考研201英語(yǔ)（一）在線題庫(kù)每日一練（一百九十八）

本文提供考研201英語(yǔ)（一）在線題庫(kù)每日一練，以下為具體內(nèi)容

1、An old saying has it that half of all advertising budgets are wasted—the trouble is, no one knows which half. In the internet age, at least in theory, this fraction can be much reduced. By watching what people search for, click on and say online, companies can aim “behavioural” ads at those most likely to buy.In the past couple of weeks a quarrel has illustrated the value to advertisers of such fine-grained information: Should advertisers assume that people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioural ads? Or should they have explicit permission?In December 2010 America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proposed adding a “do not track” (DNT) option to internet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not want to be followed. Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Apple's Safari both offer DNT; Google's Chrome is due to do so this year. In February the FTC and the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) agreed that the industry would get cracking on responding to DNT requests.On May 31st Microsoft set off the row. It said that Internet Explorer 10, the version due to appear with windows 8, would have DNT as a default.Advertisers are horrified. Human nature being what it is, most people stick with default settings. Few switch DNT on now, but if tracking is off it will stay off. Bob Liodice, the chief executive of the Association of National Advertisers, says consumers will be worse off if the industry cannot collect information about their preferences. People will not get fewer ads, he says. “They'll get less meaningful, less targeted ads.”It is not yet clear how advertisers will respond. Getting a DNT signal does not oblige anyone to stop tracking, although some companies have promised to do so. Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft's default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.Also unclear is why Microsoft has gone it alone. After all, it has an ad business too, which it says will comply with DNT requests, though it is still working out how. If it is trying to upset Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising, it has chosen an indirect method: There is no guarantee that DNT by default will become the norm. DNT does not seem an obviously huge selling point for windows 8—though the firm has compared some of its other products favourably with Google's on that count before. Brendon Lynch, Microsoft's chief privacy officer, blogged: “We believe consumers should have more control.” Could it really be that simple?1.It is suggested in Paragraph 1 that “behavioural” ads help advertisers to（  ）.2.“The industry” (Line 4, Para.3) refers to （  ）.  3.Bob Liodice holds that setting DNT as a default（  ）.4.Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 6?5.The author's attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of（  ）.

問(wèn)題1

A、ease competition among themselves

B、lower their operational costs

C、avoid complaints from consumers

D、provide better online services

問(wèn)題2

A、online advertisers

B、e-commerce conductors

C、digital information analysis

D、internet browser developers

問(wèn)題3

A、may cut the number of junk ads

B、fails to affect the ad industry

C、will not benefit consumers

D、goes against human nature

問(wèn)題4

A、DNT may not serve its intended purpose.

B、Advertisers are willing to implement DNT.

C、DNT is losing its popularity among consumers.

D、Advertisers are obliged to offer behavioural ads.

問(wèn)題5

A、indulgence

B、understanding

C、appreciation

D、skepticism

2、Just how much does the Constitution protect your digital data? The Supreme Court will now consider whether police can search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant if the phone is on or around a person during an arrest. California has asked the justices to refrain from a sweeping ruling, particularly one that upsets the old assumptions that authorities may search through the possessions of suspects at the time of their arrest. It is hard, the state argues, for judges to assess the implications of new and rapidly changing technologies. The court would be recklessly modest if it followed California's advice. Enough of the implications are discernable, even obvious, so that the justice can and should provide updated guidelines to police, lawyers and defendants. They should start by discarding California's lame argument that exploring the contents of a smart phone—a vast storehouse of digital information—is similar to say, going through a suspect's purse. The court has ruled that police don't violate the Fourth Amendment when they go through the wallet or pocketbook, of an arrestee without a warrant. But exploring one's smartphone is more like entering his or her home. A smartphone may contain an arrestee's reading history, financial history, medical history and comprehensive records of recent correspondence. The development of “cloud computing,” meanwhile, has made that exploration so much the easier. Americans should take steps to protect their digital privacy. But keeping sensitive information on these devices is increasingly a requirement of normal life. Citizens still have a right to expect private documents to remain private and protected by the Constitution's prohibition on unreasonable searches.As so often is the case, stating that principle doesn't ease the challenge of line-drawing. In many cases, it would not be overly burdensome for authorities to obtain a warrant to search through phone contents. They could still invalidate Fourth Amendment protections when facing severe, urgent circumstances, and they could take reasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not erased or altered while waiting for a warrant. The court, though, may want to allow room for police to cite situations where they are entitled to more freedom. But the justices should not swallow California's argument whole. New, disruptive technology sometimes demands novel applications of the Constitution's protections. Orin Kerr, a law professor, compares the explosion and accessibility of digital information in the 21st century with the establishment of automobile use as a digital necessity of life in the 20th: The justices had to specify novel rules for the new personal domain of the passenger car then; they must sort out how the Fourth Amendment applies to digital information now. 1.The Supreme Court will work out whether, during an arrest, it is legitimate to（  ）.2.The author's attitude toward California's argument is one of （  ）.  3.The author believes that exploring one's phone contents is comparable to （  ）.  4.In Paragraphs 5 and 6, the author shows his concern that （  ）.  5.Orin Kerr's comparison is quoted to indicate that（  ）.

問(wèn)題1

A、search for suspects' mobile phones without a warrant

B、check suspects' phone contents without being authorized

C、prevent suspects from deleting their phone contents

D、prohibit suspects from using their mobile phones

問(wèn)題2

A、tolerance

B、indifference

C、disapproval

D、cautiousness

問(wèn)題3

A、getting into one's residence

B、handling one's historical records

C、scanning one's correspondences

D、going through one's wallet

問(wèn)題4

A、principles are hard to be clearly expressed

B、the court is giving police less room for action

C、phones are used to store sensitive information

D、citizens, privacy is not effectively protected

問(wèn)題5

A、the Constitution should be implemented flexibly

B、new technology requires reinterpretation of the Constitution

C、California's argument violates principles of the Constitution

D、principles of the Constitution should never be altered

3、Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch's daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the “unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions.” Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of a collective acceptance that the only “sorting mechanism” in society should be profit and the market. But “it's us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit.’’Driving her point home, she continued: “It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose, of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.” This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.As the hacking trial concludes—finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, Andy Coulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent of the same charge—the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was that she knew nothing.In today's world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For a generation, the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit. The words that have mattered are efficiency, flexibility, shareholder value, business-friendly, wealth generation, sales, impact and, in newspapers, circulation. Words degraded to the margin have been justice, fairness, tolerance, proportionality and accountability.The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding, to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity. It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact. Ms Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories, but she asked no questions, gave no instructions—nor received traceable, recorded answers. 1.According to the first two paragraphs, Elisabeth was upset by（  ）.2.It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that （  ）.  3.The author believes that Rebekah Brooks's defence （  ）.  4.The author holds that the current collective doctrine shows （  ）.  5.Which of the following is suggested in the last paragraph?

問(wèn)題1

A、the consequences of the current sorting mechanism

B、companies' financial loss due to immoral practices

C、governmental ineffectiveness on moral issues

D、the wide misuse of integrity among institutions

問(wèn)題2

A、Glenn Mulcaire may deny phone hacking as a crime

B、phone hacking will be accepted on certain occasions

C、Andy Coulson should be held innocent of the charge

D、more journalists may be found guilty of phone hacking

問(wèn)題3

A、revealed a cunning personality

B、centered on trivial issues

C、was hardly convincing

D、was part of a conspiracy

問(wèn)題4

A、generally distorted values

B、unfair wealth distribution

C、a marginalized lifestyle

D、a rigid moral code

問(wèn)題5

A、The quality of writings is of primary importance.

B、Moral awareness matters in editing a newspaper.

C、Common humanity is central to news reporting.

D、Journalists need stricter industrial regulations.

4、In Cambodia, the choice of a spouse is a complex one for the young male. It may involve not only his parents and his friends,（1）those of the young woman, but also a matchmaker. A young man can（2）  a likely spouse on his own and then ask his parents to （3）the marriage negotiations, or the young man's parents may make the choice of a spouse, giving the child little to say in the selection. （4）, a girl may veto the spouse her parents have chosen. （5）a spouse has been selected, each family investigates the other to make sure its child is marrying（6）a good family.The traditional wedding is a long and colorful affair. Formerly it lasted three days, （7）by the 1980s it more commonly lasted a day and a half. Buddhist priests offer a short sermon and （8）  prayers of blessing. Parts of the ceremony involve ritual hair cutting, （9）cotton threads soaked in holy water around the bride's and groom's wrists, and （10）a candle around a circle of happily married and respected couples to bless the （11）. Newlyweds traditionally move in with the wife's parents and may（12）with them up to a year,（13）they can build a new house nearby.Divorce is legal and easy to （14）, but not common. Divorced persons are （15）with some disapproval. Each spouse retains（16）property he or she（17）into the marriage, and jointly-acquired property is（18）equally. Divorced persons may remarry, but a gender prejudice （19）up: The divorced male doesn't have a waiting period before he can remarry（20）the woman must wait ten months.

問(wèn)題1

A、by way of

B、as well as

C、on behalf of

D、with regard to

問(wèn)題2

A、adapt to

B、provide for

C、compete with

D、decide on

問(wèn)題3

A、close

B、renew

C、arrange

D、postpone

問(wèn)題4

A、In theory

B、Above all

C、In time

D、For example

問(wèn)題5

A、Although

B、Lest

C、After

D、Unless

問(wèn)題6

A、into

B、within

C、from

D、through

問(wèn)題7

A、since

B、or

C、but

D、so

問(wèn)題8

A、test

B、copy

C、recite

D、create

問(wèn)題9

A、folding

B、piling

C、wrapping

D、tying

問(wèn)題10

A、lighting

B、passing

C、hiding

D、serving

問(wèn)題11

A、meeting

B、association

C、collection

D、union

問(wèn)題12

A、grow

B、part

C、deal

D、live

問(wèn)題13

A、whereas

B、until

C、for

D、if

問(wèn)題14

A、obtain

B、follow

C、challenge

D、avoid

問(wèn)題15

A、isolated

B、persuaded

C、viewed

D、exposed

問(wèn)題16

A、wherever

B、however

C、whenever

D、whatever

問(wèn)題17

A、changed

B、brought

C、shaped

D、pushed

問(wèn)題18

A、divided

B、invested

C、donated

D、withdrawn

問(wèn)題19

A、clears

B、warms

C、shows

D、breaks

問(wèn)題20

A、while

B、so that

C、once

D、in that

5、For the first time in history more people live in towns than in the country. In Britain this has had a curious result. While polls show Britons rate “the countryside” alongside the royal family, Shakespeare and the National Health Service (NHS) as what makes them proudest of their country, this has limited political support.A century ago Octavia Hill launched the National Trust not to rescue stylish houses but to save “the beauty of natural places for everyone forever.” It was specifically to provide city dwellers with spaces for leisure where they could experience “a refreshing air.” Hill's pressure later led to the creation of national parks and green belts. They don't make countryside any more, and every year concrete consumes more of it. It needs constant guardianship.At the next election none of the big parties seem likely to endorse this sentiment. The Conservatives' planning reform explicitly gives rural development priority over conservation, even authorising “off-plan” building where local people might object. The concept of sustainable development has been defined as profitable. Labour likewise wants to discontinue local planning where councils oppose development. The Liberal Democrats are silent. Only Ukip, sensing its chance, has sided with those pleading for a more considered approach to using green land. Its Campaign to Protect Rural England struck terror into many local Conservative parties.The sensible place to build new houses, factories and offices is where people are, in cities and towns where infrastructure is in place. The London agents Stirling Ackroyd recently identified enough sites for half a million houses in the London area alone, with no intrusion on green belt. What is true of London is even truer of the provinces. The idea that “housing crisis” equals “concreted meadows” is pure lobby talk. The issue is not the need for more houses but, as always, where to put them. Under lobby pressure, George Osborne favours rural new-build against urban renovation and renewal. He favours out-of-town shopping sites against high streets. This is not a free market but a biased one. Rural towns and villages have grown and will always grow. They do so best where building sticks to their edges and respects their character. We do not ruin urban conservation areas. Why ruin rural ones?Development should be planned, not let rip. After the Netherlands, Britain is Europe's most crowded country. Half a century of town and country planning has enabled it to retain an enviable rural coherence, while still permitting low-density urban living. There is no doubt of the alternative—the corrupted landscapes of southern Portugal, Spain or Ireland. Avoiding this rather than promoting it should unite the left and right of the political spectrum.1.Britain's public sentiment about the countryside（  ）.2.According to Paragraph 2, the achievements of the National Trust are now being （  ）.  3.Which of the following can be inferred from Paragraph 3?4.The author holds that George Osborne's preference （  ）.  5.In the last paragraph, the author shows his appreciation of（  ）.

問(wèn)題1

A、has brought much benefit to the NHS

B、didn't start till the Shakespearean age

C、is fully backed by the royal family

D、is not well reflected in politics

問(wèn)題2

A、gradually destroyed

B、effectively reinforced

C、properly protected

D、largely overshadowed

問(wèn)題3

A、Labour is under attack for opposing development.

B、The Conservatives may abandon “off-plan” building.

C、Ukip may gain from its support for rural conservation.

D、The Liberal Democrats are losing political influence.

問(wèn)題4

A、reveals a strong prejudice against urban areas

B、shows his disregard for the character of rural areas

C、stresses the necessity of easing the housing crisis

D、highlights his firm stand against lobby pressure

問(wèn)題5

A、the size of population in Britain

B、the enviable urban lifestyle in Britain

C、the town-and-country planning in Britain

D、the political life in today's Britain