Questões de Concurso
Sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês
Foram encontradas 9.754 questões
Choose the sentence in which the article wasn’t properly used.
A Free Press Needs You
By The Editorial Board
August 15, 2018
In 1787, the year the Constitution was adopted in the USA, Thomas Jefferson famously wrote to a friend, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”
That's how he felt before he became president, anyway. Twenty years later, after enduring the oversight of the press from inside the White House, he was less sure of its value. “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper,” he wrote. “Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”
Jefferson's discomfort was, and remains, understandable. Reporting the news in an open society is an enterprise laced with conflict. His discomfort also illustrates the need for the right of free press he helped to preserve. As the founders believed from their own experience, a well-informed public is best equipped to root out corruption and, over the long haul, promotes liberty and justice. “Public discussion is a political duty,” the Supreme Court said in 1964. That discussion must be “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” and “may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”
(www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/15/opinion/editorials/free-press-local
-journalism-news-donald-trump.html?action=click&module=Trending&
pgtype=Article®ion=Footer&contentCollection=Trending. Adaptado.)
A Free Press Needs You
By The Editorial Board
August 15, 2018
In 1787, the year the Constitution was adopted in the USA, Thomas Jefferson famously wrote to a friend, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”
That's how he felt before he became president, anyway. Twenty years later, after enduring the oversight of the press from inside the White House, he was less sure of its value. “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper,” he wrote. “Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”
Jefferson's discomfort was, and remains, understandable. Reporting the news in an open society is an enterprise laced with conflict. His discomfort also illustrates the need for the right of free press he helped to preserve. As the founders believed from their own experience, a well-informed public is best equipped to root out corruption and, over the long haul, promotes liberty and justice. “Public discussion is a political duty,” the Supreme Court said in 1964. That discussion must be “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” and “may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”
(www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/15/opinion/editorials/free-press-local
-journalism-news-donald-trump.html?action=click&module=Trending&
pgtype=Article®ion=Footer&contentCollection=Trending. Adaptado.)
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage realized that, besides calculation, the Analytical Engine could be used for other purposes.
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Apart from its inventor, nobody ever used Babbage’s Analytical Engine.
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Lack of money was the main reason why the building of the Analytical Engine was not carried out.
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Nobody thought of a programmable computer before Charles Babbage.
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Ada Lovelace met Charles Babbage through Mary Somerville.
Based on the text, judge the item below.
Mary Somerville was Ada Lovelace’s teacher.
Analyze the propositions that follow according to the text and chose the correct alternative.
I. This text has been produced because these days fake news has become very common and needs to be combated.
II. The chart presented aims at furnishing readers with clues that can be used in order to avoid being a victim of fake news.
III. The pervasive power of false rumors vary according to hoaxes and frequency of the kind of information being released and spread online.
IV. The reliability of the news is regarded higher when broadcast on social media.
V. More than 50% of the population has been trying to combat fake news.
According to the text, identify the propositions below as true (T) or false (F) and chose the correct alternative, from top to bottom.
( ) The pronoun their (line 3) refers to ‘hoaxes’.
( ) The word misleading (line 2) could be replaced by ‘deceptive’ without change in meaning.
( ) The pronoun it (line 7) refers to ‘digital media’.
( ) The meaning of the sentence ‘Fake news has been one of the most hotly-debated socio-political topics of recent years’ (line 1) is that ‘lately fake news has been one of the socio-political issues most often agreed to be harmful’.
(Source:http://www.revasolutions.com/internet-of-things-newchallenges-and-practices-for-information-governance/. Retrieved on January 26th, 2018)
Governance Challenges for the Internet of Things
Virgilio A.F. Almeida -Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
Danilo Doneda - Rio de Janeiro State University
Marília Monteiro - Public Law Institute of Brasília
Published by the IEEE Computer Society
© 2015
The future will be rich with sensors capable of collecting vast amounts of information. The Internet will be almost fused with the physical world as the Internet of Things (IoT) becomes a reality. Although it’s just beginning, experts estimate that by the end of 2015 there will be around 25 billion “things” connected to the global Internet. By 2025, the estimated number of connected devices should reach 100 billion. These estimates include smartphones, vehicles, appliances, and industrial equipment. Privacy, security, and safety fears grow as the IoT creates conditions for increasing surveillance by governments and corporations. So the question is: Will the IoT be good for the many, or the mighty few?
While technological aspects of the IoT have been extensively published in the technical literature, few studies have addressed the IoT’s social and political impacts. Two studies have shed light on challenges for the future with the IoT. In 2013, the European Commission (EC) published a study focusing on relevant aspects for possible IoT governance regimes. The EC report identified many challenges for IoT governance — namely privacy, security, ethics, and competition. In 2015, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published the FTC Staff Report The Internet of Things: Privacy and Security in a Connected World. Although the report emphasizes the various benefits that the IoT will bring to consumers and citizens, it acknowledges that there are many risks associated with deploying IoT-based applications, especially in the realm of privacy and security.
[…]
The nature of privacy and security problems frequently
associated with the IoT indicates that further research, analysis,
and discussion are needed to identify possible solutions. First, the
introduction of security and privacy elements in the very design
of sensors, implementing Privacy by Design, must be taken into
account for outcomes such as the homologation process of
sensors by competent authorities. Even if the privacy governance
of IoT can oversee the control centers for collected data, we must
develop concrete means to set limits on the amount or nature of
the personal data collected.
Other critical issues regard notification and consent. If, from one side, it’s true that several sensors are already collecting as much personal data as possible, something must be done to increase citizens’ awareness of these data collection processes. Citizens must have means to take measures to protect their rights whenever necessary. If future scenarios indicate the inadequacy of a mere notice-and-consent approach, alternatives must be presented so that the individual’s autonomy isn’t eroded.
As with other technologies that aim to change human life, the IoT must be in all respects designed with people as its central focus. Privacy and ethics aren’t natural aspects to be considered in technology’s agenda. However, these features are essential to build the necessary trust in an IoT ecosystem, making it compatible with human rights and ensuring that it’s drafted at the measure, and not at the expense, of people.
(Source: https://cyber.harvard.edu/~valmeida/pdf/IoT-governance.pdf
Retrieved on January 23rd, 2018)
(Source:http://www.revasolutions.com/internet-of-things-newchallenges-and-practices-for-information-governance/. Retrieved on January 26th, 2018)
Governance Challenges for the Internet of Things
Virgilio A.F. Almeida -Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
Danilo Doneda - Rio de Janeiro State University
Marília Monteiro - Public Law Institute of Brasília
Published by the IEEE Computer Society
© 2015
The future will be rich with sensors capable of collecting vast amounts of information. The Internet will be almost fused with the physical world as the Internet of Things (IoT) becomes a reality. Although it’s just beginning, experts estimate that by the end of 2015 there will be around 25 billion “things” connected to the global Internet. By 2025, the estimated number of connected devices should reach 100 billion. These estimates include smartphones, vehicles, appliances, and industrial equipment. Privacy, security, and safety fears grow as the IoT creates conditions for increasing surveillance by governments and corporations. So the question is: Will the IoT be good for the many, or the mighty few?
While technological aspects of the IoT have been extensively published in the technical literature, few studies have addressed the IoT’s social and political impacts. Two studies have shed light on challenges for the future with the IoT. In 2013, the European Commission (EC) published a study focusing on relevant aspects for possible IoT governance regimes. The EC report identified many challenges for IoT governance — namely privacy, security, ethics, and competition. In 2015, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published the FTC Staff Report The Internet of Things: Privacy and Security in a Connected World. Although the report emphasizes the various benefits that the IoT will bring to consumers and citizens, it acknowledges that there are many risks associated with deploying IoT-based applications, especially in the realm of privacy and security.
[…]
The nature of privacy and security problems frequently
associated with the IoT indicates that further research, analysis,
and discussion are needed to identify possible solutions. First, the
introduction of security and privacy elements in the very design
of sensors, implementing Privacy by Design, must be taken into
account for outcomes such as the homologation process of
sensors by competent authorities. Even if the privacy governance
of IoT can oversee the control centers for collected data, we must
develop concrete means to set limits on the amount or nature of
the personal data collected.
Other critical issues regard notification and consent. If, from one side, it’s true that several sensors are already collecting as much personal data as possible, something must be done to increase citizens’ awareness of these data collection processes. Citizens must have means to take measures to protect their rights whenever necessary. If future scenarios indicate the inadequacy of a mere notice-and-consent approach, alternatives must be presented so that the individual’s autonomy isn’t eroded.
As with other technologies that aim to change human life, the IoT must be in all respects designed with people as its central focus. Privacy and ethics aren’t natural aspects to be considered in technology’s agenda. However, these features are essential to build the necessary trust in an IoT ecosystem, making it compatible with human rights and ensuring that it’s drafted at the measure, and not at the expense, of people.
(Source: https://cyber.harvard.edu/~valmeida/pdf/IoT-governance.pdf
Retrieved on January 23rd, 2018)
(Source:http://www.revasolutions.com/internet-of-things-newchallenges-and-practices-for-information-governance/. Retrieved on January 26th, 2018)
Governance Challenges for the Internet of Things
Virgilio A.F. Almeida -Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
Danilo Doneda - Rio de Janeiro State University
Marília Monteiro - Public Law Institute of Brasília
Published by the IEEE Computer Society
© 2015
The future will be rich with sensors capable of collecting vast amounts of information. The Internet will be almost fused with the physical world as the Internet of Things (IoT) becomes a reality. Although it’s just beginning, experts estimate that by the end of 2015 there will be around 25 billion “things” connected to the global Internet. By 2025, the estimated number of connected devices should reach 100 billion. These estimates include smartphones, vehicles, appliances, and industrial equipment. Privacy, security, and safety fears grow as the IoT creates conditions for increasing surveillance by governments and corporations. So the question is: Will the IoT be good for the many, or the mighty few?
While technological aspects of the IoT have been extensively published in the technical literature, few studies have addressed the IoT’s social and political impacts. Two studies have shed light on challenges for the future with the IoT. In 2013, the European Commission (EC) published a study focusing on relevant aspects for possible IoT governance regimes. The EC report identified many challenges for IoT governance — namely privacy, security, ethics, and competition. In 2015, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published the FTC Staff Report The Internet of Things: Privacy and Security in a Connected World. Although the report emphasizes the various benefits that the IoT will bring to consumers and citizens, it acknowledges that there are many risks associated with deploying IoT-based applications, especially in the realm of privacy and security.
[…]
The nature of privacy and security problems frequently
associated with the IoT indicates that further research, analysis,
and discussion are needed to identify possible solutions. First, the
introduction of security and privacy elements in the very design
of sensors, implementing Privacy by Design, must be taken into
account for outcomes such as the homologation process of
sensors by competent authorities. Even if the privacy governance
of IoT can oversee the control centers for collected data, we must
develop concrete means to set limits on the amount or nature of
the personal data collected.
Other critical issues regard notification and consent. If, from one side, it’s true that several sensors are already collecting as much personal data as possible, something must be done to increase citizens’ awareness of these data collection processes. Citizens must have means to take measures to protect their rights whenever necessary. If future scenarios indicate the inadequacy of a mere notice-and-consent approach, alternatives must be presented so that the individual’s autonomy isn’t eroded.
As with other technologies that aim to change human life, the IoT must be in all respects designed with people as its central focus. Privacy and ethics aren’t natural aspects to be considered in technology’s agenda. However, these features are essential to build the necessary trust in an IoT ecosystem, making it compatible with human rights and ensuring that it’s drafted at the measure, and not at the expense, of people.
(Source: https://cyber.harvard.edu/~valmeida/pdf/IoT-governance.pdf
Retrieved on January 23rd, 2018)
Mark the statements below as true (T) or false (F) according to Text II:
( ) There are already many studies on the social and political effects of the IoT.
( ) Research studies on security and privacy still need to be carried out.
( ) The report from the US Federal Trade Commission supported the unrestricted use of the IoT.
Conheça nossos planos