The Boy Made It!

    One Sunday, Nicholas, a teenager, went skiing at Sugarloaf Mountain in Maine. In the early afternoon, when he was planning to go home, a fierce snowstorm swept into the area. Unable to see far, he accidentally turned off the path. Before he knew it, Nicholas was lost, all alone! He didn't have food, water, a phone, or other supplies. He was getting colder by the minute.

    Nicholas had no idea where he was. He tried not to panic. He thought about all the survival shows he had watched on TV. It was time to put the tips he had learned to use.

    He decided to stop skiing. There was a better chance of someone finding him if he stayed put. The first thing he did was to find shelter form the freezing wind and snow. If he didn't, his body temperature would get very low, which could quickly kill him.

    Using his skis, Nicholas built a snow cave. He gathered a huge mass of snow and dug out a hole in the middle. Then he piled branches on top of himself, like a blanket, to stay as warm as he could.

    By that evening, Nicholas was really hungry. He ate snow and drank water from a nearby stream so that his body wouldn't lose too much water. Not knowing how much longer he could last, Nicholas did the only thing he could- he huddled(蜷缩) in his cave and slept.

    The next day, Nicholas went out to look for help, but he couldn't find anyone. He followed his tracks and returned to the snow cave, because without shelter, he could die that night. On Tuesday, Nicholas went out to find help. He had walked for about a mile when a volunteer searcher found him. After two days stuck in the snow, Nicholas was saved.

    Nicholas might not have survived this snowstorm had it not been for TV. He had often watched Grylls' survival show. Man vs. Wild. That's where he learned the tips that saved his life, In each episode(一期节目)of Man vs. Wild, Grylls is abandoned in a wild area and has to find his way out.

    When Grylls heard about Nicholas' amazing deeds, he was super impressed that Nicholas had made it since he knew better than anyone how hard Nicholas had to work to stay alive.

    When it's five o'clock, people leave their office. The length of the workday, for many workers, is defined by time. They leave when the clocks tell them they're done.

    These days, the time is everywhere: not just on clocks or watches, but on cellphones and computers. That may be a bad thing, particularly at work. New research shows that clock based work schedules hinder creativity.

    Clock-timers organize their day by blocks of minutes and hours. For example: a meeting from 9 a. m. to 10 a. m, research from 10 a. m to noon, etc. On the other hand, task-timers have a list of things they want to accomplish. They work down the list, each task starts when the previous task is completed. It is said that all of us employ a mix of both these types of planning.

    What, then, are the effects of thinking about time in these different ways? Does one make us more productive? Better at the tasks at hand? Happier? In experiments conducted by Tamar Avnet and Anne-Laure Sellier, they had participants organize different activities from project planning, holiday shopping, to yoga by time or to-do list to measure how they performed under "clock time" vs. " task time". They found clock timers to be more efficient(有效率的) but less happy because they felt little control over their lives. Task timers are happier and more creative, but less productive. They tend to enjoy the moment when something good is happening, and seize opportunities that come up.

    The researchers argue that task-based organizing tends to be undervalued and under-supported in the business culture. This might be a small change to the way we view work and the office, but the researchers argue that it challenges a widespread characteristic of the economy: work organized by clock time. While most people will still probably need, and be, to some extent, clock-timers, task-based timing should be used when performing a job that requires more creativity. It'll make those tasks easier, and the task-doers will be happier.

Learning, Fast and Deep

    Over the past five years researchers in artificial intelligence have become the rock stars of the technology world. A branch of AI known as deep learning, which uses neural(神经的) networks to scan through large volumes of data looking for patterns, has proven so useful that skilled practitioners can command high six-figure salaries to build software for Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.

    The standard route into these jobs has been a PhD in computer science from one of America's top universities. Earning one takes years and requires a personality suited to academia, which is rare among more normal folk.

    That is changing.

    Last month fast.ai, a non-profit education organization based in San Francisco, kicked off the third year of its course in deep learning. Since its foundation it has attracted more than 100, 000 students around the globe from India to Nigeria. The course and others like it, come with a simple idea: there is no need to spend years obtaining a PhD in order to practise deep learning. Creating software that learns can be taught as a craft, not as a high intellectual pursuit to be undertaken only in an ivory tower. Fast. ai's course can be completed in just seven weeks.

    To make it accessible to anyone who wants to learn how to build AI software is the aim of Jeremy Howard, who founded fast.ai with Rachel Thomas, a mathematician. He says school mathematics is sufficient. "No. Greek. Letters," Mr. Howard intones, pounding the table with his fist for punctuation.

    Some experts worry that this will serve only to create a flood of unreliable AI systems which will be useless at best and dangerous at worst. In the earliest days of the Internet, only a select few nerds, namely computer holies with specific skills, could build applications. Not many people used them. Then the invention of the World Wide Web led to an explosion of web pages, both good and bad. But it was only by opening up to all that the Internet gave birth to online shopping, instant global communications and search. If Mr. Howard and others have their way, making the development of AI software easier will bring forth a new crop of fruit of a different kind.

Doing crosswords(纵横字谜) is a fun way to kill the time and can also be educational. Difficult crosswords may leave you confused as you have no ideas on how to solve them sometimes. To perform well in this game, you need to have enough knowledge of different fields. If you are unable to do them and you have access to the answers, it is not generally considered cheating to look up an answer or two. However, in some cases, it does not follow the rule.

A crossword should not include someone else's answers, so even a quick look at a fellow student to complete a crossword would not be fair. Generally, you wouldn't have access to the answers.

Additionally, some crossword competitions should not be connected with cheating. Again, in such a situation, you usually won't have access to the answers. Turning to the Internet or referring to(查阅) any books of crosswords for answers is also unfair, since some people will complete the crosswords strictly with their own knowledge.

If you are not in a competitive environment, the check of a word can actually be an opportunity to learn how to become better at crosswords. Through looking up the answers (Although sometimes considered as cheat.), you can memorize whatever facts or word definitions (定义) you must look up. This will help you avoid the need to cheat in the future.

Some argue that cheating on crosswords is always wrong, and you're only cheating yourself if you are looking up the answers. It could be argued instead that cheating on crosswords that are done for fun or enjoyment can actually be an opportunity to benefit yourself because you're learning something new. Just don't forget to mention that you actually did cheat a little. Being honest is of great importance both to you and the other competitors.

It can be helpful to buy books of crosswords that have several different difficulty levels. If you are new to doing crosswords, you might want to put off working on crosswords until you are more confident in your skills.

A new study says that more than half the world's ocean area is "becoming greener," and the trend is connected to human-caused global warming.

It's not clear what is driving the greening. In some places, it could indicate changes in the amount of plankton or other organic material floating in the water. Plankton are a cornerstone of the ocean food chain, and these kinds of shifts could have ripple effects throughout the entire marine ecosystem.

The study, published on Wednesday in the journal Nature, examines 20 years of satellite data measuring light reflected at the surface of the water all across the globe, subtle changes that aren't necessarily visible to the naked eye. The research finds that 56 percent of the world's oceans are shifting in color — and on the whole, they're growing greener. The trend is especially strong in the lower latitudes, including the subtropics and tropics.

The researchers then used a computer model to find out whether climate change was playing a part. They conducted one set of simulations representing the oceans under a strong climate change scenario, and then compared them with a second set of simulations imagining a world in which climate change didn't exist. The model suggests that rising global temperatures are to blame.

The exact reasons still require some scientific digging. While climate change seems to be the culprit, the study also indicates that rising ocean temperatures in and of themselves aren't driving the greening.

There are plenty of other ways global warming is affecting the world's oceans, by changing the structure and flow of certain currents, for instance. These kinds of changes can affect the growth of phytoplankton and other factors that might be contributing to the greening.

The findings weren't a surprise to the researchers. They're consistent with the way researchers expect the global oceans to change as the world keeps on warming.

"I've been running simulations that have been telling me for years that these changes in ocean color are going to happen," study co-author Stephanie Dutkiewicz, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in a statement. "To actually see it happening for real is no unexpected, but frightening."