It started as a special day for Wesley Autrey, a 50-year-old construction worker in New York City. It was about 12:45 P.M., and he was waiting on a subway platform (月台) to take his daughters home before he went to work. He suddenly noticed a man nearby have convulsions (抽搐) and fall down suddenly. Mr. Autrey and two women went to help the stranger. The man, Cameron Hollopeter, managed to get to his feet, but then stumbled (绊倒) at the edge of the platform and fell onto the subway tracks. Mr. Autrey looked up and saw the lights of the subway train coming near through the tunnel.

    Mr. Autrey jumped onto the track immediately. He realized that he didn't have time to get Mr. Hollopeter and himself back up on the platform before the train arrived, so he lay on top of the man and pressed down as hard as he could. Although the driver tried to stop the train before it reached them, he couldn't. Five cars passed over them before the train finally stopped. The cars had passed only inches from his head.

    New York loves a hero. Mr. Autrey became an overnight hero and was named the “Subway Superman”. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg gave him the Bronze Medallion, the city's highest honor. He was asked to appear on several TV talk shows. He was also rewarded with money and gifts, such as $10,000 from Donald Trump, a $5,000 gift card from the Gap clothing store, a new Jeep, and Beyonce concert tickets.

    How did Autrey react (反应) to all this? He said, “I don't feel like I did anything great; I just saw someone who needed help. I did what I felt was right”.

    Kathy Fletcher and David Simpson have a son named Santi. He had a friend who sometimes went to school hungry. So Santi invited him to occasionally eat and sleep at his house.

    That friend had a friend and that friend had a friend, and now when you go to dinner at Kathy and David's house on Thursday night there might be 15 to 20 teenagers gathering around the table, and later there will be groups of them crashing in the basement or in the few small bedrooms upstairs. The kids who show up at Kathy and David's have suffered the pains of modern poverty: homelessness, hunger, abuse.

    And yet by some miracle, hostile soil has produced beautiful flowers. Kids come from around the city. Spicy chicken and black rice are served. Cellphones are banned. The kids who call Kathy and David “Momma” and “Dad,” are polite and clear the dishes. Birthdays and graduations are celebrated. Songs are performed. Each meal we go around the table and everybody has to say something nobody else knows about them. Each meal the kids show their promise to care for one another.

    The adults in this community give the kids the chance to present their gifts. “At my first dinner, Edd read a poem that I first thought was from Langston Hughes, but it turned out to be his own. Kesari has a voice that somehow appeared from New Orleans jazz from the 1920s. Madeline and Thalya practice friendship as if it were the highest art form.”

    “They give us a gift — complete intolerance of social distance. When I first met Edd, I held out my hand to shake his. He looked at it and said, “We hug here,” and we've been hugging since.”

    Bill Milliken, a veteran youth activist, is often asked which programs turn around kids' lives. “I still haven't seen one program change one kid's life,” he says. “What changes people is relationships. Somebody is willing to walk through the shadow of the valley of adolescence with them.” Souls are not saved in bundles. Love is the necessary force.

    How is it that siblings (兄弟姐妹) can turn out so differently? One answer is that in fact each sibling grows up in a different family. The firstborn is, for a while, an only child, and therefore has a completely different experience of the parents than those born later. The next child is, for a while, the youngest, until the situation is changed by a new arrival. The mother and father themselves are changing and growing up too. One sibling might live in a stable and close family in the first few years; another might be raised in a family crisis, with a disappointed mother or an angry father.

    Sibling competition was identified as an important shaping force as early as in 1918. But more recently, researchers have found many ways in which brothers and sisters are a lasting force in each others' lives. Dr. Annette Henderson says firstborn children pick up vocabulary more quickly than their siblings. The reason for this might be that the later children aren't getting the same one-on-one time with parents. But that doesn't mean that the younger children have problems with language development. Later-borns don't enjoy that much talking time with parents, but instead they harvest lessons from bigger brothers and sisters, learning entire phrases and getting an understanding of social concepts such as the difference between “I” and “me”.

    A Cambridge University study of 140 children found that siblings created a rich world of play that helped them grow socially. Love-hate relationships were common among the children. Even those siblings who fought the most had just as much positive communication as the other sibling pairs.

    One way children seek more attention from parents is by making themselves different from their siblings, particularly if they are close in age. Researchers have found that the first two children in a family are typically more different from each other than the second and third. Girls with brothers show their differences to a maximum degree by being more feminine than girls with sisters. A 2003 research paper studied adolescents from 185 families over two years, finding that those who changed to make themselves different from their siblings were successful in increasing the amount of warmth they gained from their parents.

    The decisions that we make shape us throughout our lives. No matter what decisions we make, good or bad, each one puts us on a new road in the future. Make a bad decision? No problem. Learn from the decision and make another decision to get on a different path. This is advice that I got from Tony Robbins in his book Awaken the Giant Within. This is a book that I recommend(推荐) to anyone wanting to develop a fire to make changes in their life. It helped me to understand how fear of making poor choices was hindering me from becoming the great man who I am today. Now I am not saying I am a well-known person in any particular circle. But I am the king of my castle working hard and trying to make good decisions in regard to the paths that I have chosen. I am a great man in the eyes of my wife and my children. And that is all the recognition that I need in my lifetime. And I know that my past failures have been the building block that I continue to use to build my career and self-image in my community that I live in.

    Ben Lerer, cofounder of the CEO of Thrillist Media Group, is a good example of this. In an article on the Fast Company website, Lerer talks about this very subject. He says, “I've had to make some really tough decisions but finally, I think the best companies are those that can recognize when something isn't going right, and fix it, instead of just turning a blind eye because it's easier.” Great people make decisions. When a decision does not have the desired result, make a different decision. It does not get any simpler than that.

    Self-driving vehicles have been proposed as a solution for the rapidly increasing number of fatal traffic accidents, which now cause 1.3 million deaths each year.

    While we have made great progress in advancing self-driving technology, we have yet to explore how autonomous vehicles will be programmed to deal with situations that endanger human life, according to a new study published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience.

    To understand how self-driving cars might make these judgments, the researchers looked at how humans deal with similar driving dilemmas.

    When faced with driving dilemmas, people show a high willingness to sacrifice themselves for others, make decisions based on the victim's age and turn onto sidewalks to minimize the number of lives lost. Ethical（伦理的）guidelines tend to disagree with human instincts（本能） in this case, saying that no life should be valued above another.

    “The technological advancement and adoption of autonomous vehicles are moving quickly but the social and ethical discussions about their behavior are lagging behind,” says lead author Lasse T. Bergmann from University of Osnabrück, Germany.

    Automated vehicles will eventually outperform their human counterparts, but there will still be circumstances where the cars must make an ethical decision to save or possibly risk losing a human life.

    The study is especially relevant considering earlier this year a self-driving Uber car struck and killed a passenger in Arizona, in an incident widely regarded as the first death resulting from an autonomous vehicle.

    An ethics commission launched by the German Ministry for Transportation has created a set of guidelines, representing its members' best judgement on a variety of issues concerning self-driving cars. These expert judgments may, however, not reflect human instinct.

    Bergmann and colleagues developed a virtual reality experiment to examine human instinct in a variety of possible driving situations. It was based on the well-known ethical thought experiment—the trolley problem.

    In this experiment, there is a trolley running down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up, unable to move, and the trolley is headed straight for them. A person is standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever（操作杆）.If he pulls this lever, the trolley will turn to a different set of tracks. However, there is one person tied up on the side track. Does the person choose to pull the lever and kill one person, or do nothing and let five people die?

    Bergmann recognized that the majority of people would not approve of the proposal made by the ethics commission that a passenger in the vehicle should not be sacrificed to save more people. “We find people chose to save more lives, even if this involves turning onto the sidewalk, endangering people uninvolved in the traffic incident,” said Bergmann, “Furthermore, subjects considered the factor of age, for example, choosing to save children over the elderly.” He also realized further discussion and research were needed. “Driving requires a complex weighing of risks versus rewards, for example, speed versus the danger of a critical situation,” Bergmann explained.

    Wellington: Huawei has started a rugby-themed media campaign in a bid to win over New Zealand's public after the country's security agency blocked the Chinese technology giant's equipment from being used in a nationwide Internet network.

    "5G without Huawei is like rugby without New Zealand," ads in New Zealand's two largest newspapers read alongside a photo of players competing in a ball. Large posters also appeal to the country's love of the sport. In November, New Zealand's Government Communications Security Department (GCSD) told Spark it couldn't use equipment from Huawei-the world's largest telecommunication equipment company—in the building of its 5G network because an unspecific "significant network security risk was identified". Spark is now in the process of seeing if it can make changes to prevent those risks, although GCSD has declined to publicly say how that would happen.

    Huawei's newspaper ad goes on to argue the decision would mean less advanced technology and higher prices for New Zealand customers. The ads come after the company last month publicly offered to only use New Zealand, rather than Chinese, staff to build the network—in a bid to ease fears—and called for an urgent meeting with the government, denying (否认) there had been any wrongdoing.

    Western spy agencies have increasingly raised security concerns about Huawei—China's largest telecommunications company-over what they say are possible links to the Chinese government, with the United States reportedly pressing Five Eyes intelligence network allies (同盟国) to avoid the company. Australia and Canada were the first countries to ban Huawei from a building of 5G networks.

The company has repeatedly denied accusations.

    New Zealand's top politicians have repeatedly denied the GCSD decision was influenced by other Western powers and say it's about the particular technology being suggested, not China. They have also denied suggestions New Zealand's diplomatic ties with China have been tense over the decision, with the official promotion of a major China—New Zealand tourism project now postponed.