Questõesde UFPR sobre Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

InícioTodas as questões
1
1
1
Foram encontradas 49 questões
ac12637c-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text, it is correct to say that René Descartes:

             Ancient dreams of intelligent machines: 3,000 years of robots


      The French philosopher René Descartes was reputedly fond of automata: they inspired his view that living things were biological machines that function like clockwork. Less known is a strange story that began to circulate after the philosopher’s death in 1650. This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever at the age of five.

      According to the tale, a distraught Descartes had a clockwork Francine made: a walking, talking simulacrum. When Queen Christina invited the philosopher to Sweden in 1649, he sailed with the automaton concealed in a casket. Suspicious sailors forced the trunk open; when the mechanical child sat up to greet them, the horrified crew threw it overboard.

      The story is probably apocryphal. But it sums up the hopes and fears that have been associated with human-like machines for nearly three millennia. Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits – in Descartes’s case, death itself. But this very unnaturalness terrifies and repulses others. In our era of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), those polarized responses persist, with pundits and the public applauding or warning against each advance. Digging into the deep history of intelligent machines, both real and imagined, we see how these attitudes evolved: from fantasies of trusty mechanical helpers to fears that runaway advances in technology might lead to creatures that supersede humanity itself.

         (Disponível em: <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05773-y)

A
had a long lasting and untroubled relationship with his daughter.
B
was enthusiastic about moving mechanical devices.
C
decided to build a mechanical clock.
D
used to tell people a story about his daughter Francine.
E
taught his daughter to sit and greet people like a robot.
ac15c6ba-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

In the sentence “This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever …”, the underlined word refers to the:

             Ancient dreams of intelligent machines: 3,000 years of robots


      The French philosopher René Descartes was reputedly fond of automata: they inspired his view that living things were biological machines that function like clockwork. Less known is a strange story that began to circulate after the philosopher’s death in 1650. This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever at the age of five.

      According to the tale, a distraught Descartes had a clockwork Francine made: a walking, talking simulacrum. When Queen Christina invited the philosopher to Sweden in 1649, he sailed with the automaton concealed in a casket. Suspicious sailors forced the trunk open; when the mechanical child sat up to greet them, the horrified crew threw it overboard.

      The story is probably apocryphal. But it sums up the hopes and fears that have been associated with human-like machines for nearly three millennia. Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits – in Descartes’s case, death itself. But this very unnaturalness terrifies and repulses others. In our era of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), those polarized responses persist, with pundits and the public applauding or warning against each advance. Digging into the deep history of intelligent machines, both real and imagined, we see how these attitudes evolved: from fantasies of trusty mechanical helpers to fears that runaway advances in technology might lead to creatures that supersede humanity itself.

         (Disponível em: <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05773-y)

A
philosopher’s death.
B
clockwork.
C
French philosopher.
D
strange story.
E
automata.
ac18eddd-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

A partir das informações apresentadas no texto, considere as seguintes afirmativas:


1. Descartes viajou para a Suécia com um robô escondido.

2. Os marinheiros abriram à força um baú que continha o simulacro de uma criança.

3. A tripulação fez uma apresentação do robô para os passageiros do navio.

4. Chocados com o que viram, os marinheiros jogaram o humanoide ao mar.


Assinale a alternativa correta.

             Ancient dreams of intelligent machines: 3,000 years of robots


      The French philosopher René Descartes was reputedly fond of automata: they inspired his view that living things were biological machines that function like clockwork. Less known is a strange story that began to circulate after the philosopher’s death in 1650. This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever at the age of five.

      According to the tale, a distraught Descartes had a clockwork Francine made: a walking, talking simulacrum. When Queen Christina invited the philosopher to Sweden in 1649, he sailed with the automaton concealed in a casket. Suspicious sailors forced the trunk open; when the mechanical child sat up to greet them, the horrified crew threw it overboard.

      The story is probably apocryphal. But it sums up the hopes and fears that have been associated with human-like machines for nearly three millennia. Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits – in Descartes’s case, death itself. But this very unnaturalness terrifies and repulses others. In our era of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), those polarized responses persist, with pundits and the public applauding or warning against each advance. Digging into the deep history of intelligent machines, both real and imagined, we see how these attitudes evolved: from fantasies of trusty mechanical helpers to fears that runaway advances in technology might lead to creatures that supersede humanity itself.

         (Disponível em: <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05773-y)

A
Somente a afirmativa 3 é verdadeira.
B
Somente as afirmativas 1 e 3 são verdadeiras.
C
Somente as afirmativas 2 e 4 são verdadeiras.
D
Somente as afirmativas 1, 2 e 3 são verdadeiras.
E
Somente as afirmativas 1, 2 e 4 são verdadeiras.
ac1c2abd-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

In the sentence “Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits …”, the underlined word refers to:

             Ancient dreams of intelligent machines: 3,000 years of robots


      The French philosopher René Descartes was reputedly fond of automata: they inspired his view that living things were biological machines that function like clockwork. Less known is a strange story that began to circulate after the philosopher’s death in 1650. This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever at the age of five.

      According to the tale, a distraught Descartes had a clockwork Francine made: a walking, talking simulacrum. When Queen Christina invited the philosopher to Sweden in 1649, he sailed with the automaton concealed in a casket. Suspicious sailors forced the trunk open; when the mechanical child sat up to greet them, the horrified crew threw it overboard.

      The story is probably apocryphal. But it sums up the hopes and fears that have been associated with human-like machines for nearly three millennia. Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits – in Descartes’s case, death itself. But this very unnaturalness terrifies and repulses others. In our era of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), those polarized responses persist, with pundits and the public applauding or warning against each advance. Digging into the deep history of intelligent machines, both real and imagined, we see how these attitudes evolved: from fantasies of trusty mechanical helpers to fears that runaway advances in technology might lead to creatures that supersede humanity itself.

         (Disponível em: <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05773-y)

A
hopes and fears.
B
human-like machines.
C
three millennia.
D
natural limits.
E
machine builders.
ac1fb317-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text, it is correct to say:

             Ancient dreams of intelligent machines: 3,000 years of robots


      The French philosopher René Descartes was reputedly fond of automata: they inspired his view that living things were biological machines that function like clockwork. Less known is a strange story that began to circulate after the philosopher’s death in 1650. This centred on Descartes’s daughter Francine, who died of scarlet fever at the age of five.

      According to the tale, a distraught Descartes had a clockwork Francine made: a walking, talking simulacrum. When Queen Christina invited the philosopher to Sweden in 1649, he sailed with the automaton concealed in a casket. Suspicious sailors forced the trunk open; when the mechanical child sat up to greet them, the horrified crew threw it overboard.

      The story is probably apocryphal. But it sums up the hopes and fears that have been associated with human-like machines for nearly three millennia. Those who build such devices do so in the hope that they will overcome natural limits – in Descartes’s case, death itself. But this very unnaturalness terrifies and repulses others. In our era of advanced robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), those polarized responses persist, with pundits and the public applauding or warning against each advance. Digging into the deep history of intelligent machines, both real and imagined, we see how these attitudes evolved: from fantasies of trusty mechanical helpers to fears that runaway advances in technology might lead to creatures that supersede humanity itself.

         (Disponível em: <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05773-y)

A
In a near future, people will be better prepared to cope with the idea of death.
B
Humanity will disappear if advances in technology become uncontrollable.
C
There are groups with different positions about intelligent machines.
D
The first examples of automata have been attributed to Descartes’ contemporaries.
E
People have dreamed of human-like machines for more than three thousand years.
ac0ba3f0-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Gold One and Palabora Mining Company operate South African mines. Both companies have one aspect in common: they are unlisted. This means that these companies:

                        More than 100 South African gold miners

                                treated for smoke inhalation


      JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – Hundreds of South African gold mine workers were rescued and over 100 treated for smoke inhalation after an underground fire, the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) said on Thursday.

      Safety is a huge issue in South Africa’s dangerous deep-level mines and a focus for investors. A spate of deaths at SibanyeStillwater’s gold operations, including a seismic event that killed seven miners in early May, has highlighted the risks.

      In the latest incident, more than 600 miners were initially trapped after a fire broke out at a mine east of Johannesburg operated by unlisted Gold One, NUM said.

      This comes almost two weeks after five miners died in an underground fire at a South African copper mine operated by unlisted Palabora Mining Company in Limpopo.

      Company officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

      “As the NUM, we vehemently condemn this kind of incident as it is becoming a trend”, the union said in a statement.

(Disponível em:<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-mining-fire/more-than-100-south-african-gold-miners-treated-for-smoke-inhalation-idUSKBN1KG294  .)

A
are not on the official list of a particular stock exchange, so people cannot buy or sell their stocks there.
B
are not trustworthy or reliable because of their latest incidents in South African gold and copper mines.
C
have not been inspected by investors and, as a consequence, their workers are in constant danger.
D
do not agree with the recent events which have slaughtered mine workers.
E
do not have any company officials considering the dangers miners have to face in South Africa.
ac08691e-dd
UFPR 2018 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the information reported by the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), hundreds of South African mine workers:

                        More than 100 South African gold miners

                                treated for smoke inhalation


      JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – Hundreds of South African gold mine workers were rescued and over 100 treated for smoke inhalation after an underground fire, the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) said on Thursday.

      Safety is a huge issue in South Africa’s dangerous deep-level mines and a focus for investors. A spate of deaths at SibanyeStillwater’s gold operations, including a seismic event that killed seven miners in early May, has highlighted the risks.

      In the latest incident, more than 600 miners were initially trapped after a fire broke out at a mine east of Johannesburg operated by unlisted Gold One, NUM said.

      This comes almost two weeks after five miners died in an underground fire at a South African copper mine operated by unlisted Palabora Mining Company in Limpopo.

      Company officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

      “As the NUM, we vehemently condemn this kind of incident as it is becoming a trend”, the union said in a statement.

(Disponível em:<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-mining-fire/more-than-100-south-african-gold-miners-treated-for-smoke-inhalation-idUSKBN1KG294  .)

A
died after they were entombed by fire while working in a gold mine.
B
had to fight an underground fire before they were sent to nearby burn centers.
C
were able to leave a mine after an underground fire started but a lot of them suffered from breathing in smoke.
D
underwent serious health problems and as a consequence were incapable of continuing working inside gold mines.
E
got lost after a fire began violently at a gold mine in Johannesburg.
d0187d6b-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

The main idea of the text is related to:

                         Britain bans gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040

     Britain will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040 as part of a bid to clean up the country’s air. The decision to phase out the internal combustion engine heralds a new era of low-emission technologies with major implications for the auto industry, society and the environment. “We can’t carry on with diesel and petrol cars”, U.K. environment secretary Michael Gove told the BBC on Wednesday. “There is no alternative to embracing new technology”. Almost 2.7 million new cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016, making it the second biggest market in Europe after Germany.

     Meeting the 2040 deadline will be a heavy lift. British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market. Still, experts say sales of clean cars are likely to continue on their dramatic upward trajectory.

     The car industry says that demand for electric vehicles will only reach a tipping point once they're cheaper to own than conventional vehicles.

     The deadline was announced by the government on Wednesday as part of a plan to reduce air pollution. The blueprint highlighted roughly £1.4 billion in government investment designed to help ensure that every vehicle on the road in Britain produces zero emissions by 2050.

     Gove said action was needed because gasoline and diesel engines contribute to health problems, “accelerate climate change, do damage to the planet and the next generation”. Roughly 40,000 deaths in Britain each year are attributable to outdoor air pollution, according to a study published last year by the Royal College of Physicians. Dirty air has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, among other health issues.

    The problem is especially pronounced in big cities. London surpassed the European Union’s annual limit for nitrogen dioxide exposure just five days into the new year, according to King’s College. The university estimates that air pollution is responsible for 9,400 premature deaths in the city every year.

    The timeline for ending sales of internal combustion engines mirrors one proposed in early July by France. President Emmanuel Macron has given the auto industry the same deadline to make the switch to cleaner tech.

    “We are quite rightly in a position of global leadership when it comes to shaping new technology”, Gove said. But the auto industry, which supports over 800,000 jobs in the U.K., is wary of hard deadlines.

    Other countries have been even more ambitious than the U.K. India is planning to stop selling gas-powered vehicles by 2030.

    The German car industry and government officials will meet in early August to discuss the future of diesel engine technology. Manufacturers are trying to avoid diesel cars being banned from German towns and cities.

(Disponível:http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/26/news/uk-bans-gasoline-diesel-engines-2040/index.html>. Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
The plan to ban the sales of internal combustion engine cars in Britain.
B
France, Germany and India’s plans to ban the sales of electric cars.
C
The concerns doctors have with the amount of air pollution produced by combustion engine cars.
D
The British government concerns with the reduction of car sales.
E
The concerns car manufacturing companies have in relation to the drops in sales.
d01bca77-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Pronome subjetivo | Subjective pronoun, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension, Pronomes | Pronouns

Com base no texto, considere as seguintes afirmativas:

1. No primeiro parágrafo, a palavra em negrito e sublinhada (“it”) refere-se ao Reino Unido.

2. No segundo parágrafo, a palavra em negrito e sublinhada (“they”) refere-se a “electric, fuel cell and pug-in hybrid cars”.

3. No terceiro parágrafo, a palavra em negrito e sublinhada (“they”) refere-se a “conventional vehicles”.

4. No oitavo parágrafo, a palavra “we” em negrito e sublinhada refere-se ao governo da França.

Assinale a alternativa correta.

                         Britain bans gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040

     Britain will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040 as part of a bid to clean up the country’s air. The decision to phase out the internal combustion engine heralds a new era of low-emission technologies with major implications for the auto industry, society and the environment. “We can’t carry on with diesel and petrol cars”, U.K. environment secretary Michael Gove told the BBC on Wednesday. “There is no alternative to embracing new technology”. Almost 2.7 million new cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016, making it the second biggest market in Europe after Germany.

     Meeting the 2040 deadline will be a heavy lift. British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market. Still, experts say sales of clean cars are likely to continue on their dramatic upward trajectory.

     The car industry says that demand for electric vehicles will only reach a tipping point once they're cheaper to own than conventional vehicles.

     The deadline was announced by the government on Wednesday as part of a plan to reduce air pollution. The blueprint highlighted roughly £1.4 billion in government investment designed to help ensure that every vehicle on the road in Britain produces zero emissions by 2050.

     Gove said action was needed because gasoline and diesel engines contribute to health problems, “accelerate climate change, do damage to the planet and the next generation”. Roughly 40,000 deaths in Britain each year are attributable to outdoor air pollution, according to a study published last year by the Royal College of Physicians. Dirty air has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, among other health issues.

    The problem is especially pronounced in big cities. London surpassed the European Union’s annual limit for nitrogen dioxide exposure just five days into the new year, according to King’s College. The university estimates that air pollution is responsible for 9,400 premature deaths in the city every year.

    The timeline for ending sales of internal combustion engines mirrors one proposed in early July by France. President Emmanuel Macron has given the auto industry the same deadline to make the switch to cleaner tech.

    “We are quite rightly in a position of global leadership when it comes to shaping new technology”, Gove said. But the auto industry, which supports over 800,000 jobs in the U.K., is wary of hard deadlines.

    Other countries have been even more ambitious than the U.K. India is planning to stop selling gas-powered vehicles by 2030.

    The German car industry and government officials will meet in early August to discuss the future of diesel engine technology. Manufacturers are trying to avoid diesel cars being banned from German towns and cities.

(Disponível:http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/26/news/uk-bans-gasoline-diesel-engines-2040/index.html>. Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
Somente as afirmativas 1 e 2 são verdadeiras.
B
Somente as afirmativas 2 e 4 são verdadeiras. 
C
Somente as afirmativas 3 e 4 são verdadeiras
D
Somente as afirmativas 1, 2 e 3 são verdadeiras.
E
As afirmativas 1, 2, 3 e 4 são verdadeiras.
d01eec76-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following excerpt taken from the text:

British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market.

Choose the alternative that conveys the same meaning of the excerpt above.

                         Britain bans gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040

     Britain will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040 as part of a bid to clean up the country’s air. The decision to phase out the internal combustion engine heralds a new era of low-emission technologies with major implications for the auto industry, society and the environment. “We can’t carry on with diesel and petrol cars”, U.K. environment secretary Michael Gove told the BBC on Wednesday. “There is no alternative to embracing new technology”. Almost 2.7 million new cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016, making it the second biggest market in Europe after Germany.

     Meeting the 2040 deadline will be a heavy lift. British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market. Still, experts say sales of clean cars are likely to continue on their dramatic upward trajectory.

     The car industry says that demand for electric vehicles will only reach a tipping point once they're cheaper to own than conventional vehicles.

     The deadline was announced by the government on Wednesday as part of a plan to reduce air pollution. The blueprint highlighted roughly £1.4 billion in government investment designed to help ensure that every vehicle on the road in Britain produces zero emissions by 2050.

     Gove said action was needed because gasoline and diesel engines contribute to health problems, “accelerate climate change, do damage to the planet and the next generation”. Roughly 40,000 deaths in Britain each year are attributable to outdoor air pollution, according to a study published last year by the Royal College of Physicians. Dirty air has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, among other health issues.

    The problem is especially pronounced in big cities. London surpassed the European Union’s annual limit for nitrogen dioxide exposure just five days into the new year, according to King’s College. The university estimates that air pollution is responsible for 9,400 premature deaths in the city every year.

    The timeline for ending sales of internal combustion engines mirrors one proposed in early July by France. President Emmanuel Macron has given the auto industry the same deadline to make the switch to cleaner tech.

    “We are quite rightly in a position of global leadership when it comes to shaping new technology”, Gove said. But the auto industry, which supports over 800,000 jobs in the U.K., is wary of hard deadlines.

    Other countries have been even more ambitious than the U.K. India is planning to stop selling gas-powered vehicles by 2030.

    The German car industry and government officials will meet in early August to discuss the future of diesel engine technology. Manufacturers are trying to avoid diesel cars being banned from German towns and cities.

(Disponível:http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/26/news/uk-bans-gasoline-diesel-engines-2040/index.html>. Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
In 2015, British clean energy car manufacturers dominated the automobile market.
B
The search for plug-in hybrid cars is not as large as for electric and fuel cell cars.
C
40% of the cars sold in Britain in 2015 use clean energy.
D
Only 3% of the car sales in the market refer to petrol energy vehicles.
E
 In 2015, the majority of the cars sold in Britain were internal combustion energy vehicles.
d00762e4-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

The text illustrates:

                                                              The ways Mexicans tell time

Understanding this takes not a fluency in the language but rather a fluency in Mexican culture.

Mexicans are famous in the Spanish-speaking world for their extensive use of the diminutive. While in most Spanish-speaking countries the addition of the diminutive ‘ita’ to an adverb like ahora (meaning ‘now’) would strengthen it to indicate immediacy (i.e. ‘right now’), this is not the case in Mexico. Dr Company explained that Mexicans instead use the diminutive form to break down the space between the speaker and the listener and lessen formality. In this case of ‘ahorita’, the addition of the diminutive reduces urgency rather than increasing it – a difference that can be extremely confusing for foreigners.

(Disponível:<http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20170725-the-confusing-way-mexicans-tell-time>.

Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
a variety of ways of expressing immediacy in Spanish.
B
the non-interference of the diminutive in communication among Spanish speakers.
C
different forms of expressing periods of time in Spanish.
D
the importance of language accuracy in communicating in Spanish
E
the variations of the use of the diminutive in different Spanish speaking countries.
d01480ef-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

According to the text, choose the correct alternative

                         Britain bans gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040

     Britain will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040 as part of a bid to clean up the country’s air. The decision to phase out the internal combustion engine heralds a new era of low-emission technologies with major implications for the auto industry, society and the environment. “We can’t carry on with diesel and petrol cars”, U.K. environment secretary Michael Gove told the BBC on Wednesday. “There is no alternative to embracing new technology”. Almost 2.7 million new cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016, making it the second biggest market in Europe after Germany.

     Meeting the 2040 deadline will be a heavy lift. British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market. Still, experts say sales of clean cars are likely to continue on their dramatic upward trajectory.

     The car industry says that demand for electric vehicles will only reach a tipping point once they're cheaper to own than conventional vehicles.

     The deadline was announced by the government on Wednesday as part of a plan to reduce air pollution. The blueprint highlighted roughly £1.4 billion in government investment designed to help ensure that every vehicle on the road in Britain produces zero emissions by 2050.

     Gove said action was needed because gasoline and diesel engines contribute to health problems, “accelerate climate change, do damage to the planet and the next generation”. Roughly 40,000 deaths in Britain each year are attributable to outdoor air pollution, according to a study published last year by the Royal College of Physicians. Dirty air has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, among other health issues.

    The problem is especially pronounced in big cities. London surpassed the European Union’s annual limit for nitrogen dioxide exposure just five days into the new year, according to King’s College. The university estimates that air pollution is responsible for 9,400 premature deaths in the city every year.

    The timeline for ending sales of internal combustion engines mirrors one proposed in early July by France. President Emmanuel Macron has given the auto industry the same deadline to make the switch to cleaner tech.

    “We are quite rightly in a position of global leadership when it comes to shaping new technology”, Gove said. But the auto industry, which supports over 800,000 jobs in the U.K., is wary of hard deadlines.

    Other countries have been even more ambitious than the U.K. India is planning to stop selling gas-powered vehicles by 2030.

    The German car industry and government officials will meet in early August to discuss the future of diesel engine technology. Manufacturers are trying to avoid diesel cars being banned from German towns and cities.

(Disponível:http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/26/news/uk-bans-gasoline-diesel-engines-2040/index.html>. Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
The number of cars sold in the UK have turned Great Britain into the most profitable car market in Europe.
B
German manufacturers of cars are interested in banning diesel vehicles form German towns and cities, despite financial concerns.
C
British government is willing to spend over 1,4 billion pounds in order to have only clean energy cars by 2050.
D
France has set the year 2030 as its deadline to stop selling petrol and diesel cars.
E
British government expects to reach zero emissions over twenty years after the 2040 deadline.
d01067c3-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following numbers:

1. 2.7 million new clean energy cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016.

2. 40,000 of British deaths yearly are said to be caused by pollution related diseases.

3. Car industry in Britain is cautious about having specific dates for banning internal combustion energy cars because it supports over 800.000 jobs in the UK.

Mark the correct alternative.

                         Britain bans gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040

     Britain will ban sales of new gasoline and diesel cars starting in 2040 as part of a bid to clean up the country’s air. The decision to phase out the internal combustion engine heralds a new era of low-emission technologies with major implications for the auto industry, society and the environment. “We can’t carry on with diesel and petrol cars”, U.K. environment secretary Michael Gove told the BBC on Wednesday. “There is no alternative to embracing new technology”. Almost 2.7 million new cars were registered in the U.K. in 2016, making it the second biggest market in Europe after Germany.

     Meeting the 2040 deadline will be a heavy lift. British demand for electric and fuel cell cars, as well as plug-in hybrids, grew 40% in 2015, but they only accounted for less than 3% of the market. Still, experts say sales of clean cars are likely to continue on their dramatic upward trajectory.

     The car industry says that demand for electric vehicles will only reach a tipping point once they're cheaper to own than conventional vehicles.

     The deadline was announced by the government on Wednesday as part of a plan to reduce air pollution. The blueprint highlighted roughly £1.4 billion in government investment designed to help ensure that every vehicle on the road in Britain produces zero emissions by 2050.

     Gove said action was needed because gasoline and diesel engines contribute to health problems, “accelerate climate change, do damage to the planet and the next generation”. Roughly 40,000 deaths in Britain each year are attributable to outdoor air pollution, according to a study published last year by the Royal College of Physicians. Dirty air has been linked to cancer, asthma, stroke and heart disease, among other health issues.

    The problem is especially pronounced in big cities. London surpassed the European Union’s annual limit for nitrogen dioxide exposure just five days into the new year, according to King’s College. The university estimates that air pollution is responsible for 9,400 premature deaths in the city every year.

    The timeline for ending sales of internal combustion engines mirrors one proposed in early July by France. President Emmanuel Macron has given the auto industry the same deadline to make the switch to cleaner tech.

    “We are quite rightly in a position of global leadership when it comes to shaping new technology”, Gove said. But the auto industry, which supports over 800,000 jobs in the U.K., is wary of hard deadlines.

    Other countries have been even more ambitious than the U.K. India is planning to stop selling gas-powered vehicles by 2030.

    The German car industry and government officials will meet in early August to discuss the future of diesel engine technology. Manufacturers are trying to avoid diesel cars being banned from German towns and cities.

(Disponível:http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/26/news/uk-bans-gasoline-diesel-engines-2040/index.html>. Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
Only affirmative 3 is correct.
B
Only affirmatives 1 and 2 are correct. 
C
Only affirmatives 1 and 3 are correct.
D
 Only affirmatives 2 and 3 are correct. 
E
Affirmatives 1, 2 and 3 are correct.
d00b11f3-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following excerpt:

Difficulty interpreting what I have come to call ‘Ahorita Time’ is a reflection of different cultural understandings of time. Dr Company explained that if she is giving a talk in Mexico and goes over her allotted time, Mexicans “feel like I am giving them a gift”. In the UK or the US, however, “The audience starts to leave, feeling like I am wasting their time”.

Choose the alternative that conveys the same meaning of the excerpt above.

A
Mexicans tend to feel lack of respect when talks or lectures go beyond the destined time frames.
B
Dr Company believes that negative feelings from different audiences in talks are due to lack of language comprehension.
C
People in different countries react differently to going over time in talks based on cultural backgrounds.
D
In the US or the UK, it is customary for the audiences to stay over the allotted times of talks and lectures.
E
The interpretation of time by Mexicans and people from different nationalities is a language barrier. 
d0040343-be
UFPR 2017 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following affirmatives:

1. The use of the diminutive in Mexico does not follow the same rules for other Spanish speaking countries.

2. Dr Company says that Mexicans use ‘ahorita’ to indicate immediacy.

3. The use of the diminutive in Mexico indicates more proximity between speaker and listener.

4. The ‘ahorita’ example indicates the particular way Mexicans have adapted language to their cultural patterns.

Choose the correct alternative.

                                                              The ways Mexicans tell time

Understanding this takes not a fluency in the language but rather a fluency in Mexican culture.

Mexicans are famous in the Spanish-speaking world for their extensive use of the diminutive. While in most Spanish-speaking countries the addition of the diminutive ‘ita’ to an adverb like ahora (meaning ‘now’) would strengthen it to indicate immediacy (i.e. ‘right now’), this is not the case in Mexico. Dr Company explained that Mexicans instead use the diminutive form to break down the space between the speaker and the listener and lessen formality. In this case of ‘ahorita’, the addition of the diminutive reduces urgency rather than increasing it – a difference that can be extremely confusing for foreigners.

(Disponível:<http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20170725-the-confusing-way-mexicans-tell-time>.

Adaptado. Acesso: 26 de julho de 2017.)

A
Only affirmatives 1 and 3 are correct.
B
Only affirmatives 2 and 3 are correct. 
C
Only affirmatives 2 and 4 are correct. 
D
Only affirmatives 1, 2 and 4 are correct.
E
Only affirmatives 1, 3 and 4 are correct.
3555271e-3b
UFPR 2016 - Inglês - Pronome subjetivo | Subjective pronoun, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension, Pronomes | Pronouns

The word “they”, in boldface and underlined, in section 3, refers to:

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car
1 - Human beings are terrible drivers.
We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000 people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40% of drivers never even hit the brakes. We’re flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Google’s “moonshots” – to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human.
2 - Google self-driving cars are timid.
The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that it’s more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns.
3 - They’re cute.
Google’s new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. They’re intended as moderate-distance couriers, not openroad warriors, so their max speed is 25 miles per hour.
4 - It’s not done and it’s not perfect.
Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still aren’t ready for the real world. They can’t drive in the snow or heavy rain, and there’s a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could.
5 - I want this technology to succeed, like… yesterday.
I’m biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that she’ll probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95% of a car’s lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they don’t think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better.
6 - It wasn’t an exhilarating ride, and that’s a good thing.
Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that you’re being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, you’re being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all it’s going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy.
(Adapted from: <http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car> . 21/08/2016.)
A
Google’s new self-driving cars.
B
inanimate or animate objects.
C
objects resembling living things.
D
other car drivers.
E
open-road warriors.
355e0954-3b
UFPR 2016 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Based on the text, it is correct to affirm that the author:

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car
1 - Human beings are terrible drivers.
We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000 people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40% of drivers never even hit the brakes. We’re flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Google’s “moonshots” – to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human.
2 - Google self-driving cars are timid.
The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that it’s more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns.
3 - They’re cute.
Google’s new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. They’re intended as moderate-distance couriers, not openroad warriors, so their max speed is 25 miles per hour.
4 - It’s not done and it’s not perfect.
Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still aren’t ready for the real world. They can’t drive in the snow or heavy rain, and there’s a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could.
5 - I want this technology to succeed, like… yesterday.
I’m biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that she’ll probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95% of a car’s lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they don’t think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better.
6 - It wasn’t an exhilarating ride, and that’s a good thing.
Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that you’re being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, you’re being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all it’s going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy.
(Adapted from: <http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car> . 21/08/2016.)
A
denies the advantages of self-driving vehicles.
B
admits the new type of car will receive severe criticism.
C
wants to buy his mother an autonomous vehicle in the future.
D
was an intern working in Google’s new self-driving vehicle project.
E
believes the new self-driving cars need human support on highways.
3558077e-3b
UFPR 2016 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

The text points out that the design of the self-driving car is deliberately attractive because:

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car
1 - Human beings are terrible drivers.
We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000 people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40% of drivers never even hit the brakes. We’re flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Google’s “moonshots” – to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human.
2 - Google self-driving cars are timid.
The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that it’s more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns.
3 - They’re cute.
Google’s new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. They’re intended as moderate-distance couriers, not openroad warriors, so their max speed is 25 miles per hour.
4 - It’s not done and it’s not perfect.
Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still aren’t ready for the real world. They can’t drive in the snow or heavy rain, and there’s a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could.
5 - I want this technology to succeed, like… yesterday.
I’m biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that she’ll probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95% of a car’s lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they don’t think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better.
6 - It wasn’t an exhilarating ride, and that’s a good thing.
Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that you’re being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, you’re being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all it’s going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy.
(Adapted from: <http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car> . 21/08/2016.)
A
Google expects to neutralize their possible competitors.
B
people tend to behave positively towards things that look like alive things.
C
young people enjoy driving attractive brand new models.
D
other drivers might not surpass these autonomous cars on the road.
E
their appearance may help people who suffered accidents overcome their fears.
355266d6-3b
UFPR 2016 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following characteristics of the new Google self-driving car:

1. It runs on batteries and petrol.
2. It can be used in extreme weather conditions.
3. It has a design which requires further modifications.
4. It can reach the speed of 25 miles per hour.

Mark the correct alternative.

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car
1 - Human beings are terrible drivers.
We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000 people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40% of drivers never even hit the brakes. We’re flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Google’s “moonshots” – to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human.
2 - Google self-driving cars are timid.
The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that it’s more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns.
3 - They’re cute.
Google’s new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. They’re intended as moderate-distance couriers, not openroad warriors, so their max speed is 25 miles per hour.
4 - It’s not done and it’s not perfect.
Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still aren’t ready for the real world. They can’t drive in the snow or heavy rain, and there’s a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could.
5 - I want this technology to succeed, like… yesterday.
I’m biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that she’ll probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95% of a car’s lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they don’t think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better.
6 - It wasn’t an exhilarating ride, and that’s a good thing.
Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that you’re being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, you’re being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all it’s going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy.
(Adapted from: <http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car> . 21/08/2016.)
A
Only 1 is correct.
B
Only 1 and 4 are correct.
C
Only 3 and 4 are correct.
D
Only 1, 2 and 3 are correct.
E
Only 2, 3 and 4 are correct.
3549abca-3b
UFPR 2016 - Inglês - Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

Consider the following:

1. Drinking before driving.
2. Sending a written message while driving.
3. Sleeping for a short period of time.
4. Hitting the brakes.
5. Speeding up.

According to the text, some human mistakes that happen before or during a car accident are:

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car
1 - Human beings are terrible drivers.
We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000 people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40% of drivers never even hit the brakes. We’re flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Google’s “moonshots” – to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human.
2 - Google self-driving cars are timid.
The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that it’s more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns.
3 - They’re cute.
Google’s new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. They’re intended as moderate-distance couriers, not openroad warriors, so their max speed is 25 miles per hour.
4 - It’s not done and it’s not perfect.
Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still aren’t ready for the real world. They can’t drive in the snow or heavy rain, and there’s a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could.
5 - I want this technology to succeed, like… yesterday.
I’m biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that she’ll probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95% of a car’s lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they don’t think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better.
6 - It wasn’t an exhilarating ride, and that’s a good thing.
Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that you’re being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, you’re being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all it’s going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy.
(Adapted from: <http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car> . 21/08/2016.)
A
1 and 3 only.
B
1, 2 and 4 only.
C
2, 4 and 5 only.
D
3, 4 and 5 only.
E
1, 2, 3 and 5 only.