The U.S. Postal Service(USPS) is losing billions of dollars a year. The government company that delivers "small mail" is losing out to email and othertypes of electronic communication. First-classmail amount fell from a high point of 104 million pieces in 2000 to just 64million pieces by 2014.

    Congress permits the 600,000-empIoyee USPS to hold a monopoly (垄断) overfirst-class and standard mail. The company pays no federal, state or local taxes; pays no vehicle fees; and is free from many regulations on other businesses. Despite these advantages, the USPS has lost $52 billion since 2007, and will continue losing money without major reforms.

    The problem is that Congress is preventing the USPS from reducing costs as its sales decline, and is blocking efforts to end Saturday service and close unneeded post office locations. USPS also hasa costly union-dominated work force that slows the introduction of new ideas ormethods down. USPS workers earn significantly higher payment than comparable private-sector workers. The answer isto privatize the USPS and open postal markets to competition. With the riseof the Internet, the argument that mail is a natural monopoly that needs government protection is weaker than ever.

    Other countries facing declining letter amounts have madereforms. Germany and the Netherlands privatized their national postal companies over a decade ago, and other European countries have followed suit. Britain floated shares of the Royal Mail on its stock exchange in 2013. Some countries, such us Sweden and New Zealand, have not privatized their national postal companies, but they have opened them up to competition.

    These reforms have driven efficiency improvements in all of these countries. Additional number of workers have been reduced, productivity has risen and consumers have benefited. Also, note that cost-cutting measures—such as closing tone post offices—are good for both the economy and the environment.

    Privatization and competition also encourage new changes. When the USPS monopoly over "extremely urgent" mail was stopped in 1979, we saw an explosion in efficient overnight private delivery by firms such as FedEx.

    The government needs to wake up to changing technology, study postal reforms abroad and let businessmen reinvent our out-of-date postal system.

     Rocky Mountain Summer Adventure Camps Bring Learning to Life!

     The Museum of Idaho Rocky Mountain Adventure Camps are available for students aged 6-14. Participants will have amazing outdoor experiences combined with adventure and fun. Space is limited to 20participants each session and registration is not complete until payment has been received by the Museum of Idaho. Registration fee is non-returnable.

     Junior Adventure Camp

     Children aged 6-9 (must have completed first grade).

Well conduct experiments, go on field trips, and discover the fun and excitement of science! This year, we will learn about colonial（殖民主义的）science to go along with our exhibit, America's Revolution!

     Instructor: Chloe Doucette

     Dates: June 27- June30

     Time: 9:00 a.m. - noon

     Cost: $75 per child, $60 per child for MOI members, $50 each additional brother or   sister

     Original Camp

     Children aged 9-12 (must have completed third grade)

     Original Camp is for children who are ready for an exciting full-day outdoor camp. Participants visit various habitats and ecosystems as we explore eastern Idaho. Well go bird watching, hiking in the mountains, and lots more!

Instructors: Alana Jensen, Jerry Petty

     Dates: July 18- July21

     Time: 9:00 a.m.  4:00 p.m.(9:00-6:00 on the last day)

     Cost: $150 per child, $125 per child for MOI members, $100 each additional brother or sister

     High Adventure Camp

     Youth aged 11-14 (must have completed fifth grade)

     High Adventure Camp is for youth who are looking for an amazing summer adventure! This outdoor camp is full of exciting physical challenges and involves participants in even more in-depth activities than the Original Camp. This year, students will study how rattlesnakes experience the outdoors!

     Instructors: Chloe Doucette, Mike Winston, Jerry Petty

     Dates: August 8- August 11

     Time: 9:00 a.m.  4:00 p.m.(9:00  6:00 on the last day)

     Cost: $150 per child, $125 per child for MOI members, $100 each additional brother or sister

Participate in both Original AND High Adventure for only $200! Call522-1400 ext. 3002 to take advantage of this great offer. If you have any questions about the Museum of Idaho's education programs, contact Chloe Doucette, Education Director at (208) 522-1400 ext.3002.

    Breathe, wave and smile. Along with more than 300 other seniors, I marched into the stadium on the afternoon of May 10. The audience burst into deafening cheers. The huge stadium shook with all the whistling and clapping.

    It was as if a Hollywood superstar had walked on stage. And indeed, every single senior that day was a star of the moment. Each deserved it. The seniors had been preparing for four years for this once-in-a-lifetime moment—the commencement (graduation ceremony).

    Seated, I waited anxiously for the opening address. As a foreign exchange student, I was not able to receive a diploma. However, I still had the wonderful feeling of being part of things. Like the other graduates, I was dressed in marron cap and gown.

    Our principal, Mr. Glover, delivered a short, warm greeting. The US national anthem followed and then, hands on chests, a solemn Pledge of Allegiance(美国的爱国誓言).

    Students who had excelled academically gave farewell speeches. The tears in some eyes convinced me that many had deep feelings about the occasion. It was as the class motto says, “Life brings us tears, smiles and memories. The tears dry; the smiles fade; but the memories last forever.”

    Then came the core (the most important part) of the commencement. Hundreds of names were announced. Each graduate walked across the stage to receive his or her diploma from the principal. From the different cheers each graduate got, we had the funny sense that it was a kind of competition of who could cheer the loudest.

    To be honest, the presentation of diplomas got boring. A girl sitting next to me even started yawning. But it wasn't boring for those receiving the diploma: they would treasure the moment the principal placed the sacred brown document in their hands for the rest of their lives.

    A new page in the book of that person's life had turned. They were glimpsing their futures: futures of challenge, hardship, perhaps loneliness too, which would take all of their courage.

    Robots make me nervous—especially the ones which seem to think for themselves. I was embarrassed to admit this till I heard that Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, felt the same way.

Gates said in an interview with the social networking and news website Reddit: "I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent．That should be positive if we manage well. A few decades after that, though, the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern."

    Well, maybe I don't have to worry about my computer and kitchen equipment yet. After I use them I can always pull the plug. But in the future, machines might find a way to prevent us from switching them off. There's a terrible thought!

    Maybe the problem with computers too clever for us is not that they are evil like some we've seen in sci-fi movies. What could put us in danger is that they might be too efficient. That's what philosopher Nick Bostrom from Oxford University believes. He says that machines are indifferent to humans and in pursuit of their own goals，the destruction of people might be just additional damage. Bostrom gives us an example: A machine which might have its only goal to produce as many paperclips as possible might look at human bodies as extra material for paperclips and go after you. Because it is, well, a machine, it would not take pity on you.

    It's a good thing that American writer Isaac Asimov thought about how far robots can go and left us his three rules of robotics. They state that a robot may not hurt a human being or allow the human being to come to harm.

I'm glad my machines at home are "dumb". All my cleaner wants to take over is the carpet in my living room. Let's hope they don't create an appliance which wants to take over the world!

    People do not analyze every problem they meet. Sometimes they try to remember a solution from the last time they had a similar problem. They often accept the opinions or ideas of other people. Other times they begin to act without thinking. They try to find a solution by trial and error. However, when all these methods fail, the person with a problem has to start analyzing. There are six stages in analyzing a problem.

    First the person must recognize that there is a problem. For example, Sam's bicycle is broken, and he cannot read it to class as he usually does. Sam must see that there is a problem with his bicycle.

    Next the thinker must define the problem. Before Sam can repair his bicycle, he must find the reason why it does not work. For instance, he must determine if the problem is with the gears, the brakes, or the frame. He must make his problem more specific.

    Now the person must look for information that will make the problem clearer and lead to possible solutions. For instance, suppose Sam decided that his bike does not work because there is something wrong with the gear wheels. At this time, he can look in his bicycle repair book and read about gears. He can talk to his friends at the bike shop. He can look at his gears carefully.

    After studying the problem, the person should have several suggestions for a possible solution. Take Sam as an illustration. His suggestions might be: put oil on the gear wheels; buy new gear wheels and replace the old ones; tighten or loosen the gear wheels.

    Eventually one suggestion seems to be the solution to the problem. Sometimes the final idea comes very suddenly because the thinker suddenly sees something new or sees something in a new way. Sam, for example, suddenly sees that there is a piece of chewing gum between the gear wheels. He immediately realizes the solution to his problem: he must clean the gear wheels.

    Finally the solution is tested. Sam cleans the gear wheels and finds that afterwards his bicycle works perfectly. In short, he has solved the problem.

Anew study suggests that Medicare could spend billions of dollars on screening (拍片检查) smokers for lung cancer that would be better spent on helping them quit and keeping others from starting.

The new study indicated that screening more often supported smokers' beliefs that they could safely continue to smoke. Most participants remained smoking because they believed screening could catch cancer early before it would threaten their lives.

"They compared how hard it was to quit smoking with how easy it was to be screened," said Steven B. Zeliadt, the lead author of the study." They engaged in magical thinking that now there's this wonderful painless external test that can save lives."

He and seven colleagues conducted the study of 37 current smokers who were offered lung cancer screening at Department of Veteran Affairs. After being screened and told the results, they were interviewed about their smoking-related heath beliefs. For about half of those, cancer was not found." Screening lowered their motivation for quitting," the team reported in July in JAMA Internal Medicine. The participants focused only on lung cancer, ignoring other potential harm of smoking.

A national study published four years ago found that annual CT screening for lung cancer three years in a row could reduce deaths among heavy smokers by about 20 percent. In an interview, Dr. Russell P. Harris, a preventive medicine specialist at the UNC-Chapel Hill, noted that" Screening is being believed by people as an alternative to stopping smoking. But stopping smoking would have huge benefits for the individual and society." Furthermore, smoking causes many other cancers.

Dr. Harris agreed that rather than screening, money is better spent on smoking prevention. He suggested providing free stop-smoking aids, sponsoring anti-smoking advertising and raising taxes on tobacco products and the age at which people are allowed to buy them.