1 . As we know, queues (队列) have always been related to the theme park experience. Disliked by many, attractions do their best to stop them from having a bad influence on the guest experience. However, queues remain a necessity for gated attractions with popular rides.

The most obvious problem with queues is that they waste time, and for guests, wasting their limited time during their visit leads to a poor experience. For attraction operators, queues can be a letdown too. Even though long queues might be a sign that business is good, the more time guests spend tied up in long lines, the less opportunity they have to spend money on on-site retail and food offerings.

Thankfully, technology is developing to meet changing guest expectations. Many theme parks are taking guests out of physical queues and putting them into virtual queues through an app or wearable device.

Free from queues, guests are likely to spend their time and money far more freely around the attraction. Even though no one has to wait in line, attractions can still offer queue upgrades within a virtual queue system. According to a recent survey done by Attractions.io, over 84% of theme park visitors said they would rather use virtual queuing.

But queuing isn’t all bad, either. Making a queue part of the experience can also create an opportunity for better guest management. For example, Disney observes queues on many of their rides to give worried kids a space to relax. For smaller attractions, physical queues can be useful for judging how busy different rides are likely to be.

So to queue or not to queue? We say, why not both. In an ideal world, every attraction will have both virtual and physical queues. While virtual queuing can ensure that no one has to stand in line for hours, not every ride will need one. Short physical queues may still work for smaller or less popular rides, which guests can even enjoy while they wait in line virtually for another ride.

4 . When Amelia thinks about her freshman year two years ago, she remembers being tardy to her 8 a.m. first period class from time to time. “It was so hard to wake up in the morning,” she said. “I had to bike to school and I lived on the other side of the island.”

Like other teens, mornings area struggle because she had several hours of homework and extracurricular activities the night before, but research shows that’s not the entire story. According to psychotherapists, Heather Turgeon and Julie Wright in their book Generation Sleepless, today's teens are sleepier than ever and earlier school start time is disturbing their body's circadian (昼夜节律的) rhythm.

“One of the things that happens somewhere around age 12 is that their brain clock becomes set to a later pace,” said Turgeon, which put sateen about two hours behind the sleep schedule of a young child or an adult. “That means they want to go to sleep later and they want to wake up later,” she said.

“We consider adequate sleep —the very lowest amount—to be about eight hours,” said Wright. However, the average sleep time for high school students is usually about 6.5 hours. And missing out on just a couple hours of rest each night has negative consequences for developing teenage brains.

When a teen is tired, the amygdala—which is the part of the brain that responds to danger—will become more active. And the parts of the brain that are in charge of judgment become less active. Sleep issues are commonly associated with anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder (双相情感障碍) and ADHD (多动症). “We see teens with very serious mental health issues and accidents and soon things that parents really worry about—and getting enough sleep addresses those issues.”

Even with research showing that letting students sleep well contributes to better academic performance, lower truancy (旷课) rates and improved mental health, there has been pushback from parents and school districts about delaying the start of the school day.

Japan said on Tuesday that it had decided to    1    (gradual) release tons of treated wastewater from the ruined Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant (福岛第一核电站) into the ocean,    2     (describe) it as the best solution to dealing with the leftovers (残留物) from the Fukushima nuclear accident, one of the    3    (serious) in the world.

The    4    (decide) ends years of debate over how to deal with the water,    5    is enough to fill more than 500 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

“The Japanese government ignores concerns and strong opposition both at home and abroad. Such an    6    (responsilble)act not only directly harms the interests of the people in Japan’s neighbouring countries, but    7    threatens the global marine environment and international public health security,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said.

Greenpeace(绿色和平组织)criticized Japan’s plan and said there are other solutions that should    8    (censider). “    9    than using the best available technology to store and process the water    10    the long term, they have chosen the cheapest solution, damping the water into the Pactfie Ocean.”

10 . A century ago, the immigrants from across the Atlantic included settlers and travelers. Along with the many folks looking to make a permanent home in the United States came those who had no intention to stay, and 7 million people arrived while about 2 million departed. About a quarter of all Italian immigrants, for example, eventually returned to Italy for good. They even had an affectionate nickname, “uccelli di passaggio”, birds of passage.

Today, we place more restrictions on immigrants. We divide newcomers into two categories: legal or illegal, good or bad. We acknowledge them as Americans in the making, or identify them as aliens to be kicked out. That framework has contributed a great deal to our broken immigration system and the long political paralysis over how to fix it. We don’t need more categories, but we need to change the way we think about categories. We need to look beyond strict definitions of legal and illegal. To start, we can recognize the new birds of passage, those living and thriving in the gray areas. We might then begin to solve our immigration challenges.

Crop pickers, violinists, construction workers, entrepreneurs, engineers, home health-care aides and physicists are among today’s birds of passage. They are energetic participants in a global economy driven by the flow of work, money and ideas. They prefer to come and go as opportunity calls them. They can manage to have a job in one place and a family in another.

With or without permission, they straddle (跨越) laws, jurisdictions and identities with ease. We need them to imagine the United States as a place where they can be productive for a while without committing themselves to staying forever. We need them to feel that home can be both here and there and that they can belong to two nations honorably.

Accommodating this new world of people in motion will require new attitudes on both sides of the immigration battle. Looking beyond the culture war logic of right or wrong means opening up the middle ground and understanding that managing immigration today requires multiple paths and multiple outcomes, including some that are not easy to accomplish legally in the existing system.