懂你英语视频

不同的年龄，不同的学习目的，都可以找到各自适合的APP来进行英语学习。

1、3-12岁的儿童学习英语

叽里呱啦：这是一款适合0-7岁的孩子使用的一款APP。包含丰富的儿歌、动画资源，可以免去家长到处找资源的烦恼，启蒙阶段孩子磨耳朵需要的儿歌和原版动画，都可以在线播放。

少儿趣配音：适合有一定基础的孩子，开始跟读和模仿，可以在APP里找到很多动画的片段，分割成单句，孩子可以很容易模仿，最后还可以自动合成配音片段，让孩子体会给电影动画人物配音的乐趣，激发他们的学习热情和兴趣。

亲子英文教练：这是一款原版儿童读物阅读为主的APP，有近千本的原版读物，分级读物，绘本，章节书籍，各个阶段的孩子，都可以找到自己的喜欢的书籍。部分书籍还有老师的讲解，可以帮助孩子学习和理解故事。

2、对于成人来学习英语

罗赛塔石碑（Rosetta Stone）:据说这是美国训练特工人员学习外语的一个工具。除了英语以外，还有25种语言可以学习。用图片和声音辅助的方法来学习，无需翻译，在情境中理解和学习。有4500个场景和对话，覆盖了生活中的方方面面。这个也适合小学的孩子来学习，有一个儿童学习软件“大思英语”，其实就和这个软件非常的类似。

流利说：非常强大的语音识别能力，可以打分的一款学习软件，除了免费的学习课程外，还有从零基础开始的“懂你英语”付费课程，从听说读写多个方面来进行，仿佛和一位资深的外教在一对一的练习，如果每天能够坚持半个小时以上，半年的课程还可以退回全部学费。

这些APP都是一些辅助的工具，语言的学习关键还是重复和持续，每天定时定量的学习和复习，不断积累，能真正发挥这些工具的最大效用。

1、喜马拉雅。喜马拉雅FM是国内音频分享平台。从2013年3月上线至今，已经积累了大量的英文音频资源。不论是一两岁幼儿，还是毕业后听力口语充电的职场人士都可以在这款app中找到丰富的资源。打开喜马拉雅，在听外语这个分类下，有十几个类别，资源非常丰富。儿童故事，广播剧，绘本音频，小说音频，各种教材，影视音频应有尽有，用户也可以直接搜索自己感兴趣的资源。

2、有道词典。学习英语过程中难免遇到一些专业、生僻词汇，可以使用这款app解决这个问题。不过这个app缺点就是广告有点多，软件略大。

3、英语趣配音。这款app通过给1-2分钟短视频配音的方式来锻炼口语。电影，演讲，视频，歌曲，教材一句一句配音，短视频短小，很容易完成配音，与枯燥无味的背书方式有很大差别。这款app操作也很简单。进入视频播放界面，可以先观看完整视频，再点击开始配音按钮进入配音界面。视频会根据每句话自动分割，点开始配音按钮就可以开始配音了。

4、扇贝和百词斩。这两个app可以用来背单词。坚持一个用下来，单词数量增长很快。

It's as though we stand before two doors. Behind door number one, we stop making progress in building intelligent machines. Our computer hardware and software just stops getting better for some reason. Now take a moment to consider why this might happen. I mean, given how valuable intelligence and automation are, we will continue to improve our technology if we are at all able to. What could stop us from doing this? A full-scale nuclear war? A global pandemic? An asteroid impact? Justin Bieber becoming president of the United States? The point is, something would have to destroy civilization as we know it. You have to  imagine how bad it  would have to be to  prevent us from making  improvements in our technology permanently, generation  after generation. Almost by definition, this is the worst thing that's ever happened in human history. So the only alternative, and this is what lies behind door number two, is that we continue to improve our intelligent machines year after year after year. At a certain point, we will build machines that are smarter than we are, and once we have machines that are smarter than we are, they will begin to improve themselves. And then we risk what the mathematician IJ Good called an "intelligence explosion," that the process could get away from us. Now, this is often caricatured, as I have here, as a fear that armies of malicious robots will attack us. But that isn't the most likely scenario. It's not that our machines will become spontaneously malevolent. The concern is really that we will build machines that are so much more competent than we are that the slightest divergence between their goals and our own could destroy us. Just think about how we relate to ants. We don't hate them. We don't go out of our way to harm them. In fact, sometimes we take pains not to harm them. We step over them on the sidewalk. But whenever their presence seriously conflicts with one of our goals, let's say when constructing a building like this one, we annihilate them without a qualm(顾虑，不安). The concern is that we will one day build machines that, whether they're conscious or not, could treat us with similar disregard. What will happen if people continue to improve AI technology? >Machines will become smarter than human beings. If someone does something without qualm they... >don't feel quilty about it. (1)It's as though we stand before two doors. (2)Behind door number one, we stop making progress in building intelligent machines. (3)Our computer hardware and software just stops getting better for some reason. (4)Now take a moment to consider why this might happen. Why does Harris say there are only two possibilities moving forward? He thinks humanity will either be wiped out or continue to progress. To be malicious is to be   ... >cruel. You have to  imagine  how bad it  would  have to be to  prevent  us from making  improvements  in our technology permanently, generation  after generation. If you're anything like me, you'll find that it's fun to think about these things. I'm going to describe how the gains we make in artificial intelligence could ultimately destroy us.I think it's very difficult to see how they won't destroy us or inspire us to destroy ourselves. I'm going to describe a scenario that I think is both terrifying and likely to occur,  and that's not a good combination. Why does Harris say that there are only two possibiliteis moving forward? >He thinks humanity will either be wiped out or continue to progress.  Now, I suspect this seems far-fetched to many of you.  I bet there are those of you who doubt that superintelligent AI is possible, much less inevitable.  But then you must find something wrong with one of the following assumptions.  And there are only three of them. Intelligence is a matter of information processing in physical systems.  Actually, this is a little bit more than an assumption.  We have already built narrow intelligence into our machines, and many of these machines perform at a level of superhuman intelligence already.  And we know that mere matter can give rise to what is called "general intelligence," an ability to think flexibly across multiple domains  because our brains have managed it. Right?  I mean, there's just atoms in here, and as long as we continue to build systems of atoms that display more and more intelligent behavior, we will eventually, unless we are interrupted, we will eventually build general intelligence into our marchines. It's crucial to realize that the rate of progress doesn't matter  because any progress is enough to get us into the end zone.  We don't need Moore's law to continue.  We don't need exponential progress.  We just need to keep going. The second assumption is that we will keep going.  We will continue to improve our intelligent machines.  And given the value of intelligence -- I mean,  intelligence is either the source of everything we value or we need it to safeguard everything we value. It is our most valuable resource.  So we want to do this. We have problems that we desperately need to solve.  We want to cure diseases like Alzheimer's and cancer.  We want to understand economic systems. We want to improve our climate science.  So we will do this, if we can.  The train is already out of the station, and there's no brake to pull. Finally, we don't stand on a peak of intelligence, or anywhere near it, likely.  And this really is the crucial insight. This is what makes our situation so precarious,  and this is what makes our intuitions about risk so unreliable. Now, just consider the smartest person who has ever lived.  On almost everyone's shortlist here is John von Neumann. 冯·诺依曼 I mean, the impression that von Neumann made on the people around him,  and this included the greatest mathematicians and physicists of his time, is fairly well-documented.  If only half the stories about him are half true, there's no question he's one of the smartest people who has ever lived.  So consider the spectrum of intelligence.  Here we have John von Neumann.  And then we have you and me.  And then we have a chicken.  Sorry, a chicken. There's no reason for me to make this talk more depressing than it needs to be. It seems overwhelmingly likely, however, that the spectrum of intelligence extends much further than we currently conceive,  and if we build machines that are more intelligent than we are, they will very likely explore this spectrum in ways that we can't imagine, and exceed us in ways that we can't imagine.  What does Harris believe intelligence is? >information being processed in physical systems. Why does Harris think that the rate of technological progress is insignificant. >Progress will inevitbly lead to AI as long as it isn't interrupted. To safeguard something means to... >to protect it from harm. Why are users more likely to send messages to people who others don't find attractive? >They think there will be less competition. An incentive is something that motivates a person to do something. information being processed in physical systems. General interlligence is... >the ability to think flexibly across many domains. What does Harris believe about the spectrum of intelligentce? >it extends far beyond what people can conceive.  If only half the stories about  him are half  true , there's no  question  he's one of the  smartest  people who has ever  lived . We have problems that we desperately need to solve. It's not totally true that the more attractive you are,  the more messages you get. He believes humanity will either be wiped out or continue progressing. I'm going to describe how the gains we make in artificial intelligence could ultimately destroy us. The concern is that we will one day build machines that, whether they're conscious or not, could treat us with similar disregard. One of the things that worries me most about the development of AI at this point is that we seem unable to marshal an appropriate emotional response to the dangers that lie ahead. We want to cure diseases like Alzheimer's and cancer.