【推荐1】The family unit of parents and children is the most important in our life. However, a common complaint (抱怨) nowadays is “my parents have no time for me” or “my children prefer to spend time with their friends”. So what is the reason for such complaints?

One of the basic parenting rules is that parents should spend time with their children. This is the time when parents can show their love and care for their children, physically and emotionally. Similarly, the children can show that they appreciate their parents’ love and this brings about a strong parent-child relationship. Both parties get advantage.

Busy work is one reason why parents don’t spend time with their children. They are the bread winners, wanting their children to have the best. Often both parents had to work to support the family. So, the children turn to their friends who are there to offer a helping hand and a shoulder to cry on. They open up to their friends more than their parents. Another choice for parents is the maid (女佣) who is always there.

When parents get home from the office and the children from school, they are on their own-one parent prepares a meal, the other and children either in front of the computer or their iPhones. They spend time together at a meal but each is more buried in his own thoughts rather than what the others are thinking about.

What can be done to correct the situation? Both parents and children can reschedule their activities with the purpose of spending more time together. Have common interests like watching a football game. This will help develop a close and healthy relationship. Having quality time together takes effort, but it’s worthwhile.

【推荐3】When I was two years old, my parents were still getting used to the lifestyle of raising a kid, but what they had noticed was what they considered “out of the ordinary” behavior. Whatever toys I played with, I placed them in a straight line. When others were unfriendly to me, I became changeable. My diagnosis (诊断) was in 1999, a time when a type of autism (孤独症) called PDD-NOS was still not commonly understood and was still being observed. My parents were initially shocked at this result.

As I got older, I began to develop from keeping to myself to interacting with other kids once I entered a public school in first grade. I noticed how the other kids were able to answer questions in class a lot faster than I could understand. Since fourth grade, I joined my school’s marching band, something I never had any interest in, but my mom made me believe that it was a great way to not only make friends, but to help gain more confidence in myself.

At the same time during fourth grade, I discovered my talent for creative writing. I realized, on the day I wrote my first story about superheroes, my processed thinking and my imagination provided a basic feature for my character: a hidden talent. As the years passed, I helped my fellow classmates with articles, and I even shared the original pieces I wrote with my classmates occasionally, although I was still unaware about my diagnosis.

However, one day when I was fifteen years old, I learned the real truth about myself. My parents kept it from me because they thought it would affect my self-respect. I understood why they’d hide this from me because they really love me, and ever since then, I’ve accepted who I am, and I use my talents to help others who need a friend.

【推荐1】There's an old joke about how you can never buy beer——just rent it. Who would think that the same joke applies to book buying in the digital age? But that's the case. Many people who will be loading their iPads or Amazon Kindles with bestsellers or classics won't have any idea how limited their rights are as their books' "owners". Unlike the owners of a physical book, they won't have the unlimited right to lend an e-book, give it away, or resell it.

All these restrictions "raise obvious questions about what "ownership' is," observes Dan Gillmor, an expert on digital media. "The companies that license stuff digitally have made it clear that you own nothing." The rules are based on the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), with which Congress hoped to balance the rights of copyright holders and content users. "In the digital environment, that's always been the trickiest balance to achieve, "Annemarie Bridy, a specialist said.

Both camps have important fights to protect. In the digital world, technology allows infinite(无限的）copies to be made. One could give away an e-book and still have it to read. This becomes a great threat to the livelihood of authors, artists, filmmakers and musicians. So some limitation is sensible. That's usually done through digital rights management, or DRM, which encodes copy limitations into the digital file. The DMCA protected DR M. The question is whether the balance has given an unfair advantage to the booksellers, at the consumers expense. The answer is yes.

For one thing, DRM has put far too much power in the hands of digital booksellers. In 2009, Amazon simply deleted some e-books from buyers, Kindles secretly. An uproar(鼓噪）followed. Amazon then promised never to steal a book back from a Kindle without the device owner's permission. But in early 2012, the company shut down the access of Linn Jordet Nygaard, a Norwegian Kindle owner, to her library of 43 e-books. Another uproar followed, and Amazon backed down again, restoring Nygaard's account.

Another problem of e-book DRM is that most e-books are tied to the seller's reading device. Buy a book from Amazon, and you can read it only on a Kindle or Amazon app. This lock-in gives the booksellers power over not only consumers but publishers.

Moreover, nowhere does Amazon, Apple or any other distributor promise to support its digital formats forever. There are ways to protect your e-books by changing the format. But is it legal? No one is quite sure.

The guiding principle must be that an e-book owner's rights and responsibilities parallel those of a printed book owner, and the same must apply to authors, publishers and booksellers.Clarify these rules, and the book market will reap the benefit.

Leave the rules as vague (模糊的) as they are, and the victims will be authors, consumers and publishers.