Questões de Concurso

Some things don't change, even during a pandemic. Consistent with previous years, in CIO’s 2021 State of the CIO survey, a plurality of the 1,062 IT leaders surveyed chose “data/business analytics” as the No.1 tech initiative expected to drive IT investment.

Unfortunately, analytics initiatives seldom do nearly as well when it comes to stakeholder satisfaction.

Last year, CIO contributor Mary K. Pratt offered an excellent analysis of why data analytics initiatives still fail, including poor-quality or siloed data, vague rather than targeted business objectives, and clunky one-size-fits-all feature sets. But a number of fresh approaches and technologies are making these pratfalls less likely.

(...)

New technology invariably incurs new risks. No advancement has had more momentous impact on analytics than machine learning – from automating data prep to detecting meaningful patterns in data – but it also adds an unforeseen hazard. As CSO Senior Writer Lucian Constantin explains in "How data poisoning attacks corrupt machine learning models," deliberately skewed data injected by malicious hackers can tilt models toward some nefarious goal. The result could be, say, manipulated product recommendations, or even the ability for hackers to infer confidential underlying data.

(...)

In the end, the secret to successful analytics is not in choosing and implementing the perfect technology, but in cultivating a broad understanding that pervasive analytics yields better decisions and superior outcomes. Usually, you can iron out technology kinks or requirements misunderstandings. But if you can't change the mindset, few will use the beautiful analytics machine you just built.

Disponível em: https://www.cio.com/article/3614692/5-perspectiveson-modern-data-analytics.html.

Acesso em: 15 out. 2021. 

    General observation suggests that it is those who start to learn English after their school years who are most likely to have serious difficulties in acquiring intelligible pronunciation, with the degree of difficulty increasing markedly with age. This difficulty has nothing to do with intelligence or level of education, or even with knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary.

    Of course, there is no simple answer to why pronunciation is so difficult to learn — indeed, there is a whole range of theoretical perspectives on the question. What is generally accepted among psycholinguists and phonologists who specialized in this area is that the difficulty in learning to pronounce a foreign language is cognitive rather than physical, and that it has something to do with the way “raw sound” is categorized or conceptualized in using speech.

    Many learners of English as a second language have major difficulties with English pronunciation even after years of learning the language. This often results in them facing difficulties in areas such as finding employment. Up to a certain proficiency standard, the fault which most severely impairs the communication process in EFL/ESL learners is pronunciation, not vocabulary or grammar.

    The history of language study illustrates widely divergent attitudes concerning the relationship between writing and speech. Written language was the medium of literature, and, thus, a source of standards of linguistic excellence. It was felt to provide language with permanence and authority. The rules of grammar were, accordingly, illustrated exclusively from written texts.

    The everyday spoken language, by contrast, was ignored or condemned as an object unworthy of study, demonstrating only lack of care and organization. It was said to have no rules, and speakers were left under the illusion that, in order to “speak properly”, it was necessary to follow the “correct” norms, as laid down in the recognized grammar books and manuals of written style.

    There was sporadic criticism of this viewpoint throughout the 19th century, but it was not until the 20th century that an alternative approach became widespread. This approach pointed out that speech is many thousands of years older than writing; that it develops naturally in children (whereas writing has to be artificially taught); and that writing systems are derivative — mostly based on sounds of speech.

    Whatever training is given there should always be a permanent concern about the naturalness and spontaneity of everyday speech rather than an artificial sound production for the sake of preserving a “correct” pronunciation.

    This is, in fact, a crucial issue, since if too much care is demanded from the student, this may turn out to be an undesirable blockage to another more important factor, namely, fluency. Perhaps, and even worse, if over-careful pronunciation habits are developed, this will certainly cause difficulties for the oral comprehension, as the students will expect to hear sounds, words and utterances the way they personally produce them.