Whether you love happy endings or a dark reality in TV dramas,you could soon be able to decide what you get. Netflix,the TV-streaming company behind hit shows such as The Crown and House Of Cards,is working on ways to give viewers control of key plot decisions.

    Some of the storylines will be simple and linear,like the Choose Your Own Adventure books that many grew up with.For example,viewers might decide whether a prisoner in the drama Orange Is The New Black joins a gang (黑帮) or not.

    The technology could also potentially be used to allow Princess Margaret to marry Peter Townsend in The Crown,instead of having her relationship with the divorcee (离婚者) blocked by the Establishment.Other storylines will be much more complex,allowing viewers to connect plot points in a variety of ways using their TV remotes.

    A source said,"We're doing work on branch narratives (叙事) so you are actually making choices as you watch. All the content will be there,and then people will have to get through it in different ways.We'll see how it plays out. It's an experiment.We'll see if it gets much success.For creators,it's a new field."

    Actors would film numerous alternate plot segments (片段) in advance,letting viewers choose which route to take through the story.Netflix will run a trial with choose-your-own-adventure shows for children later this year, based on an established character.If they are successful,it will use the format for TV programmes aimed at adults. Netflix president Reed Hastings confirmed that the company is working on interactive shows,saying,"Once you have got interactivity,you can try anything."

    At least five million UK households are thought to be signed up to Netflix,and it is challenging traditional broadcasters.Earlier this year,BBC boss Lord Hall promised to reinvent the iPlayer so that it overtakes Netflix as a destination in its own right,rather than a catch-up service.

    Through the following four cultural relics, the world has known about Korea's cultural treasures.

Pulguksa Temple

    Pulguksa Temple plays an important part in the history of Korean temples. The building of Pulguksa Temple began in 751. In the year 774 the large temple was finished, becoming an important center for Korean national-protection Buddhism(佛教). The way used to create the store structure gave the temple a look of beauty. The building thus represents the excellent Korean sculpting(雕刻).

Sokkuram Cave

    Sokkuram Cave is a man-made cave, which has been sculpted from white stone in special sculpting ways. In the cave, a seated Buddha is the main statue. On the walls around him are found 38 other statues and the Four Heavenly Kings. This stone cave is one of Korea's greatest places, built when Shilla's religion, science and sculpture were at the height. It shows Shilla's knowledge of math, physics and art.

Haeinsa Temple

    Haeinsa Temple's Changgyong Panjon (藏经板库) is a world-class cultural treasure. It has 81,340 wooden blocks. Millions of Chinese characters were caved on the blocks. In addition to its artistic value, it is famous as the oldest Buddhist canon(教义)in the world today. The building is beautiful. What's more important is that its design allows for natural wind as well as temperature control. Each book is 69.5cm in width and 23.9cm in height. There are 23 lines on each of the blocks and each line contains fourteen characters.

Changdokkung palace

    Changdokkung palace, one of the five places of the Chosen Dynasty, was built in 1405. The oldest structure is Tonhwammun Gate. Other ancient buildings include Injongjon hall, Sonjongjon Hall and Taejojon Hall. The back garden for kings remains a great example of the ancient Korean scenery.

    The ability to speak more than one language certainly has its special benefits.It enables you to work in another country or interact with people whose language is different from your mother tongue.Cognitive（认知的）  psychologists have been interested in how bilingualism（双语能力）shapes the mind for almost a century.There are those who suggest that in order to speak one language,bilinguals have to suppress（抑制）the influence of the other.In the past three decades,research had argued that this unique form of language processing trains the brain in the use of abilities known as "executive（执行的）functions" such as ignoring irrelevant information or shifting attention. Bilinguals of different ages and cultural backgrounds have been shown to be faster and more accurate than their monolingual（单语的）peers when performing cognitive tasks demanding these abilities.Furthermore,it has been argued that bilingualism may lead to a delayed onset（发作）of symptoms associated with dementia（痴呆）.

    But the scientific community recently has become increasingly skeptical of the bilingual advantage.One of the main points of criticism is that differences between monolinguals and bilinguals when it comes to executive functions are not always apparent.It appears that research on bilingualism is at a turning point.We need to pursue a new approach to understand,beyond those individual examples of executive functions,how the bilingual mind works. We have attempted to address this challenge by testing whether bilinguals and monolinguals differ in terms of how accurately they can assess their own performances.This ability is called meta cognition and is associated with other areas where bilinguals have been shown to have an advantage.

    In our research,we presented participants with a situation in which they had to observe two circles on a screen and guess which one contained more dots.Sometimes the difference was obvious,making the decision easy,while at other times the decision was very difficult (for example,one circle contained 50 dots and the other 49).Participants were then asked to determine how confident they were in their decision on a scale from less to more confident than normal.

    During the course of two experiments,we found that bilinguals and monolinguals were equally likely to choose the circle containing the highest number of dots.However,monolinguals were better able than bilinguals to discriminate between when they were right and when they were wrong.In other words,bilinguals had less insight into their performance than monolinguals.This went against our initial predictions,as we expected to find a bilingual advantage in meta cognitive processing.These results indicate that bilingualism may be associated with cognitive disadvantages as well as benefits.

    Like their ancient toga-wearing counterparts, modern philosophers continue to disagree on the nature of freewill. Do we really have any control over the choices we make and the things we desire, and if so, to what degree?

    Theories of freewill vary, but the ancient words of Plato still line up with our modern perceptions(概念) of temptation and willpower. The respected Greek philosopher argued that the human experience is one of constant struggle between the intellect and the body, between rationality and desire. Along these lines, true freedom is only achievable when willpower unchains us from bodily, emotional, instinctual slavery.

    You can find similar thoughts throughout world religions, most of which offer a particular and often difficult path to rise above our darker natures.

    And science? Well, science mostly agrees with all of this. Willpower is all about overcoming your natural desires to eat cupcakes, skip your morning workout, play games on mobile phone, hit the snooze alarm and check your e-mail during a funeral.

    Your willpower, however, is limited. If life were a video game, you'd see a glowing "willpower" or "ego"(自我) meter at the top of the screen next to your "life" meter. Successfully resist one temptation, and the meter drains a little. The next temptation drains the "willpower" meter even more, until there's nothing left at all.

    Our modern scientific understanding of willpower in large part stems from a 1996 research experiment involving chocolate and radishes(小红萝卜). Psychologist Roy Baumeister led a study in which 67 test subjects were presented with tempting chocolate chip cookies and other chocolate-flavored treats before a persistence-testing puzzle. Here's the catch: The researchers asked some of the participants to withdraw from sweets and snack on radishes instead.

    Baumeister's results told a fascinating story. The test subjects who resisted the sweet stuff in favor of radishes performed poorly on the persistence test. They simply didn't have the willpower left to resist slacking off(松懈).

    The research inspired more than a thousand additional studies discussing everything from the influence of positive messages to the ego-sapping power of daily decisions.

    Studies also show that cognitive capacity also affects our ability to hold out against temptation. Cognitive capacity is essentially your working memory, which you employ when resisting a temptation… or holding a string of numbers in your head. A 1999 study from the University of Iowa professor Baba Shiv found that people tasked with remembering a two-digit number held out better than people remembering a seven-digit number when tempted with chocolate cake.

    After I was married and had lived in Japan for while, my Japanese gradually improved to the point where I could take part in simple conversations with my husband and his friends and family. And I began to notice that often, when I joined in, the others would look surprised, and the conversational topic would come to a stop. After this happened several times, it became clear to me that I was doing something wrong. But for a long time, I didn't know what it was.

    Finally, after listening carefully to many Japanese conversations, I discovered what my problem was. Even though I was speaking Japanese, I was handling the conversation in a Western way.

    A Western-style conversation between two people is like a game of tennis. If I introduce a topic, a conversational ball, I expect you to hit it back. If you agree with me, I don't expect you simply to agree and do nothing more. I expect you to add something-a reason for agreeing, another example, or a detailed explanation to carry the idea further. But I don't expect you always to agree. I am just as happy if you question me, or challenge me, or completely disagree with me. Whether you agree or disagree, your response will return the ball to me.

    A Japanese-style conversation, however, is not at all like tennis or volleyball. It's like bowling. You wait for your turn. And you always know your place in line. It depends on such things as whether you are older or younger, a close friend or a relative stranger to the previous speaker, in a senior or junior position, and so on.

    When your turn comes, you step up to the starting line with your bowling ball and carefully bowl it. Everyone else stands back and watches politely, murmuring encouragement. Everyone waits until the ball has reached the end of the alley（球场）and watches to see if it knocks down all the pins, or only some of them, or none of them. There is a pause, while everyone registers your score.

    Then, after everyone is sure that you have completely finished your turn, the next person in line steps up to the same starting line, with a different ball. He doesn't return your ball, and he does not begin from where your ball stopped. And there is always a suitable pause between turns. There is no rush, no scramble for the ball.

    If you have been trained all your life to play one game, it is no simple matter to switch to another, even if you know the rules. Knowing the rules is not at all the same thing as playing the game.

    We can achieve knowledge either actively or passively. We achieve it actively by direct experience, by testing and proving an idea, or by reasoning.

    We achieve knowledge passively by being told by someone else. Most of the learning that takes place in the classroom and the kind that happens when we watch TV or read newspapers or magazines is passive. We are used to passive learning, and it's not surprising that we depend on it in our everyday communication with friends and co-workers. Unfortunately, passive learning has a serious problem. It makes us tend to accept what we are told even when it is little more than hearsay and rumor.

    Did you ever play the game Rumor? It begins when one person writes down a message but doesn't show it to anyone. Then the person whispers it, word for word, to another person. That person, in turn, whispers it to still another, and so on, through all the people playing the game. The last person writes down the message word for word as he or she hears it. Then the two written statements are compared. Typically, the original message has changed.

    That's what happens in daily life. The simple fact that people repeat a story in their own words changes the story. Then, too, most people listen to improve on it, stamping(打上标记) it with their own personal style. Yet those who hear it think they know.

    This process is also found among scholars and authors: A statement of opinion by one writer may be re-stated as fact by another, who may in turn be quoted by yet another; and this process may continue, unless it occurs to someone to question the facts on which the original writer based his opinion or to challenge the interpretation he placed upon those facts.