Some houses are designed to be smart. Others have smart designs. An example of the second type of house won an Award of Excellence from the American Institute of Architects.

    Located on the shore of Sullivan's Island off the coast of South Carolina, the award-winning cube-shaped beach house was built to replace one smashed to pieces by Hurricane（飓风）Hugo 10 years ago. Before Hugo, many new houses built along South Carolina's shoreline were poorly constructed, and enforcement of building rules wasn't strict, according to architect Ray Huff, who created the cleverly-designed beach house. Soon after Hugo, all new shoreline houses are required to meet stricter, better-enforced rules. The new beach house on Sullivan's Island should be able to withstand a Level 3 hurricane with peak winds of 179 to 209 kilometers per hour.

    At first sight, the house on Sullivan's Island looks anything but hurricane-proof. Its redwood shell makes it resemble “a large party lantern (灯笼)” at night, according to one observer. But looks can be misleading. The house's wooden frame is reinforced with long steel rods to give it extra strength.

    To further protect the house from hurricane damage. Huff raised it 2.7 meters off the ground on timber pilings－long, slim wood pieces anchored deep in the sand. Pilings might appear insecure, but they are strong enough to support the weight of the house. They also raise the house above storm waves. The pilings allow the waves to run under the house instead of running into it. 'These waves come ashore at terrible speeds and cause most of the damage done to beach-front buildings,” said Huff.

    Huff designed the timber pilings to be partially hidden by the house's ground-to-roof shell. “The shell masks the pilings so that the house doesn't look like it's standing with its pant legs (裤腿) pulled up,” said Huff. In the event of a storm, the shell should break apart and let the waves rush under the house, the architect explained.

    British writer John Donne once said: “No man is an island; every book is a world.” As an enthusiastic reader, I can't agree with the latter part of the sentence more. Every summer, I endeavor to find some peaceful places where I can attack some classics without being disturbed. Thomas Hardy wants to live far from the madding crowd. I am no friend to chaos, either.

    I read George Orwell's 1984 in a New England beachside cottage with no locks on the doors, no telephones or televisions in the rooms. 1984 is a good book that needs deep reflection. Attempting Sound and Fury lying on the bed of a poorly-occupied motel, however, was less fruitful: I made it through one and a quarter volumes, but then my eyelids were so heavy that I couldn't keep them open.

    But this summer I find myself at a loss. I'm not quite interested in J.D.Salinger, say, or Frankenstein. There's always War and Peace which I've covered some distance several times, only to get bogged down in the “War” part, set it aside for a while, and realize that I have to start over from the beginning again, having forgotten everyone's name and social rank. How appealing to simply fall back on a favorite—once more into The Call of the Wild or Alice in the Wonderland, which feels almost like cheating, too exciting and too much fun to properly belong to serious literature.

    And then there's John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath. This title does not amaze but confuse. We're never short of sour grapes, but we've never heard of angry grapes. Anyway grapes are my favorite fruit of summer. These stone fruits can always make me feel cheerful and peaceful all at once.

    Some of the world's biggest companies—Apple, Amazon, Facebook—didn't exist 30 years ago. So what firms are we working for in 2050? That's a question put forward by historian Yuval Noah Harari in his new book "21 Lessons for the 21st Century".

    He argues that because technology is changing so fast, it's one of the first times in human history when we don't know what jobs will look like in the coming three decades." So the best bet is to focus on emotional intelligence（EQ）," he said. "Information is the last thing the kids need. They have too much of it."

    In this book, he focuses on the various challenges facing us today. As he writes in the book's introduction: "What are today's greatest challenges? What should we pay attention to? What should we teach our kids?" One area where these questions crop up is artificial intelligence（AI）Harari believes that AI will completely affect the job market for the next generation of workers.

    His first two books—"Sapiens" and "Homo Deus"—became international bestsellers, selling more than 12 million copies worldwide. They were praised by the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, Barack Obama and Bill Gates. Harari's books, about the past and future of humanity, attract a great number of fans. Fellow Israeli, actress Natalie Portman, is a fan. So is American R&B star Janelle Monae.

    As for Bill Gates, he might be Harari's biggest fan. So when the New York Times asked him to review Harari's latest books, he jumped at the opportunity. "All the three books wrestle with some version of the same question: What will give our lives meaning in the decades and centuries ahead?" Gates wrote in his review. "So far, human history has been driven by a desire to live longer, healthier, happier lives. If science is eventually able to give that dream to most people, and large numbers of people no longer need to work, what reason will we have to get up in the morning?"

    Whenever we see a button (按钮), we are eager to press it because we know something will happen. This is true in most cases, for example on a doorbell and on the “on/off” button on the TV. But some buttons are actually fake, like the “close” button on a lift.

    Many people are in the habit of pressing the “close” button because they don't have the patience to wait for the lift doors to shut. But lifts'" close" buttons are a complete scam, at least in the US—the doors will not close any faster no matter how hard you press.

    It started in the 1990s when the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in the US, making sure that all lifts stayed open long enough so that people with disabilities could enter. Only US firefighters and repairmen can use the buttons to speed up the door-closing process if they have a code or special keys.

    But to normal lift riders, the buttons aren't completely useless. According to psychologists, fake buttons can actually make you feel better by offering you a sense of control.

    “Perceived (能够感知的) control is very important. It reduces stress and increases well-being," Ellen J. Langer, a psychology professor, said, “Having a lack of control is associated with depression.”

    Experts have revealed that a lot of buttons that don't do anything exist in our lives for this same purpose. For example  many offices in the US have fake thermostats (温度调节器) because people tend to feel better when they think they can control the temperature in their workspace.

    But psychologists found it interesting that even when people are aware of these little "white lies", they still continue to push fake buttons because as long as the doors eventually close, it is considered to be worth the effort.

    "That habit is here to stay," John Kounios, a psychology professor, said, ''Even though I have real doubts about the traffic light buttons, I always press them. After all, I've got nothing else to do while waiting. So why not press the button in the hope that this one will work?”

    Roughly the size of a soda can, sitting on a bookshelf, a relatively harmless device(设备) may be turning friends away from your home. The elephant in your living room is your Internet-connected camera, a device people are increasingly using for peace of mind in their homes. But few stop to think about the effect these devices may have on house guests. Should you tell your friends, for instance, that they're being recorded while you all watch the big game together?

    "It's certainly new territory, especially as home security cameras become easier to fix," says Lizzie Post, president of the Emily Post Institute, America's distinguished manners advisors." I think it will be very interesting to see what manners appear in terms of whether you tell people you have a camera or not, and whether guests have a right to ask that it be turned off, if it's not a security issue. "Post wants to make clear that she's not talking about legal rights, but rather personal preference.

When it comes to security cameras, Post says it's a host's responsibility to make sure guests feel comfortable within their home. If the host casually acknowledges that there is a camera in the room by telling a story about it, that may be enough to provide an opening for a guest to say if they are uncomfortable.

    However, if a contractor(合约工)is working in your home, you don't need to tell them that there are cameras watching. Then again, the camera can also work in contractors' favor. "If anything does go wrong while they're in the house, they don't want to be blamed for it," she says. "In fact, the camera could be the thing that proves that they didn't steal the $20, or knock the vase off the table.

When I was in the eighth grade, my class was assigned (指派) to be friends with the second-grade kids. I got this little girl named Shelley. The first time I saw her, she was silent and cold. She was small for her age, and she didn't play with the other kids in her class.

I tried all kinds of things to get her to talk to me. I bought her toys, crayons and candies. But try as I might, nothing worked. One time, I gave her a coloring book and said, "Shelley, now you can color at any time."

Shelley looked at the coloring book and then looked up at me, and finally looked away. By that, I didn't know how I was going to get through to the little girl, but I knew I wouldn't give up on her.

One Friday, I decided to tell her a story about my childhood. I told her that I felt lonely when I was with my classmates, and how I thought only my teachers liked me. I also told her that every day was a battle(战役) for me and that I fought back tears so people wouldn't know how much I was hurting.

She sat there just listening, trying to decide whether I was lying or not. Finally, when my story ended, there were tears in her eyes. And then she did the unthinkable, She said, "Thank you." From then on, Shelley was a different little girl. She started smiling and talking with other kids.

Looking back at this,I'm in awe(惊叹), because all I did was to help her realize that she wasn't alone. I didn't ask her to tell her story, because her story is my story,