Everyday Food—--by Martha Stewart

    No matter how busy you are, at the end of the day you want meals that are easy to prepare. And you want lots of choices and variations. You'll find all of that in this book: 250 simple recipes for delicious meals that bring freshness and nutrition.

Paperback, published by Random House, $ 16.79

    Zeroes —--by Scott Westerfeld, Margo Lanagan and Deborah Biancotti

    New York Times bestselling author Scott Westerfeld teams up with Margo Lanagan and Deborah Biancotti in the book about six teenagers with amazing abilities. These teenagers have powers that set them apart. They can do things ordinary people can't.

    Paperback, published by Simon & Schuster, $12.99

    Mighty Jack —--by Ben Hatke

Jack dislikes summer. But he's got a good reason: summer is when his single mom takes a second job and leaves him at home to watch his sister, Maddy. It's lots of responsibility, and it's boring, too, because Maddy doesn't talk. But one day, at the market, Maddy does talk—to tell Jack to trade their mom's car for a box of mysterious seeds. It's the best mistake Jack has ever made.

    Hardcover, published by First Second, $ 14.15

    Only Daughter —--by Anna Snoekstra

    She's caught stealing. She's homeless and on the run. But she happens to look the same as a girl who went missing a decade ago, Rebecca Winter. She assumes (冒充) Rebacca's identity, using it as a way out.  She doesn't know anything about her new life as Rebecca is itself a prison and it looks like a killer might be after her.

Kindle edition, published by Harlequin Enterprises, $8.88

    Walk through the Amazon rainforest today and you will find it is steamy, warm, damp and thick. But if you had been around 15,000 years ago, during the last ice age, would it have been the same? For more than 30 years, scientists have been arguing about how rainforests like the Amazon might have reacted to the cold, dry climates of the ice ages, but until now, no one has reached a satisfying answer.

    Rainforests like the Amazon are important for mopping up CO₂ from the atmosphere and helping to slow global warming. Currently the trees in the Amazon take in around 500 million tons of CO₂ each year: equal to the total amount of CO₂ giving off in the UK each year. But how will the Amazon react to future climate change? If it gets drier, will it still survive and continue to draw down CO₂?

    Scientists hope that they will be able to learn in advance how the rainforest will manage in the future by understanding how rainforests reacted to climate change in the past. Unfortunately, getting into the Amazon rainforest and collecting information are very difficult. To study past climate, scientists need to look at fossilized pollen, kept in lake mud. Going back to the last ice age means drilling deep down into lake sediments （沉淀物）which requires specialized equipment and heavy machinery. There are very few roads and paths, or places to land helicopters and aeroplanes. Rivers tend to be the easiest way to enter the forest, but this still leaves vast areas between the rivers completely unsampled（未取样）.So far, only a handful of cores have been drilled that go back to the last ice age and none of them provide enough information to prove how the Amazon rainforest reacts to climate change.

    The new social robots, including Jibo, Cozmo, Kuri and Meccano M.A.X., bear some similarities to assistants like Apple's Siri, but these robots come with something more. They are designed to win us over not with their smarts but with their personality. They are sold as companions that do more than talk to us. Time magazine cheered for the robots that "could fundamentally reshape how we interact with machines." But is reshaping how we interact with machines a good thing, especially for children?

    Some researchers in favor of the robots don't see a problem with this. People have relationships with many kinds of things. Some say robots are just another thing with which we can have relationships. To support their argument, roboticists sometimes point to how children deal with toy dolls. Children animate (赋予…生命) dolls and turn them into imaginary friends. Jibo, in a sense, will be one more imaginary friend, and arguably a more intelligent and fun one.

    Getting attached to dolls and sociable machines is different, though. Today's robots tell children that they have emotions, friendships, even dreams to share. In reality, the whole goal of the robots is emotional trickery. For instance, Cozmo the robot needs to be fed, repaired and played with. Boris Sofman, the chief executive of Anki, the company behind Cozmo, says that the idea is to create "a deeper and deeper emotional connection ... And if you neglect him, you feel the pain of that." What is the point of this, exactly? What does it mean to feel the pain of neglecting something that feels no pain at being neglected, or to feel anger at being neglected by something that doesn't even know it is neglecting you?

    This should not be our only concern. It is troubling that these robots try to understand how children feel. Robots, however, have no emotions to share, and they cannot put themselves in our place. No matter what robotic creatures "say", they don't understand our emotional lives. They present themselves as empathy machines, but they are missing the essential equipment. They have not been born, they don't know pain, or death, or fear. Robot thinking may be thinking, but robot feeling is never feeling, and robot love is never love.

    What is also troubling is that children take robots' behavior to indicate feelings. When the robots interact with them, children take this as evidence that the robots like them, and when robots don't work when needed, children also take it personally. Their relationships with the robots affect their self-esteem (自尊). In one study, an 8-year-old boy concluded that the robot stopped talking to him because the robot liked his brothers better.

    For so long, we dreamed of artificial intelligence offering us not only simple help but conversation and care. Now that our dream is becoming real, it is time to deal with the emotional downside of living with robots that "feel".

    I came to the United States ten years ago. I would always say that I was trying to study, but there were always things like work and my kids that would not allow me to start.

    Now I realized that those were only excuses. What stopped me was that I was afraid to start studying again. I always believed I would learn by myself.

    One day, however, my son told me that he was sad because his friends would come over and I didn't understand them because I didn't speak English. He was also sad because I could never help him with his homework. That same day, I told myself, "Rocio, you have to start believing in yourself and you will see you can make it."

    The next day, I went downtown to look for a big banner (横幅) in front of the school which said that they offered classes for adults. I came in to see if I could join, but the classes were closed already. That night I took the kids to the movies, and on the way back, I told them we would take a new route. I ended up getting lost. That's the way I found Chaffey College. The following Monday, I went to ask for information. They told me that summer school was starting that week.

    That's how I started studying English last summer. It is difficult, but I have had great rewards. My daughter had written a story for school. It was about the female they most admired and why. She wrote that I was the person she most admired because I had started going to college. I will never forget this.

By 11:00, Gopamma knew something was wrong. Her husband, Hanutha, should have returned from collecting firewood an hour before. Gopamma sent for her son, who gathered a search party and headed to Bandipur Tiger Reserve, a nearby national park in south-western India. Just inside the forest, they discovered Hanutha's half-eaten remains. The tiger that killed him was still sitting next to the body.

In the face of her husband's death, Gopamma struggled not only with grief but economic hardship. Her son had to drop out of university. "My life was much better when my husband was alive," she says. "My older son could have studied, but now both of my sons have to work. I feel insecure and dependent. "

Despite all this, Gopamma feels no hate toward the tiger that killed her husband. Like many Hindus in India, she views humans and creatures, each with an equal right to existence. Her husband's death, she says, has nothing to do with the fact that the government is trying to save tigers: "This was my fate."

Rural Indians are unique in the world for their high tolerance for co-existing with potentially deadly wildlife. "You don't find this in other cultures," says Ullas, a biologist at the Wildlife Conservation Society and a leading expert on tigers. "If this kind of thing happened in Montana or Brazil, they'd wipe out everything the next day. "

The country holds just 25% of total tiger habitat, but accounts for 70% of all remaining wild tigers, or around 3, 000 animals today. Success does not come without cost, however. They still have a lot of difficulties with tigers breaking into human-dominated places in certain parts of India, livestock(牲畜) are killed and sometimes so are people.

Some animal activists think that there are too few tigers left in the wild, so even one shouldn't be killed. Tigers are treasures, we'd better live with them together.

There has been tremendous concern recently over misinformation on social media. This concern is quite justifiable, as the consequences of believing false information are greatly affecting the individual and collective health.

Many people tend to fall for misinformation they encounter online. There is one influential explanation for this phenomenon. As the thinking goes, someone, who possesses very limited skills in finding and consuming digital content, creating digital content, and communicating it, is likely to have difficulty recognizing false information and thus is more vulnerable to believing false information. As a result, these less digitally literate people may play a significant part in the spread of misinformation.

This argument sounds perfectly plausible. Yet very little research has actually investigated the link between digital literacy and the vulnerability to believing false information. There's even less understanding of the potential link between digital literacy and what people share on social media. A group of MIT researchers explored these potential associations by surveying 1,341 Americans.

In the experiment, the researchers first showed the participants two dozen news headlines about politics, half of which were accurate, and half of which were false. In the second phase, they included a series of tests: having the participants report their familiarity with various Internet-related terms and answer questions about how social media platforms decide what to show in their newsfeeds. At last, the participants were required to assess the accuracy of a set of headlines and point out their likelihood of sharing each headline on social media.

The researchers found "clear evidence" that digital literacy was a strong predictor of accuracy discernment (识别能力). However, the results were "strikingly different" regarding sharing discernment. Digitally literate subjects were just as likely to share inaccurate information. Most surprisingly, even people with high digital literacy were not immune from clicking "share" for false news.

This sounds odd. Although most people don't want to spread misinformation, social media is distracting: people are scrolling quickly, and their attention is drawn to social validation (社会认知度), such as how many likes their posts will get. So make sure a certain post is accurate before you click the "share" button.