I pressed my fist into Dad’s old baseball glove as I stared out of the window of my stepfather’s van. Not a day went by that I didn’t think about Dad and how much I missed him.

The van stopped at the edge of the baseball field. “Hey, buddy, have fun at practice. And don’t forget about your sister’s recital (表演) tonight,” said my stepfather as I climbed out.

Zoe is not my sister, and you can’t tell me what to do, I grumbled (嘟囔) to myself.

A bunch of guys from the team waved from the dugout. I jogged over half-heartedly. “Why do you look so unhappy?” David asked. “I have to go to my stepsister’s dance recital,” I sighed. “It could be worse,” David replied. I shot him an I-highly-doubt-that expression. “What if you had to perform in it?” Kevin said as he leaped and twirled (旋转) like a rodeo bull. I tried not to smile.

The truth was that I had a lot of mixed-up feelings since Mom remarried a few months ago. I had always loved baseball, but even that felt different lately. I could barely concentrate.

After practice, David and I sat together waiting for our ride. “I wish things didn’t have to change,” I said, “you know, for my mom and me.” “I have a stepmother and stepbrother too,” David said as if it were no big deal. “Seriously?” I hadn’t realized that, so I asked. David shrugged, “They’re just Mom and Dennis now. Give it a chance.” I let out a breath, still unsure about the recital tonight. Still unsure about everything!

Back home, I found Zoe in her costume, but something was wrong. Her arms were folded tight across her chest, and her eyes were glossed with tears. “What’s wrong, Zoe?” I asked. “Opening night jitters (战战兢兢),” my stepfather said. “She doesn’t want to be in the recital,” Mom said.

Huh. This should have been the best thing that could have happened — the possibility of not having to go to the performance. But somehow it wasn’t. Zoe had practiced so hard. And she’d reminded me at least a thousand times where she would be onstage.

Thinking of Kevin’s funny dance, I had an idea.

After Zoe disappeared into dancers backstage, we found our seats.

William grew up in Miami in a rough area. William’s father ran a fish business in the Florida Keys, and William helped with it. Fishing was a huge part of their life. His father always said, “Fishing is so peaceful, and it is like an escape.”

Inspired by his father. William founded a nonprofit fishing organization in Lakeland, Florida, which took many kids on fishing trips. Its purpose was to instruct poor kids without their fathers’ company through the sport of fishing.

During the weekdays, William worked as a tire salesman. On weekends, he and a few other volunteers, mostly people from his workshop, took about 20 kids out to fish in the nearby river at a time. To make the kids enjoy fishing safely and happily, he previously led his staff in professional training in fishing and boating.

William went to local homes himself to invite the kids to go fishing. Many had never been fishing or even on a boat, so William. or Big Will, as the kids call him, started by teaching the basics. Then came the life lessons that fishing offered: patience, teamwork and the simple joy of relaxing outdoors. The fishing organization took more than 600 fishing trips with almost 2,000 kids who lacked their fathers’ company in their lives.

Of course, William’s great kindness was widely recognized in society. When William explained his mission to Captain Jack, who was in charge of a boat in Clearwater, Captain Jack offered him a great deal. Then the nonprofit fishing organization paid less money to spend weekends on the boat. The kids were inspired to release little fish. On a recent trip with kids from a group home, William kept some big fish and enjoyed delicious fish soup with the kids at dinner.

William kept searching the neighborhood for kids in need and sharing his love of fishing with the kids. He said, “I just want to show them that I care about them and that I’m there for them.” Many kids went on multiple trips, so William was able to build relationships with them.

One day, William noticed his eight-year-old neighbor, Camron, sitting sadly in front of his door.

Big Will’s reputation was growing, and the nonprofit fishing organization attracted more sponsors besides Captain Jack.

4 . We Need to Think about Conservation on a Different Timescale

Time, perceived by humans in days, months, and years, contrasts with nature’s grander scales of centuries and millennia, referred to as “deep time.” While paleontologists (古生物学者) are trained to think in deep time, conservationists are realizing the challenges it poses. Shortsightedness about time limits modern conservation, with efforts often overlooking past healthy conditions of ecosystems in the context of climate and biodiversity crises.

The shifting baseline syndrome (综合症), where standards in a place change gradually, makes conservation more complex. It involves evaluating ecosystems primarily on their recent past, often with negative consequences.

Recent shifts in California’s forest management practices, from stopping fires to embracing Indigenous knowledge of controlled burns, exemplify the importance of understanding historical ecosystem dynamics. To enhance conservation, adopting a deep-time approach is crucial.

Modern mathematical modeling, combined with long-term data, offers a pathway for preserving ecosystems. In California’s kelp (海带、海藻) forest, researchers identified an overlooked keystone species — the extinct Seller’s Sea Cow (大海牛). By examining past kelp forests, a deeper story impacting regeneration was revealed. The sea cow, a massive plant-cater, contributed to a diverse, vital undergrowth by trimming kelp and letting light reach the area.

The researchers put forward a novel approach to kelp forest restoration: selectively harvesting kelp, imitating the sea cow’s impact. This strategy, considering historical dynamics, challenges assumptions about recent ecosystems and offers new conservation methods.

Rather than only focusing on removing urchins (海胆) or reintroducing sea otters, the researchers suggest employing teams of humans to selectively harvest kelp, as the Steller’s sea cow once did, to encourage fresh growth. This sustainable harvest could benefit both the ecosystem and human consumption.

In short, assumptions based on the recent past may impede the understanding and protection of ecosystems. On the other hand, the application of controlled burns, similar modeling studies, and a deep-time perspective (视角) could significantly transform conservation efforts. Recognizing our role in an ongoing narrative spanning millions of years is essential, urging a comprehensive understanding of ecosystems through time. Embracing this role is crucial for shaping the future and establishing vital connections from the past to the future.

8 . When you ask people to judge others by their speech, a trend emerges: Listeners dislike disfluency. Slow talkers producing loads of ums and pauses(停顿)are generally perceived as less charming. But science tells us there may be even more to disfluency.

Disfluencies do not occur in arbitrary positions in sentences. Ums typically occur right before more difficult or low-frequency words. Imagine you’re having dinner with a friend at a restaurant,and there’re three items on the table: a knife, a glass, and a wine decanter(醒酒器). Your friend turns to you and says, “Could you hand me the...um...” What would you assume they want? Since it’s unlikely that they will hesitate before such common words as knife, and glass, chances are you’ll pick up the decanter and ask, “You mean this?”

This is exactly what we demonstrated through controlled eye-tracking studies in our lab. Apparently, listeners hear the um and predict that an uncommon word is most likely to follow.Such predictions, though, reflect more than just simple association between disfluencies and difficult words; listeners are actively considering from the speaker’s point of view. For example, when hearing a non-native speaker say the same sentence but with a thick foreign accent, listeners don’t show a preference for looking at low-frequency objects. This is probably because listeners assume non-native speakers may have as much trouble coming up with the English word for a common object, like a knife, as for unusual ones and can’t guess their intention.

In another experiment, listeners were presented with an atypical speaker who produced disfluencies before simple words and never before difficult words. Initially, participants displayed the natural predictive strategy: looking at uncommon objects. However, as more time went by, and they gained experience with this atypical distribution of disfluencies, listeners started to demonstrate the contrary predictive behavior: They tended to look at simple objects when hearing the speaker say um.

These findings represent further evidence that the human brain is a prediction machine: We continuously try to predict what will happen next, even though not all disfluencies are created equal.

9 . On March 7, 1907, the English statistician Francis Galton published a paper which illustrated what has come to be known as the “wisdom of crowds” effect. The experiment of estimation he conducted showed that in some cases, the average of a large number of independent estimates could be quite accurate.

This effect capitalizes on the fact that when people make errors, those errors aren’t always the same. Some people will tend to overestimate, and some to underestimate. When enough of these errors are averaged together, they cancel each other out, resulting in a more accurate estimate. If people are similar and tend to make the same errors, then their errors won’t cancel each other out. In more technical terms, the wisdom of crowds requires that people’s estimates be independent. If for whatever reasons, people’s errors become correlated or dependent, the accuracy of the estimate will go down.

But a new study led by Joaquin Navajas offered an interesting twist (转折) on this classic phenomenon. The key finding of the study was that when crowds were further divided into smaller groups that were allowed to have a discussion, the averages from these groups were more accurate than those from an equal number of independent individuals. For instance, the average obtained from the estimates of four discussion groups of five was significantly more accurate than the average obtained from 20 independent individuals.

In a follow-up study with 100 university students, the researchers tried to get a better sense of what the group members actually did in their discussion. Did they tend to go with those most confident about their estimates? Did they follow those least willing to change their minds? This happened some of the time, but it wasn’t the dominant response. Most frequently, the groups reported that they “shared arguments and reasoned together”. Somehow, these arguments and reasoning resulted in a global reduction in error. Although the studies led by Navajas have limitations and many questions remain, the potential implications for group discussion and decision-making are enormous.

Jean’s dream was to be a great chef, so when she was 20, she travelled to France, which has the most famous cuisine in the world, to learn to cook. After twelve years, she was among the best.

Her father, Bob, was getting old, and she wanted to be near him. Jean accepted an offer from one of Washington’s top restaurants. The manager offered her a handsome salary, and 30% ownership of the restaurant. The next day, Jean went to sign the contract. As she got out of the car, she caught sight of a green sunshade. Instead of going to meet the manager, she crossed the street towards the old restaurant, Fargonetti’s. She pushed open the door and the memories came flooding back.

Jean’s mum died when she was just 11, and her father lost his job and was forced to freelance (从事自由职业). Money was very short. When Jean turned thirteen, Bob had made a reservation at Fargonetti’s, the capital’s best restaurant.

“I’m not hungry, baby girl. I had a huge breakfast,” Bob said. “This is all for you!” “Oh,” Jean cried. “Daddy was so silly! He’s been saving to come here for lunch for MONTHS and now he ruined his appetite with breakfast!” The waiter, Carl Bader, immediately realised what was going on and went to Mr Fargonetti, the restaurant owner, and told him about Jean and Bob.

An hour later, surprisingly, the waiter brought wonderful dishes and set them before the father and daughter. “Lunch is on the house with Mr Fargoneti’s compliments (致意),” Carl said. For Bob and Jean, it was a free but magical meal. They were on cloud nine when they walked out. “Jean,“ said Bob happily. “I feel our luck has changed!” And it did! The next day, one of Bob’s old friends called and offered him a job at a new magazine, and Jean believed Fargonetti’s had made it all happen. That was when she decided to become a chef!

Twenty years later, the old restaurant looked run-down and sad, but Jean recognised the waiter immediately. “Carl?” she asked delightedly.

The man looked surprised.

Jean was staring at Carl and a brilliant idea was taking shape in her mind.