Questões de Concurso
Sobre vocabulário | vocabulary em inglês
Foram encontradas 3.148 questões
Considering the ideas and the vocabulary of text II, decide whether the statements below are right (C) or wrong (E).
The adjective “coeval” (l.19) could be replaced by coetaneous
without changing the meaning of the sentence.
Considering the ideas and the vocabulary of text II, decide whether the statements below are right (C) or wrong (E).
The expression “sleight of hand” (l.14) carries the notion of
skilful deception.
Considering the ideas and the vocabulary of text II, decide whether the statements below are right (C) or wrong (E).
The word “ineluctability” (l.13) is synonymous with
questionability.
In text I, without altering the meaning of the sentence, the noun “realms” (l.35) could be replaced by (mark right — C — or wrong — E):
divisions.
In text I, without altering the meaning of the sentence, the noun “realms” (l.35) could be replaced by (mark right — C — or wrong — E):
grounds.
Considering the grammatical and semantic aspects of text I, decide whether the following items are right (C) or wrong (E).
The expression “coming to terms with” (l.17) could be
replaced by assimilating, without altering the meaning of the
sentence.
On the ideas of the text and the vocabulary used in it, judge the next item.
Replacing “earlier” (l.17) by older changes the meaning of the
last sentence of the text.
On the ideas of the text and the vocabulary used in it, judge the next item.
In line 9, “unless” can be correctly replaced by except if.
OneDrive
Microsoft has a problem when it comes to sticking with product names. With the exception of Windows and Office, it seems to re-brand its offerings every few years. Sometimes it's arbitrary (at least to customers). Sometimes it's ....I... of legalities. Take FolderShare, for instance, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2005 and promptly renamed Windows Live FolderShare − everything was called "Live" back then. In the years since, it has been Windows Live Mesh, Essentials, Live Folders, and SkyDrive.
SkyDrive is a great name, but it was taken. Sort of. Microsoft got sued in the U.K. by broadcaster BSkyB for using the word "Sky." A court agreed that it infringed a trademark, and Microsoft had to rebrand again. In keeping with other products like OneNote and Xbox One, it went with OneDrive.
OneDrive really should be a bigger name than it is. But Microsoft isn't as synonymous with cloud/sync as Dropbox or Google Drive. The latter has the excellent integration of Docs and Sheets for online editing, but OneDrive has something arguably better: full integration with Office. Office Online houses the online versions of Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote. Plus, OneDrive is integrated directly with Windows − no utility needed. All it takes to access OneDrive is a Microsoft account. The service will sync files between all your Windows and Mac computers, which you can access online via mobile apps and the Web.
OneDrive also made a big splash announcing unlimited online storage in 2014, but recently took that option away thanks to a small number of users who abused the privilege, Microsoft claims.
(Adapted from: http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/story/329141/16-tips-to-help-you-master-microsoft-onedrive)
Considere a sentença abaixo.
To generate the swelling curve, it is first necessary to estimate three variables which affect the rate and potential magnitude of serviceability loss due to swelling … [ ] ... Generally, swelling need only be considered for fine-grained soils such as clays and silts.
Os termos swelling e clays referem-se, respectivamente, a
Os termos mortar e masonry referem-se, respectivamente, a
Considere a sentença abaixo.
In the repair and maintenance of traditional buildings it is always best practice to retain as much of the original material as possible. Where that is not possible, the most effective alternative involves the understanding and use of materials and techniques that were employed in the original construction.
Na sentença, a expressão traditional building refere-se a
TEXT II
The backlash against big data
[…]
Big data refers to the idea that society can do things with a large body of data that weren’t possible when working with smaller amounts. The term was originally applied a decade ago to massive datasets from astrophysics, genomics and internet search engines, and to machine-learning systems (for voice-recognition and translation, for example) that work well only when given lots of data to chew on. Now it refers to the application of data-analysis and statistics in new areas, from retailing to human resources. The backlash began in mid-March, prompted by an article in Science by David Lazer and others at Harvard and Northeastern University. It showed that a big-data poster-child—Google Flu Trends, a 2009 project which identified flu outbreaks from search queries alone—had overestimated the number of cases for four years running, compared with reported data from the Centres for Disease Control (CDC). This led to a wider attack on the idea of big data.
The criticisms fall into three areas that are not intrinsic to big data per se, but endemic to data analysis, and have some merit. First, there are biases inherent to data that must not be ignored. That is undeniably the case. Second, some proponents of big data have claimed that theory (ie, generalisable models about how the world works) is obsolete. In fact, subject-area knowledge remains necessary even when dealing with large data sets. Third, the risk of spurious correlations—associations that are statistically robust but happen only by chance—increases with more data. Although there are new statistical techniques to identify and banish spurious correlations, such as running many tests against subsets of the data, this will always be a problem.
There is some merit to the naysayers' case, in other words. But these criticisms do not mean that big-data analysis has no merit whatsoever. Even the Harvard researchers who decried big data "hubris" admitted in Science that melding Google Flu Trends analysis with CDC’s data improved the overall forecast—showing that big data can in fact be a useful tool. And research published in PLOS Computational Biology on April 17th shows it is possible to estimate the prevalence of the flu based on visits to Wikipedia articles related to the illness. Behind the big data backlash is the classic hype cycle, in which a technology’s early proponents make overly grandiose claims, people sling arrows when those promises fall flat, but the technology eventually transforms the world, though not necessarily in ways the pundits expected. It happened with the web, and television, radio, motion pictures and the telegraph before it. Now it is simply big data’s turn to face the grumblers.
(From http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist explains/201 4/04/economist-explains-10)
TEXT I
Will computers ever truly understand what we’re saying?
Date: January 11, 2016
Source University of California - Berkeley
Summary:
If you think computers are quickly approaching true human communication, think again. Computers like Siri often get confused because they judge meaning by looking at a word’s statistical regularity. This is unlike humans, for whom context is more important than the word or signal, according to a researcher who invented a communication game allowing only nonverbal cues, and used it to pinpoint regions of the brain where mutual understanding takes place.
From Apple’s Siri to Honda’s robot Asimo, machines seem to be getting better and better at communicating with humans. But some neuroscientists caution that today’s computers will never truly understand what we’re saying because they do not take into account the context of a conversation the way people do.
Specifically, say University of California, Berkeley, postdoctoral fellow Arjen Stolk and his Dutch colleagues, machines don’t develop a shared understanding of the people, place and situation - often including a long social history - that is key to human communication. Without such common ground, a computer cannot help but be confused.
“People tend to think of communication as an exchange of linguistic signs or gestures, forgetting that much of communication is about the social context, about who you are communicating with,” Stolk said.
The word “bank,” for example, would be interpreted one way if you’re holding a credit card but a different way if you’re holding a fishing pole. Without context, making a “V” with two fingers could mean victory, the number two, or “these are the two fingers I broke.”
“All these subtleties are quite crucial to understanding one another,” Stolk said, perhaps more so than the words and signals that computers and many neuroscientists focus on as the key to communication. “In fact, we can understand one another without language, without words and signs that already have a shared meaning.”
(Adapted from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/01/1 60111135231.htm)
Welcome to the Drone Age
THE scale and scope of the revolution in the use of small, civilian drones has caught many by surprise. In 2010 America's Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) estimated that there would, by 2020, be perhaps 15,000 such drones in the country. More than that number are now sold there every month. And it is not just an American craze. Some analysts think the number of drones made and sold around the world this year will exceed 1 million. In their view, what is now happening to drones is similar to what happened to personal computers in the 1980s, when Apple launched the Macintosh and IBM the PS/2, and such machines went from being hobbyists' toys to business essentials.
That is probably an exaggeration. It is hard to think of a business which could not benefit from a PC, whereas many may not benefit (at least directly) from drones. But the practical use of these small, remote-controlled aircraft is expanding rapidly. These involve areas as diverse as agriculture, landsurveying, film-making, security, and delivering goods. Other roles for drones are more questionable. Their use to smuggle drugs and phones into prisons is growing. Instances have been reported in America, Australia, Brazil, Britain and Canada, to name but a few places. In Britain the police have also caught criminals using drones to scout houses to burgle. The crash of a drone on to the White House lawn in January highlighted the risk that they might be used for acts of terrorism. And in June a video emerged of a graffito artist using a drone equipped with an aerosol spray to deface one of New York's most prominent billboards.
How all this activity will be regulated and policed is, as the FAA's own flat-footed response has shown, not yet being properly addressed. There are implications for safety (being hit by an out-of-control drone weighing several kilograms would be no joke); for privacy, from both the state and nosy neighbours; and for sheer nuisance—for drones can be noisy. But the new machines are so cheap, so useful and have so much unpredictable potential that the best approach to regulation may simply be to let a thousand flyers zoom.
[Source: The Economist September 26th 2015- adapted]
Welcome to the Drone Age
THE scale and scope of the revolution in the use of small, civilian drones has caught many by surprise. In 2010 America's Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) estimated that there would, by 2020, be perhaps 15,000 such drones in the country. More than that number are now sold there every month. And it is not just an American craze. Some analysts think the number of drones made and sold around the world this year will exceed 1 million. In their view, what is now happening to drones is similar to what happened to personal computers in the 1980s, when Apple launched the Macintosh and IBM the PS/2, and such machines went from being hobbyists' toys to business essentials.
That is probably an exaggeration. It is hard to think of a business which could not benefit from a PC, whereas many may not benefit (at least directly) from drones. But the practical use of these small, remote-controlled aircraft is expanding rapidly. These involve areas as diverse as agriculture, landsurveying, film-making, security, and delivering goods. Other roles for drones are more questionable. Their use to smuggle drugs and phones into prisons is growing. Instances have been reported in America, Australia, Brazil, Britain and Canada, to name but a few places. In Britain the police have also caught criminals using drones to scout houses to burgle. The crash of a drone on to the White House lawn in January highlighted the risk that they might be used for acts of terrorism. And in June a video emerged of a graffito artist using a drone equipped with an aerosol spray to deface one of New York's most prominent billboards.
How all this activity will be regulated and policed is, as the FAA's own flat-footed response has shown, not yet being properly addressed. There are implications for safety (being hit by an out-of-control drone weighing several kilograms would be no joke); for privacy, from both the state and nosy neighbours; and for sheer nuisance—for drones can be noisy. But the new machines are so cheap, so useful and have so much unpredictable potential that the best approach to regulation may simply be to let a thousand flyers zoom.
[Source: The Economist September 26th 2015- adapted]
Conheça nossos planos