【推荐3】The other day, my sister and I were sitting in a restaurant, trying to have a conversation, but her children, four-year-old Willow and seven-year-old Luca, would not stop fighting. The arguments-over a fork, or who had more water in a glass-never stopped.

Then my sister reached into her handbag, produced two shiny iPads, and handed one to each child. Suddenly, the two were quiet. They sat playing games and watching videos, and we continued with our conversation.

After our meal, as my sister stuffed the iPads back into her bag, she said, “I don’t want to give them the iPads at the dinner table, but if they keep them occupied for an hour so we can eat in peace, I often just hand them over. I’m afraid it’s bad for them. I do worry that it makes them think it’s OK to use electronics at the dinner table in the future.”

Dr. Gary Small, director of the Longevity Center at the University of California, Los Angeles says that the brain is highly sensitive to stimuli (刺激物), like iPads and smartphone screens, and if people spend too much time on one technology, and less time interacting with people like parents at the dinner table, that could prevent the development of certain communication skills.

“Conversations with each other are the way children learn to have conversations with themselves, and learn how to be alone,” said Sherry Turkle, a professor of science, technology and society at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. She fears that children who do not learn real interactions, which often have imperfections, will come to know a world where perfect, shiny screens give them a false sense of intimacy (亲密) without risk. However, they need to be able to gather themselves and know who they are. So someday they can form a relationship with another person without a panic of being alone. “If you don’t teach your children to be alone, they’ll only know how to be lonely,” she said.

【推荐1】Certain forms of AI are indeed becoming ubiquitous. For example, algorithms (算法) carry out huge volumes of trading on our financial markets, self-driving cars are appearing on city streets, and our smartphones are translating from one language into another. These systems are sometimes faster and more perceptive than we humans are. But so far that is only true for the specific tasks for which the systems have been designed. That is something that some AI developers are now eager to change.

Some of today’s AI pioneers want to move on from today’s world of “weak” or “narrow” AI, to create “strong” or “full” AI, or what is often called artificial general intelligence (AGI). In some respects, today’s powerful computing machines already make our brains look weak. AGI could, its advocates say, work for us around the clock, and drawing on all available data, could suggest solutions to many problems. DM, a company focused on the development of AGI, has an ambition to “solve intelligence”. “If we’re successful,” their mission statement reads, “we believe this will be one of the most important and widely beneficial scientific advances ever made.”

Since the early days of AI, imagination has outpaced what is possible or even probable. In 1965, an imaginative mathematician called Irving Good predicted the eventual creation of an “ultra-intelligent machine…that can far surpass all the intellectual (智力的) activities of any man, however clever.” Good went on to suggest that “the first ultra-intelligent machine” could be “the last invention that man need ever make.”

Fears about the appearance of bad, powerful, man-made intelligent machines have been reinforced (强化) by many works of fiction — Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Terminator film series, for example. But if AI does eventually prove to be our downfall, it is unlikely to be at the hands of human-shaped forms like these, with recognizably human motivations such as aggression (敌对行为). Instead, I agree with Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom, who believes that the heaviest risks from AGI do not come from a decision to turn against mankind but rather from a dogged pursuit of set objectives at the expense of everything else.

The promise and danger of true AGI are great. But all of today’s excited discussion about these possibilities presupposes the fact that we will be able to build these systems. And, having spoken to many of the world’s foremost AI researchers, I believe there is good reason to doubt that we will see AGI any time soon, if ever.

【推荐2】Everyone knows you must exercise regularly to keep good health. Indeed, staying physically fit is a big part of our culture. We consider (or rightly so) that healthy people are attractive people. Since most of us want to be attractive, there is no shortage of exercise clubs, training videos, magazines and books offering to help us stay physically fit.

Unfortunately, however, our culture doesn’t place the same emphasis on mental fitness. Although we tend to like men and women with strong, healthy-looking bodies, we don’t have the same degree of respect or attraction for smart, educated, mentally healthy people. This is a pity, because there are great rewards for people who have developed the ability to think well.

If your mind is well trained and flexible, you will be able to understand a great deal of what happens around you. And if you are also well educated-that is, if you understand basic science, mathematics, music, art, literature, history and so on—you will find it much easier to make good decisions throughout your life. Over the long run, this leads to a sense of control over your destiny (命运) and a much better life than otherwise (in another way).

People who are poorly educated or who don’t think well—that is, people who are not mentally fit—see things differently. Their world is controlled by mysterious, often malevolent (恶意的) forces. Such people live within a system they will never master, forced to follow rules they will never understand. Although it may not be obvious, most spend their lives being manipulated (控制) by others. They are told what to do, what to think, how to spend their money, and what they should and should not aspire (渴望) to in life.

In my opinion, if you want to live well, you must be able to use your mind well. For this reason, I want you to be able to concentrate, to solve problems, to understand complex ideas, and to think clearly and quickly. Such skills will make it easier for you to make informed decisions, understand current events, choose good friends, manage your money well, make wise long-term decisions and appreciate music, art and literature.

The key to developing such skills is to enjoy learning, and to have the ability and motivation to teach yourself.

【推荐3】It is an uncomfortable fact that civilized society is almost completely dependent upon fossil fuels in nearly every aspect. Whether you believe there are hundreds of years or just a few decades left of this resource, the fact remains that it is a limited resource. At some point, fossil fuels are going to either be gone or become too expensive to realistically use. That is, when fossil fuels become too expensive to use, people will just start using something else. Though this may work well in theory, actually shifting from fossil fuels is not the same as shifting from one brand of shampoo to another.

This is entirely due to the fact that humans rely so much on the infrastructure (基础设施) they have developed, which is entirely dependent upon this resource, accounting for 85% of the United State's energy use. If the world were entirely dependent upon solar energy, that would be fine because sunlight is a continuing resource. However, at the current state of things, humans are in a dangerous position owing to its complete dependence upon one single limited input.

Fossil fuels are also responsible for a significant amount of land, water, and air pollution beyond their carbon dioxide (二氧化碳) production. For example, coal mining brings solid wastes to the surface that would normally remain underground and the areas around a mine can remain barren (贫瘠的) for generations due to the lack of proper topsoil. The burning of coal for energy also produces many different types of particulate (微粒的) matter that pollutes the air. Compared with fossil fuels, renewable energy is far more environmentally friendly.

There exists an argument that renewable energy options are not as efficient as fossil fuels because the deployment (部署) of renewable energy equipment like the wind turbine (风力涡轮机) costs a lot of money. However, when factors such as pollution and climate change are considered, renewable energy is actually far more efficient than fossil fuels. And fossil fuels will be surely replaced by renewable energy whether it is your generation or your grandchildren's.

【推荐1】For the past five years, Paula Smith, a historian of science, has devoted herself to re-creating long-forgotten techniques. While doing research for her new book, she came across a 16th-century French manuscript(手稿)consisting of nearly 1,000 sets of instructions, covering subjects from tool making to finding the best sand.

The author’s intention remains as mysterious(神秘)as his name; he may have been simply taking notes for his own records. But Smith was struck mainly by the fact that she didn’t truly grasp any of the skills the author described. “You simply can’t get an understanding of that handwork by reading about it,” she says.

Though Smith did get her hands on the best sand, doing things the old-fashioned way isn’t just about playing around with French mud. Reconstructing the work of the craftsmen(工匠)who lived centuries ago can reveal how they viewed the world, what objects filled their homes, and what went on in the workshops that produced them. It can even help solve present-day problems: In 2015, scientists discovered that a 10th-century English medicine for eve problems could kill a drug-resistant virus.

The work has also brought insights for museums, Smith says. One must know how an object was made in order to preserve it. What’s more, reconstructions might be the only way to know what treasures looked like before time wore them down. Scholars have seen this idea in practice with ancient Greek and Roman statues. These sculptures were painted a rainbow of striking colours. We can’t appreciate these kinds of details without seeing works of art as they originally appeared-something Smith believes you can do only when you have a road map.

Smith has put the manuscript’s ideas into practice. Her final goal is to link the worlds of art and science back together: She believes that bringing the old recipes to life can help develop a kind of learning that highlights experimentation, teamwork, and problem solving.

Back when science—then called “the new philosophy”—took shape, academics looked to craftsmen for help in understanding the natural world. Microscopes and telescopes were invented by way of artistic tinkering(修补), as craftsmen experimented with glass to better bend light.

If we can rediscover the values of hands-on experience and craftwork, Smith says, we can marry the best of our modern insights with the handiness of our ancestors.

【推荐2】Tree-planting, intended to help draw down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, has become a synonym (同义词) for climate action. In our constant focus on trees, we’ve developed a fixed understanding: Trees absorb carbon dioxide, end of story. The reality is that trees don’t grow well alone. They exist within complex communities, helped along by each other as well as the animals they coexist with. The woodland isn’t nature’s only carbon sink: Grasslands and oceans also help reduce the carbon level and rely on a healthy amount of biodiversity.

That’s what the paper, published in Nature, wants to get across. Co-author Oswald J. Schmitz, a professor of ecology at Yale University, said trees might not be able to do their carbon-uptake job efficiently without the right animals in their ecosystem. That’s because animals animate the carbon cycle through their behavior and roles in the ecosystem. He added that the very presence of wild animals could cause feedback effects that change the ecosystem’s capacity to absorb, release, or transport carbon.

In Serengeti, for instance, the sharp decline in wildebeest (角马) population s during the mid-20th century allowed grass to grow wildly, eventually promoting wildfires that consumed 80 percent of the ecosystem annually and led to a net release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. When disease management and bans on illegal hunting helped animal populations recover, a greater share of the carbon stored in plants was consumed by wildebeest and released as waste, keeping it in the system and restoring the grassland as a carbon sink.

【推荐3】When Elinor Lobel was 16, a “smart” insulin (胰岛素) pump was attached to her body. Powered by AI, it tracks her glucose levels and administers the right dose of insulin at the right time to keep her healthy. It is one of the new ways that data and AI can help improve lives.

Books that criticize the dark side of data are plentiful. They generally suggest there is much more to fear than fete in the algorithmic(算法的)age.

But the intellectual tide may be turning. One of the most persuasive supporters of a more balanced view is Elinor Lobel’s mother, Orly, a law professor. In The Equality Machine she acknowledges AI’s capacity to produce harmful results. But she shows how, in the right hands, it can also be used to fight inequality and discrimination.

A principle of privacy rules is “minimization”: collect and keep as little information as possible, especially in areas such as race and gender. Ms Lobel flips the script, showing how in hiring, pay and the legal system, knowing such characteristics leads to fairer outcomes.

Ms Lobel’s call to use more, not less, personal information challenges data-privacy orthodoxy(正统观念). But she insists that “tracking differences is key to detecting unfairness.” She advocates g loosening of privacy rules to provide more transparency(透明)over algorithmic decisions.

The problems with algorithmic formulae(公式) are tackled in depth in Escape from Model Land by Erica Thompson of the School of Economics. These statistical models are the backbone of big data and AL. Yet a perfect model will always be beyond reach. “All models are wrong,” runs a wise saying. “Some are useful.”

Ms Thompson focuses on a challenge she calls the Hawkmoth Effect. In the better known Butterfly Effect, a serviceable model, Vin the prediction of climate change, becomes less reliable over time because of the complexity of what it is simulating(模拟), or because of inaccuracies in the original data. In the Hawkmoth Effect, by contrast, the model itself is flawed; it might fail to take full account of the interplay between humidity, wind and temperature.

The author calls on data geeks to improve their solutions to real-world issues, not merely refine their formulae—in other words, to escape from model land. “We do not need to have the best possible answer,” she writes, “only a reasonable one.”

Both these books exhibit a healthy realism about data, algorithms and their limitations. Both recognize that making progress involves accepting limitations, whether in law or coding. As Ms Lobel puts it: “It’s always better to light a candle than to curse the darkness.”