The Internet is full of headlines that grab your attention with buzzwords (流行词). But often when we click through, we find the content hardly delivers and it wastes our time. We close the page, feeling we've been cheated. These types of headlines are called "click bait".

    A headline on Businesslnsider.com reads: "This phrase will make you seem more polite". First, when you click through, you find another headline: "Four words to seem more polite." Then, on reading the article, you find it's actually an essay about sympathy. And what are the four words? They're "Wow, that sounds hard." On some video websites, you might encounter headlines such as "Here's what happens when six puppies visited a campus". Turns out it's just some uneventful dog footage (镜头).

    Nowadays, with the popularity of social media, many news outlets tweet (推送) click bait links to their stories. These tweets take advantage of the curiosity gap or attempt to draw the reader into a story using a question in the headline. These click bait headlines are so annoying that someone is attempting to save people time by exposing news outlet click bait through social media. The Twitter account @SavedYouAClick, run by Jake Beckman, is one such example.

    Beckman's method is to grab tweets linking to a story and retweet them with a click-saving comment. For example, CNET tweeted "So iOS 8 appears to be jailbreakable but...", with a link to its coverage of Apple's product announcements. Beckman retweeted it with this comment attached: "... it hasn't been jailbroken yet."

    Since founding the account, Beckman's Twitter experiment has brought him more than 131,000 followers. Beckman said that @SavedYouAClick is…"just my way of trying to help the Internet be less temble." Asked about his goal, he said, "I'd love to see publishers think about the experience of their readers first. I think there's an enormous opportunity for publishers to provide readers with informative updates that include links so you can click through and read more.

    This happened when I was ten.

    My girl cousin had decided to be a boy for Halloween, so my aunt called my mom to borrow some of my clothes. The next morning, they came to our house early before school. My cousin told me that she was going to be a boy for Halloween and wear some of my clothes. I told her that I didn't care. Then, with a big grin(咧嘴笑) on her face, she told me that I was going to be a girl. I told her she was crazy but she said that she had overheard my mom's plan and that her mom had brought some of her clothes for me.

    So I went to the living room to see our moms. Then I knew she wasn't lying. There was a wig(假发）on the table and my mom and aunt were both smiling at me. I shook my head and told them “NO WAY!” before they even said a word. My aunt said that it would be really cute. Then Mom told me not to be a stick-in-the-mud. She said that it would be fun and she wanted to see what I'd look like as a little girl. I told them I absolutely would not do it!

    I was still refusing twenty minutes later… when my aunt was putting make-up on me. I was wearing a pink party dress, the blond wig with pigtails(辫子) and earrings. My cousin wore one of my sweatshirts, my jeans and a baseball cap. We were sent to school like that, where I spent a sad day. The kids thought it funny that we were dressed that way and made stupid comments about us. They also played jokes on us and I've never been so uncomfortable.

    I still don't like Halloween to this day!

    Antarctica's ice white environment is going green and facing other unexpected threats. Scientists say that as temperatures go up in the polar area, invading (入侵) plants and insects, including the flies, cause a major threat.

More and more of these invaders, in the form of larvae(幼虫) or seeds, are surviving in coastal areas around the South Pole, where the temperature has risen by more than 3℃ over the past three decades. Glaciers have melted, exposing more land which has been occupied by mosses that have been found to be growing more quickly and thickly than ever before—providing potential green homes for invaders.

    “The common house flies are a perfect example of the problem the Antarctic now faces from invading species,” said Dominic Hodgson of the British Antarctic Survey. “It comes in on ships, where it exists in kitchens and then at bases on the continent. It now has an increasing chance of surviving in the Antarctic as it warms up, and that is a worry. Insects like the house flies carry bacteria that could have a deadly effect on native lifeforms.”

    The Antarctic has several native species of insects. Together with its native mosses these are now coming under increased threat from three major sources: visiting scientists increasing numbers of tourists and global warming. However, it is global warming that is the main driver of the greening of Antarctica.

    In 2015, more than 38, 000 tourists visited Antarctica. “These tourists are often very careful about not leaving waste or having mud. But they could carry seeds or larvae on their boots when they set foot on the Antarctic, “ said Hodgson.

    More and more invasive insects and plants have been found on the Antarctic and have required removal. “The insects and plants that are native to Antarctica have survived there for thousands of years,” said Hodgson, “We have got to act now if we want to save the environment.”

    Cooperation at work is generally seen as a good thing. The latest survey by the Financial Times of what employers want from MBA graduates found that the ability to work with a wide variety of people was what managers wanted most. But managers always have to balance the benefits of teamwork, which help ensure that everyone is working towards the same goal, with the dangers of “groupthink” when critics are reluctant to point out a plan's drawbacks for fear of being kept out of the group. The disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1961 was a classic case of groupthink. Skeptics were reluctant to challenge John F. Kennedy, the newly elected American president.

    Modern communication methods mean that cooperation is more frequent. Workers are constantly in touch with each other via e-mail messaging groups or mobile calls. But does that improve, or lower performance? A new study by three American academics, tried to answer this question. They set a logical problem (designing the shortest route for a travelling salesman visiting various cities). Three groups were involved: one where subjects acted independently; another where they saw the solutions posted by team members at every stage; and a third where they were kept informed of each other's views only intermittently.

    The survey found that members of the individualist group reached the premier solution more often than the constant cooperators but had a poorer average result. The intermittent cooperators found the right result as often as the individualists, and got a better average solution. When it comes to ideal generation, giving people a bit of space to a solution seems to be a good idea. Occasional cooperation can be a big help: most people have benefited from a colleague's brainwave or (just as often) wise advice to avoid a particular course of action.

    Further clues come from a book, Superminds, by Thomas Malone of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He says that three factors determine the collective intelligence of cooperating groups: social intelligence (how good people were at rating the emotional states of others); the extent to which members took part equally in conversation (the more equal, the better); and the cooperation of women in the group (the higher, the better). Groups ranked highly in these areas cooperated far better than others.

    In short, cooperation may be a useful tool but it doesn't work in every situation.

    If you want to spark a heated debate at a dinner party, bring up the topic of genetically modified foods. For many people, the concept of genetically altered, high-tech crop production raises all kinds of environmental, healthy, safety and ethical questions. Particularly in countries with long a grain traditions—and vocal green lobbies—the idea seems against nature.

    In fact, genetically modified foods are already very much apart of our lives. A third of corn and more than half the soybeans and cotton grown in the U. S. last year were the product of biotechnology, according to the Department of Agriculture. More than 65 million acres of genetically modified crops will be planted in the U. S. this year. The genetic genie(鬼怪) is out of the bottle.

    Yet there are clearly some very real issues that need to be resolved. Like any new product entering the food chain, genetically modified foods must be subjected to rigorous testing. In wealthy countries, the debate about biotech is tempered by the fact that we have a rich array of foods to choose from and a supply that far exceeds our needs. In developing countries desperate to feed fast-growing and underfed populations, the issue is simpler and much more urgent: Do the benefits of biotech outweigh the risks？

    The statistics on population growth and hunger are disturbing. Last year the world's population reached 6 billion. The U. N. estimates that nearly 800 million people around the world are undernourished. The effects are devastating. About 400 million women of child-bearing age are iron deficient, which means their babies are exposed to various birth defects. As many as 100 million children suffer from vitamin A deficiency, a leading cause of blindness.

    How can biotech help? Biotechnologists have developed genetically modified rice that is fortified with beta-carotene—which the body converts into vitamin A—and additional iron, and they are working on other kinds of nutritionally improved crops. Biotech can also improve farming productivity in places where food shortages are caused by crop damage attributable to pests, drought, poor soil and crop viruses, bacteria or fungi.

    The importance of reading literature often seems lost on many Chinese people. Even experts in education think that the first goal of education is to encourage a love of learning. There is therefore the possibility of something wrong with the way students are taught here.

    Why should they read literature? Do stories have value compared with the reading and learning of facts? Studies show clearly that the most powerful ways of learning are by experience, action and doing experiments and taking risks. Yet there are so many important things to learn that cannot be learned in these ways: feelings, problem solving, danger and relationships, for example. Research into this has shown how deep reading is a valuable experience different to a learning of words or facts. Keen(热心的) readers of -literature show a better understanding of others. Their abilities to make good decisions are raised. Young children who enjoy a parent reading stories to them show greater awareness(意识) when they reach school age.

    The best schools do seem to provide a limited (有限的) chance to enjoy literature, usually about the Chinese classic stories but there is not enough "free" time for students. There are enough reading materials (材料). Chinese book shops are full of story books, and most of them are of good quality (质量) in terms of content, plot (情节) and language. Was there not a Chinese author who received a Nobel Prize for literature recently? There are moves in Chinese education to promote (提升) decision making and shared values. The value of literature is helpful to these as well as to the future of China.