Indeed, otherwise both sides _________ a lot.
Julie was one of my favorite students at the University of Nebraska. I remember her coming to me after class one day. While most students hurriedly left, Julie1to ask questions about the next week's exam.
Julie never2it to the exam, though. The day after our conversation, she was tragically struck by a truck.
In Julie's ward, her parents stood in quiet3. The physician entered, cleared his4, and said, “Your Julie has only a few5to live.” He felt the6to ask, “Would you consider donating some of her organs?”
7, in a neighboring state, Mary leaned forward, her eyes following every movement of her child. She was8memories to enjoy when she could no longer9him.
Several states away, John, 26, was reading to his sons, his body connected to a life-giving “artificial kidney”. Doctors had given him a10of only weeks to live. His only hope was a kidney transplant.
Julie's grief-stricken parents11the physician's question in their mind. Julie had once said she wanted to be an organ donor12her death.13as they were, they turned to the physician, responding, “Yes. Julie always gave to others while living. She would want to give in death.”
Within 24 hours, Mary was informed she would receive one of Julie's eyes, and John was told to prepare for a kidney transplant. Julie's other organs would give life and14to other waiting recipients.
“Julie died right after her twentieth birthday. My heart breaks again and again, at each birthday, at each15: when she might have graduated; when she might have married…” says Julie's mother. “But Julie's life was a16to us. Knowing that in her death, she gave life and sight to others is17to us, and remembering that we carried out her18has helped us19 the loss of her.”
I may have had a small part in teaching Julie how to live. But she, and her family, are still teaching me an even greater lesson how to20.
Incredible experiences in Bucharest
Admire one of the world's largest buildings
The world's biggest parliamentary building, Palace of Parliament, happens to be in Bucharest. Hour-long guided tours manage to take in just a fraction of the building's three-million-plus square feet (there are more than a thousand rooms) and focus on the tons of marble, hardwood, and gold used in the building's construction in the 1980s, a time when Romania was trying to feed its own people. Ceausescu and his wife, Elena, both played a direct role in the construction. It was originally intended to house the presidential offices and the Central Committee of the Romanian Communist Party but was never finished.
See remains of old “Paris”
“Paris of the East” was Bucharest's nickname in the decades before World War II. Decades of communist misrule and a tragic earthquake in 1977 brought much of the old city down but there are places here and there where that former elegance can still be glimpsed. The Cismigiu Gardens in the center of the city is a pearl of park built around a romantic lake and featuring old-growth trees and gracious, wrought-iron signposts and benches.
Learn about Romania's roots
Walking though Bucharest's busy streets, it's easy to forget that outside the capital and a U large cities, Romania is a largely agricultural country, with a long and rich peasant tradition. The amazing Museum of the Romanian Peasant shows off the elaborate woodworking, pottery-making, egg-painting, and weaving skills of the peasantry in a way that's both educational and amusing. Small tongue-in-cheek signs at the entrance to each room poke fun at modern life, bring a chuckle, and draw you in. Downstairs there's a side exhibition on the Communists' efforts to nationalize the peasantry in the 1970s and 1980s.
Appreciate 21st-century art
Romania has exploded onto the contemporary art scene in recent years. The excitement was generated initially by a group of young painters and visual artists from the northern city of Cluj-Napoca, but at least some of the action has shifted to the capital as new galleries and design centers open up. It's hard to pinpoint precisely what constitutes Romanian contemporary art, though critics point to shared elements of wit and dark humor, a somber mood, and bits of surrealism in defining a common style.
In 2016, designer Liz Ciokajlo received a task from the Museum of Modern Art (Moma) in New York: revisit the Moon Boot, a fluffy-looking snowshoe inspired by the footwear used by the Apollo astronauts.
Launched in 1972 at the height of the lunar missions, the Moon Boot is an icon of the 20th Century's “plastic age” and the museum administrators wanted a new take on it.
Ciokajlo set out to reimagine it. She knew only a biomaterial would work in a “post-plastic age”, but the designer also wanted a new destination to inspire it. Our generation's space travel obsession is not the Moon, she thought, but the red planet Mars. And Mars allows you to really think outside of the box.
The task led her to an amazing biomaterial that had already attracted the attention of engineers innovating m building materials and of top space agencies like NASA and ESA. Her final design, a tall, female, rough-looking boot, can be made on board a spaceship with almost only human sweat and a few fungus spores (真菌孢子), ideal for a seven-month trip to Mars with limited check-in luggage.
This magic biomaterial is mycelium (菌丝体), the vegetative part of the fungus It looks like amass of white thread-like structures, each called hyphae. Collectively, these threads are called mycelium and are the largest part of the fungus.
Mycelium has amazing properties. It is a great recycler, as it feeds off a substrate to create more material, and has the potential of almost limitless growth in the right conditions. It can endure more pressure than conventional concrete without breaking. It is a known insulator and fire-retardant and could even provide radiation protection on space missions.
On Earth it's currently used to create ceiling panels, leather, packaging materials and building materials, but in outer space it stands out for its architectural potential, says artist and engineer Maurizio Montalti, who has teamed up with Ciokajlo.
For her revisited boot, Ciokajlo wanted to use the human body as the source for some of the building materials and decided to employ sweat. Reusing sweat is not entirely new in space exploration but a novelty approach for footwear. She thinks it might make astronauts feel closer to home during the long journey to Mars.
The design is still hypothetical, because the real boot submitted for Moma and currently in display at the London Design Museum did use mycelium but not human sweat, as their deadline was too tight, but the science checks out.
Going to university is supposed to be a mind-broadening experience.
That assumption is possibly made in contrast to training for work straight after school. But is it actually true? Jessika Golle of the University of Tubingen, Germany, thought she would try to find out.
Her result, however, is not quite what might be expected. It shows that those who have been to university do indeed seem to leave with broader and more inquiring minds than those who have spent their immediate post-school years in vocational training for work. However, it is not the case that university broadens minds. Rather, work seems to narrow them.
After studying the early career of 2095 German youngsters, Dr. Golle reached the conclusion.
During the period under investigation, Germany had three tracks in its schools: a low one for pupils who would most probably leave school early and enter vocational training; a high one for those almost certain to enter university; and an intermediate one, from which there was a choice between the academic and vocational routes.
The team used two standardized tests to assess their volunteers. One was of personality traits and the other of attitudes. They administered both tests twice once towards the end of each volunteer's time at school, and then again six years later.
Of the original group, 382 were on the intermediate track, and it was on these that the researchers focused. Of them, 212 went to university and the remaining 170 chosen for vocational training and a job.
When it came to the second round of tests, Dr Golle found that the personalities of those who had gone to university had not apparently changed. Those who had undergone vocational training and then got jobs were not that much changed in personality, either except in one crucial respect they had become more responsible.
That sounds like a good thing, compared with the common public image of undergraduates as a bunch of pampered layabouts(娇生惯养的闲人). But changes in attitude the researchers recorded were more worrying. In the university group, again, none were detectable. But those who had chosen the vocational route showed marked drops in interest in tasks that are investigative and enterprising in nature.
And that might restrict their choice of careers. Some investigative and enterprising jobs, such as scientific research, are, indeed off limits to the degreeless.
But many, particularly in Germany, with its tradition of vocational training, are not. The researchers mention, for example, computer programmers, finance-sector workers and entrepreneurs as careers requiring these attributes.
If Dr Golle is correct, and changes in attitude brought about by the very training Germany prides itself on are narrowing people's choices, that is indeed a matter of concern.
When my vision-challenged daughter was 3, and I was pregnant with my second child, we got her glasses. It was a long process involving many different opticians (配镜师)over the course of a year, because of my daughter's overwhelming desire to scream and fly into a temper any time we tried to have her eyes examined. The fourth optician was amazing while my daughter didn't cooperate, she performed various miracles and managed what she called a “best guess” at her prescription.
“Start with this,” she said. “When she realizes she can see better, bring her back, and we can try for something more accurate.”
I didn't want to pay $300 for glasses that might be replaced in a month's time, so I decided to bring her straight to a Walmart optical. Things were going on well, until the optician needed to take an additional measurement, which would involve holding a ruler up to her eyes and measuring the distance between the outer corner of one eye and the inner corner of the other.
“Are you sure you need the measurement?” I asked. “She's really not cooperative when it comes to the eye-testing stuff.”
“We definitely need to have it, we can't fill her prescription without it.” the optician said.
But my daughter would not let the optician anywhere near her face with the small plastic ruler. She started yelling and crying, and we took her off to the side and promised we'd get ice cream afterward if she let the nice lady hold the ruler near her nose! The optician gave us the ruler, thinking we would have an easier time, but when my daughter knew we needed to hold the ruler near her face, which, in toddler logic, meant a life-or-death situation, she prevented us from getting anywhere near her.
Finally, my husband and I agreed that one of us would have to hold her down and the other would take the measurement. I sat on the floor trying to hold her head still while my husband tried to get an accurate reading on that stupid ruler. Despite her struggle and scream, we finally got it. My daughter stopped crying three seconds later and went back to play as if nothing had happened.
There is no version of this story where I feel comfortable us even if it was for her own good. I felt awful wondering, if magically know what to say to get her cooperation? The weeks spent with a special book about wearing glasses, telling her how great glasses were... I could feel tears welling up and I thought, “I can't cry. I'm sitting on the floor of a Walmart optical centre. I can't cry here.”
And there it was the final thing I could not bear. It w already reduced me to sitting on the floor of a Walmart optical p toddler down to press a ruler against her face and do it for the packed Saturday audience of all the Walmart checkout counters. I cried. Big, shoulder-shaking sobs. Sitting right there on the floor of a Walmart, behind the optical counter.
Five days later, the Walmart optical centre called. They said my daughter's glasses were ready for pickup and I should schedule an appointment with the optician so that we can have them properly fitted. I said I'd be picking up the glasses alone and we would do the fitting another day. She insisted that the fitting was crucial, to which I replied, “I don't know if you were working last Saturday, but my daughter is really not cooperating on this whole glasses thing. I'd prefer to just pick them up.” Silence. Then she said, “I was there last Saturday, I remember you. Absolutely, you can pick them up any time.”
Who's Really Addicting You To Technology?
“Nearly everyone I know is addicted in some measure to the Internet”, wrote Tony Schwartz in The New York Times. It's a common complaint these days. A steady stream of similar headlines accuses the Net and its offspring apps, social media sites and online games of addicting us to distraction.
There's little doubt that nearly everyone who comes in contact with the Net has difficulty disconnecting. Then who's at fault for its overuse? To find solutions, it's important to understand what we're dealing with. There are four parties cooperating to keep you connected: the tech, your boss, your friends and you.
The technologies themselves and their makers are the easiest suspects to blame for our distraction. Online services like Facebook, Google, twitter and the like rely on advertising revenue, so the more frequently you use them, the more money they make. No wonder these companies employ teams of people focused on improving their services to be as attractive as possible.
Good as these services are, there are simple steps we can take to keep them from coming too close. However, less than 15 percent of smartphone users are willing to adjust their notification settings meaning the remaining 85 percent of us default to (默认)the app makers' every preset devices.
While companies like Facebook harvest attention to generate revenue from advertisers, other technologies have no such agenda. Take email, for example. We check email at all hours of the day we're obsessed, because that's what the boss wants. For almost all white-collar jobs, email is the primary tool of corporate communication. A slow response to a message could hurt not only your reputation but also your livelihood.
Your friends are also responsible for the addiction. Think about this familiar scene. People gathered around a table, enjoying food and each others' company. Then, during an interval in the conversation, someone takes out their phone to check who knows what. Barely anyone notices and no one says a thing.
The reality is taking one's phone out at the wrong time is more than an impolite behavior because, unlike other minor offense, checking tech is contagious (传染). Once one person looks at their phone, other people tend to do the same, starting a chain reaction.
Hie technology, your boss, and your friends, all influence how often you find yourself using (or overusing) these gadgets. But there's still someone who deserves careful examination the person holding the phone.
When people are doing something difficult they'd rather not do, the phone is used to transport them elsewhere. They can easily escape discomfort temporarily, by answering email or browsing the web under the excuse of so-called “research”. The truth is that we are working unproductively out of our bad habits.
Personal technology is indeed more attractive than ever, which doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to control our use of technology, instead, we should come to terms with the fact that it's more than the technology that's responsible for our habits. Our workplace culture, social norms and individual behaviors all play a part.
|
Who's Really Addicting You To Technology? |
||
|
A common phenomenon |
More and more people are getting addicted to some to the Internet nowadays. Those who have difficulty disconnecting often lay on the Net and its offspring apps. |
|
|
Four suspects |
The technologies |
Some online services like Facebook are designed attractively for reasons. Most people won't to make any adjustment to the preset devices. |
|
Your boss |
Emails are widely used for communication in many companies. White-collar employees check emails hourly as a delayed response may them reputation and livelihood. |
|
|
Your friends |
A check on the phone is often taken for though it's sometimes impolite with friends around. One tends to suit when seeing; his friends surfing on the phone. |
|
|
You (The users) |
Technologies can be used as a good excuse to ourselves from something boring or challenging. Some had habits as well as technologies give to our distraction. |
|
|
Conclusion |
Technology is not the root of the problem with our addition, as many other factors also play a part. |
|
Robots will create double the number of jobs that they will destroy, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF), but there will be significant shifts in the structure of America's workforce that may impact everyone. The report says that 75 million jobs will be replaced by artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and automation. But it also suggests that 133 million new jobs may be created as organizations shift the balance between human workers and machines.
It is a widely held belief that routine, low-skilled jobs are most at risk for automation, but the report shows that many middle-class roles are also at risk. Financial analysts, accountants and lawyers could all see significant changes by 2022. But manual workers could be among the hardest hit.
Meanwhile, there could be a huge change in the structure of the workforce, with the executives surveyed by WEF expecting a shift away from full-time work to flexible employment with a focus on productivity.
All industries expect big skills gaps, stating that at least 50 percent of their workforce will require reskilling of some degree. The aviation, travel and tourism industry will have the largest demand for reskilling.
【写作内容】
1）用约30个单词概述短文的主要内容；
2）用约120个单词发表你的观点，内容包括:
⑴这一现象产生的原因有哪些(不少于两点)；
⑵面对即将到来的“智能时代”你所做的准备。
【写作要求】
1）阐述观点或提供论据时，不能直接引用原文语句；
2）作文中不能出现真实姓名和学校名称；
3）不必写标题。
【评分标准】内容完整，语言规范，语篇连贯，词数适当。
