2 . Technology seems to discourage slow, careful reading. Reading on a screen tires your eyes and makes it harder for you to keep your place. Online writing tends to be more skimmable (易略读的) and list-like than print. The neuroscientist Mary Walt argued recently that this new standard of skim reading is producing“an invisible, game-changing transformation”in how readers process words. The neuronal circuit (神经回路) that maintains and supports the brain’s ability to read now prefers the rapid absorption of information.

We shouldn’t overplay this danger. All readers skim. From about the age of nine, our eyes start to skim quickly across the page, reading only about a quarter of the words properly, and filling in the gap s by inference. Nor is there anything new in these fears about declining attention spans (持续时间). So far, the anxieties have proved to be false alarms. “Quite a few critics have been worried about attention spans lately and see very short stories as signs of cultural decline,” the American author Selvin Brown wrote. “No one ever said that poems were evidence of short attention spans.”

And yet the Internet has certainly changed the way we read. For a start, it means that there is more to read, because more people than ever are writing. And digital writing is meant for rapid release and response. This mode of writing and reading can be interactive and fun. But often it treats other people’s words as something to be quickly taken as materials to say something else. Everyone talks over the top of everyone else, eager to be heard.

Perhaps we should slow down. Reading is constantly promoted as a source of personal achievement. But this argument often emphasizes “enthusiastic” “passionate” or “eager” reading, non e of which words suggest slow, quiet absorption. To a slow reader, a piece of writing can only be fully understood by immersing oneself in the words and their slow understanding of a line of thought.

The human need for this kind of deep reading is too tenacious for any new technology to destroy. We often assume that technological change can’t be stopped and happens in one direction, so that older media like “dead-tree” books are kicked out by newer, more virtual forms. In practice, older technologies can coexist with new ones. The Kindle has not killed off the printed book any more than the car killed off the bicycle. We still want to enjoy slowly-formed ideas and carefully-chosen words. Even in a fast-moving age, there is time for slow reading.

6 . The name, Bella means beautiful, but Bella Hadid didn’t think she was when she was a teenager.

Supermodel Bella Hadid is finally coming clean about having cosmetic surgery (整形手术), but she is speaking out on her regret of having it done when she was 14, according to a report.

“I was the uglier sister. I wasn’t as pretty as my sister Gigi,” Bella said. “That’s really what people said about me. And unfortunately when you get told things so many times, you do just believe it.” “Now I wish Ihad kept the nose of my parents,” Bella said.

About 229,000 cosmetic surgeries were performed on teenagers between the ages of 13 to 19 in 2017, which accounted for nearly 4 percent of all cosmetic procedures.

But experts caution that a “nose job”, is not recommended until the growth of the nose is completed, which is around ages 15 to 16 in females and ages 16 to 18 in males.

“Some teens are more psychologically mature (成熟的) than others, but it’s important to note that their brain development is not at a point where they can really think through the possible risks,” said Dr.Zuckerman, president of the National Center for Health Research.

Cosmetic procedures improve confidence in teenagers rather than the actual physical changes, especially for those who have poor confidence, according to Dr. Steven Pearlman, a facial plastic surgeon.

Zuckerman argues that in an ideal world, doctors would delay certain operations in teens, while parents would work with their children to delay decisions of cosmetic procedures “…until a teenager is of age, like at least 18.”

8 . Several studies in recent years have suggested that ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft can worsen traffic problems in cities, which continue to have high rates of private vehicle ownership.

Recently, a new study has found that ride-sharing services result in much more pollution than other kinds of private and public transportation. Ride-sharing trips also draw passengers away from more environment-friendly methods of travel, like public transportation, walking or biking, the study found.

The new study, carried out by the not-for-profit group Union of Concerned Scientists, represents an attempt to center on how ride-sharing services affect pollution. The research examined the effects of ride-sharing services on seven of America’s largest cities.

Overall, the researchers reported that ride-sharing trips now “result in an estimated 69 percent more climate pollution on average than the trips they displace.” The study notes that the same passengers could have chosen to travel by bus, train, bike, scooter or on foot.

One of the big reasons they give for this result is that ride-sharing vehicles are often driven with no passengers in the car. This happens when drivers are either waiting for rider requests, are on the way to pick up passengers or are driving in between pickups. This situation, known as “deadheading”, takes up about 42 percent of all ride-sharing driving activity, the study found. The researchers said that deadheading results in about 50 percent more carbon dioxide than one person driving in a private vehicle. Both Uber and Lyft do offer a choice of a “pooled” ride, which involves drivers picking up additional riders during the same trip.

The study urges services like Uber and Lyft to work to increase the number of pooled rides. It also urges the two companies to increase the number of electric vehicles on the road and to improve connections to public transportation centers.

Both Uber and Lyft have said in the past that most studies on the subject overstate the effects of their services on pollution. They have noted that the majority of vehicles on the road belong to private individuals or companies. Uber told Reuters news agency in a statement it had no comment on the latest report. But the company said it aims to be part of the solution to address climate change by working directly with cities. The statement added that Uber would continue to promote pooled trips and other means of transportation.

9 . Since App Store was set up, it has been selling consumers one simple thing: choice. Whether you wanted to play games, read the news, or do a thousand other things, there was something for whatever you desired.

Then something funny happened. Logging into the App Store today is like going into a shopping mall with only a coupon (优惠券) for one thing: There’s so much choice; it might be easier to give up than to choose.

It isn’t just consumers who are burdened, though. Too much content of all kinds also has economic effects. When countless choices are available, it causes pressure, pushing prices down and driving us a bit crazy.

So what is the way forward? Less choice itself may be a sensible strategy. There are already signs that this is happening. Firstly content companies are looking to prevent their offerings from getting lost in the tons of stuff. Most obvious is Disney, which is planning to open its own streaming service next year. The point is to narrow the focus so that those seeking Disney cartoons will have one place to go, rather than being around various services.

Yet if that represents a careful first step, there are more extreme options too. Consider the idea of a wine club: from tens of thousands of bottles each year, subscribers pay someone to select the most interesting ones. Perhaps what comes next for digital content is similar — carefully selected offerings from trusted sources that put choices in the hands of customers in order to get rid of the anxiety of choosing.

Up to now, too much choice in digital media has only one solution: the algorithm (运算法则). But we’ve seen the trouble with algorithms on You Tube. They feed you only what you’ve already said you like, not things you may not know you’re into. Worse, they have a tendency to serve up disturbing content. The way forward can’t simply be more or better algorithms.

Instead, it’s time for digital companies to start thinking about how to put limits on things: on how much we can use a device, or what we are available to choose from. As we move further into the digital revolution, what people ask for is clear: Less.

The University of Cambridge    1    (use) scores on gaokao as part of its admission criteria for Chinese students for the last few years, according to its official Weibo account.

However, it does not admit students simply     2     (base) on their test scores. In addition to top scores on gaokao, Chinese    3     (apply) also need to meet English language requirements, participate in an interview    4     take a subject-specific written admission assessment.

Internet users have     5     (broad) welcomed the move,     6     (say) this is a blessing for Chinese students    7    want to enter the university, though the requirement     8    (set) high, reported China Daily.

Stephen Toope, vice-chancellor of the university, said the reason for accepting gaokao scores is that Cambridge wants as much information as possible to evaluate candidates who are possibly suitable    9    studying here.

“Global universities must seek connection, communication and collaboration if we wish to see changes that will make the world a better place for everyone,” he said in March during a visit to Peking University, “All the universities are now trying to seek an approach to    10     (provide) an equal environment for students from all over the world.”