2 . Reunions offer a chance to reflect on how much has changed. One happened in Hollywood when Here premiered (首映), bringing together the actors, director and writer behind Forrest Gump 40 years later for a new film. The stars were “de-aged” using new AI tools, making them more youthful in some scenes and enabling the filmmakers to see the transformation in real time while shooting.

With the use of generative AI in film making come things worth watching. The first is how AI will be used to tell new types of stories, as storytelling becomes more personalised and interactive. No one is quite sure how the nature of storytelling will change, but it is sure to. David Thomson, a film historian, compares generative AI to the advent of sound. “When movies were no longer silent, it changed the way plot points were made and how deeply viewers could connect with characters.” Cristóbal Valenzuela, who runs a company providing AI-enhanced software, says AI is like a “new kind of camera”, offering a fresh “opportunity to reimagine what stories are like”. Both are right.

Another big development to watch is how AI will be used as a time-saving tool. Generative AI will automate and simplify complex tasks like film-editing and special effects. For a glimpse of the future, watch Everything Everywhere All at Once, which won the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2023. It featured a scene that used a “rotoscoping” tool to edit out the green-screen background and make a talking rock more believable. It shortened into hours what might have otherwise taken days of video-editing.

What is also noticeable is more dramatic conflicts between creators and those running AI platforms. This year is likely to bring floods of lawsuits (诉讼) from authors, musicians and actors about how their works have been used to train AI systems without permission or payment. Perhaps they can agree on some sort of licensing arrangement, in which AI companies start paying copyright-holders.

It will probably be a few years before a full-length film is produced entirely by AI, but it is just a matter of time.

3 . Kids everywhere love to play. And they know that a ball is a perfect thing to play with. Now scientists report bumblebees (大黄蜂) seem to know the same thing, making bumblebees the first insects known to play.

Lots of animals play. But the behavior is best known in mammals and birds. For many animals, playing is often seen as a kind of training for things they’ll have to deal with in later life. But before this, there were no reports of insects playing.

Dr. Lars Chittka did an earlier experiment, where he trained bumblebees to roll balls into a goal for food. He noticed some bees were rolling balls even when they weren’t rewarded. He wondered if they were playing.

To test the idea, he with other scientists set up a new experiment. First, they marked 45 young bumblebees, both male and female, between one and 23 days old. Then they set up a clear pathway from the bumblebees’ nest to a feeding area. On either side of the open pathway, small colored wooden balls were placed. On one side of the path, the balls couldn’t move. On the other side, the balls could roll around.

For three hours a day over 14 days, the scientists opened the pathway. The bumblebees never had to leave the pathway to find food, but they left anyway. They weren’t so interested in the side where the balls couldn’t move, but they made lots of visits to the side with the rolling balls.

Grabbing the balls with their legs, the bumblebees would beat their wings to pull on the balls, causing them to roll. The 45 marked bumblebees did this 910 times during the experiment. Though some only did it once, others did it a lot. The scientists found the younger bumblebees spent more time rolling balls, and that males seemed more likely to play than females.

The scientists say it’s not clear why the bumblebees roll the balls or whether they enjoy it. But the experiment raises important questions about how the insects’ minds work and whether they have feelings.

7 . Pick up any packaged processed food, and there’s a decent chance that one of its listed ingredients will be “natural flavour”. The ingredient sounds good, particularly in contrast to “artificial flavours” since there is a common belief that ingredients from nature are necessarily safer than something artificially made. But it’s not true. Then what exactly does the natural flavour mean? It refers to extracts (提取物) got from natural sources like plants, meat or seafood. When consumers see the “natural flavour” on a label, they are unlikely to assume that someone is squeezing the juice from oranges into their bottles. They know even though natural flavour must come from natural sources, it needn’t all come from the plant or meat. For example, orange flavours might contain not only orange extracts, but also extracts from bark and grass.

So if flavours like orange are needed, why not just use oranges? The answer comes down to “availability, cost, and sustainability”, according to flavour chemist Gary Reineccius of the University of Minnesota. “If you’re going to use all your grapes on grape soda,” Reineccius says, “you don’t have any grapes for wine making; the products are going to be exorbitant; besides, what do you do with the by-products you create after you’ve squeezed all the juice out of the grapes?”

Actually, while chemists make natural flavours by extracting chemicals from natural ingredients, artificial flavours are made by creating the same chemicals artificially. The reason why companies bother to use natural flavours rather than artificial flavours is simple: marketing. “Many of these products have health titles,” says Platkin, professor from Hunter College. “Consumers may be talked to believe products with natural flavours are healthier, though they are nutritionally no different from those with artificial flavours. Natural flavours may involve more forest clear-cutting and carbon emissions from transport than flavours created in the lab.”

Platkin suggests getting more transparent (易懂的) labeling on packaging that describes exactly what the natural or artificial flavours are, so consumers are-not misled into buying one product over another because of “natural flavours”. Reineccius also offers simple guidance: “Don’t buy anything because it says ‘natural flavours’. Buy it because you like it.”

8 . Guy Noble, one of Australia’s most famous conductors, who conducted the touring concert “East Meets West”, said he’d like to learn more about Chinese music. “I’m impressed by the history and the beauty Chinese music has,” he’s said in an interview recently.

“East Meets West” concert tour in Australia was resumed this year after being postponed twice due to the pandemic. It was hosted in Canberra last Saturday, bringing audiences some well-known Chinese and Western pieces such as Jasmine Flower, Carmen, Romeo and Juliet, and The Yellow River.

While it was called “East Meets West”, music from China and the West with the same themes was brought together. Chinese singer Ya Fen and Australian singer Victoria Lambourn performed a duet(二重唱) Hope Betrayed, which was inspired by the Chinese classic novel A Dream of Red Mansions. Noble said he loved the duet as it showed completely different singing styles: traditional Chinese opera style and Western opera style. “They’re not exactly the same, but they came together,” he said.

Having been a professional conductor for more than 20 years, Noble called music an international language. He noted that most music at the concert was about love, which was also an international language. He also spoke highly of some Chinese musicians, such as pianist Lang Lang who he thought has inspired many kids in China to learn music.

Noble admitted his knowledge of Chinese culture was limited. He said that conducting the Canberra concert was “an experience that I’ve enjoyed”, which made him more interested in discovering the background and history of the music, as well as the stories behind it. Noble is ready to create more things that can involve dance or calligraphy or some of the other aspects of Chinese culture, and put them together with music.

9 . When you think of a map, is north on the top or the bottom? Usually, maps are designed with north on top, though when we think about it, there is no logical reason for this bias (偏见). After all, there is no up or down in space. So what is wrong with south, east or west being on the top of the map? The answer is: nothing at all. In fact, north-up maps only became the norm in the last few hundred years.

Ancient Egyptian maps had south at the top because the Nile River flows downhill from mountains in the south to the Mediterranean Sea in the north. Mecca was to the south of most early Muslim civilizations, and south-up maps were designed so that viewers would look up to see Mecca. Medieval Christian maps had east at the top, as they believed the Garden of Eden was in the east. The only early maps that had north at the top were those of early China because the emperor lived in the north.

North seems to have settled at the top of maps during the 16th century, largely thanks to a Flemish mapmaker, Mercator. Mercator was a great admirer of an early Greek mapmaker, who, for reasons now unknown, put north at the top of maps, so Mercator did, too. When Mercator’s world map became the standard map to navigate the oceans, north up became standard as well.

What is the implication of this north-view of the world? Psychologically, people tend to think of up as good and down as bad. Just think of words and phrases like “upmarket”, “upbeat” and “moving up in the world”, and how they contrast with their opposites. Because north is so consistently put at the top of maps, people now think of north as good, too.

Several attempts have been made in recent years by introducing south-up maps to the market. These maps not only give us a chance to see the world differently, but also give everyone the chance to see themselves on top.