Questões de Concurso
Sobre pronome relativo | relative clauses em inglês
Foram encontradas 165 questões
Ano: 2008
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
Petrobras
Prova:
CESGRANRIO - 2008 - BR Distribuidora - Advogado |
Q10947
Inglês
In terms of reference, the only item that DOES NOT refer to "robot(s)" is
Ano: 2007
Banca:
CESPE / CEBRASPE
Órgão:
ANVISA
Prova:
CESPE - 2007 - ANVISA - Técnico Administrativo |
Q168269
Inglês
Texto associado
In the text,
In the text,
“which” (L.25) can be correctly replaced by what.
Ano: 2007
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
TRE-SE
Prova:
FCC - 2007 - TRE-SE - Analista Judiciário - Tecnologia da Informação |
Q9110
Inglês
Texto associado
Atenção: Para responder às questões de números 53 a 60,
considere o texto abaixo.
Brian Krebs on Computer Security
Three of the most aggressive buyers of online advertising
space today agreed to ...53... fines and reform their advertising
practices as part of a landmark anti-spyware settlement.
Mobile phone giant Cingular Wireless LLC, and travel
sites Priceline.com and Travelocity.com agreed to settle their
part in an ongoing investigation by the New York State Attorney
General's office, which last year sued adware/spyware purveyor
DirectRevenue for deceptively and fraudulently installing its popup
ad serving and Web tracking software on millions of PCs
...54... approval or consent of consumers.
This is an important settlement on a number of levels.
Online help forums are awash in desperate messages from
consumers ...55... machines were besieged by pop-up ads after
visiting a Web site that used slimy drive-by tactics to install
DirectRevenue's software, which is notoriously difficult to
remove from a host machine.
Perhaps more significantly, these advertisers were just
as culpable for supporting DirectRevenue's sleazy business
practices long after anti-spyware activists like Ben Edelman,
Suzi Turner and others published evidence of the illegal
distribution methods of DirectRevenue and the Webmasters it
paid to install its software. Experts consistently documented
adware bundles like the ones distributed by DirectRevenue
being installed on computers that contract distributors had
already infected with computer viruses and worms.
Ari Schwartz, deputy director for the Center for
Democracy & Technology, a consumer policy group in
Washington, D.C., said today's settlement was important
because it recognizes the oft-overlooked role that advertisers
continue to play in supporting the adware and spyware industry.
"The dirty secret about unwanted adware is that many
legitimate companies - knowingly or not - fund its proliferation
with their advertising dollars. Until we cut off that funding, there
will always be a financial incentive for companies to bombard
users with adware that they neither want nor need," Schwartz
said in a written statement.
While the settlement is a welcome and important one, the
terms and fines could have been a bit stiffer. Under the terms of
the agreement, all three companies will have to pay between
$30,000 and $35,000 each to New York state. In addition, "prior
to contracting with a company to deliver their ads, and quarterly
thereafter, the companies must investigate how their online ads
are delivered. The companies must immediately cease using
adware programs that violate the settlement agreements or their
own adware policies."
By Brian Krebs ? January 29, 2007
(Adapted from:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/01/web_advertisers
_settle_ny_spyw.html)
considere o texto abaixo.
Brian Krebs on Computer Security
Three of the most aggressive buyers of online advertising
space today agreed to ...53... fines and reform their advertising
practices as part of a landmark anti-spyware settlement.
Mobile phone giant Cingular Wireless LLC, and travel
sites Priceline.com and Travelocity.com agreed to settle their
part in an ongoing investigation by the New York State Attorney
General's office, which last year sued adware/spyware purveyor
DirectRevenue for deceptively and fraudulently installing its popup
ad serving and Web tracking software on millions of PCs
...54... approval or consent of consumers.
This is an important settlement on a number of levels.
Online help forums are awash in desperate messages from
consumers ...55... machines were besieged by pop-up ads after
visiting a Web site that used slimy drive-by tactics to install
DirectRevenue's software, which is notoriously difficult to
remove from a host machine.
Perhaps more significantly, these advertisers were just
as culpable for supporting DirectRevenue's sleazy business
practices long after anti-spyware activists like Ben Edelman,
Suzi Turner and others published evidence of the illegal
distribution methods of DirectRevenue and the Webmasters it
paid to install its software. Experts consistently documented
adware bundles like the ones distributed by DirectRevenue
being installed on computers that contract distributors had
already infected with computer viruses and worms.
Ari Schwartz, deputy director for the Center for
Democracy & Technology, a consumer policy group in
Washington, D.C., said today's settlement was important
because it recognizes the oft-overlooked role that advertisers
continue to play in supporting the adware and spyware industry.
"The dirty secret about unwanted adware is that many
legitimate companies - knowingly or not - fund its proliferation
with their advertising dollars. Until we cut off that funding, there
will always be a financial incentive for companies to bombard
users with adware that they neither want nor need," Schwartz
said in a written statement.
While the settlement is a welcome and important one, the
terms and fines could have been a bit stiffer. Under the terms of
the agreement, all three companies will have to pay between
$30,000 and $35,000 each to New York state. In addition, "prior
to contracting with a company to deliver their ads, and quarterly
thereafter, the companies must investigate how their online ads
are delivered. The companies must immediately cease using
adware programs that violate the settlement agreements or their
own adware policies."
By Brian Krebs ? January 29, 2007
(Adapted from:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/01/web_advertisers
_settle_ny_spyw.html)
Atenção: Para responder às questões de números 53 a 60,
considere o texto abaixo.
Brian Krebs on Computer Security
Three of the most aggressive buyers of online advertising
space today agreed to ...Q9108... fines and reform their advertising
practices as part of a landmark anti-spyware settlement.
Mobile phone giant Cingular Wireless LLC, and travel
sites Priceline.com and Travelocity.com agreed to settle their
part in an ongoing investigation by the New York State Attorney
General's office, which last year sued adware/spyware purveyor
DirectRevenue for deceptively and fraudulently installing its popup
ad serving and Web tracking software on millions of PCs
...Q9109... approval or consent of consumers.
This is an important settlement on a number of levels.
Online help forums are awash in desperate messages from
consumers ...Q9110... machines were besieged by pop-up ads after
visiting a Web site that used slimy drive-by tactics to install
DirectRevenue's software, which is notoriously difficult to
remove from a host machine.
Perhaps more significantly, these advertisers were just
as culpable for supporting DirectRevenue's sleazy business
practices long after anti-spyware activists like Ben Edelman,
Suzi Turner and others published evidence of the illegal
distribution methods of DirectRevenue and the Webmasters it
paid to install its software. Experts consistently documented
adware bundles like the ones distributed by DirectRevenue
being installed on computers that contract distributors had
already infected with computer viruses and worms.
Ari Schwartz, deputy director for the Center for
Democracy & Technology, a consumer policy group in
Washington, D.C., said today's settlement was important
because it recognizes the oft-overlooked role that advertisers
continue to play in supporting the adware and spyware industry.
"The dirty secret about unwanted adware is that many
legitimate companies - knowingly or not - fund its proliferation
with their advertising dollars. Until we cut off that funding, there
will always be a financial incentive for companies to bombard
users with adware that they neither want nor need," Schwartz
said in a written statement.
While the settlement is a welcome and important one, the
terms and fines could have been a bit stiffer. Under the terms of
the agreement, all three companies will have to pay between
$30,000 and $35,000 each to New York state. In addition, "prior
to contracting with a company to deliver their ads, and quarterly
thereafter, the companies must investigate how their online ads
are delivered. The companies must immediately cease using
adware programs that violate the settlement agreements or their
own adware policies."
By Brian Krebs ? January 29, 2007
(Adapted from:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/01/web_advertisers
_settle_ny_spyw.html)
considere o texto abaixo.
Brian Krebs on Computer Security
Three of the most aggressive buyers of online advertising
space today agreed to ...Q9108... fines and reform their advertising
practices as part of a landmark anti-spyware settlement.
Mobile phone giant Cingular Wireless LLC, and travel
sites Priceline.com and Travelocity.com agreed to settle their
part in an ongoing investigation by the New York State Attorney
General's office, which last year sued adware/spyware purveyor
DirectRevenue for deceptively and fraudulently installing its popup
ad serving and Web tracking software on millions of PCs
...Q9109... approval or consent of consumers.
This is an important settlement on a number of levels.
Online help forums are awash in desperate messages from
consumers ...Q9110... machines were besieged by pop-up ads after
visiting a Web site that used slimy drive-by tactics to install
DirectRevenue's software, which is notoriously difficult to
remove from a host machine.
Perhaps more significantly, these advertisers were just
as culpable for supporting DirectRevenue's sleazy business
practices long after anti-spyware activists like Ben Edelman,
Suzi Turner and others published evidence of the illegal
distribution methods of DirectRevenue and the Webmasters it
paid to install its software. Experts consistently documented
adware bundles like the ones distributed by DirectRevenue
being installed on computers that contract distributors had
already infected with computer viruses and worms.
Ari Schwartz, deputy director for the Center for
Democracy & Technology, a consumer policy group in
Washington, D.C., said today's settlement was important
because it recognizes the oft-overlooked role that advertisers
continue to play in supporting the adware and spyware industry.
"The dirty secret about unwanted adware is that many
legitimate companies - knowingly or not - fund its proliferation
with their advertising dollars. Until we cut off that funding, there
will always be a financial incentive for companies to bombard
users with adware that they neither want nor need," Schwartz
said in a written statement.
While the settlement is a welcome and important one, the
terms and fines could have been a bit stiffer. Under the terms of
the agreement, all three companies will have to pay between
$30,000 and $35,000 each to New York state. In addition, "prior
to contracting with a company to deliver their ads, and quarterly
thereafter, the companies must investigate how their online ads
are delivered. The companies must immediately cease using
adware programs that violate the settlement agreements or their
own adware policies."
By Brian Krebs ? January 29, 2007
(Adapted from:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/01/web_advertisers
_settle_ny_spyw.html)
Ano: 2006
Banca:
CESGRANRIO
Órgão:
EPE
Prova:
CESGRANRIO - 2006 - EPE - Técnico de Nível Superior - Área Tecnologia da Informação |
Q1898
Inglês
Mark the only correct statement concerning reference.
Ano: 2003
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
CVM
Prova:
FCC - 2003 - CVM - Analista - Planejamento e Execução Financeira |
Q2242131
Inglês
Texto associado
From the IPO to the First Trade: Is Underpricing Related to the
Trading Mechanism?
Sonia Falconieri, Albert Murphy and Daniel Weaver
As documented by a vast empirical literature, IPOs are
characterized by underpricing. Most of the theoretical literature
has linked the size of underpricing to the IPO procedure used on
the primary market. In this paper, by using a matched sample of
NYSE and Nasdaq IPOs, we show that the size of underpricing
also depends on the trading method used in the IPO
aftermarket.
There are two major methods of opening trading of initial
public offerings (IPOs) in the U.S. The NYSE is an order-driven
market ....56... a call auction allows supply and demand to be
aggregated (at one location) prior to the start of trading. .....57.... ,
Nasdaq is a quote-driven market. Dealers can only specify their
best quotes, and participants have KK
58 idea of supply and
demand away from the inside quotes.
We propose a new proxy for ex ante uncertainty of firm
value and test it. Our results show that there is a larger level of
uncertainty at the beginning of trading on Nasdaq than on the
NYSE. This in turn is associated with larger levels of
underpricing for Nasdaq IPOs. We suggest that this may be due
to the different informational efficiency of the two trading
systems.
(http://www.nyse.com/marketinfo/p1020656068262.html?displayPage=%
2Fmarketinfo%2Fmarketinfo.html)
Instruções: Para responder à questão,
assinale, na folha de respostas, a letra correspondente à alternativa que preenche corretamente a lacuna do texto apresentado.
Conheça nossos planos