BOX SET: 6 Minute English - 'Technology 3' English mega-class! 30 minutes of new vocab!

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.

Hello and welcome to 6 Minute English. I'm Neil.

And I'm Finn. Hello.

Hello there, Finn. Now, what do you know about robots?

Robots? Well, they talk in a funny way, like that!

Yes. You sound quite convincing there, actually, Finn.

— You like it? — Yes, I do.

Is there anything else you know about robots?

Well, there are, mm, there are a couple of good ones in Star Wars, aren't there?

Oh, yes. Um, R2-D2 and C-3PO.

C-3PO talks in quite a human voice.

He does. But, of course, that's science fiction not real life.

No. But things have moved on in real life.

The use of machines to do work that people do or used to do is called 'automation'

and that's the subject of today's show.

Mm, but before we talk more about this,

I'd like you, Neil, to answer today's quiz question.

What makes a job more likely to be done by robots?

Is it if a job involves a) Manipulating small objects?

B) Working in open spaces?

Or c) Social and emotional skills?

Hmm. OK.

I'm going to guess at manipulating small objects, I think.

Interesting. OK, we'll find out if you're right or wrong later on.

Now, two UK academics have calculated how 'susceptible to' —

that means 'likely to be affected by' —

how susceptible to automation each job is based on some key skills.

And these include negotiation, persuasion, caring for others, originality,

and 'manual dexterity' — now, that means being 'good with your hands'.

So do you think intelligent machines could replace us?

Well, maybe you, Neil.

Not me, no. I have all the key skills, you know — I'm original,

persuasive, of course, very caring and very good with my hands as well, I think.

Well, I'm very glad that you're safe, Finn!

Thank you.

However, a study from Oxford University

has suggested that 35% of existing UK jobs are being automated in the next 20 years.

Let's listen to Michael Osborne from Oxford University talking about this.

Computers are increasingly able to learn

in a way that hitherto has been the reserve of human beings.

So, in their ability to learn, computers are able to perform

a much wider range of tasks than they've been able to do in the past.

So, as a result,

it's not just manual labour that's coming under threat of automation.

It's increasingly cognitive labour — the labour of the mind.

Michael Osborne.

And 'cognitive labour' means using your 'noggin' — that's 'using your head'!

So computers and machines are also using their noggins and getting smarter.

And office workers who do repetitive jobs, such as drawing up spreadsheets,

could be replaced with software.

But surely jobs like being a doctor or a lawyer are safe, Neil?

Well, some white collar jobs may be less safe than you think.

At one city law firm, junior staff have to read through contracts,

assessing them for risks.

But now an artificial intelligence programme can do that faster and better.

Aha, so 'white collar' refers to

'a job that you do at an office rather than a factory'.

And 'artificial intelligence' refers to

'a computer's ability to copy intelligent human behaviour'.

Now let's listen to Matthew Whalley from a city law firm to find out what he thinks.

What you're seeing the robot do now,

the robot can do in three seconds what it would take a group of lawyers days to do.

And the advantage is that it can do huge volumes, incredibly reliably,

in unbelievable times.

There's a huge amount of this work to do

and lawyers have far better higher-value legal analysis to worry about.

Well, he thinks that there is work for the lawyers and the computers.

In fact, it sounds like a good division of labour —

the computers do the boring stuff and the lawyers do the more interesting work!

Yes. Well, let's keep our fingers crossed that we've got good prospects too.

You know, I don't want our listeners

to start listening to robot presenters any time soon!

Indeed, we need...

We talk about 'keeping our fingers crossed' when we hope

that things are going to turn out in the way we want them to in the future.

That's right. So shall we hear the answer to today's quiz question?

Neil, I asked you what makes a job more likely to be done by robots?

Is it if a job involves a) Manipulating small objects?

b) Working in open spaces?

Or c) Social and emotional skills?

Well, I said a) Manipulating small objects,

and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I've got the right answer.

OK. You're keeping them crossed?

Yes, I am.

— You've got the answer right! Well, done! — Yay, brilliant!

I'm glad my cognitive skills are still functioning.

— Great. — Now how about hearing those words again?

OK, the words we heard today were:

automation,

susceptible to,

manual dexterity,

cognitive labour,

noggin,

white collar,

artificial intelligence,

and keeping your fingers crossed.

Well, that brings us to the end of this 6 Minute English.

We hope you enjoyed the programme. Please join us again soon. Goodbye.

Bye.

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.

Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Sam.

And I'm Neil.

In 1436 in Germany, Johannes Gutenberg, invented the printing press,

a machine capable of making many copies of the same page of text.

Ever since, printing has been used around the world

to produce books, newspapers and magazines.

Printing technology has come a long way since Gutenberg's time,

but even today's most advanced laser printers

have only printed flat, two-dimensional objects, until now.

In this programme, we're discussing 3D printers —

printers which can build solid, three-dimensional objects

out of a variety of materials, including plastic, concrete and metal.

Now, Neil, when you say a printer that can make solid objects,

I guess you're not talking about a normal printer.

That's right, Sam.

These large and complex 3D printers work in a completely different way.

Unlike a sculptor, who chips away at a block of stone

to reveal a shape underneath, 3D printers work in the opposite way,

building up physical objects by adding material layer on layer.

And the ability to print objects in this way

is providing solutions to many problems, as we'll be finding out.

But first I have a question for you, Neil.

Before Johannes Gutenberg invented his printing press,

copies of texts were made by block printing,

using hand-carved wooden blocks pressed into ink.

So, what was the oldest known text to be printed this way?

Was it a) A religious teaching? b) A cooking recipe?

Or c) A love letter?

I think it might have been a recipe.

OK, Neil. I'll reveal the answer later in the programme.

The idea of printing solid objects is not new,

but it was only after the millennium

that tech companies began to realise how it could be done.

Here's Professor Mark Miodownik,

a material scientist at University College, London,

explaining more to BBC World Service programme People Fixing The World.

As the millennium turned, patents expired

and that meant people started making really cheap 3D printers.

And people started mucking about with them

and going, "Hold on a minute! It's not just an industrial tool.

"You can put them in schools, you can put them in universities.

"Oh, it's actually really great for prototyping".

And then people got excited about it and it became the answer to everything.

Everything was going to be 3D-printed!

After the year 2000, 3D printers suddenly got much cheaper

and tech companies started 'mucking about' with them —

'spending time playing with them in a fun way'.

They realised that 3D printers had many uses.

For example, they discovered that 3D printers

were great at making 'prototypes' —

'models of a product that can be tested, improved

'and used to develop better products'.

Professor Miodownik thinks these tech companies were surprised

at how useful 3D printing was.

He uses the phrase 'Hold on a minute!' to express this surprise or disbelief.

In fact, in turned out that 3D printers

were excellent at making 'bespoke' things —

'objects which are made specially for a particular person'.

One area which 3D printing dramatically improved was medical 'prosthetics' —

'artificial body parts' made specially for someone

who has lost an arm, a leg or a foot, for example.

In 2021, Stephen Verze, who lost an eye in a childhood accident,

became the first person to be fitted with a 3D-printed prosthetic eye.

It's prosthetic, so the new eye doesn't restore Stephen's sight,

but it has boosted his confidence.

Surgeon Mandeep Sagoo led the team

at Moorfields Hospital that operated on Stephen's eye.

Here he is explaining more to BBC World Service's People Fixing The World.

In many countries, particularly in the developed world,

there are facilities for custom-making a prosthetic eye to match the other eye,

and that's an artisan process which is very time-consuming

and requires real artistry on the part of the ocularist.

The ocularist is the person who fits the prosthetic eye.

And so what we have been developing is a technique to automate the whole process.

Even before 3D printers, prosthetic eyes were 'custom-made',

a word similar to 'bespoke',

which means 'specially made according to a particular person's requirements'.

But the traditional way of making artificial eyes by hand

is very 'time-consuming' — 'it takes a lot of time to do'.

Nowadays, 3D printing can complete the whole process in just 30 minutes.

It's great to see technology helping people,

and amazing how far new inventions like 3D printers have come

since the days of Johannes Gutenberg.

Speaking of which, Neil, it's time to reveal the answer to my question.

Right. You asked me about the earliest known text

to have been printed using wooden blocks, and I guessed it was a cooking recipe.

So, was I right?

You were wrong, I'm afraid, Neil!

The oldest known wooden block print was actually a religious text —

the Buddha's Diamond Sutra.

OK, let's recap the vocabulary from this programme, starting with 'mucking about',

an informal way to say 'playing with something carelessly,

'not for a serious reason'.

A 'prototype' is 'a model of a product

'that can be tested, improved and used to develop a better product'.

The phrase 'hold on a minute!' can be used to express surprise or disbelief.

'Prosthetics' refer to 'artificial body parts'

such as arms, legs, feet or eyes,

which are used to replace a missing natural part.

The words 'bespoke' and 'custom-made'

describe 'something specially made for a particular person'.

And finally, if something is 'time-consuming',

it 'takes a lot of time to do'.

— Goodbye for now! — Goodbye.

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.

Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Neil.

And I'm Beth.

As the world switches from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy,

solar panels are appearing in more and more places, and with good reason.

Yes. Today, the world is generating ten times more solar electricity

than a decade ago, and what's more, solar is the only energy source

on track to meet the UN's 2050 net zero targets.

But there's a problem — space.

As the rooftops in our cities and towns get filled up with solar panels,

finding space for them becomes difficult.

In this programme, we'll be exploring two surprising solar projects

to build PV panels in all kinds of weird and wonderful places.

And, as usual, we'll be learning some useful new vocabulary too.

Great! But first I have a question for you, Beth.

Harnessing the power of the sun is not new.

In fact, solar power dates back over 2,700 years.

In 213 BC, mirrors were used

to reflect sunlight back onto Roman ships attacking the city of Syracuse,

causing them to catch fire.

But which Ancient Greek philosopher was responsible for this solar heat ray?

Was it a) Archimedes? b) Socrates? Or c) Pythagoras?

I think it was Pythagoras.

OK, Beth. I'll reveal the answer later in the programme.

Our first surprising solar project takes place

in one of the world's biggest car parks, owned by US supermarket giant, Walmart.

Joshua Pearce, a researcher at Western University in Ontario, Canada,

wants Walmart to introduce solar canopies in all their car parks.

A 'canopy' is 'a cover fixed over something

'to provide shelter or decoration'.

Joshua's canopies protect customers' cars from the sun and rain,

while the solar panels fixed on top generate electricity.

This electricity can be used by the supermarket,

or given to customers to charge their electric car for free.

Here's Myra Anubi, presenter of BBC World Service programme

People Fixing The World, discussing Joshua's idea.

Of course, if Walmart or an equivalent retailer were to do this,

they wouldn't just be paying off their investment in green electricity,

they would be adding hundreds of thousands of electric charging points across the US

which would make switching to electric vehicles

more enticing for American drivers.

So we're starting to see more and more of these occur.

I think, in the very near future, we're gonna see an enormous increase.

Solar canopies provide free charging points,

making electric cars a cheaper, more enticing option for American drivers.

If something is 'enticing',

it's 'attractive because it offers advantages or pleasures'.

Joshua hopes we'll see more solar canopies in the 'near future' —

'at some time very soon'.

Our second surprising solar project is, quite literally, out of this world!

Martin Soltau is founder of Space Solar,

a company planning to build solar panels 22,000 miles away, in outer space.

With no night or changing seasons, it's believed that solar panels in space

would generate 13 times as much electricity as on Earth.

Martin's plans sound like science fiction, and haven't been tried out, yet.

But the idea of solar power from space has existed since the 1960s,

as Martin explains to BBC World Service programme People Fixing The World.

And then in really the late '60s, the American scientist Peter Glazier

designed first practical, technically practical, system

and after that NASA studied it on and off right through the decades,

and so it's really only in the last six or seven years

that it's actually now become economically feasible.

So the whole cost of getting things into space has tumbled by over 90%.

NASA has studied the idea of putting solar panels in space 'on and off',

meaning 'occasionally', or 'from time to time', since the 1960s.

Recently, the costs of travelling to space have 'tumbled' —

'decreased quickly and in a short time',

making Martin's idea for space solar panels economically feasible.

If a business plan is 'economically feasible',

'the economic advantages achieved are greater than the economic costs'.

It seems that a good idea is a good idea,

whether it's thousands of years ago or in the near future.

With that, it's time to reveal the answer to my question.

Yes. You asked me which famous Ancient Greek philosopher

used the power of the sun to destroy enemy Roman ships in 213 BC.

I said it was Pythagoras.

Which was, I'm afraid to say, the wrong answer, Beth.

It was actually Archimedes who used parabolic mirrors

to burn the enemy's wooden ships at Syracuse —

a trick which schoolchildren still do today,

using a magnifying glass and sunbeams to make fire.

Right, let's recap the vocabulary we've learned from this programme,

starting with 'canopy' —

'a cover that's fixed over an object to shelter or decorate it'.

The adjective 'enticing'

means 'attractive because of the advantages or benefits it offers'.

'In the near future' means 'very soon'.

The phrase 'on and off' means 'occasionally', or 'from time to time'.

If the cost or price of something has 'tumbled',

it's 'decreased quickly in a short time'.

And finally, if a business plan is 'economically feasible',

'the economic advantages achieved will be greater than the economic costs'.

Once again, our six minutes are up.

— Goodbye for now! — Bye.

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.

Hello and welcome to 6 Minute English —

the programme where we bring you an interesting topic

and six items of vocabulary.

— I'm Neil. — And I'm Catherine.

Now, this programme is six minutes long.

Yes. It's 6 Minute English!

And we have a challenge for everyone — can you stay focused for the full six minutes?

Sounds easy?

Maybe not, because today we're talking about our attention spans.

Are they shrinking?

That's right, so we're asking today is the length of time we can focus on something —

that's our 'attention span' — actually getting shorter?

Now, one study says yes.

In fact, it claims the human attention span

is now shorter than that of a goldfish.

Can that be true?

Smartphones, the internet, social media —

these all certainly do take up a lot of our attention.

But how much? How long do we look at our mobile phones for in a day, on average?

Is it a) Around 30 minutes?

b) Around two and a half hours? Or c) Over three hours?

I tend to be quite busy,

but I know some people are really addicted to their mobile phones,

so I'm going to say around two and a half hours — that's answer 'b'.

OK, so, a report released by Microsoft

said the average human attention span in 2000 was 12 seconds.

Since then, it's fallen to just eight seconds.

Right, and that's a massive change in a very short time.

Now, the year 2000 was just before the boom in digital media and smartphones,

so many think they're to blame for all these distractions.

Now, 'distractions' are 'things which take away our focus or attention'.

Yes. And we mentioned goldfish earlier.

Goldfish reportedly have an attention span of nine seconds.

That's one more than phone-obsessed humans, with a mere eight seconds!

And there's a phrase in English —

we say 'to have the attention span of a goldfish'.

Or 'the memory of a goldfish'.

So these poor, poor goldfish, Neil.

Yes, they get 'a bad press', don't they?

That's a phrase which means 'criticism' —

especially criticism in the media and especially in 'newspapers' —

or 'the press', as we call it.

So, is it really true than humans are now even more easily distracted than fish?

Well, BBC radio programme More or Less recently investigated this claim.

That's right. And they found out a couple of things.

Firstly, they couldn't find evidence of the research

that Microsoft quoted in their report.

In other words, the programme couldn't find scientific evidence

that our attention spans are in fact shrinking.

And secondly, the psychologist they spoke to said there are problems

with the idea of measuring attention spans in the first place.

It's a term that's widely used, but it's not very scientific.

Hm, sounds fishy.

Yes. 'Fishy' means 'suspicious', by the way.

Sorry, goldfish. Again!

So, are we humans in fact more easily distracted than before?

More or Less asked Dr Gemma Briggs, a psychologist at the Open University,

if human beings are less able to focus these days.

It's all down to the individual,

it's all down to how you choose to apply your attention.

So attention-switching ability may well have developed in recent years,

in the age of the smartphone and the internet.

But because someone's distracted by their smartphone

or wanting to quickly Google something,

doesn't mean that they then don't have the ability

to control and sustain their attention when they carry out another task.

So she says we're not necessarily more easily distracted.

Instead, we may actually be better

at switching our attention quickly between different tasks.

That's right. She's really saying we can 'multitask' better than before.

And that means we can 'focus on many different tasks,

'each for a shorter period of time'.

She said, "It's all down to how you choose to apply your attention."

Let's just highlight that phrase 'down to'.

Here, it means 'depends on'.

It all depends on how you choose to apply your attention.

So, maybe our attention spans aren't getting shorter,

we just choose to look at our phones a lot more.

Which reminds me, today's question —

I asked you how long, on average, we spend looking at our phones, and you said?

Well, my attention span isn't that short

that I can't remember I said two and a half hours.

And the answer — if you believe the research —

is 2.42 hours per day so, pretty good guess there, Catherine.

Thank you.

That comes from Chicago-based research firm Dscout.

And what about this?

The group they surveyed touched their mobiles over 2,600 times a day.

Do you touch your phone 2,600 times a day, Catherine?

I try not to, what about you?

It's probably more than that to be honest.

Now, I'm sure everyone wants to get back to touching their phones,

or maybe they're even touching them now as they listen,

but either way, let's have a review of today's phrases.

OK, so first we had 'attention span' —

that's 'the length of time we can focus on something'.

And mine is definitely a fair bit shorter than it used to be.

Neil?

Neil?

Oh, sorry, I just got distracted there by a message on my phone. Apologies.

That's all right.

So, next up we had 'a bad press'.

Goldfish get a bad press. Social media gets a bad press.

And this means they all get 'criticism in the media'.

And we had fishy. If something's 'fishy', it's 'suspicious'.

And we had multitask.

To 'multitask' is 'to do several things at once'.

Then we had 'down to'.

Here it means 'depends on', though it can mean other things in other contexts.

You could say it's all down to the context!

And that's our quick review, and our programme for today.

So, did you stay focused all the way through? Or were you distracted?

If you're looking for distractions,

may I recommend our Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube pages?

— Goodbye for now. — Goodbye.

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.

Hello, welcome to 6 Minute English.

I'm Neil and with me in the studio is Harry. Hello, Harry.

— Hello. — Now, Harry, do you have many passwords?

'Passwords' — you mean 'the set of words and numbers

'which I keep secret and allow me to access information'?

Yes, I do actually.

I've got a few for my computer and the different websites I use.

Then there are my cards — credit card, debit card.

And there's one for my ID here at the BBC

— and then... — Yeah, OK. I get the idea.

There are too many, aren't there?

Oh, yes! Sometimes I struggle to remember them all.

And we are advised to learn them 'by heart',

in other words, to have them 'memorised and not written down'.

It's for security reasons.

If you write them down and lose the paper you wrote them on,

then they won't be secret any more, will they?

Now, how would you like to have access to things

with no need for passwords or cards?

Yeah, that would be brilliant!

In this programme,

I'm going to tell you about a futuristic commercial building in Stockholm, Sweden,

where you don't have to remember any passwords,

you don't have to carry ID cards

and, in some cases, you don't even need to carry money to pay for your coffee.

How does it all work then — by magic?

No, by inserting a microchip under the skin of your hand!

A microchip is a very small device

with an electronic circuit which can do particular things.

In this case, the microchip we're talking about can identify you.

Wow! I'm not sure I'd want a microchip inserted under my skin.

Er, no, me neither. It's interesting though, isn't it?

Before I tell you about this experiment, let's go for our quiz question.

And, of course, it's about passwords.

Security firm SplashData publishes an annual report

about the weakest passwords people use.

Well, which was the most common password used in 2014?

Was it a) abc123?

b) The numbers 123456?

c) The words 'trustno' followed by the number 1?

I'm going to go for c), 'trustno' followed by number 1,

because actually it's the only one I hadn't heard of,

even though it's very, it's very obvious.

Well, all will be revealed at the end of the programme.

Now we're talking about the increasing need for ID

in a society which works more and more with computers

and you'll learn some more related vocabulary.

Tell us more about this building in Sweden, Neil.

You have this microchip put under your skin

and what does it allow you to do inside the building?

Let's listen to the BBC technology reporter, Rory Cellan-Jones.

He went there for a visit.

He uses an expression to say that the technology is not working perfectly yet,

because it's brand-new.

What is that expression?

The new offices will soon host a shifting population of 700 entrepreneurs

and employees and they'll all be offered the chance to get chipped, if they wish.

As well as opening doors that'll allow them to use the photocopiers

and eventually to log on to computers or pay for food in the cafe.

The technology is still having teething problems —

I found it quite a struggle to activate the photocopier!

And amongst the people working here, I found some enthusiasm, but also caution.

The expression is 'having teething problems'.

When a new project or device doesn't work perfectly,

we say it 'has teething problems'.

Yes, the microchip allowed Rory to make the photocopier work

just by swiping his hand over a console.

But it didn't work straight away.

And he tells us that some of the workers are reacting with caution

to the idea of having a microchip put under their skin.

'Caution' means 'being careful to avoid something dangerous or risky'.

It might be risky but we might all be using it one day — who knows?

The group running this scheme thinks this might be a good thing.

Hannes Sjobland from a Swedish bio-hacking group

seems to believe that linking biology and electronic devices

can make our daily lives better, but he is concerned about people's freedom.

And what if a government or a big corporation

wants to use this technology in the future?

What does Hannes Sjobland want to be able to do if it happens?

A tip, the word is a verb.

We are early adopters of this technology.

We experiment with it, we learn it, how it works,

because I think that there might be a day when the taxman or the big corporates,

will come and say, "Hey, try this chip, try this implant",

and then we will be able to question their proposals.

He wants to 'question' their proposals.

It means to 'express doubts' about their proposals and intentions.

You know what, Neil? I'd rather have my passwords!

Well, talking about passwords, let's go back to my quiz question.

I asked you what the weakest password people use is,

according to the 2014 report by the online security firm, SplashData.

The options were abc123, the numbers 123456,

and the words 'trustno' followed by the number 1.

And I said the third one, 'trustno1'.

And you were wrong, I'm afraid, Harry.

The correct answer is b).

The password '123456' has been named as the worst password of 2014.

The other two were also in the list.

Before we go, can you remind us of the words we heard today, Harry?

The words were:

password,

by heart,

microchip,

having teething problems,

caution,

to question.

Thank you. Well, that's it for this programme.

Go to BBC Learning English dot com to find more 6 Minute English programmes.

— Until next time, goodbye! — Bye!

6 Minute English.

From BBC Learning English.