Questões de Concurso
Comentadas sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês
Foram encontradas 8.691 questões
One of my earliest memories is of my mother cleaning with
what looked to me like cooking ingredients. She would be listening
to the radio as she poured baking soda, lemon, and vinegar
combinations on the surfaces of our home. Magically these natural
cleaning products kept our home clean and smelling fresh, without
stretching an already thin household budget. Here are a few basic
household ingredients and items you can use to clean your home.
Vinegar naturally cleans like an all-purpose cleaner. Mix a
solution of 1 part water to 1 part vinegar in a new store bought
spray bottle and you have a solution that will clean most areas of
your home. Vinegar is a great natural cleaning product as well as
a disinfectant and deodorizer. Always test on an inconspicuous
area. It is safe to use on most surfaces and has the added bonus of
being incredibly cheap. Improperly diluted vinegar is acidic and
can eat away at tile grout. Never use vinegar on marble surfaces.
Don't worry about your home smelling like vinegar. The smell
disappears when it dries.
Lemon juice is another natural substance that can be used to
clean your home. Lemon juice can be used to dissolve soap scum
and hard water deposits. Lemon is a great substance to clean and
shine brass and copper. Lemon juice can be mixed with vinegar
and or baking soda to make cleaning pastes. Cut a lemon in half
and sprinkle baking soda on the cut section. Use the lemon to
scrub dishes, surfaces, and stains.
Baking soda can be used to scrub surfaces in much the same
way as commercial abrasive cleansers. Baking soda is great as a
deodorizer. Place a box in the refrigerator and freezer to absorb
odors. Put it anywhere you need deodorizing action. Try these three
kitchen ingredients as natural cleaning products in your home.
(http://housekeeping.about.com/cs/environment/a/alternateclean.30.10.2009.
Adaptado)
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet:
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
All of Somalia's pirates come from one region, what makes their interdiction quite easy.
In the last year, Somalia's pirates have attacked 120 vessels in the Gulf of Aden, choking commerce in a critical shipping lane (the transit route for 20 percent of the world's oil), blocking aid supplies and driving up transport costs.
The last few weeks have shown how hard it will be to defeat the pirates on the high seas, which seems like the international community's approach. When British Marines tried to board a captured fishing dhow on Nov. 11, they had to go in with guns blazing and killed one possible hostage in the process. A week later, an Indian warship opened fire on what it thought was a pirate mother ship. But the target turned out to be a Thai fishing vessel. When pirates seized their most valuable prize ever on Nov. 15 - the Sirius Star supertanker holding 2 million barrels of Saudi crude - everyone kept their distance.
As this suggests, Somalia's seaborne bandits are making a mockery of all efforts to stop them. Pirates have only increased their efforts, ranging across an area bigger than the Mediterranean. The Sirius Star was taken 450 nautical miles southeast of Kenya, and with it, the Somalis now hold 300 hostages and 15 ships.
The Somalia's internationally recognized transitional government has invited foreign navies to do what's necessary to stop the pirates, even attacking them ashore if need be. The Security Council has affirmed that option. Moreover, nearly all of Somalia's pirates come from one region (Puntland), live in a single town (Boosaaso) and stash captured vessels in one of three ports (Eyl, Hobyo or Haradhere) - making interdiction that much easier. Andrew Linington of Nautilus UK, a seaman's union that has had many of its members taken hostage, says the international community "knows where the pirates are, they know the ports they use, they know the mother ships. Stopping them could be done," he says. But that would be expensive at a time when U.S. resources are tied up in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rod Nordlant. Sharks in the water. Internet:
According to the text, it is correct to affirm that
Although the international community may know where the pirates are or the ports they use, interdicting them would be quite expensive for the U.S. at this moment.
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
January 26, 2009
By John C. Dvorak
It's no coincidence that the computer industry peaked around the year 2000, went into a serious decline, stabilized at the low point a couple of years ago, and has since collapsed again.
A confluence of reasons is responsible for this, but when it comes to the industry bringing this on itself, one major event may have taken down the entire business.
I'm speaking about the announcement of the Itanium processor. This continues to be one of the great fiascos of the last 50 years, and not because Intel blew too much money on its development or that the chip performed poorly and will never be widely adopted. It was the reaction and subsequent consolidation in the industry that took place once this grandiose chip was preannounced.
We heard that HP, IBM, Dell, and even Sun Microsystems would use these chips and discontinue anything else they were developing. This included Sun making noise about dropping the SPARC chip for this thing - sight unseen. I say "sight unseen" because it would be years before the chip was even prototyped. The entire industry just took Intel at its word that Itanium would work as advertised in a PowerPoint presentation.
Because this chip was supposed to radically change the way computers work and become the driving force behind all systems in the future, one promising project after another was dropped. Why? Because Itanium was the future for all computing. Why bother wasting money on good ideas that didn't include it?
The failure of this chip to do anything more than exist as a niche processor sealed the fate of Intel - and perhaps the entire industry, since from 1997 to 2001 everyone waited for the messiah of chips to take us all to the next level.
It did that all right. It took us to the next level. But we didn't know that the next level was below us, not above.
(Adapted from PCMAG.COM)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
How long can the run on the dollar continue? Last
year's dollar slump, with its attendant rise in commodity
prices, ended when the market put paid to it. This time
governments are attempting to slow it down. But it is not,
as widely expected, the US government that is doing
this. Instead, the Canadian dollar dropped sharply on
Tuesday after the Bank of Canada issued a warning over
the currency's recent strength. Brazil's government went
further, imposing capital controls to stop the real gaining
at the dollar's expense. Other countries, it appears, have
more to lose from a weak dollar than the US does.
Perhaps as a result, there was a day's pause in the
trade that has seen the dollar hit 14-month lows while oil,
denominated in dollars, briefl y hit $80 a barrel before falling.
Brazil's imposition of a 2 per cent tax on capital infl ows, to
both stocks and bonds, showed strong intent. This move
brought the real, which has risen 54.5 per cent against the
dollar since its nadir, down by 3.8 per cent. The Bovespa
stock index, which has tripled since its low, fell 7.5 per cent
in dollar terms at one point.
Brazil evidently fears that an overpriced real could endanger
its recovery. Other exporters will be watching closely.
(Source: the Financial Times October 20- www.ft.com, adapted)
grouping, ended their fi rst major summit by calling for a
stable, predictable and more diversifi ed international
monetary system. But the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India
and China, stopped short of criticising the world's dominant
currency, the US dollar. The group repeated calls for a
bigger say in the global fi nancial system through greater
representation at major institutions, such as the World
Bank.
But the fi nal statement issued by the leaders made no
reference to developing new reserve currencies to challenge
the dollar, which Russia had called for at a separate event
earlier in the day.
Analysts say that as the global recession bites, the four Bric
nations are showing a growing willingness to work together.
One expert claimed the signifi cance of the summit would
be political rather than economic
(BBC News 16/6/09, adapted)
grouping, ended their fi rst major summit by calling for a
stable, predictable and more diversifi ed international
monetary system. But the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India
and China, stopped short of criticising the world's dominant
currency, the US dollar. The group repeated calls for a
bigger say in the global fi nancial system through greater
representation at major institutions, such as the World
Bank.
But the fi nal statement issued by the leaders made no
reference to developing new reserve currencies to challenge
the dollar, which Russia had called for at a separate event
earlier in the day.
Analysts say that as the global recession bites, the four Bric
nations are showing a growing willingness to work together.
One expert claimed the signifi cance of the summit would
be political rather than economic
(BBC News 16/6/09, adapted)
grouping, ended their fi rst major summit by calling for a
stable, predictable and more diversifi ed international
monetary system. But the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India
and China, stopped short of criticising the world's dominant
currency, the US dollar. The group repeated calls for a
bigger say in the global fi nancial system through greater
representation at major institutions, such as the World
Bank.
But the fi nal statement issued by the leaders made no
reference to developing new reserve currencies to challenge
the dollar, which Russia had called for at a separate event
earlier in the day.
Analysts say that as the global recession bites, the four Bric
nations are showing a growing willingness to work together.
One expert claimed the signifi cance of the summit would
be political rather than economic
(BBC News 16/6/09, adapted)

According to the text, judge the following items.

According to the text, judge the following items.
He is the farmer __we talked about last night.
My boss smokes____ a chimney.