Questões de Concurso
Foram encontradas 465 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
Ano: 2023
Banca:
CETREDE
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Guaiúba - CE
Prova:
CETREDE - 2023 - Prefeitura de Guaiúba - CE - Professor Peb II - Língua Inglesa |
Q2267405
Inglês
Choose the CORRECT answer.
Talking to my child: “I know that this situation is difficult. _________ me just a little longer. Soon it will be over!”
Talking to my child: “I know that this situation is difficult. _________ me just a little longer. Soon it will be over!”
Ano: 2023
Banca:
CETREDE
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Guaiúba - CE
Prova:
CETREDE - 2023 - Prefeitura de Guaiúba - CE - Professor Peb II - Língua Inglesa |
Q2267402
Inglês
Choose the CORRECT answer.
“John works with another mate _________ name I can't remember.”
“John works with another mate _________ name I can't remember.”
Ano: 2007
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
Câmara dos Deputados
Prova:
FCC - 2007 - Câmara dos Deputados - Analista Legislativo - Informática Legislativa |
Q2256150
Inglês
Texto associado
Google Adds a Safeguard on Privacy for Searchers
By MIGUEL HELFT
SAN FRANCISCO, March 14 — Web search companies
collect records of the searches that people conduct, a fact that
has long generated …16… among privacy advocates and some
Internet users that valuable personal data could be misused.
Now Google is taking a step to ease those concerns. The
company keeps logs of all searches, along with digital identifiers
linking them to specific computers and Internet browsers. It said
on Wednesday that it would start to make those logs anonymous
after 18 to 24 months, making it much harder to connect search
records to a person. Under current practices, the company
keeps the logs intact indefinitely.
“We have decided to make this change with feedback
from privacy advocates, regulators worldwide and, of course,
from our users,” said Nicole Wong, Google’s deputy general
counsel.
But it is unclear whether the change will have its intended
effect. Privacy advocates reacted with a mix of praise and
dismay to it.
“This is really the first time we have seen them make a
decision to try and work out the conflict between wanting to be
pro-privacy and collecting all the world’s information,” said Ari
Schwartz, deputy director of the Center for Democracy and
Technology, an advocacy group. “They are not going to keep a
profile on you indefinitely.”
Others were less enthusiastic. “I think it is an absolute
disaster for online privacy,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive
director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Ms. Wong said Google uses the search data internally
only to improve its search engine and other services. She added
that Google would release search data only if compelled by a
subpoena. Even so, Google was the only major search engine to
resist a Justice Department subpoena for vast amounts of
search data last year — a move that drew praise from privacy
advocates.
Just how personally revealing such data can be became
evident last year, when AOL released records of the searches
conducted by 657,000 Americans for the benefit of researchers.
…17… AOL did not identify the people behind the searches,
reporters from The New York Times were able to track down
some of them quickly through their search requests.
The ensuing flap caused AOL to tighten its privacy
policies. The company now keeps search histories for only 13
months and does not link them to Internet protocol addresses —
digital tags that can identify a specific computer.
For its part, Yahoo keeps search data for “as long as it is
useful,” said a spokeswoman, Nissa Anklesaria. And Microsoft
said that while it does not keep search histories alongside I.P.
addresses, it can connect the two if law enforcement requests it.
(Adapted from
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/15/technology/15googles.html_r=1&ore
f=login)
No texto, o pronome sublinhado them refere-se a
Ano: 2006
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
BACEN
Provas:
FCC - 2006 - BACEN - Analista do Banco Central - Área 1 - Prova 2 - Conhecimentos Específicos
|
FCC - 2006 - BACEN - Analista do Banco Central - Área 2 - Conhecimentos Específicos |
Q2254270
Inglês
Texto associado
The Internet at Risk
Some 12,000 people convened last week in Tunisia for
a United Nations conference about the Internet. Many delegates
want an end to the U.S. Commerce Department's control over
the assignment of Web site addresses (for example,
http://www.washington-%20post.com/ ) and e-mail accounts (for
example, [email protected]). The delegates' argument is that
unilateral U.S. control over these domain names reflects no
more than the historical accident of the Internet's origins. Why
should the United States continue to control the registration of
French and Chinese Internet addresses? It doesn't control the
registration of French and Chinese cars, whatever Henry Ford's
historic role in democratizing travel was.
The reformers' argument is attractive in theory and
dangerous in practice. In an ideal world, unilateralism should be
avoided. But in an imperfect world, unilateral solutions that run
efficiently can be better than multilateral ones that ....51....
The job of assigning domain names offers huge
opportunities for abuse. ....52.... controls this function can decide to
keep certain types of individuals or organizations offline
(dissidents or opposition political groups, for example). Or it can
allow them on in exchange for large fees. The striking feature of
U.S. oversight of the Internet is that such abuses have not
occurred.
It's possible that a multilateral overseer of the Internet
might be just as efficient. But the ponderous International
Telecommunication Union, the U.N. body that would be a
leading candidate to take over the domain registry, has a record
of resisting innovation - including the advent of the Internet.
Moreover, a multilateral domain-registering body would
be caught between the different visions of its members: on the
one side, autocratic regimes such as Saudi Arabia and China
that want to restrict access to the Internet; on the other side,
open societies that want low barriers to entry. These clashes of
vision would probably make multilateral regulation inefficiently
political.
You may say that this is a fair price to pay to uphold the
principle of sovereignty. If a country wants to keep certain users
from registering domain names (Nazi groups, child
pornographers, criminals), then perhaps it has a right to do so.
But the clinching argument is that countries can exercise that
sovereignty to a reasonable degree without controlling domain
names. They can order Internet users in their territory to take
offensive material down. They can order their banks or credit
card companies to refuse to process payments to unsavory Web sites based abroad. Indeed, governments' ample ability to
regulate the Internet has already been demonstrated by some of
the countries pushing for reform, such as authoritarian China.
The sovereign nations of the world have no need to wrest
control of the Internet from the United States, because they
already have it.
(Adapted from Washington Post, November 21, 2005; A14)
O pronome it, no final do texto, refere-se a
Ano: 2006
Banca:
FCC
Órgão:
BACEN
Provas:
FCC - 2006 - BACEN - Analista do Banco Central - Área 1 - Prova 2 - Conhecimentos Específicos
|
FCC - 2006 - BACEN - Analista do Banco Central - Área 2 - Conhecimentos Específicos |
Q2254263
Inglês
Texto associado
The Internet at Risk
Some 12,000 people convened last week in Tunisia for
a United Nations conference about the Internet. Many delegates
want an end to the U.S. Commerce Department's control over
the assignment of Web site addresses (for example,
http://www.washington-%20post.com/ ) and e-mail accounts (for
example, [email protected]). The delegates' argument is that
unilateral U.S. control over these domain names reflects no
more than the historical accident of the Internet's origins. Why
should the United States continue to control the registration of
French and Chinese Internet addresses? It doesn't control the
registration of French and Chinese cars, whatever Henry Ford's
historic role in democratizing travel was.
The reformers' argument is attractive in theory and
dangerous in practice. In an ideal world, unilateralism should be
avoided. But in an imperfect world, unilateral solutions that run
efficiently can be better than multilateral ones that ....51....
The job of assigning domain names offers huge
opportunities for abuse. ....52.... controls this function can decide to
keep certain types of individuals or organizations offline
(dissidents or opposition political groups, for example). Or it can
allow them on in exchange for large fees. The striking feature of
U.S. oversight of the Internet is that such abuses have not
occurred.
It's possible that a multilateral overseer of the Internet
might be just as efficient. But the ponderous International
Telecommunication Union, the U.N. body that would be a
leading candidate to take over the domain registry, has a record
of resisting innovation - including the advent of the Internet.
Moreover, a multilateral domain-registering body would
be caught between the different visions of its members: on the
one side, autocratic regimes such as Saudi Arabia and China
that want to restrict access to the Internet; on the other side,
open societies that want low barriers to entry. These clashes of
vision would probably make multilateral regulation inefficiently
political.
You may say that this is a fair price to pay to uphold the
principle of sovereignty. If a country wants to keep certain users
from registering domain names (Nazi groups, child
pornographers, criminals), then perhaps it has a right to do so.
But the clinching argument is that countries can exercise that
sovereignty to a reasonable degree without controlling domain
names. They can order Internet users in their territory to take
offensive material down. They can order their banks or credit
card companies to refuse to process payments to unsavory Web sites based abroad. Indeed, governments' ample ability to
regulate the Internet has already been demonstrated by some of
the countries pushing for reform, such as authoritarian China.
The sovereign nations of the world have no need to wrest
control of the Internet from the United States, because they
already have it.
(Adapted from Washington Post, November 21, 2005; A14)
No texto, a palavra que preenche corretamente a lacuna é