關於 green building example ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

- Luyện đọc và tìm kiếm từ mới nào cả nhà!
Đề Cambridge IELTS 14 Test 2 - passage 2:
BACK TO THE FUTURE OF SKYSCRAPER DESIGN

Answers to the problem of excessive electricity use by skyscrapers and large public buildings can be found in ingenious but forgotten architectural designs of the 19th and early-20th centuries

A. The Recovery of Natural Environments in Architecture by Professor Alan Short is the culmination of 30 years of research and award-winning green building design by Short and colleagues in Architecture, Engineering, Applied Maths and Earth Sciences at the University of Cambridge.
'The crisis in building design is already here,' said Short. 'Policy makers think you can solve energy and building problems with gadgets. You can't. As global temperatures continue to rise, we are going to continue to squander more and more energy on keeping our buildings mechanically cool until we have run out of capacity.'

B. Short is calling for a sweeping reinvention of how skyscrapers and major public buildings are designed - to end the reliance on sealed buildings which exist solely via the 'life support' system of vast air conditioning units.
Instead, he shows it is entirely possible to accommodate natural ventilation and cooling in large buildings by looking into the past, before the widespread introduction of air conditioning systems, which were 'relentlessly and aggressively marketed' by their inventors.

C. Short points out that to make most contemporary buildings habitable, they have to be sealed and air conditioned. The energy use and carbon emissions this generates is spectacular and largely unnecessary. Buildings in the West account for 40-50% of electricity usage, generating substantial carbon emissions, and the rest of the world is catching up at a frightening rate. Short regards glass, steel and air-conditioned skyscrapers as symbols of status, rather than practical ways of meeting our requirements.

D. Short's book highlights a developing and sophisticated art and science of ventilating buildings through the 19th and earlier-20th centuries, including the design of ingeniously ventilated hospitals. Of particular interest were those built to the designs of John Shaw Billings, including the first Johns Hopkins Hospital in the US city of Baltimore (1873-1889).
'We spent three years digitally modelling Billings' final designs,' says Short. 'We put pathogens• in the airstreams, modelled for someone with tuberculosis (TB) coughing in the wards and we found the ventilation systems in the room would have kept other patients safe from harm.

E. 'We discovered that 19th-century hospital wards could generate up to 24 air changes an hour-that's similar to the performance of a modern-day, computer-controlled operating theatre. We believe you could build wards based on these principles now.
Single rooms are not appropriate for all patients. Communal wards appropriate for certain patients - older people with dementia, for example - would work just as well in today's hospitals, at a fraction of the energy cost.'
Professor Short contends the mindset and skill-sets behind these designs have been completely lost, lamenting the disappearance of expertly designed theatres, opera houses, and other buildings where up to half the volume of the building was given over to ensuring everyone got fresh air.

F. Much of the ingenuity present in 19th-century hospital and building design was driven by a panicked public clamouring for buildings that could protect against what was thought to be the lethal threat of miasmas - toxic air that spread disease. Miasmas were feared as the principal agents of disease and epidemics for centuries, and were used to explain the spread of infection from the Middle Ages right through to the cholera outbreaks in London and Paris during the 1850s. Foul air, rather than germs, was believed to be the main driver of 'hospital fever', leading to disease and frequent death. The prosperous steered clear of hospitals.
While miasma theory has been long since disproved, Short has for the last 30 years advocated a return to some of the building design principles produced in its wake.

G. Today, huge amounts of a building's space and construction cost are given over to air conditioning. 'But I have designed and built a series of buildings over the past three decades which have tried to reinvent some of these ideas and then measure what happens. 'To go forward into our new low-energy, low-carbon future, we would be well advised to look back at design before our high-energy, high-carbon present appeared. What is surprising is what a rich legacy we have abandoned.'

H. Successful examples of Short's approach include the Queen's Building at De Montfort University in Leicester. Containing as many as 2,000 staff and students, the entire building is naturally ventilated, passively cooled and naturally lit, including the two largest auditoria, each seating more than 150 people. The award-winning building uses a fraction of the electricity of comparable buildings in the UK.
Short contends that glass skyscrapers in London and around the world will become a liability over the next 20 or 30 years if climate modelling predictions and energy price rises come to pass as expected.

I. He is convinced that sufficiently cooled skyscrapers using the natural environment can be produced in almost any climate. He and his team have worked on hybrid buildings in the harsh climates of Beijing and Chicago - built with natural ventilation assisted by back-up air conditioning - which, surprisingly perhaps, can be switched off more than half the time on milder days and during the spring and autumn.
“My book is a recipe book which looks at the past, how we got to where we are now, and how we might reimagine the cities, offices and homes of the future. There are compelling reasons to do this. The Department of Health says new hospitals should be naturally ventilated, but they are not. Maybe it’s time we changed our outlook.”

TỪ VỰNG CHÚ Ý:

Excessive (adj)/ɪkˈsesɪv/: quá mức
Skyscraper (n)/ˈskaɪskreɪpə(r)/: nhà trọc trời
Ingenious (adj)/ɪnˈdʒiːniəs/: khéo léo
Culmination (n) /ˌkʌlmɪˈneɪʃn/: điểm cao nhất
Crisis (n)/ˈkraɪsɪs/: khủng hoảng
Gadget (n)/ˈɡædʒɪt/: công cụ
Squander (v)/ˈskwɒndə(r)/: lãng phí
Reliance (n)/rɪˈlaɪəns/: sự tín nhiệm
Vast (adj)/vɑːst/: rộng lớn
Accommodate (v)/əˈkɒmədeɪt/: cung cấp
Ventilation (n)/ˌventɪˈleɪʃn/: sự thông gió
Habitable (adj)/ˈhæbɪtəbl/: có thể ở được
Spectacular (adj)/spekˈtækjələ(r)/: ngoạn mục, đẹp mắt
Account for /əˈkaʊnt//fə(r)/ : chiếm
Substantial (adj)/səbˈstænʃl/: đáng kể
Frightening (adj)/ˈfraɪtnɪŋ/: kinh khủng
Sophisticated (adj)/səˈfɪstɪkeɪtɪd/: phức tạp
Pathogen (n)/ˈpæθədʒən/: mầm bệnh
Tuberculosis (n)/tjuːˌbɜːkjuˈləʊsɪs/: bệnh lao
Communal (adj)/kəˈmjuːnl/: công cộng
Dementia (n)/dɪˈmenʃə/: chứng mất trí
Fraction (n)/ˈfrækʃn/: phần nhỏ
Lament (v)/ləˈment/: xót xa
Panicked (adj): hoảng loạn
Lethal (adj)/ˈliːθl/: gây chết người
Threat (n)/θret/: mối nguy
Miasmas (n)/miˈæzmə/: khí độc
Infection (n) /ɪnˈfekt/: sự nhiễm trùng
Cholera (n)/ˈkɒl.ər.ə/: dịch tả
Outbreak (n)/ˈaʊt.breɪk/: sự bùng nổ
Disprove (v)/dɪˈspruːv/: bác bỏ
Advocate (v)/ˈæd.və.keɪt/: ủng hộ
Auditoria (n)/ˌɔːdɪˈtɔːriə/ : thính phòng
Comparable (adj)/ˈkɒm.pər.ə.bəl/: có thể so sánh được
Contend (v) /kənˈtend/: cho rằng
Liability (n)/ˌlaɪ.əˈbɪl.ə.ti/: nghĩa vụ pháp lý
Convince (v) /kənˈvɪns/: Thuyết phục
Assist (v) /əˈsɪst/: để giúp đỡ

Các bạn cùng tham khảo nhé!

【水世界】的前製設定與現場劇照

WATERWORLD (1995)
In celebration of today’s anniversary of this wet mess/epic. Let’s celebrate the hard work this crew put into bringing this world to life. Water movies are never easy but when it comes to this movie anytime you bring it up and a crew member from it is in earshot, the stories pour out. Not always bad, I know a AC that said he had a blast, he loved the boat rides out and all the camaraderie the crew had to have to get thru it. To all the crew that helped bring WATERWORLD to life, We salute you and thanks for the memories. I personally enjoy this hot mess of a movie, it’s one of the last ones of its kind...done practically...in a way.
let’s take a deepest of dives into WATERWORLD

The director, Kevin Reynolds, knew there would be problems before production had even started, “During pre-production. Because having never shot on water to that extent before, I didn’t really realise what I was in for. I talked to Spielberg about it because he’d gone to do Jaws, and I remember, he said to me, “Oh, I would never shoot another picture on water”.
“When we were doing the budget for the picture, and the head of the studio, Sid Sheinberg, we were talking about it and I said, “Steven told me that on Jaws the schedule for the picture was 55 days, and they ended up shooting a 155 days”. Because of the water. And he sat there for a moment and he said, “You know, I’m not sure about the days, but I do know they went a hundred percent over budget”. And so, Universal knew the potential problems of shooting on water. It’s monstrous.”
The film began with a projected budget of $100 million which had reportedly increased to $175 million by the end of production. The principle photography had overrun for at least thirty days more than originally planned due to one major decision.

Whereas today they would film in water tanks with partially built sets, employing green screens to fake the locations, back in 1995 they decided to build everything full size and shoot out on the ocean.

This causes extra logistical problems on top of those that already come with making a major action blockbuster. Cast and crew have to be transported to sets. The camera boats and sets float out of position and will have to be reset between takes taking up valuable production time.

The first draft of Waterworld was written by Peter Radar, a Harvard graduate who wanted to break into the film business. His contact in the film industry was Brad Kevoy, an assistant to the legendary director Roger Corman.

Roger Corman is best known for making films very quickly on a small budget. He also liked to give young talent a chance to direct and write their own films. Brad informed Peter that if he could write a Mad Max rip off, he would arrange to finance and let him direct the picture.

Radar came back and pitched the idea for what would become Waterworld. Kevoy took one look at him and said,

“Are you out of your mind? This would cost us three million dollars to make this movie!”
So Radar kept hold of the idea and decided to re-write the script but, this time, going wild. He wrote what he wanted to see on-screen, limited only by his imagination, not a real world production budget.

He managed to get the newly written script shown to a pair of producers with whom he had made contact with. They loved it and ironically they passed it onto Larry Gordon. He shared the enthusiasm saying it had the kind of cinematic possibilities he was looking for. A deal was signed on Christmas Eve of 1989.

As further script rewrites progressed, it became clear that Waterworld was too big for the Larry Gordon’s production company to undertake by themselves. In February 1992, a deal was signed with Universal Pictures to co-produce and co-finance the film. This was now six years after the first draft had been written.

Universal had signed director Kevin Reynolds to Waterworld. Whilst he was finishing his latest film, Rapa Nui, pre-production for Waterworld was already underway.

The decision was taken that the largest set for the film, known as the atoll, would be built full size. The atoll was the primary location for film and in the story served as the location for a small population of survivors.

The logic behind this decision was due to the high percentage of live action filming required in this location, as well as a huge action set piece. No sound stage would be big enough to incorporate this number of scenes and it was crucial that we see the mariner sail his boat into the atoll, turn around and set out again. A full-size construction was the only way to go as the use of miniature and special effects would be impractical.

The next problem was deciding where to build this huge set. After much research, Kawaihae Harbour in Hawaii was chosen as the location. The atoll could be constructed in the harbour and rotated when needed thus allowing for open sea in the background. Later towards the end of principle photography, the atoll could be towed out into the open sea for the filming of the big action sequences which would be impractical to shoot in an enclosed harbour.

Director Kevin Reynolds also discussed the possibility of using the same water tank as James Cameron’s The Abyss, which had filmed there around five years ago,

“We had even entertained the notion of shooting at that big nuclear reactor facility where they had shot The Abyss, to use it for our underwater tank. But we found it in such a state of disrepair that economically it just wasn’t feasible. We didn’t have as much underwater work as they did. Most of The Abyss is interiors and underwater and model work, ours is mostly surface exterior.”

The production company had originally envisioned building the atoll by linking approximately one hundred boats together and building upon this foundation, just like the characters in the film. The production crew set out to search Hawaii and get hold of as many boats as possible.

During this search, a unique boat in Honolulu caught their attention. Upon further investigation, they discovered it was built by Navitech, a subsidiary of the famous aircraft production company, Lockheed.

They approached Lockheed with the strange request of figuring out how they could build the foundations of the atoll. Lockheed found the request unusual but didn’t shy away from the challenging. They agreed to design the atoll foundation and Navitech would construct it.

Meanwhile, an 11ft miniature model of the atoll was sent out to a model ship testing facility in San Diego. Scaled wave tanks are used to determine the effects of the open sea on large scale miniature models of new untested ship designs. This would help determine what would happen with the unusual design of the atoll when it was out of the harbour.

The atoll, when finished, was approximately ¼ mile in circumference. It took three months to construct and is rumoured to cost around $22 million. As the atoll would be used out on the open sea, it required a seafaring license. Nothing like this had been done before and after much deliberation, it was eventually classed as an unmanned vessel. This meant that all cast and crew would have to vacate the set whilst it was towed into position. By the end of production, the atoll was towed out to sea a total of five times.

Shooting out on the open sea presented a series of logistical problem as Reynolds describes,

“We had an entire navy, basically – I mean, this atoll was positioned about a mile off-shore in Hawaii, it was anchored to the bottom of the ocean so it could rotate. What you don’t think about are things like, you’re shooting on this atoll to maintain this notion that there’s no dry land, you always have to shoot out to sea. Away from the land. So we chose a location where we had about a 180 degree view of open water. Nevertheless, any time when you’re shooting, there could be a ship appear in the background, or something like that, and you had to make a choice. Do I hold up the shot, wait for the ship to move out, or do we shoot and say we’re going to incur this additional cost in post-production of trying to remove the ship from the background.

And at that time, CGI was not at the point it is now, it was a bigger deal. And so, even though if you’re shooting across the atoll and you’re shooting out onto open water, when you turn around and do the reverses, for the action, you had to rotate the entire atoll, so that you’re still shooting out to open water. Those are the kinds of things that people don’t realise.

Or something as simple as – if you’re shooting a scene between two boats, and you’re trying to shoot The Mariner on his craft, another boat or whatever, you’ve got a camera boat shooting his boat, and then the other boat in the background. Well, when you’re on open water things tend to drift apart. So you have to send lines down from each of those boats to the bottom, to anchor them so that they somewhat stay in frame. When you’ve got a simple shot on land, you set up the camera position, you put people in front of the camera and then you put background in there. But when you’re on water, everything’s constantly moving apart, drifting apart, so you have to try to hold things down somewhat.

And these are simple things that you don’t really realise when you’re looking at it on film. But logistically, it’s crazy. And each day you shoot on the atoll with all those extras, we had to transport those people from dry land out to the location and so you’re getting hundreds of people through wardrobe and everything, and you’re putting them on boats, transporting them out to the atoll, and trying to get everybody in position to do a shot. And then when you break for lunch, you have to put everybody on boats and take them back in to feed them.”

The final size of the atoll was determined by the size of the Mariners boat, the trimaran. The dimensions for the trimaran were finalised very early on in pre-production, allowing all other vehicles and sets to be sized accordingly.

Production required two trimarans boats which are so called because they have three hulls. The first was based on the standard trimaran blueprint and built for speed but also had to accommodate a secret crew below decks.

During wide and aerial shots it would have to look like Costner himself was piloting the boat. In reality, a trained crew could monitor and perform the real sailing of the boat utilising specially built controls and television monitors below deck.

The second trimaran was the trawler boat which could transform into the racer through the use of special practical effects rigs. Both of these boats were constructed in France by Jeanneau. Normally this type of vessel requires a year to construct but production needed two boats in five months!

Normally once the boat had been constructed, Jeammeau would deliver it on the deck of a freighter, requiring a delivery time of around a month. This delay was unacceptable and so the trimarans were dismantled into sections and taken by a 747 air freighter to the dock Hawaii. Upon arrival, a further month was required to reassemble the boat and get them prepared for filming.

sets recreating the inside of the tanker were built using forced perspective in a huge 1000ft long warehouse which had an adjoining 2000ft field. In this field, they built the set of the oil tankers deck, again constructed using forced perspective. Using the forced perspective trick, the 500ft long set could be constructed to give the impression that it was really twice as long.

There’s more to a film than just it’s sets and filming locations. Over two thousand costumes had to be created with many of the lead actors costumes being replicated many times over due to wear and tear.

This is not an uncommon practice for film production, but due to the unique look of the people and the world they inhabit, it did create some headaches. One costume was created with so many fish scales the wardrobe department had to search the entire island of Hawaii looking for anyone who could supply in the huge quantity required.

Makeup had to use waterproof cosmetics, especially on the stunt players. As everyone had a sun burnt look, a three-sided tanning booth was setup. The extras numbering in their hundreds, with ages ranging from six to sixty-five, passed through the booth like a production line to receive their spray tan. The extras then moved onto costume before finally having their hair fixed and becoming ready for the day.

In some scenes, extras were actually painted plywood cutouts to help enhance the number of extras on the set. This can easily be seen in one particular shot on board the Deez super tanker.

Filming on the water is not only a difficult and time-consuming process but also very dangerous. It’s been reported that Jeanne Tripplehorn and Tina Majorino nearly drowned on their first day of filming.

Waterworld’s star Kevin Costner reported having a near-death experience when filming a scene in which the mariner ties himself to his catamaran to survive a storm. The pounding water caused him to black out and nearly drown.

Unbeknownst to most of the crew, Kevin Costner’s stunt double was riding his jet ski across 40 miles of open ocean between his home on Maui and the film’s set on the Big Island. When he didn’t show up for work one day, the production team phoned his wife, who informed them he had already left for work. The stunt double’s jet ski had run out of gas halfway through his “commute” and a storm had swept him farther out to sea. It took a helicopter most of the day to find him. The stunt doubles name was Laird Hamilton.

As well as the logistical problems of creating a film of this scale and on water, they also had to deal with the press who seemed intent on wanting the film to fail. Director Kevin Reynolds discusses the situation,

“It was huge, we were constantly fighting – people wanted to have bad press. That was more exciting to them than the good news. I guess the most egregious example of that that I recall was that the publicist told me that one day…we’d been out the day before and we were doing a shot where we sent two cameras up on a mast of the trimaran and we wanted to do a shot where they tilled down from the horizon down to the deck below. We’re out there, we’re anchored, we’re setting the shot up and a swell comes in, and I look over and the mast is sort of bending.

And I turned to the boatmaster and I said, “Bruno, is this safe?”. And he looks up the mast and he goes, “No”. So I said, “Okay, well, we have to get out as I can’t have two guys fall off from 40 feet up”. So, we had to break out of the set-up, and go back in a shoot something else and we lost another half-day.

Anyway, the next day the publicist is sitting in his office and he gets this call from some journalist in the States and he goes, “Okay. Don’t lie to me – I’ve had this confirmed from two different people. I want the facts, and I want to hear about the accident yesterday, we had two cameramen fall off the mast and were killed”.

And, he goes, “What are you talking about?”. And he goes, “Don’t lie to me, don’t cover this up, we know this has happened”. It didn’t happen! People were so hungry for bad news because it was much more exciting than…they just said it, and you know, it hurt us.”
Upon release, the press seemed to be disappointed that the film wasn’t the massive failure they were hoping it to be. Universal Studios told Kevin Reynolds that one critic came out of an early screening in New York and in a disappointed tone said,

“Well, it didn’t suck.”

It is true that during principle photography the slave colony set sank and had to be retrieved. However due to bad press, the rumour became much bigger and to this day when you mention the sinking set, most people assume it was the huge atoll.

During production, press nicknamed the film “Kevin’s Gate” and “Fishtar”, referring to 1980’s box office failures Heaven’s Gate and Ishtar. Heaven’s Gate failed so badly it led to the sale of United Artists Studio and has become synonymous with failure in Hollywood.

As well as the exaggerated set problems and other various production rumours, there were also difficulties with the script. In a risky move, the film was green lit and moved into production without a finalised script.

The final total is a reportedly thirty-six rewrites. One of the writers involved was Joss Whedon. Joss had worked on many scripts before becoming a director having being at the helm of both The Avengers and the sequel Avengers: Age Of Ultron. He described his experience on Waterworld as,

“Seven weeks of hell”
Everything came to a head just three weeks before the end of principle photography. Kevin Reynolds who was an old friend of Kevin Costner allegedly walked off set or was fired. There was no official statement on what happened.

When Reynolds left the production this event caused many changes to be made. Composer Mark Isham had already composed approximately two-thirds of the film’s score by the time Reynolds left and that event ultimately caused him to leave production. As Mark describes in this interview excerpt,

“Kevin Reynolds quit the film, which left me working for Kevin Costner, who listened to what I had written and wanted a completely different point of view. He basically made a completely different film — he re-cut the entire film, and in his meeting with me he expressed that he wanted a completely different approach to the score. And I said, “oh let me demonstrate that I can give that to you”, so I presented him with a demo of my approach to his approach, and he rejected that and fired me. What I find a lot in these big films, because the production schedules are so insane, that the directors have very little time to actually concentrate on the music.”
Rumours report that Costner took control of production. He directed the last few weeks of principle photography and edited the final cut of the film that was released in cinemas.

Reynolds discusses his surprise at discovering that one of the most famous scenes from what is known as the extended version, was left on the cutting room floor,

“…it would have differed from what you saw on the screen to some extent, and one of the things I’ve always been perplexed by in the version that was released, theatrically, although subsequently the longer version included it, and the reason that I did the film, was that at the very end of the picture, at the very end of the script, there’s a scene when they finally reach dry land and The Mariner’s sailing off and he leaves the two women behind, and in the script they’re standing up on this high point and they’re watching him sail away, and the little girl stumbles on something.
And they look down and clear the grass away and that’s this plaque. And it says, “Here, near this spot, 1953, Tenzing Norgay and Edmund Hillary first set foot on the summit of Everest”. And that was in script and I was like, “Oh, of course! Wow, the highest point on the planet! That would have been dry land!”. And we got it! We shot that. And they left it out of the picture. And I’m like, “Whaaat?!”. It’s like the Statue of Liberty moment in Planet of the Apes. And I was like, “Why would you leave that out?”

Written by John Abbitt | Follow John on twitter @UKFilmNerd

If any the crew cares to share any of their experiences on it please comment.
Thanks for reading
If you want more deep dives visit
https://www.facebook.com/groups/crewstories/?ref=share

Apple CEO tells college graduates: ‘We’ve failed you’
蘋果CEO給大學畢業生的致詞

蘋果執行長庫克(Tim Cook)於5月18日應邀至杜蘭大學(Tulane Univeristy)做畢業典禮演講(Commencement Speech)，內容是鼓勵畢業生處理困難的問題，有勇氣嘗試找出解決問題的方法，並以20年前的親身經驗告訴年輕學子，為何當年從前途似錦的科技業巨擘康柏公司(Compaq)，投入前途黯淡的蘋果公司。

杜蘭大學是位於紐奧良的研究型私立大學，有「南方常春藤」之稱，以下摘錄庫克的演講內容：

∎ Life will always find lots of ways to tell you no, that you can't, that you shouldn't, that you'd be better off if you didn't try. But New Orleans teaches us there is nothing more beautiful or more worthwhile than trying.
人生總會用很多方式告訴你，這個不可以、那個做不到、你不應該這麼做，或是你最好連試都別試。但紐奧良教導我們，沒什麼比嘗試更美妙，更有價值。

∎ For me, it was that search for greater purpose that brought me to Apple in the first place. I had a comfortable job at a company called Compaq that at the time looked like it was going to be on top forever.
對我來說，當初就是為了尋找更大的目的，才讓我來到蘋果。我原本在康柏的工作很舒服，而且那時康柏看來將永遠處於顛峰。

∎ As it turns out, most of you are probably too young to even remember its name. But in 1998, Steve Jobs convinced me to leave Compaq behind to join a company that was on the verge of bankruptcy.
你們大多數人可能都太年輕，不記得康柏的名字，但在1998年，賈伯斯說服了我離開康柏，加入一家處於破產邊緣的公司。

∎ They made computers, but at that moment at least, people weren't interested in buying them. Steve had a plan to change things. And I wanted to be a part of it.
他們生產電腦，但至少那時大家沒什麼興趣買電腦。賈伯斯想要改變這個局面，而我想參與其中。

∎ It wasn't just about the iMac, or the iPod, or everything that came after. It was about the values that brought these inventions to life.
這不只攸關iMac或iPod，或之後問世的所有東西，而是關於把這些創新真正做出來的價值。

∎ The idea that putting powerful tools in the hands of everyday people helps unleash creativity and move humanity forward. That we can build things that help us imagine a better world and then make it real.
這個想法是將強大工具放到一般人的手中，釋放出創造力，推動人類前進；也就是我們可以打造的東西，能讓我們想像出更美好的世界，再實現這個夢想。

∎ Try something. You may succeed. You may fail. But make it your life's work to remake the world because there is nothing more beautiful or more worthwhile than working to leave something better for humanity.
去多多嘗試，你可能成功，也可能失敗，但要把改造世界變成你的人生目標，努力留下任何東西讓人類更好，沒有什麼比這麼做更美妙、更值得。

以下是演講內容全文：
Hello Tulane! Thank you, President Fitts, Provost Forman, distinguished ( ) faculty ( ), other faculty [laughs], and the entire Tulane family, including the workers, ushers ( ), [and] volunteers who prepared this beautiful space. And I feel duty-bound ( ) to also recognize the hard-working bartenders at The Boot. Though they’re not here with us this morning, I’m sure some of you are reflecting on their contributions as well. [The Boot is a popular college bar right next to Tulane’s campus which has been around for decades.]

And just as many of you have New Orleans in your veins ( ), and perhaps your livers, some of us at Apple have New Orleans in our blood as well. When I was a student at Auburn, the Big Easy was our favorite getaway ( ). It’s amazing how quickly those 363 miles fly by when you’re driving toward a weekend of beignets and beer. And how slowly they go in the opposite direction. Apple’s own Lisa Jackson is a proud Tulane alum ( ). Yes. She brought the Green Wave all the way to Cupertino where she heads our environment and public policy work. We’re thrilled to have her talent and leadership on our team.

OK, enough about us. Let’s talk about you. At moments like this, it always humbles me to watch a community come together to teach, mentor ( ), advise, and finally say with one voice, congratulations to the class of 2019!

Now there’s another very important group: your family and friends. The people who, more than anyone else, loved, supported, and even sacrificed ( ) greatly to help you reach this moment. Let’s give them a round of applause ( ). This will be my first piece of advice. You might not appreciate until much later in your life how much this moment means to them. Or how that bond of obligation ( ), love, and duty between you matters more than anything else.

In fact, that’s what I really want to talk to you about today. In a world where we obsessively ( ) document our own lives, most of us don’t pay nearly enough attention to what we owe one another. Now, this isn’t just about calling your parents more, although I’m sure they’d be grateful if you did that. It’s about recognizing that human civilization began when we realized that we could do more together. That the threats and danger outside the flickering firelight got smaller when we got bigger. And that we could create more — more prosperity ( ), more beauty, more wisdom, and a better life — when we acknowledge certain shared truths and acted collectively.

Maybe I’m biased ( ), but I’ve always thought the South, and the Gulf Coast in particular ( ), have hung on to ( ) this wisdom better than most. [Tim Cook grew up in Robertsdale, Alabama, which is about an hour from New Orleans and is similarly close to the Gulf of Mexico.] In this part of the country, your neighbors check up on you if they haven’t heard from you in a while. Good news travels fast because your victories are their victories too. And you can’t make it through someone’s front door before they offer you a home-cooked meal.

Maybe you haven’t thought about it very much, but these values have informed your Tulane education too. Just look at the motto ( ): not for one’s self, but for one’s own. You’ve been fortunate to live, learn, and grow in a city where human currents blend into ( ) something magical and unexpected. Where unmatched beauty, natural beauty, literary beauty, musical beauty, cultural beauty, seem to spring ( ) unexpectedly from the bayou. The people of New Orleans use two tools to build this city: the unlikely and the impossible. Wherever you go, don’t forget the lessons of this place. Life will always find lots of ways to tell you no, that you can’t, that you shouldn’t, that you’d be better off if you didn’t try. But New Orleans teaches us there is nothing more beautiful or more worthwhile than trying. Especially when we do it not in the service of one’s self, but one’s own.

For me, it was that search for greater purpose that brought me to Apple in the first place. I had a comfortable job at a company called Compaq that at the time looked like it was going to be on top forever. As it turns out, most of you are probably too young to even remember its name. But in 1998, Steve Jobs convinced me to leave Compaq behind to join a company that was on the verge of bankruptcy. They made computers, but at that moment at least, people weren’t interested in buying them. Steve had a plan to change things. And I wanted to be a part of it.

It wasn’t just about the iMac, or the iPod, or everything that came after. It was about the values that brought these inventions to life. The idea that putting powerful tools in the hands of everyday people helps unleash creativity and move humanity forward. That we can build things that help us imagine a better world and then make it real.

There’s a saying that if you do what you love, you’ll never work a day in your life. At Apple, I learned that’s a total crock ( ). You’ll work harder than you ever thought possible, but the tools will feel light in your hands. As you go out into the world, don’t waste time on problems that have been solved. Don’t get hung up on what other people say is practical. Instead, steer ( ) your ship into the choppy ( ) seas. Look for the rough spots, the problems that seem too big, the complexities ( ) that other people are content to work around. It’s in those places that you will find your purpose. It’s there that you can make your greatest contribution. Whatever you do, don’t make the mistake of being too cautious. Don’t assume that by staying put, the ground won’t move beneath your feet. The status quo ( ) simply won’t last. So get to work on building something better.

In some important ways, my generation has failed you in this regard ( ). We spent too much time debating. We’ve been too focused on the fight and not focused enough on progress. And you don’t need to look far to find an example of that failure. Here today, in this very place, in an arena where thousands once found desperate shelter ( ) from a 100-year disaster, the kind that seem to be happening more and more frequently, I don’t think we can talk about who we are as people and what we owe to one another without talking about climate change.

[applause] Thank you. Thank you.

This problem doesn’t get any easier based on whose side wins or loses an election. It’s about who has won life’s lottery and has the luxury of ignoring this issue and who stands to lose everything. The coastal communities, including some right here in Louisiana, that are already making plans to leave behind the places they’ve called home for generations and head for higher ground. The fishermen whose nets come up empty. The wildlife preserves ( ) with less wildlife to preserve. The marginalized ( ), for whom a natural disaster can mean enduring poverty.

Just ask Tulane’s own Molly Keogh, who’s getting her Ph.D. this weekend. Her important new research shows that rising sea levels are devastating ( ) areas of Southern Louisiana more dramatically than anyone expected. Tulane graduates, these are people’s homes. Their livelihoods ( ). The land where their grandparents were born, lived, and died.

When we talk about climate change or any issue with human costs, and there are many, I challenge you to look for those who have the most to lose and find the real, true empathy ( ) that comes from something shared. That is really what we owe one another. When you do that, the political noise dies down, and you can feel your feet firmly planted on solid ground. After all, we don’t build monuments ( ) to trolls ( ), and we’re not going to start now.

If you find yourself spending more time fighting than getting to work, stop and ask yourself who benefits from all the chaos. There are some who would like you to believe that the only way that you can be strong is by bulldozing ( ) those who disagree or never giving them a chance to say their peace in the first place. That the only way you can build your own accomplishments is by tearing down ( ) the other side.

We forget sometimes that our preexisting beliefs have their own force of gravity ( ). Today, certain algorithms ( ) pull toward you the things you already know, believe, or like, and they push away everything else. Push back. It shouldn’t be this way. But in 2019, opening your eyes and seeing things in a new way can be a revolutionary act. Summon the courage not just to hear but to listen. Not just to act, but to act together.

It can sometimes feel like the odds ( ) are stacked ( ) against you, that it isn’t worth it, that the critics are too persistent and the problems are too great. But the solutions to our problems begin on a human scale with building a shared understanding of the work ahead and with undertaking it together. At the very least, we owe it to each other to try.

It’s worked before. In 1932, the American economy was in a free-fall ( ). Twelve million people were unemployed, and conventional ( ) wisdom said the only thing to do was to ride it out, wait, and hope that things would turn around ( ). But the governor ( ) of New York, a rising star named Franklin Roosevelt, refused to wait. He challenged the status quo and called for action ( ). He needed people to stop their rosy ( ) thinking, face the facts, pull together ( ), and help themselves out of a jam. He said: “The country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it and try another. But above all, try something.”
This was a speech to college students fearful ( ) about their future in an uncertain world. He said: “Yours is not the task of making your way in the world, but the task of remaking the world.” The audacious ( ) empathy of young people, the spirit that says we should live not just for ourselves, but for our own. That’s the way forward. From climate change to immigration, from criminal justice reform to economic opportunity, be motivated by your duty to build a better world. Young people have changed the course of history time and time again. And now it’s time to change it once more.

I know, I know the urgency of that truth is with you today. Feel big because no one can make you feel strong. Feel brave because the challenges we face are great but you are greater. And feel grateful because someone sacrificed to make this moment possible for you. You have clear eyes and a long life to use them. And here in this stadium, I can feel your courage.

Call upon your grit ( ). Try something. You may succeed. You may fail. But make it your life’s work to remake the world because there is nothing more beautiful or more worthwhile than working to leave something better for humanity.

Thank you very much, and congratulations class of 2019!

#高雄人 #學習英文 請找 #多益達人林立英文
#高中英文
#成人英文
#多益家教班
#商用英文