Questões de Concurso

Planes top 800 mph as near-record winds sweep high over Mid-Atlantic

(Available at: www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2024/02/18/record-jet-stream-winds-dc-flights/ – text specially adapted for this test)

Text CB1A7 

    Whenever a global economic transformation takes place, a single city usually drives it forward. Ghent, in modern-day Belgium, was at the core of the burgeoning global wool trade in the 13th century. The first initial public offering took place in Amsterdam in 1602. London was the financial centre of the first wave of globalisation during the 19th century. Today the city is San Francisco. 

    California’s commercial capital has no serious rival in generative artificial intelligence (AI), a breakthrough technology that has caused a bull market in American stocks and which, many economists hope, will power a global productivity surge. Almost all big AI start-up companies are based in the Bay Area, which comprises the city of San Francisco and Silicon Valley (largely based in Santa Clara county, to the south). OpenAI is there, of course; so are Anthropic, Databricks and Scale AI. Tech giants, including Meta and Microsoft, are also spending big on AI in San Francisco. According to Brookings Metro, a think tank, last year San Francisco accounted for close to a tenth of generative AI job postings in America, more than any other city of the country. New York, with four times as many residents, was second. 

Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted). 

Read Text II and answer the three questions that follow it.

Text II

June 15, 2023 - Debates over Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts are currently thriving, including debates over the degree to which corporate diversity efforts are valuable, whether chief diversity officers can succeed, and whether corporate diversity commitments can produce lasting change.

Over the past year, at least a dozen U.S. state legislatures have proposed or passed laws targeting DEI efforts, including laws aimed at limiting DEI roles and efforts in businesses and higher education and laws eliminating DEI spending, trainings, and statements at public institutions. Moreover, with the U.S. Supreme Court poised to address affirmative action in two cases involving the consideration of race in higher education admissions this summer, debates in the U.S. regarding DEI initiatives are likely far from over.

At the same time, DEI-related legal requirements continue to grow in other jurisdictions, and with global financial institutions facing expanding environmental, social, and governance (ESG)- related trends and regulations in the EU and other jurisdictions, as well as global expectations regarding their role in ESG, including DEI-related corporate developments and initiatives, these matters are likely to continue to work their way into capital allocations and the costs of doing business, as well as into the expectations of certain stakeholders.

This widening gap between global expectations and regulation regarding DEI-related matters and the concerns of some constituents in the U.S. over the role of DEI in corporate decision-making is likely to continue growing for the foreseeable future, putting companies between the proverbial rock and hard place.

What these developments make clear is that corporate DEI efforts are, and likely have been for some time, riskier than many companies may initially appreciate. And the risks associated with DEI initiatives are only positioned to grow and expand as companies look to thread the DEI needle and make a broader and potentially more divergent set of stakeholders happy, or at least less annoyed, with their DEI-related commitments and initiatives. In this article, we discuss the top four legal risks that companies often fail to address in their DEI efforts.

[…]

(From https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/diversity-matters-four-scarylegal-risks-hiding-your-dei-program-2023-06-15/

Read the Text I and answer the five questions that follow it.

Text I

Correspondence

Human genome editing: potential seeds of conflict

Recently, The Lancet published an important declaration regarding the necessity of regulating and legislating for human genome editing. We agree with their opinions that the human genome editing technology and resulting research can have both positive and negative effects on human society. The use of genome editing for research and commercial purposes has sparked debates in both biological and political realms. However, most of them have mainly focused on the effects of human genome editing on the patients themselves, and little attention has been paid to their offspring.

Several films, such as Gattaca and Gundam SEED, have addressed the conflicts that arise from human genome editing. Such conflicts not only exist within the generation who have experienced editing but are also transmitted to their offspring. For example, in these films, the offspring of people without genome editing felt a sense of unfairness regarding the inferiority of their physical (or other non-edited domains) status, whereas the offspring of people with genome editing grew up in a biased, discriminated against, and ostracized environment. They could have lived in peace with a strong and well regulated government; however, when the tenuous grip of government weakens, jealousy and resentment can lead to ruins. Although these scenes still exist in films, they might become increasingly plausible in decades to come. Using the concept of preparedness, access, countermeasures, tools, and trust, we should prepare legitimate human genome editing, establish access to deal with imminent or potential discrimination, develop countermeasures and tools for prevention and resolution of conflict, and entrust future generations with the responsibility to use them wisely.

Bing-Yan Zeng, Ping-Tao Tseng, *Chih-Sung Liang

Adapted from: www.thelancet.com, vol. 401, June 24, 2023 athttps://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2823%2901084-X