1 . This question has fascinated behavioural scientists for decades: why do we give money to charity?

The explanations for charitable giving fall into three broad categories, from the purely altruisic (利他的)— I donate because I value the social good done by the charity. The “impurely” altruistic— I donate because I extract value from knowing I contribute to the social good for the charity. And the not-at-all altruistic— I donate because I want to show off to potential mates how rich I am.

But are these motives strong enough to enable people to donate as much as they would want to? Most people support charities in one way or another, but often we struggle to make donations as often as we think we should. Although many people would like to leave a gift to charity in their will, they forget about it when the time comes.

Many people are also aware that they should donate to the causes that have the highest impact, but facts and figures are less attractive than narratives. In a series of experiments, it was found that people are much more responsive to charitable pleas that feature a single, identifiable beneficiary(受益者), than they are to statistical information about the scale of the problem being faced. When it comes to charitable giving, we are often ruled by our hearts and not our heads.

The good news is that charitable giving is contagious—seeing others give makes an individual more likely to give and gentle encouragement from an important person in your life can also make a big difference to your donation decisions— more than quadrupling them in our recent study. Habit also plays a part— in three recent experiments those who volunteered before were more likely to do donate their time than those who had not volunteered before.

In summary, behavioural science identifies a range of factors that influence our donations, and can help us to keep giving in the longer term. This is great news not just for charities, but also for donors.

3 . Two very different movies were released on July 21 this summer in the West, bringing record numbers of people into cinemas as the “Barbenheimer (芭比海默)” trend took over social media.

Barbie and Oppenheimer have been huge hits around the world, with Barbie alone making over 1 billion US dollars just 17 days after release. This makes it Wamer Bros studio’s fastest movie to reach $1 billion and the film’s director, Greta Gerwig, the first-ever solo female filmmaker with a billion-dollar film.

Barbie and Oppenheimer are an interesting pair because of how different they are from one another. Barbie is about a famous toy coming to life and facing issues of sexism and finding her own identity. Meanwhile, Oppenheimer is a serious male-driven historical film about J. Robert Oppenheimer’s Manhattan Project and the development of the atomic bomb. The release of these two huge, wildly different movies on the same day led to the creation of countless memes (表情包) under the Barbenheimer hashtag. Filmgoers have even gone to see both movies one right after the other, with some dressing up in pink for Barbie going on to see Oppenheimer as well.

Meanwhile, people have found some of the “Barbenheimer” memes disturbing. Atomic bombs killed many people and they think the memes made light of a very dark time in history. But the films have brought a healthy boost to cinema ticket sales around the world, helping an industry that has faced many challenges in recent years. The increasing popularity of streaming services and the COVID-19 pandemic have kept people out of cinemas. Now, the strikes from writers and actors over concerns of pay and about the use of artificial intelligence by film studios are also having an impact. Add to that a public tired of yearly big movies about superheroes and fast cars, as declining ticket sales suggest.

Described as a historic moment for the movie industry. “‘Barbenheimer’ will go down as one of the biggest and unexpected milestones in the history of cinema,” Paul Dergarabedian at Comscore told CNN.

5 .

2023 Gotham Award Nominee for Breakthrough Figure(Raven Jackson)

One of the most visually striking, profoundly moving American moviemaking debuts(首次亮相) in years, Raven Jackson’s All Dirt Roads Taste of Salt is an eye-catching immersion into a young woman’s inner world, filmed and edited with an extraordinary attention to the tiniest detail. This impressionistic journey skips ahead and back through decades to tell the story of Mack, whose upbringing in rural Mississippi is touched by grace, dotted with heartbreak, and always carried high in the sky by the surrounding natural beauty. As she ages, she loses loved ones and gains others, while making decisions that change the course of her life, and that of her beloved sister. Relying on sounds and images to tell her story, and employing minimal dialogue, Jackson has created something breathtakingly quiet and ultimately transporting a spiritual respect to the moments, feelings, and connections that make a life. An A24 release.

November 7—November 15

12:15 PM            2:15 PM             4:15 PM        6:15 PM          8:15 PM

*Open caption screenings of the film will play on November 8—November 13

12:15 PM             6:15 PM

*Audio description available at all screenings.

6 . Have you ever wondered what happens to your mobile phones and laptops after you throw them out to make way for a newer model? According to its latest Global E-Waste Monitor, India is the third top producer of e-waste in the world. E-waste in Indian landfill goes on to pollute soil and groundwater, affecting food supply systems and water sources.

Thankfully, the country has a new group of artists who are changing these thrown mechanical items-from mobile phones to old televisions- into large murals (壁画) and artworks to creatively show their concern for the waste problem.

Over the past quarter of a century, Mumbai’s Haribaabu Naatesan has transformed hundreds of tonnes of e-waste into art, integrating elements from nature and industry. “I get my waste material from friends, relatives and neighbours who know my interest in e-art and send me bags of thrown electronic appliances,” says Naatesan. Over his career, he has created huge murals for several companies. He has also showed his work at the India Art Fair, as well as several other national displays.

Another artist Vishwanath Davangere has also long worked with e-waste. He likes to take apart old laptops and reassemble (重新组装) them into birds, animals and plants. After retirement, he started pursuing this hobby more seriously and started selling his creations across the world. His most outstanding works include a robotic Egyptian statue with glowing red eyes and a Milky Way made from keyboard keys. He hopes to enable others to reconsider their own consumption habits and make more environmentally conscious choices.

“By giving e-waste a second chance, I aim to raise awareness about the environmental impact of electronic waste.” says Davangare, who today has a collection of more than 600 eco-art objects.

7 . Released on Aug 30, a three-episode web series titled Escape From the British Museum has gone viral online for its touching and innovative narrative (叙事). The series follows the journey home of a Chinese jade teapot that has come to life as a girl. She runs away from the British Museum and comes across a Chinese journalist who helps the artifact return to China. The series, created by two Chinese vloggers, aims to raise broader awareness of Chinese artifacts that were stolen or looted (掠夺) from China and are displayed or stored in the British Museum.

The video series echoes the Chinese people’s call for the British Museum to return these Chinese artifacts. However, some UK media outlets said that the video series promotes nationalism (民族主义). In fact, every country whose artifacts are displayed or stored in the British Museum wants them back. These countries, such as Greece, Nigeria and Sudan, have already issued their demands for the return of artifacts. It’s fair enough to say these demands are shared. They can correct centuries-old wrongs by having the UK return artifacts to their rightful homes.

An opinion in the UK newspaper The Telegraph said that if the British Museum gives back its collection of artifacts, then nationalism will win over humanity’s common heritage. It also said that the artifacts were “lawfully acquired (合法取得)” by the UK. By “lawfully acquired”, does the writer mean the artifacts were acquired with the “help” of machine guns and warships? Or does he mean that the cultural artifacts of African, Asian and American countries should be kept in the hands of looters, rather than in their land of origin?

8 . Each year, the discovery of new shark species underlines how little we know about ocean biodiversity. In a recent report conducted by Sibert and Rubin, they reported an unexpected finding: a large-scale extinction of sharks in the pelagic ocean, the largest ecosystem on Earth, about 19 million years ago. Their discovery suggests that some extinctions in the open sea of the past may have been mysterious.

The study of Sibert and Rubin takes advantage of a system by using tiny, hard bits of shark skin and bony fish teeth that naturally fall from their bodies to the seafloor. These extremely small fossils provide a rich record of ancient oceanic sharks and their abundance for thousands of years. By studying fossils from many regions, the diversity patterns can give major insights into evolution (进化) of the open sea that would be otherwise unknown.

Sibert and Rubin quantified(量化)a past extinction of sharks, reporting a 90% decline in number and >70% drop in diversity. They found that nearer-shore sharks appear to survive, but migratory ones go extinct. The finding of this study is that sharks had undergone a widespread extinction that reorganized their communities from 16 million to 20 million years ago.

Sibert and Rubin narrowed the disappearance of sharks to a window of time under 100,000 years around 19 million years ago, but the causes of this event remain unclear. Because this time period does not stand out as a period of major climatic change, the authors do not attribute(归因于) environmental factors as an extinction driver. As for other causes, the loss of shark diversity is directly linked to overfishing.

The loss of sharks from the oceans has profound, complex, and unavoidable ecological consequences because their presence reflects the stability of marine ecosystems. Yet, one-quarter of the global diversity of sharks is currently threatened with extinction. Despite recent improvements in conservation actions, shark communities never recovered from a mysterious extinction event 19 million years ago; the ecological fate of what remains is now in our hands.

9 . Working for a big company in London on a salary (薪水)of over £100,000, you might expect Grayden Reece-Smith to have a luxurious (奢侈)lifestyle, going on expensive holidays or driving a sports car around south London, where he lives. In fact, the 28-year-old lives a very different existence from his colleagues. He gives away everything he earns over £42,000–a figure that he thought he could comfortably live on.

Over the past five years, Reece-Smith has handed over more than £250,000 to organizations such as International Care Ministries, which helps poor families in the Philippines, and the Against Malaria Foundation. He is part of a growing number of young professionals described as “effective altruists”. Effective altruists typically donate regularly to a charity which they think will have a great impact (影响). Some change careers to make more money, which can then be given away.

Reece-Smith considered working in the charity sector after graduating from university, but thought that he could make a bigger difference by donating a large part of his salary. He had volunteered as a teacher at a school in Tanzania, but then realized that earning and giving would be more effective. “The cost of my flights there could have paid the salaries of two teachers for an entire year,” he says. Instead, he could “stay at home, living a nice life and still make a huge difference in the world”.

He is not mean with money-last year he went to Cuba on holiday, and spent several thousand pounds on a new sofa. But his lifestyle isn’t as luxurious as some of the people he works with. “I usually don’t buy supermarket-branded food products, but I don’t own a car. Other people on my salary might have a bigger house. Some of my colleagues have four-bedroom houses, but we only bought what we needed-a two-bedroom flat.£42,000 is more than enough to live on and still save,” he says.