degree-granting schools. For more information see www.smuresearch.edu.
SMU has an uplink facility located on campus for live TV, radio, or online interviews. To speak with an SMU expert or book an SMU guest in the studio, call SMU News & Communications at 214-768-7650.
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
New study: Running mechanics, not metabolism, are the key to performance for elite sprintersPublic release date: 1-Aug-2012 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Margaret Allen mallen@smu.edu 214-768-7664 Southern Methodist University
Sprinting performance isn't a factor of conserving energy; Rather, forces applied by the foot hitting the ground maximize all-out bursts of sprinting
Sprinters competing in the 2012 Olympics might assume their championship performance is the result of their fuel-efficient physiology.
But a new study disproves the classic scientific view that conserving energy maximizes performance in a sprinting event.
The study by biomechanics researchers Matthew W. Bundle at the University of Montana and Peter G. Weyand at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, demonstrates that metabolic economy is not an important factor for performance in events lasting 60 seconds or less.
In fact, just the opposite is true.
"That prevailing view is no longer viable," said Weyand. "Sprinters, if anything, are wasteful of energy. This is due to the biological trade-offs between faster muscle fibers that provide the large and rapid forces needed for sprinting, and slower muscle fibers that maximize metabolic economy."
Instead, the key to top-flight sprinting is to maximize how hard each foot hits the ground, which allows sprinters to translate musculoskeletal and ground reaction forces into swift motion, said Bundle.
"Saving energy is critically important for endurance, but not for sprinting, which our findings indicate is not energy-limited," Bundle said.
Metabolic energy available from sustainable, aerobic sources predominantly determines performance during endurance events by setting the intensity of the musculoskeletal performance that can be sustained throughout the effort, the study found.
For sprinters, Bundle and Weyand conclude the opposite is true.
"The intensity of the mechanical activity that the musculoskeletal system can (for a very short time) achieve determines the quantities of metabolic energy released and the level of performance attained," according to the study.
The authors reported their findings in "Sprint Exercise Performance: Does Metabolic Power Matter?" in the July issue of Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, http://bit.ly/ODvCrk.
Sprint performance variations are a function of external forces
The authors write in their study that athletic performance can be analyzed considering either the input to, or the output from, the skeletal muscles that serve as biological engines. Input is the chemical energy that fuels muscular contraction. Output is the force or mechanical power the contractions produce.
To analyze the mechanics of burst-type sprint activities, the authors said they drew on all-out running speeds and cycling power outputs of humans because of the abundance and quality of the data available and because the mechanical and metabolic contrasts between the two provide informative insights. The authors focused on durations of up to five minutes, particularly on efforts of less than a minute.
For both exercises, differences in sprinting performance were predominantly a function of the magnitude of the external forces applied because running contact lengths and cycling down-stroke lengths, as well as stride and pedal frequency, exhibited limited variations. Additionally, for both cycling and running, external forces applied during sprinting are believed to be consistently related to the corresponding muscle forces, regardless of the intensity or duration of the effort.
So what determines the maximum external forces the musculoskeletal system can apply during a brief, all-out sprint? And why do those forces decrease over the duration of the sprint?
The researchers assessed neuromuscular activation using a diagnostic procedure called surface electromyography to measure electrical activity in the activated muscle fibers. That assessment showed that neuromuscular activation increases continuously during all-out sprint cycling and running trials. More rapid increases were typical for the briefest trials that required the greatest forces. That indicates that all-out sprinting performances are highly dependent on duration because of the speed of musculoskeletal fatigue during dynamic exercise requiring large force outputs, the authors reported.
Sprint performance linked to mechanics of applying external force
Bundle and Weyand altered three independent variables to maximize the variation observed in sprint performance: Subjects were individuals with large differences in their sprint performance capabilities; all-out sprint trials spanned a broad range of durations from 2 to 300 seconds; and performance was compared across different modes of sprinting, namely cycling and running.
"The predictive success of our force application model, both within and across modes of sprint exercise, indicates that as efforts extend from a few seconds to a few minutes, the fractional reliance on anaerobic metabolism progressively impairs whole-body musculoskeletal performance, and does so with a rapid and remarkably consistent time course," the authors wrote. "In this respect, the sprint portion of the performance-duration curve predominantly represents, not a limit on the rates of energy re-supply, but the progressive impairment of skeletal muscle force production that results from a reliance on anaerobic metabolism to fuel intense, sequential contractions."
Conclusion of study departs from prevailing physiological paradigm
Since the muscular engines of humans and other animals are similar in terms of their metabolic and mechanical function, the findings likely apply to the burst performance capabilities of vertebrate animals in general, say the researchers.
###
Bundle is an assistant professor of biomechanics at the University of Montana. Weyand (http://bit.ly/M1jFLa) is an associate professor of applied physiology and biomechanics at SMU in Dallas.
Funding for the study came from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command and the Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center.
SMU is a nationally ranked private university in Dallas founded 100 years ago. Today, SMU enrolls nearly 11,000 students who benefit from the academic opportunities and international reach of seven degree-granting schools. For more information see www.smuresearch.edu.
SMU has an uplink facility located on campus for live TV, radio, or online interviews. To speak with an SMU expert or book an SMU guest in the studio, call SMU News & Communications at 214-768-7650.
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Last week, I picked apart a spammy ?SEO service? email and discussed why it was actually effective.
See, the tricky thing about spam is that it works. Sure, maybe not on a more educated buyer?but not all buyers are that educated. Instead, they?re going on pure emotion ? and it?s that emotion that gets them to respond.
And that?s exactly what these companies want.
See, good spam emails get results because they follow the copywriting basics to the letter. The email is written with a certain customer persona in mind (in this case, a site owner/manager who isn?t very SEO savvy.) It includes copywriting power words like ?no obligation.? It outlines typical pain points ? and expertly shows how the company has the perfect solution.
Again, we may not like spam ? but we know people who fall for it all the time. Here?s a couple more specific takeaways from last week?s email example?and what we can learn from them
?Requesting this report does not obligate you to buy SEO services.?
Why this works:
The sentence overcomes objections?
?A valuable service is offered ?for no charge.
Ever hear something that sounds fantastic?and then your first thought is, ?How much is this going to cost me.?
Yeah. me too.
The person who penned this email know that, too. That?s why the writer made it clear that the report is ?no obligation? (otherwise known as ?free.?) ?The spammy SEO company is counting on the prospect to say, ?Well, it couldn?t hurt to contact them and get the report. I may learn something. Besides, I don?t have to buy anything that I don?t want to.?
See how easily the ?no obligation? blurb overcomes the objection and makes it easy for the prospect to say yes? If you don?t overcome objections in your copy, your prospects may still have that niggling bit of doubt ? and that small amount of doubt could cause them to say no. The goal of your copy is to make it easy for your prospects to always say, ?yes? ? and take the action that you want them to take.
(As a side note?the phrase ?no obligation? is used because the word ?free? would have tripped spam filters. However, if you?re writing a sales page, know that ?free? is a very powerful word.)
?We guarantee that from the first month of our work you will see an improvement in ranking, link popularity and traffic, which would result in higher Organic rankings, more Leads and Orders for better ROI (Return on Investment).?
Why this works:
A guarantee is offered, which helps remove any perceived risk.
The writer uses benefit statements that are important to the target audience.
The benefits are time-specific.
Do you offer a guarantee on your products or services? If not, you may want to reconsider. The word ?guarantee? is a a very powerful word in copywriting. When there?s a guarantee, the transaction seems risk-free. The next step seems easy. And it helps the prospect keep saying, ?yes? to your offer.
If the copywriter wanted to really add some marketing punch to the note, the phrase ?money-back guarantee? ?is even better. That signals the prospect that there is no risk ?- and they have nothing to lose.
Listing the benefits help to reinforce this ?no risk? scenario. With this line, you can almost see the?prospect?s mind starts churning with the thought, ?Wow, I?d love better search positions and more sales. Maybe these guys can actually help me.??After all, what marketer wouldn?t want more leads and higher positions? ?:) ?When you?re writing your copy, remember that it?s benefits ? not features ? that close the deal. People need to immediately know what?s in it for them ? or they aren?t interested.
A better way that they could have approached this? They could have included third-party success story testimonials. It?s one thing to ?read that you?ll see an ?increase in ROI.? It?s another when you read how a companies service has helped drive over $10,000 of sales in the first month.
Finally, always remember that time-specific results a great selling tool. If you can (ethically) tell the prospect what they can expect ? and when to expect it ? you?ve calmed their fears and overcome their objections.
Yes, spam may drive us nuts ? especially SEO company spam. But rather than instantly deleting it, take the time to read it over.
It's time to go inside the venue. ?Anthony, Sambo Steve and Tyga head to a hallway upstairs that will serve as the locker room for them and half the fighters on the card (the locker room for the other half is a hallway downstairs).? I shake Anthony's hand and wish him luck.? As I leave to go to my spot at cageside, his coaches are taking turns reminding him he's ready.
Since Anthony's opponent has sold a fair number of tickets, their bout is moved to later in the card.? In the meantime, other fighters do their thing.? A heavyweight smothers another on the ground and earns a decision.? A wiry submission wizard ties his foe in knots.? A fighter lands a crushing left that earns him a TKO victory.? A woman with purple hair gets out-boxed and loses a decision.? A bantamweight named Julio Arce, a precision instrument honed to a keen edge and sporting an 11-0 amateur record, has his first pro bout, and he's almost surgical in the way he scores a knockout in just under two minutes.? Anthony's got a ways to go before he reaches that level of experience, but when he enters the cage to take on Michael, he's moving one step closer.
Michael and Anthony are now standing across from each other, the classic stand-off, minus the sixguns but complete with cold stares and bad intentions.? Michael is taller with a build like an action figure, and upon his face is a look determination that threatens to wilt those not prepared for it.? With a gesture and a shout, the referee signals for them to begin.
From the outset it's clear Michael's got the edge in striking ? his reach enables him to tag Anthony from a distance, his footwork enables him to maintain range, and his confidence has him firing off salvos at will, forcing Anthony to cover himself with his forearms and absorb the barrage.? What Anthony does have, though, is tenacity, and it comes out in his dogged takedown attempts.? The first few yield no fruit, Michael is able to protect his hips and sprawl out of trouble.? But eventually the New Yorker is successful in putting his opponent on his butt, and in the waning seconds of the first round, Anthony gets Michael down against the cage, rises up and knees him in the chest (think: Anderson Silva vs. Chael Sonnen at UFC 148).? Though the?crowd is certainly partisan and cheering loudly for Michael, it's hard to say who the judges will favor for Round 1; Anthony makes it a little easier for them all in the next frame.?
There's more wrestling, and at one point Michael lowers his hands in anticipation of another takedown attempt and gets cracked in the jaw.? Anthony can't seem to keep Michael down when he puts him there, but by virtue of his success in getting the fight horizontal ? and the number of Matt Hughes-style slams he executes ? he's scoring points.
By the third round, Michael has things figured out, and he's able to avoid Anthony's grasping arms and stay on top.? Anthony's stuck underneath for the duration.? From cageside, Sambo Steve and Tyga shout frantically for their ward to get up, but he's spent, and when the clock runs out it's clear that block of time belonged to Michael.
(In an unexpected funny moment, when Anthony is struggling to get up from below Michael, he blindly swings his arms back and accidently punches the referee in the face.? The ref, Gasper Oliver, laughs about it afterwards.)
The time after the bout ends and before the judges' scorecards are read is always one of activity and emotion.? While doctors rush the cage and examine the combatants, searching for outward signs of trauma and concussion, the coaches are again by their respective warrior's side, alternating between congratulating and managing expectations.? And unless what transpired was anything but a brutal beatdown, there's always questions running through everyone's heads.? Who did enough to win?? Who took which rounds?? It's an impromptu math that overtakes those standing in the cage, and it even draws in those on the other side of the fence.?
At the signal, Oliver grabs the wrists of the two fighters and pulls them to the center.? The announcer, an older gentleman with the kind of big white hair that would paint him as a stock villain in any number of Harry Potter flicks, reads the official scores, his voice going into the microphone in his hand and echoing throughout the union hall.? It's a split decision.? Anthony has won.
The rest of the card breezes by.? Anthony, Sambo Steve and Tyga join me at cageside for the bouts ? their jobs are done, so it's time to relax and take in the sights.??A female Strikeforce veteran in the co-main event?goes down in the second round, the victim of a knockout cross.? A Bellator veteran in the main event gets the job done via relentless jiu-jitsu, but he has to work for it, his opponent fighting him hard every inch of the way.?
And then this installment of Matrix Fights is over, and all that's left is to collect the gear and go home.? Upstairs, the losing half of the main event is emotional over his defeat, and the female Strikeforce vet is shedding tears, too.? But Anthony is happy.? We make our way to the parking lot and join in the exodus.
Outside of Philly we stop at a Wawa for some post-fight grub, scarfing down sandwiches and gulping down drinks.? Anthony gobbles up a quesadilla and an apple turnover ? his victory meal ? and on the ride home we trade stories, the talk trailing off us exhaustion overtakes those of us who didn't fight.? It's past midnight when we get back to New York City, and one by one, Anthony drops us off.? Soon it's just?me and him in the car.
Still buzzing from having fought and won, Anthony shows no signs of being tired, and talks of his family, of food, of the buttermilk pie he makes and its superiority to the one his wife makes.? We pass by a billiards hall.? A?fistfight has spilled out into the street, two shirtless men swinging their arms wildly as a dozen or so others hoot and holler around them.? Anthony drives slowly through the melee, stops the car a half a block up the road, leans out his window, and watches.?
I'm incredulous that he'd have any interest.? After all, only a few hours before he'd fought in a cage, then watched some high-level MMA from cageside.? How could he want more fighting?? But maybe that's the point.? It was a long day's journey just so he could have his second venture into the realm of sanctioned combat, and for Anthony ? just like for any fighter ? it's a constant trek.? He'll have other bouts, other trips to Upstate New York and maybe Pennsylvania again and probably even New Jersey.? Like all who train and slip on the gloves and step into the cage, it's up to him to decide when it truly ends.
He drops me off a few minutes later, and after I congratulate him on his win once more, Anthony continues on.? His journey isn't quite over.
Jim Genia?goes to fights?in person so you don't have to.? Follow him here.
NEW YORK (AP) ? In the first move of its kind, the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday said it's accepting a $1.25 million settlement from Verizon Wireless to end an investigation into whether the company asked Google Inc. to withhold so-called "tethering" software for Internet sharing.
Until recently, phone companies charged extra fees to allow tethering, or sharing of Internet access between devices.
Applications stores, like those run by Google and Apple Inc., have worked with carriers and restricted apps that try to circumvent those fees. But Verizon's LTE network, which went live in late 2010, uses a slice of the airwaves that carries special conditions ? the carrier is not allowed to block any lawful applications from devices on the network.
Tuesday's action marks the first time the FCC has exercised its authority over that spectrum.
Verizon said it did not block customers from using third-party applications, and that the settlement "puts behind us concerns related to an employee's communication with an app store operator about tethering applications."
The FCC remarked that Verizon justified its tethering fees by saying that tetherers used more data on the network. But the company demanded the fees even from customers who paid for data based on how much they used, so those users were charged again for the same service.
A public-interest group, Free Press, complained to the FCC about Verizon's practices a year ago.
Verizon eliminated its tethering fees for limited-data plans last month, with the introduction of a new suite of "Share Everything" plans. It hasn't charged extra for tethering on the latest iPad, which is the first Apple Inc. device with LTE access.
Verizon Wireless is a joint venture of Verizon Communications Inc. of New York and Vodafone Group PLC of Britain.
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_t0mBr5ajkS3AGiEzEczd7fcUkR-co7nJDPi0FKIw8nBqMdYZ-HfmBBLu0EhLKqVcCoDqs8KBd8443iTvekdefPCsB5zlf1yL-ZCawCPfA=s0-d){kind=small}
Public release date: 1-Aug-2012
Share ] 
Last week, I picked apart a spammy ?SEO service? email and discussed why it was actually effective.
.JPG.php){kind=link}
