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.

B

    Asking for salary history provides an easy way to sort applicants into an employer's desired price range and helps the employer calculate the lowest offer that will still attract a candidate. But an increasing number of U.S. states and cities agree there ought to be a law against it. Massachusetts, Philadelphia, New York City and Puerto Rico have banned salary history questions on applications and in interviews.

    Why? Because when it comes to a candidate's suitability for a job, salary history is a subjective (主观的) and often misleading indicator — and it may most affect ＂the people who have already been illegally treated,＂ says Katie Donovan, a salary negotiation coach and one of the authors of the Massachusetts law.

    Candidates who start their careers underpaid because of the gender (性别) or race wage gap, a bad economy or a cheap boss finds that this lowball (虚报低价) figure continues to weigh them down throughout their career. At the same time, senior victims of layoffs have difficulty being hired because employers assume they're not interested in senior victims.

    In an interview, you can avoid talking about salary history questions by turning the discussion to what you're looking to make.

    Donovan recommends a method similar to what you're already doing: Enter $0.00, or some other number that is clearly intended not to cheat, but to oppose.

    Of course, there's always a risk doing so because it will cost you opportunities. But Ronda Wakefield, owner of NW MT HR Solutions, says that when she receives an application with an obviously false salary history, she'll still follow up if the candidate interests her. ＂I personally don't want to miss out on a great candidate because they didn't want to answer the question directly,＂ she says.

    Do you love Beats headphones, True Religion jeans, and UGG shoes? These are some of the most popular brands (牌子) around. They are also expensive. But some experts say they are not much better than cheaper brands.

    For example, Jim Wilcox works for Consumer Reports. He tested all kinds of headphones. He says that $80 Koss Pro headphones provide basically the same quality (质量) and comfort as Beats. So why do people pay twice or even 10 times as much for the hottest brands?

    Experts say it's because fashionable, expensive brands send a message. Brands say “I belong” or “I can afford it.”

    Some people think that expensive brand names are worth the price. They say that some designer clothes really are top quality and that they last longer than cheaper brands. Some teenagers choose to wear popular brands because these brands make them feel good about themselves.

    Alexandra Allam, 17, likes to buy brand-name products. “I'd rather spend the extra money to get something I know I'll be satisfied with,” she says. Her friend Emmy Swan agrees, saying “As long as you can afford it, it seems reasonable to buy what you want.” But not all teenagers agree. “Spending hundreds of dollars for designer sunglasses is stupid and unreasonable,” says Daniel Steinbrecher, 16. “It's fake (假的) happiness.”

    People who are against wearing expensive brand names say that many designer brands aren't any better. “It's wasteful to buy things just because they are popular,” says Edmund Williams, 15. “You'll feel better if you buy things because you like them. If you have extra money to spend, it would be better to give it to people in need.”

    Last week the British university system offered a record number of places. That sounds like good news—but do we really need more people to go to university? For that matter, does the world need more universities?

    The answer feels like it should be yes.

    Education is good, is it not? But everything has a cost.

    Education takes time. We could insist that everyone study full-time until the age of 45 but that would surely be too much. And perhaps half the population studying until they're 21 is also too much. As for universities, they consume financial and intellectual resources—perhaps those resources might be better spent elsewhere.

    My own personal opinion is strongly in favor both of going to university, and of simply having universities around.

    The main skill I learnt at university was to write about economics, and I use that skill every day of my professional life, even an abstract education seems practical to me. And I now live in Oxford, one of the world's most celebrated (著名的) university cities. Oxford's experience certainly suggests that universities have much to offer.

    The city's architecture and green spaces have been shaped—greatly for the better, on balance —by the 900-year-old institution at its heart. The beauty attracts tourists and locals too.

    But these are samples of one. Many people do not find themselves using the skills and knowledge they accumulated at university. And Oxford's dreaming spires (尖顶) aren't terribly representative of global universities as a whole.

    In this Pennsylvania city, Pittsburgh is shrinking but getting wealthier. Since 2000, its population has declined by 95,000 while its income per capita (人均) has shot up 24 percent. The trend is taking hold in many other cities, like Buffalo in New York, Providence in Rhode Island and New Orleans.

    Some of these areas have created more high-paying jobs in energy, health care or education. Others have managed to reshape their manufacturing (制造业) for a new economy. Higher-paying jobs have a greater effect because they create demand for additional services. “The story in Pittsburgh is very positive, and other areas are looking at it as an example of the transformation that might be possible,” said Guhan Venkatu, who wrote an economic history of the area called “Rust and Renewal” for the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

    Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh have helped bring tech jobs and innovation (革新) to the area by sponsoring tech centers that help graduates start companies without moving to Silicon Valley or San Francisco. This has helped keep Pittsburgh's educated young population growing even as the entire population in the city has dropped.

    Pittsburgh has more STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) jobs than other shrinking cities, about 80,000 or 7% of all jobs. STEM jobs add productivity and income growth to the area. Manufacturers of high-tech medical equipment in the Pittsburgh area also have doubled employment in the last 10 years.

    However, some experts question whether growing income per capita can really make up for a declining population. According to Patrick Adler, a researcher at the University of Toronto, population loss does matter if it means lower-skilled workers have fled because of a lack of opportunity. What's more, high-paying jobs in education and health care can disappear if the population declines too greatly. So it'd be wise to find ways to increase the population.

Instagram(图片分享社交应用程序)is about to take its biggest step toward removing likes from its platform. After months of testing an option to hide likes in select international markets, Instagram, which is owned by Facebook(FB), has already been testing hiding likes in seven other countries, including Canada, Ireland and Australia. For years, likes have been central to how celebrities, brands, politicians and everyday users experience Instagram and Facebook. It's a way of measuring popularity(名气) and success. But in recent months, Instagram has been rethinking how likes contribute to making its platform more toxic. Now it's considering a change.

The total number of likes on posts — which appear as hearts on the app—will disappear from Instagram's main feed, profile pages and permalink(永久链接)pages. The owner of the account can still see their own likes, but their followers won't know the count.

CNN Business previously spoke with users in countries with the test. The majority felt this move would improve well-being on the app. Instagram is the most harmful social networking app for young people's mental health, such as negatively influencing body image, according to one study.

But other users and psychologists said hiding likes won't fix everything. The test doesn't address some of the key ways that activity on Instagram can influence the well-being of users, including bullying(欺凌), feeling left out and thinking other people's lives are better than their own.

Renee Engeln, a psychology professor at Northwestern University, voiced his opinion that the biggest impact of Instagram is the content and the exposure to this constant stream of perfected images is what seems to hurt psychologically. Plus, users can still see their own likes—and feel badly if their posts don't perform well.