【推荐1】A study of Australian teens' Instagram （a popular photo social media platform） usage found 57% of Australian teenagers use it, while 30% reported being contacted by a stranger, and 20% reported being sent inappropriate unwanted content.

Facebook is considering launching a version of Instagram for children under the age of 13 to safely use it. Currently the company does not allow people who are under 13 to create an account on the platform. A spokesperson for Facebook, announced the company was exploring a parent-controlled version, similar to the Messenger Kids app that is for kids between 6 and 12.

"Increasingly kids are asking their parents if they can join apps that help them keep up with their friends. Right now there aren't many options for parents, so we're working on building additional products that are suitable for kids, managed by parents," the spokesperson said. "We're exploring bringing a parent-controlled experience to Instagram to help kids keep up with their friends, discover new hobbies and interests, and more."

In a blog post, the company noted that although people were asked to enter their ages when signing up for Instagram, there was nothing to prevent them from lying about their ages at registration. Facebook said it would overcome that by using machine learning in association with the registration age to determine people's ages on the platform.

The company also announced plans to roll out new safety features, including preventing adults from messaging children under 13, sending safety notices to children when they are messaged by an adult who sends a lot of friend requests, and making it more difficult for adults to find and follow children using the search function in Instagram. Children will also be encouraged to keep their profiles private at the point of registration.

【推荐3】In the poverty-stricken neighborhoods in and around Manila, Philippines, millions of people live in darkness in their homes — even in the daytime. Electricity is often too expensive, and windows are a building expense that many cannot bear. To change this, a local social entrepreneur has created a program called A Liter of Light that shines the homes of underprivileged families by creating solar-powered light bulbs from a resource some may find surprising: used plastic soft drink bottles.

Volunteers for A Liter of Light begin by gathering abandoned, clear plastic bottles. The volunteers then fill each bottle with water and a few drops of chlorine bleach that can hold back algae (藻) growth. They then fit the bottle tightly into a custom-cut hole in the roof of a home, with the bottom of the bottle extending down into the room below. This allows the clear plastic bottle and water to reflect the sun’s rays and scatter light into the house. A silicone (硅酮) plastic sealant applied to the roof and bottle prevents water leaks during rainy.

On a sunny day, this simple device can produce approximately 50 watts of light in an otherwise dark room. Because plastics are lightweight and durable, the bottle lights are easy to install and are expected to last more than five years. And the materials to produce the lights cost very little — or nothing, in the case of abandoned bottles gathered by volunteers — which makes it possible for A Liter of Light to help many, many people.

This simple technology was originally the brainchild of Alfredo Moser from Brazil, a mechanic in SAA Paulo, Brazil, to light his workshop when his neighborhood was suffering energy shortages. Later it was updated largely by MIT students who use lead acid batteries coming with a 30-watt solar panel that can withstand strong winds.

This grassroots movement has spread to 32 countries, involving 2,800 young volunteers from around the world. Liter of Light is rethinking solar lighting for the developing world, using inexpensive and readily available materials. The technology is simple and creates local jobs, teaches green skills and empowers energy-poor communities.

【推荐1】To fight against the ballooning waistlines among people, several U. S. cities have instituted taxes on drinks with added sugar aiming to reduce consumption, but new research suggests these policies currently have one fundamental flaw.

The study found sugary drink only reduce purchasing if price tags at stores mention consumers are paying that tax when they buy the drink.

The research included a field study at two convenience stores in San Francisco, which currently has a tax on sugary drinks of 1 cent per ounce. Researchers varied the price tags placed on the sugary drinks over the eight-week study: one tag that simply said the price for the 12-ounce drink ($1.52) and one that had the price and the message “Includes SF Sugary Drink Tax”. All non-sugary drinks, which weren’t subject to the tax, simply had the price of the drink ($1.40).

The researchers compared sales of the drinks during the study period to the two weeks before the study began when the sugary drink tax was in effect but there were no price tags on any drinks. Results showed sales of sugary drinks weren't lower during the two weeks, compared to sales before the tax, indicating the tax itself didn't reduce purchases of sugary drinks.

The researchers then looked at the effects of the two different price tags. Results showed the share of sugary drinks purchased when the tags simply showed the price wasn’t significantly different from the two-week period before the study, but did decline slightly when the tags mentioned the price included the added tax.

In a separate online study, the researchers asked participants to estimate what the tax would be on a can of their favorite drink that cost $1.52. The average estimate was 40 cents — much higher than the 12 cents actually demanded in San Francisco. When told the tax was only 12 cents, they reported they’d still purchase the drink.

The findings suggest price tags should mention the tax but not the amount, for consumers tend to overestimate how much the tax is. “If cities want these policies to be effective, they need to regulate how sugary drinks are labeled at stores and they currently don’t do that,” said Donnelly, lead author of the study.

【推荐3】Carson Kropfl, 11, came up with his idea because no company sold what he wanted. “Everything else fits into my locker (柜子) —my books, my bag, my lunch—but not my skateboard,” he said. So in 2013, Carson broke the nose and tail off a full-size skateboard to make a locker-size board.

At the time, Carson was saving for surfing lessons. His mom, Carrie, told him he needed to do that on his own. He decided to sell the boards at school. For months, he sold them during lunch for $20 each, until he’d saved $1, 000 for lessons. After hitting his financial goal, Carson realized he liked running a business. But he needed start-up capital. Again, his mom said he had to find a way to get it himself. “So that’s exactly what he set out to do,” Carrie says. Carson approached the company Vans to see if he could get some of their used skateboards for free. Vans set up a recycling program for him, and started giving him 50 used boards per month.

Carson first applied for Shark Tank in 2013. The producers turned him down because his company wasn’t big enough. But every six months, he checked in with the producers again. In 2017, they finally said yes. At the shoot, Carson made his pitch (陈述), with the help of his mom. Sir Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Records, Virgin Airlines and hundreds of other companies decided to invest (投资). Since then, Carson has sold more than 1, 000 boards. His company has grown more than 300%. He plans to expand to Canada, the U. K. , and Australia. He credits his mom, who has her own title at Locker Board: Chief Mom Officer. She runs day-to-day operations while Carson is in school.

Locker Board was created because Carson had a problem. Identify a problem in your life. Can you come up with a solution? How could you turn your idea into a business?

【推荐1】Fifty years ago, astronauts traveled to space in rockets designed, built, and maintained by NASA and paid for by government funding. Today, the astronauts are often billionaires enjoying a journey into low orbit on a rocket they paid for from their billion-dollar bank accounts.

The change feels like a giant leap, but it makes sense, says Laura Seward Forczyk, founder of Astralytical a space consulting company. “More and more of modern civilization relies on space,” she says.

Huge numbers of satellites orbit the planet connecting us to everything from cell phones to GPS to Netflix and there is big money in maintaining those systems. “This doesn’t get a lot of headlines typically, but there are profit reasons why private companies want to go into space,” says Forczyk.

And 85 private companies learn more about putting rockets and satellites into space, they’re able to help the likes of NASA on their missions. That’s important because NASA itself has become financially constrained from its 1966 peak, where spending on the space race took up 4.4 percent of the federal budget, that spending is now less than 0.5 percent of the country’s total budget.

“NASA using commercial companies to build a lot of the hardware to do a lot of those services of taking scientific payloads to the surface of the moon,” says Forczyk. The hope is that people will follow — possibly by 2025, but more realistically, says Forczyk, by 2030. If you’re wondering why we’re going back to the moon since mankind has already walked its surface, the answer is that we explored only part of it.

“We know a lot more, but we also know so very little,” says Forczyk. “So we want to go back with people to learn more, but more importantly, we want to go back to live and work there.”

Some even see the moon as an eventual staging area for human exploration of deep space. Mars is seen as the next stepping-off point toward the final frontier — though whether we’ll get there in our lifetimes is another question.

【推荐2】Professor Johann-Dietrich Woemer has been in his new job as Director General of the European Space Agency (ESA) for a week. In charge of a € 4. 4 billion annual budget, the former Chair of the German space agency is ultimately responsible for everything at ESA: Europe’s new weather and communication satellites; astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS); and explorations of Mars, Mercury and Jupiter.

When I ask him about his intentions for ESA,I expect a predictable and political answer about the economic and social benefits of space or maybe the importance for science of exploring the unknown Universe. Instead, Woemer surprises me with a vision for a future of space exploration that is both daring and ambitious.

“We should look to the future beyond the International Space Station,” he tells me. “I propose a Moon village on the far side of the Moon. ”

Yes, a village on the Moon. “A Moon village shouldn’t just mean some houses, a church and a town hall,” says Woerner. “This Moon village should mean partners from all over the world contributing to this community with robotic and astronaut missions and supporting communication satellites.”

Woerner pictures his Moon village in his mind as a multinational settlement involving astronauts from different countries. “We should have international cooperation, without any limitations, with any countries of the world,” says Woemer. “We have enough Earthly problems between different nations-space can bridge these Earthly problems and the Moon seems to be a good proposal. To keep a certain country out of a space program is not the right way; a much better solution is to find ways to cooperate in space to strengthen ties between humans on Earth. ”

【推荐3】Blue Origin, a Los Angeles-based company, announced plans to develop a private space station this week. The company and its partner Sierra Space said the station, called “Orbital Reef,” will be operated as a “business park” in space and the project is also backed by Boeing, Amazon and Arizona State University.

In a statement, Sierra Space said Orbital Reef aims to provide individuals and companies the chance “to establish their own address on orbit (轨道).” The company aims to begin operating Orbital Reef between 2025 and 2030. The station plans to stay in low-Earth orbit, at about 500 kilometers, which is higher than the International Space Station (ISS).

The developers say Orbital Reef will support 10 people in an area of about 830 m³, nearly the size of the ISS. A range of private customers will be served, including science researchers, space agencies and nations without space programs. Space tourists would be treated to clear views of Earth and would experience 32 sunrises and sunsets each day.

Brent Sherwood, leading scientist of the program, said the past development of flight vehicles and space stations by NASA had prepared the way for private space stations to become a reality. Now, Orbital Reef will seek to “broaden access (通道、机会), lower the cost, and provide all the services needed to normalize space flight,” Sherwood said. He also mentioned it will be designed “to be humanity’s footprint” in low-Earth orbit.

Orbital Reef is one of several private space stations planned in the coming years as the40future of the aging ISS is uncertain. The ISS project is set to end in 2024 unless its international partners assign new financing to keep it going. The ISS’s other main supporter, Russia, has said it is considering quitting the project as early as 2025 to build its own space station. The plans for private space stations have been welcomed by NASA, which announced this year it plans to award up to $400 million for such projects.