Questões de Concurso Sobre inglês

Foram encontradas 25.503 questões

Resolva questões gratuitamente!

Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!

Q3780403 Inglês
Read the following text and answer the questions.


Artificial Intelligence: The “lethal trifecta”

    LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS (LLMs), a trendy way of building artificial intelligence, have an inherent security problem: they cannot separate code from data. As a result, they are at risk of a type of attack called a prompt injection, in which they are tricked into following commands they should not. Sometimes the result is merely embarrassing, as when a customer-help agent is persuaded to talk like a pirate. On other occasions, it is far more damaging.

    The worst effects of this flaw are reserved for those who create what is known as the “lethal trifecta”. If a company, eager to offer a powerful AI assistant to its employees, gives an LLM access to untrusted data, the ability to read valuable secrets and the ability to communicate with the outside world at the same time, then trouble is sure to follow. And avoiding this is not just a matter for AI engineers. Ordinary users, too, need to learn how to use AI safely, because installing the wrong combination of apps can generate the trifecta accidentally. 

   Better AI engineering is, though, the first line of defence. And that means AI engineers need to start thinking like engineers, who build things like bridges and therefore know that shoddy work costs lives.

  The great works of Victorian England were erected by engineers who could not be sure of the properties of the materials they were using. In particular, whether by incompetence or malfeasance, the iron of the period was often not up to snuff. As a consequence, engineers erred on the side of caution, overbuilding to incorporate redundancy into their creations. The result was a series of centuries-spanning masterpieces.

   AI-security providers do not think like this. Conventional coding is a deterministic practice. Security vulnerabilities are seen as errors to be fixed, and when fixed, they go away. AI engineers, inculcated in this way of thinking from their schooldays, therefore often act as if problems can be solved just with more training data and more astute system prompts.

   These do, indeed, reduce risk. The cleverest frontier models are better at spotting and refusing malicious requests than their older or smaller cousins. But they cannot eliminate risk altogether. Unlike most software, LLMs are probabilistic. Their output is driven by random selection from likely responses. A deterministic approach to safety is thus inadequate. A better way forward is to copy engineers in the physical world and learn to work with, rather than against, capricious systems that can never be guaranteed to function as they should. That means becoming happier dealing with unpredictability by introducing safety margins, risk tolerance and error rates.

   Overbuilding in the AI age might, for instance, mean using a more powerful model than is needed for the task at hand, to reduce the risk it will be tricked into doing something inappropriate. It might mean imposing limits on the number of queries LLMs can take from external sources, calibrated to the risk of damage from a malicious query. And mechanical engineering emphasises failing safely. If an AI system must have access to secrets, then avoid handing it the keys to the kingdom.

   In the physical world, bridges have weight limits – even if they are not always stated clearly to drivers. And, importantly, these are well within the actual tolerances that calculations suggest a bridge will bear. The time has now come for the virtual world of AI systems to be similarly equipped.

Adapted from The Economist, September 27th, 2025, p. 10
The word tricked (1st paragraph) means that LLMs can be
Alternativas
Q3780402 Inglês
Read the following text and answer the questions.


Artificial Intelligence: The “lethal trifecta”

    LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS (LLMs), a trendy way of building artificial intelligence, have an inherent security problem: they cannot separate code from data. As a result, they are at risk of a type of attack called a prompt injection, in which they are tricked into following commands they should not. Sometimes the result is merely embarrassing, as when a customer-help agent is persuaded to talk like a pirate. On other occasions, it is far more damaging.

    The worst effects of this flaw are reserved for those who create what is known as the “lethal trifecta”. If a company, eager to offer a powerful AI assistant to its employees, gives an LLM access to untrusted data, the ability to read valuable secrets and the ability to communicate with the outside world at the same time, then trouble is sure to follow. And avoiding this is not just a matter for AI engineers. Ordinary users, too, need to learn how to use AI safely, because installing the wrong combination of apps can generate the trifecta accidentally. 

   Better AI engineering is, though, the first line of defence. And that means AI engineers need to start thinking like engineers, who build things like bridges and therefore know that shoddy work costs lives.

  The great works of Victorian England were erected by engineers who could not be sure of the properties of the materials they were using. In particular, whether by incompetence or malfeasance, the iron of the period was often not up to snuff. As a consequence, engineers erred on the side of caution, overbuilding to incorporate redundancy into their creations. The result was a series of centuries-spanning masterpieces.

   AI-security providers do not think like this. Conventional coding is a deterministic practice. Security vulnerabilities are seen as errors to be fixed, and when fixed, they go away. AI engineers, inculcated in this way of thinking from their schooldays, therefore often act as if problems can be solved just with more training data and more astute system prompts.

   These do, indeed, reduce risk. The cleverest frontier models are better at spotting and refusing malicious requests than their older or smaller cousins. But they cannot eliminate risk altogether. Unlike most software, LLMs are probabilistic. Their output is driven by random selection from likely responses. A deterministic approach to safety is thus inadequate. A better way forward is to copy engineers in the physical world and learn to work with, rather than against, capricious systems that can never be guaranteed to function as they should. That means becoming happier dealing with unpredictability by introducing safety margins, risk tolerance and error rates.

   Overbuilding in the AI age might, for instance, mean using a more powerful model than is needed for the task at hand, to reduce the risk it will be tricked into doing something inappropriate. It might mean imposing limits on the number of queries LLMs can take from external sources, calibrated to the risk of damage from a malicious query. And mechanical engineering emphasises failing safely. If an AI system must have access to secrets, then avoid handing it the keys to the kingdom.

   In the physical world, bridges have weight limits – even if they are not always stated clearly to drivers. And, importantly, these are well within the actual tolerances that calculations suggest a bridge will bear. The time has now come for the virtual world of AI systems to be similarly equipped.

Adapted from The Economist, September 27th, 2025, p. 10
By referring to LLMs as a trendy way of building artificial intelligence (1st paragraph), the author implies they are 
Alternativas
Q3780401 Inglês
Read the following text and answer the questions.


Artificial Intelligence: The “lethal trifecta”

    LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS (LLMs), a trendy way of building artificial intelligence, have an inherent security problem: they cannot separate code from data. As a result, they are at risk of a type of attack called a prompt injection, in which they are tricked into following commands they should not. Sometimes the result is merely embarrassing, as when a customer-help agent is persuaded to talk like a pirate. On other occasions, it is far more damaging.

    The worst effects of this flaw are reserved for those who create what is known as the “lethal trifecta”. If a company, eager to offer a powerful AI assistant to its employees, gives an LLM access to untrusted data, the ability to read valuable secrets and the ability to communicate with the outside world at the same time, then trouble is sure to follow. And avoiding this is not just a matter for AI engineers. Ordinary users, too, need to learn how to use AI safely, because installing the wrong combination of apps can generate the trifecta accidentally. 

   Better AI engineering is, though, the first line of defence. And that means AI engineers need to start thinking like engineers, who build things like bridges and therefore know that shoddy work costs lives.

  The great works of Victorian England were erected by engineers who could not be sure of the properties of the materials they were using. In particular, whether by incompetence or malfeasance, the iron of the period was often not up to snuff. As a consequence, engineers erred on the side of caution, overbuilding to incorporate redundancy into their creations. The result was a series of centuries-spanning masterpieces.

   AI-security providers do not think like this. Conventional coding is a deterministic practice. Security vulnerabilities are seen as errors to be fixed, and when fixed, they go away. AI engineers, inculcated in this way of thinking from their schooldays, therefore often act as if problems can be solved just with more training data and more astute system prompts.

   These do, indeed, reduce risk. The cleverest frontier models are better at spotting and refusing malicious requests than their older or smaller cousins. But they cannot eliminate risk altogether. Unlike most software, LLMs are probabilistic. Their output is driven by random selection from likely responses. A deterministic approach to safety is thus inadequate. A better way forward is to copy engineers in the physical world and learn to work with, rather than against, capricious systems that can never be guaranteed to function as they should. That means becoming happier dealing with unpredictability by introducing safety margins, risk tolerance and error rates.

   Overbuilding in the AI age might, for instance, mean using a more powerful model than is needed for the task at hand, to reduce the risk it will be tricked into doing something inappropriate. It might mean imposing limits on the number of queries LLMs can take from external sources, calibrated to the risk of damage from a malicious query. And mechanical engineering emphasises failing safely. If an AI system must have access to secrets, then avoid handing it the keys to the kingdom.

   In the physical world, bridges have weight limits – even if they are not always stated clearly to drivers. And, importantly, these are well within the actual tolerances that calculations suggest a bridge will bear. The time has now come for the virtual world of AI systems to be similarly equipped.

Adapted from The Economist, September 27th, 2025, p. 10
The author compares AI and 19th century engineers to argue that the latter were
Alternativas
Q3780400 Inglês
Read the following text and answer the questions.


Artificial Intelligence: The “lethal trifecta”

    LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS (LLMs), a trendy way of building artificial intelligence, have an inherent security problem: they cannot separate code from data. As a result, they are at risk of a type of attack called a prompt injection, in which they are tricked into following commands they should not. Sometimes the result is merely embarrassing, as when a customer-help agent is persuaded to talk like a pirate. On other occasions, it is far more damaging.

    The worst effects of this flaw are reserved for those who create what is known as the “lethal trifecta”. If a company, eager to offer a powerful AI assistant to its employees, gives an LLM access to untrusted data, the ability to read valuable secrets and the ability to communicate with the outside world at the same time, then trouble is sure to follow. And avoiding this is not just a matter for AI engineers. Ordinary users, too, need to learn how to use AI safely, because installing the wrong combination of apps can generate the trifecta accidentally. 

   Better AI engineering is, though, the first line of defence. And that means AI engineers need to start thinking like engineers, who build things like bridges and therefore know that shoddy work costs lives.

  The great works of Victorian England were erected by engineers who could not be sure of the properties of the materials they were using. In particular, whether by incompetence or malfeasance, the iron of the period was often not up to snuff. As a consequence, engineers erred on the side of caution, overbuilding to incorporate redundancy into their creations. The result was a series of centuries-spanning masterpieces.

   AI-security providers do not think like this. Conventional coding is a deterministic practice. Security vulnerabilities are seen as errors to be fixed, and when fixed, they go away. AI engineers, inculcated in this way of thinking from their schooldays, therefore often act as if problems can be solved just with more training data and more astute system prompts.

   These do, indeed, reduce risk. The cleverest frontier models are better at spotting and refusing malicious requests than their older or smaller cousins. But they cannot eliminate risk altogether. Unlike most software, LLMs are probabilistic. Their output is driven by random selection from likely responses. A deterministic approach to safety is thus inadequate. A better way forward is to copy engineers in the physical world and learn to work with, rather than against, capricious systems that can never be guaranteed to function as they should. That means becoming happier dealing with unpredictability by introducing safety margins, risk tolerance and error rates.

   Overbuilding in the AI age might, for instance, mean using a more powerful model than is needed for the task at hand, to reduce the risk it will be tricked into doing something inappropriate. It might mean imposing limits on the number of queries LLMs can take from external sources, calibrated to the risk of damage from a malicious query. And mechanical engineering emphasises failing safely. If an AI system must have access to secrets, then avoid handing it the keys to the kingdom.

   In the physical world, bridges have weight limits – even if they are not always stated clearly to drivers. And, importantly, these are well within the actual tolerances that calculations suggest a bridge will bear. The time has now come for the virtual world of AI systems to be similarly equipped.

Adapted from The Economist, September 27th, 2025, p. 10

Based on the text, mark the statements below as true (T) or false (F).


I. AI models are watertight when it comes to safety risks.

II Bridges built in the Victorian Age were proven to be quite fragile.

III. A deterministic model does not deal with randomness.


The statements are, respectively,

Alternativas
Q3778307 Inglês

Are Some Sugars ‘Less Bad’ Than Others?


        Q: I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets. Are “natural” sweeteners like honey and agave syrup healthier alternatives to table sugar?


         You probably know that the sugars in fruits, vegetables and other plants are far better for you than the added sugars often found in processed foods like sodas, candy bars and many baked goods.


         But in that category of added sugars, there’s an array of sweeteners that are often seen as more “natural” or healthier than others. Honey, maple syrup and agave nectar, for instance, are commonly touted as “better for you” swaps for regular sugar, such as in many health-focused baking recipes and on social media.


        Is that right? We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out. 


Source: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/well/eat/health-

effects-honey-maple-syrup-agave.html 

Which option correctly rewrites the sentence “We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out” in the present perfect? 
Alternativas
Q3778306 Inglês

Are Some Sugars ‘Less Bad’ Than Others?


        Q: I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets. Are “natural” sweeteners like honey and agave syrup healthier alternatives to table sugar?


         You probably know that the sugars in fruits, vegetables and other plants are far better for you than the added sugars often found in processed foods like sodas, candy bars and many baked goods.


         But in that category of added sugars, there’s an array of sweeteners that are often seen as more “natural” or healthier than others. Honey, maple syrup and agave nectar, for instance, are commonly touted as “better for you” swaps for regular sugar, such as in many health-focused baking recipes and on social media.


        Is that right? We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out. 


Source: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/well/eat/health-

effects-honey-maple-syrup-agave.html 

In the question “Is that right?” the word that refers to: 
Alternativas
Q3778305 Inglês

Are Some Sugars ‘Less Bad’ Than Others?


        Q: I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets. Are “natural” sweeteners like honey and agave syrup healthier alternatives to table sugar?


         You probably know that the sugars in fruits, vegetables and other plants are far better for you than the added sugars often found in processed foods like sodas, candy bars and many baked goods.


         But in that category of added sugars, there’s an array of sweeteners that are often seen as more “natural” or healthier than others. Honey, maple syrup and agave nectar, for instance, are commonly touted as “better for you” swaps for regular sugar, such as in many health-focused baking recipes and on social media.


        Is that right? We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out. 


Source: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/well/eat/health-

effects-honey-maple-syrup-agave.html 

In the sentence “I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets,” the word limit is closest in meaning to:
Alternativas
Q3778304 Inglês

Are Some Sugars ‘Less Bad’ Than Others?


        Q: I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets. Are “natural” sweeteners like honey and agave syrup healthier alternatives to table sugar?


         You probably know that the sugars in fruits, vegetables and other plants are far better for you than the added sugars often found in processed foods like sodas, candy bars and many baked goods.


         But in that category of added sugars, there’s an array of sweeteners that are often seen as more “natural” or healthier than others. Honey, maple syrup and agave nectar, for instance, are commonly touted as “better for you” swaps for regular sugar, such as in many health-focused baking recipes and on social media.


        Is that right? We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out. 


Source: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/well/eat/health-

effects-honey-maple-syrup-agave.html 

Segundo o texto, alguns adoçantes como mel e xarope de agave são frequentemente divulgados em redes sociais como substitutos “melhores” do que o açúcar comum. Assinale a alternativa incorreta sobre a forma como o texto apresenta essa percepção. 
Alternativas
Q3778303 Inglês

Are Some Sugars ‘Less Bad’ Than Others?


        Q: I’m trying to limit sugar, but I love sweets. Are “natural” sweeteners like honey and agave syrup healthier alternatives to table sugar?


         You probably know that the sugars in fruits, vegetables and other plants are far better for you than the added sugars often found in processed foods like sodas, candy bars and many baked goods.


         But in that category of added sugars, there’s an array of sweeteners that are often seen as more “natural” or healthier than others. Honey, maple syrup and agave nectar, for instance, are commonly touted as “better for you” swaps for regular sugar, such as in many health-focused baking recipes and on social media.


        Is that right? We asked three nutrition experts to help us sort it out. 


Source: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/well/eat/health-

effects-honey-maple-syrup-agave.html 

No trecho inicial, o autor afirma que os açúcares presentes em frutas e vegetais são “far better for you” do que os açúcares adicionados. Essa informação permite concluir que: 
Alternativas
Q3774235 Inglês
Reading comprehension involves understanding both explicit information and implicit meanings within a text. Select the alternative that correctly identifies the main idea of a text stating: "While many believe technology isolates people, studies show it can actually enhance connectivity across long distances."
Alternativas
Q3774234 Inglês
In the context of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), the integration of the four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) is fundamental for developing communicative competence. Select the alternative that correctly describes an integrated skills activity.
Alternativas
Q3774233 Inglês
Conditional sentences describe a condition and its result. The First Conditional is used for real or possible situations in the future. Select the correct structure for the First Conditional.
Alternativas
Q3774231 Inglês
Pronouns are used to replace nouns, and their form depends on their function in the sentence. In the sentence "Sarah gave the book to Peter," identify the correct pronouns to replace "Sarah" and "Peter". 
Alternativas
Q3774230 Inglês
Phrasal verbs consist of a verb plus a particle (preposition or adverb) that creates a new meaning. Mark T, (True), or F, (False) for the definitions of the phrasal verbs in bold.


(__)"To look for" means to try to find something or someone (search).


(__)"To give up" means to stop doing something or to surrender.


(__)"To get up" means to leave a bus or a train.


(__)"To turn on" means to start a machine or light by pressing a switch.


Select the alternative that presents the correct sequence, from top to bottom.

Alternativas
Q3774229 Inglês
The Noun Phrase (NP) is a syntactic unit built around a noun, which functions as the head, and may include determiners and modifiers. Analyze the statements below regarding the structure of the noun phrase in the sentence: "The three expensive cars."


I."Cars" is the head noun of the phrase, determining the number and gender of the phrase.


II."The" acts as a determiner (definite article), identifying the specific group of cars being referred to.


III."Three" and "expensive" function as pre-modifiers (numeral and adjective) that describe the head noun.


Choose the alternative that indicates the correct statement(s). 
Alternativas
Q3774228 Inglês
Verb tenses and moods allow speakers to locate actions in time and express attitudes. Analyze the statements about the use of verb tenses in English. 


I.The Present Perfect tense describes an action that happened at an unspecified time in the past or has a connection to the present.


II.The Simple Past tense is used for actions that were completed at a definite time in the past.


III.The Present Continuous tense is used to describe permanent states and facts that are always true.


Choose the alternative that indicates the correct statement(s).
Alternativas
Q3774227 Inglês
Connectives (or linking words) are crucial for joining clauses and expressing relationships between ideas. In the sentence "She studied hard for the exam; nevertheless, she didn't get a good grade," the connective "nevertheless" expresses: 
Alternativas
Q3774226 Inglês
The Passive Voice is used to shift the focus from the doer of the action to the action itself or the object. Choose the alternative that correctly transforms the active sentence "The chef prepared a delicious meal" into the passive voice.
Alternativas
Q3774225 Inglês
Prepositions of place describe the position of an object relative to another. Select the alternative that correctly completes the sentence: "The picture is hanging _____ the wall."
Alternativas
Q3774224 Inglês
Discourse markers are words or phrases used to organize speech and writing, signaling the speaker's attitude or the relationship between ideas. Identify the function of the discourse marker "actually" in the sentence: "People think he is British, but actually, he is Australian."
Alternativas
Respostas
2621: D
2622: E
2623: A
2624: C
2625: C
2626: B
2627: A
2628: D
2629: D
2630: A
2631: C
2632: E
2633: A
2634: B
2635: B
2636: A
2637: C
2638: B
2639: D
2640: D