下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
As if there wasn't enough angst in the world, besides the false nuclear alerts and a general sense of anxiety, now we also have a growing sense of alarm about how smartphones and their applications are impacting children.
In the past days alone, The Wall Street Journal ran a long story about the “parents' dilemma” of when to give kids a smartphone, citing tales of addiction, attention deficit disorder, social isolation, and general malaise. Said one parent, “It feels a little like trying to teach your kid how to use cocaine, but in a balanced way.” The New York Times ran a lead article in its business section titled “It's Time for Apple to Build a Less Addictive iPhone,” echoing a rising chorus in Silicon Valley about designing products and programs that are purposely less addictive.
Alarm at the corrosive effects of new technologies is not new. Rather, it is deeply rooted in our history. In ancient Greece, Socrates cautioned that writing would undermine the ability of children and then adults to commit things to memory. The advent of the printing press in the 15th century led Church authorities to caution that the written word might undermine the Church's ability to lead (which it did).
The pattern of technophobia recurred with the gramophone, the telegraph, the radio, and television. The 1950s saw reports about children glued to screens, becoming more “aggressive and irritable as a result of sleepless nights and tired days.” Those screens, of course, were televisions. Then came fears that rock-and-roll in the 1950s and 1960s would fray the bonds of family and undermine the ability of young boys and girls to become productive members of society.
Just because these themes have played out benignly time and again does not, of course, mean that all will turn out fine this time. Information technologies from the printed book onward have radically transformed societies, pre-existing customs and social order. So it should come as no surprise that concerns about children and smartphones have been rising steadily, and media has picked up on that. For the past decade, researchers have been trying to establish a link between teen depression and obsessive smartphone use. So too have parents, who swing between complacency and panic as they watch their children-and themselves-become increasingly attached to their devices.
It's worth examining these conclusions carefully. The smartphone era is just in its teens, dating from Apple's introduction of the iPhone in 2007. That is only a small moment in human evolution. No matter what we think we know now, we simply don't know what the long-term effects of smartphones are or will be, any more than generations past could collect the effects of all of those earlier technologies on moods, relationships, and cognitive development.
[A] anguish
[B] horror
[C] anger
[D] anxiety
[A] all the media start to cast a shadow over smartphones
[B] parents hold that smartphones can do more harm than good
[C] Apple is finally persuaded to design less addictive smartphones
[D] increasingly more people in Silicon Valley suggest smartphones be designed to be less addictive
[A] undermine the family tie
[B] impair people's ability to remember
[C] make the children be no longer innocent
[D] lead to attention deficit disorder
[A] Scornful.
[B] Objective.
[C] Favorable.
[D] Critical.
[A] Smartphones Should Be Designed to Be Less Addictive
[B] Smartphone Use May Lead to Addiction Among Children
[C] Smartphones' Disadvantages Outweigh Its Advantages
[D] Smartphones Are Just Our Latest Technological Scapegoat
In poor countries, the tax rate on cigarettes is typically below 50%—and in some zero. These rates may not curb smoking much, because tobacco companies, which are sometimes monopolies, can cut their profit margins on cheaper brands and raise them on luxury ones to offset their losses.
Poorer countries could raise taxes, but they do not because they have relied on market studies paid for by tobacco companies. These suggest that high taxes on cigarettes cause a surge in smuggling and, perversely, reduce overall tax revenues. Now, independent studies by the World Bank and others have shown that this conclusion is wrong. The black market is not as menacing as it seems and the revenues raised by higher cigarette taxes can help suppress it.
A growing number of countries, including the Philippines, Brazil, Turkey and Uruguay, are showing the way. The Philippines, for example, raised the tax on all types of cigarettes more than fourfold in 2012. As a result, prices of the cheapest brands, accounting for about two-thirds of all cigarettes, rose by more than 50%. In 2011-2015 tobacco-tax revenues more than doubled, and the share of adults who smoked fell from 30% to 25%. By comparison, Britain took more than a decade to achieve the same change in smoking rates.
Crucially, some countries strengthened efforts to detect and curb smuggling at the same time. Black markets were often smaller than thought, with only 10-15% of all cigarettes sold illegally. When taxes went up, this share typically rose by just a few percentage points. In poorer countries, tax evasion will be higher, but even then, taxes will cut smoking and increase revenues if they are well administered.
The secret is to make the tax predictable and punitive. A uniform tax of, say, $1 a pack on all brands helps governments monitor compliance and predict tax revenues. As a rule, the World Health Organisation says, taxes should be at least 75% of the retail price of the most popular brand of cigarettes and rise with inflation and income growth.
The other step is to crack down on smuggling and tax evasion. Tax stamps that are difficult to counterfeit are a good start. Brazil, the Philippines and Turkey print encrypted codes on stamps in invisible ink. Kenya fits tobacco lorries with devices that transmit their routes to the authorities, helping them keep tabs on the merchandise. How to pay for extra law enforcement? Globally, tobacco-tax revenues are about $270bn a year, but less than $1bn of that is spent on anti-smoking policies. It is time for governments to help their citizens kick the habit-and earn some useful cash while they do it.
[A] the underworld power
[B] the inaccurate market studies
[C] the menacing black market
[D] the incomplete international market
[A] tax on all cigarettes was raised fourfold
[B] prices of the cheapest cigarettes rose by 50%
[C] tobacco-tax revenues more than doubled
[D] the share of adult smokers dropped from 30% to 25%
[A] completely hijacked the prices of the cheapest tobacco brands
[B] posed greater threats to the tobacco industry than we expected
[C] exerted limited influences and the government could address them
[D] was at the mercy of international tobacco monopoly groups
[A] to be moderate and prudent
[B] to monitor and crack down
[C] to be flexible and adaptable
[D] to be predictable and punitive
[A] the cost for extra law enforcement about tobacco is staggering
[B] tax stamps hard to counterfeit should be an international standard
[C] governments can actually profit quite a lot from taxing tobaccos
[D] tobacco smuggling and tax evasion are top concerns for governments
As astronomers discover more and more planets in galaxies far, far away, they are increasingly confronted with a curious subset ( 子集 ) of orbs ( 天体 ) that are free-floating and not connected to or orbiting a particular star. Further complicating matters is that within that group, most of what they have found are large gassy planets; few resemble rockier planets like our own Earth.
First discovered in 2003, these potential free-floating planets are difficult to detect from the existing ground-based observatories.
Soon, however, a revolutionary new telescope launching in 2025 may be able unlock the secrets of the darkness of space, where sunless worlds may even outnumber the stars. NASA's Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope will be able to see even more rocky free-floating planets, potentially hundreds as small as Mars, according to research published this August in the Astronomical Journal . These lightless worlds can shine light on how planets formed and what happens to them after their star finally dies.
“The galaxy could be teeming with these free-floating planets, or maybe none,” says Scott Gaudi, an astronomer at Ohio State University and an author on the new research. “There could be more Earth-mass planets than stars in the galaxy…Now we'll have the possibility with Roman to figure that out.”
The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, named after NASA's first chief astronomer who tirelessly advocated for new tools like Hubble and made several important contributions to the field of astronomy, will engage in a couple of core surveys. Roman will study dark energy, survey a special type of supernovae ( 超新星 ) and discover numerous exoplanets through a technology known as gravitational microlensing ( 微引力透镜 ).
This technique can reveal objects too dark to discover through other means, objects such as black holes or planets. When an object, like a planet, passes in front of a star, its gravity causes a very slight brightening to the stellar light. The faint magnification, predicted by the theory of general relativity, can provide insights into the passing magnifier. Unlike most other planetary discovery techniques, microlensing can find worlds cast off from their star, drifting through the darkness of space.
“Microlensing can find planets from a little past Earth to the center of the galaxy,” says Samson Johnson, a graduate student at Ohio State University and first author on the new research. “It can find planets all throughout the galaxy.”
The technique has its own limitations. Once a planet completes the lensing process, it continues to drift through the darkness of space, never to be seen again from Earth. But Johnson says that's not a huge problem-after all, astronomy is full of transient, one-time events. “ You don't ask a supernova to explode again, you don't ask black holes to re-merge ,” he says.
[A] predominately as rocky as the Earth
[B] mainly gassy and free-floating
[C] mostly as detectable as others
[D] generally as messy as Mars
[A] It was originally launched in the year of 2003.
[B] It was named after the first NASA administrator.
[C] It is expected to unveil the mysteries of outer space.
[D] It will replace the renowned Hubble Space Telescope.
[A] derives from Einstein's theory of general relativity
[B] takes advantage of dark energy of the supernovae
[C] helps discover the extremely dark objects such as black holes
[D] aims at detecting planets usually orbiting a certain star
[A] it can be applied to spot the same free-floating planet only once
[B] it can be quite difficult for astronomers to explain how it is applied
[C] it cannot be used to detect planets from the edge of the Earth to the galaxy
[D] it cannot find planets that are drifting through the darkness of space
[A] It is impossible to explain the cause of supernova explosion.
[B] It is ridiculous to imagine science will explain all the mysteries.
[C] The limitation of gravitational microlensing is not so big a deal.
[D] The defect of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is obvious.
Society's investments in science paid enormous dividends-vaccines, computer technology, global positioning systems, the Internet, web searches to access the world's knowledge, molecular biology, the sequencing of the human genome, solar panels, and more. Science gave birth to huge industries and created millions of jobs.
Since the turn of the century, though, society's compact with science has been falling into disrepair. Science has been facing increasing polarization, with ever-stronger doubts and denial, political interference, and efforts to slash federal investment in research. The problems predate the current administration, and it's important to understand the tensions.
A key problem is that science often reveals truths that challenge economic interests-provoking aggressive efforts to fight back. When science found that cigarettes cause cancer, tobacco companies paid people to put up a smoke screen . In this century, climate change research has been met with vehement denial by fossil fuel interests. Rather than debating solutions, opponents dismiss evidence-rising global temperatures, massive forest fires from Australia to the Arctic Circle, stronger and more frequent hurricanes, glaciers retreating-as unrelated flukes. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency has been standing scientific integrity on its head-barring academic researchers who receive EPA funding from serving on its advisory committees and disregarding public health studies that protect patient confidentiality on the grounds that they violate scientific “transparency.”
But there are other problems as well. Science sometimes seems to overreach-turning valid hope into hype by promising solutions just around the corner. And people sometimes want explanations that science can't yet provide-leaving a void easily filled by conspiracy theories, such as the long-debunked falsehood that vaccines cause autism ( 自闭症 ).
It's also become glaringly apparent that the economic benefits of science are unevenly distributed. Without a more inclusive approach, the general public's support for science will wane.
Finally, we have to recognize that good science doesn't guarantee utopian outcomes. Things can go off the rails-the Wonderful World of Chemistry can produce carcinogens and toxic waste; the Internet designed to give us all the world's information can deluge us with disinformation; and social media that was supposed to bring us together can instead tear us apart.
What's to be done? Science and society are increasingly out of sync, but progress depends on their partnership. It's time to refresh the compact.
Some things are non-negotiable. Science's commitment to proceed carefully, require evidence, and admit error may seem like a sucker's strategy in an age of political bluster, but it's what makes science succeed in the long run. We'll need to keep fighting hard for truth.
[A] society's investments in science reaped insignificant benefits
[B] science outweighs anything else in social development
[C] the connection between science and society matters a lot
[D] the polarization of science occurred all of a sudden
[A] Smoke heavily to make smoke fill the entire room.
[B] Put up a board that tells people not to smoke in public.
[C] Make a smoke collector and detect its density.
[D] Mislead people over the dangers of smoking.
[A] Provide one-for-all solutions.
[B] Offer explanations anytime.
[C] Adopt an inclusive approach.
[D] Risk the benefits of companies.
[A] science is never incompatible with society
[B] science benefits women more than men
[C] science may lead the world to nowhere
[D] science is likely to commit to what is not feasible
[A] to prevent companies from interfering with science
[B] to proceed carefully, require evidence and admit error
[C] to make sure scientific experiments are done in the labs
[D] to refresh the compact between scientists and companies