Police should be allowed to use facial recognition to investigate specific crimes and to protect the public at major events, according to the first national survey of the public's attitude to the technology. However, they are opposed to unrestricted use while two thirds (65 percent) of the public believe an absolute ban on the police would be wrong, Up to 70 percent backed its use to analyse faces on CCTV (闭路电视) to catch a suspect in an investigation or in day-to-day policing to prevent crime at events such as football matches or carnivals, The technology enables police to scan crowds and pick out faces that match huge databases of suspects.
There is, however, far less tolerance of its use by private (私人的) companies, whether to monitor shoppers or workers, or in schools if it was to be used to track children's behaviour or expressions. By a majority of almost two to one, the public believes that organizations should seek the permission of people before they start using facial recognition. Most also want a pause on any further use of the technology until publicly-agreed guidelines are in place on when and where it should be used.
More than half (55 percent) of the public believe the Government should limit police use of facial recognition to criminal investigations, though half also saw it as no different to taking photographs or using CCTV. Of those who were comfortable with its use, 80 percent said it was because it was “beneficial for the security of society”,
There was also a majority in favour of the technology where there was personal benefit, with 54 percent backing its use to unlock a smartphone by recognizing an owner’s face and with passport checks at airports where it can speed up queues.
1. Why is the technology of facial recognition significant to the police?| A．It helps them better investigate criminal cases. |
| B．It is a good way to control private companies. |
| C．It can recognize and catch suspects. |
| D．It mainly gets fully support from all walks of life. |
| A．It is believed to go against publicly-agreed guidelines. |
| B．It is helpful to track students’ behavior at home. |
| C．It is a potential threat to privacy. |
| D．It is popular among shoppers, workers and private companies. |
| A．It should be banned totally. |
| B．It should be open to police undoubtedly. |
| C．It is a double-edged sword. |
| D．It benefits the society in every aspect. |
| A．Should the police free use facial recognition? |
| B．Should facial recognition be applied to airports? |
| C．Should facial recognition protect the privacy of the public? |
| D．Should private companies use facial recognition without limit? |
相似题推荐
【推荐1】Back in the early 2000s, lots of people couldn’t have imagined life without alarm clocks, CD players, calendars, cameras, or lots of other devices. But along came the iPhone and other smartphones, and they took over the functions of dozens of things we used to think were essential.
The smartphone story could even be a model for fighting climate change; not because smartphones use a small part of the energy of all the things they replace - although they do-but because they represent a different approach to design in general. And that approach is to focus on function rather than form. That requires focusing on understanding the underlying problem，and then engineering a wide range of potential solutions. This approach could revolutionize how we think about energy efficiency.
Traditionally, improvements in energy efficiency have mostly focused on individual devices, which can be quite fruitful. But focusing on individual devices is like if Apple had spent effort inventing a better alarm clock, a better CD player, a better calendar, and a better camera. Now with an iPhone, we don’t need the standalone(独立运行的) devices at all, because it can function as all of them.
So when it comes to using energy efficiently, rather than just installing a more efficient heater，some people have focused instead on the desired function: staying warm. They designed and coated their house so well that they could get rid of their heater altogether, letting them heat their house with 99% less energy.
In the same way, rather than just making cars more efficient, what if we focus on the desired function-getting where we want when we want-and create an efficient transportation system where we can drive less or get rid of our personal cars entirely?
The most energy efficient car or heater is no car, or no heater, while still being able to get around and stay warm. In other words, it’s not thinking efficient, it’s thinking different.
1. What makes the iPhone a good example of environmental protection?| A．Perfecting individual devices. | B．Combining possible functions. |
| C．Adopting a simplest design. | D．Reducing the energy consumption. |
| A．Using recyclable materials. | B．Revolutionizing technologies. |
| C．Figuring out various solutions. | D．Concentrating on the essential needs. |
| A．Fruitless. | B．Out-of-date. | C．Adequate. | D．Perfect. |
| A．Think out of the box. | B．Differences make it unique. |
| C．Be economical with energy. | D．Step out of the comfort zone. |
【推荐2】A European Union program is letting blind people experience famous paintings for the first time. It uses three dimensional (3-D) printing to re-create famous paintings so that they can be touched.
One painting printed with the new technology is Gustav Klimt’s “The Kiss.” It is a popular attraction at the Belvedere Museum in Vienna, Austria. The painting shows a man and a woman standing in a field filled with flowers. They are wearing gold robes and have their arms around each other. The man leans down to kiss the woman.
Klimt finished the painting in 1908. Until now, people who have trouble seeing can not enjoy the artwork. But thanks to the reproduction (复制品) they can touch the piece and feel the ridges (隆起) and depressions (凹地). Andreas Reichinger started making 3-D versions of artwork in 2010. He said this reproduction was his most difficult project because the couple’s robes are so detailed (精细的).
Dominika Raditsch is a blind museum visitor. She touched the reproduction. As she moved her hands around it, she said, “Exactly, can you see these? There are so many details.” Raditsch said she can imagine what the original painting looks like when she touches the reproduction. “It’s somehow round. You can feel it. It comes with it. And in many places it’s so smooth. And then I think to myself: it probably shines too!” Raditsch said.
The Belvedere is not the only museum to have 3-D versions of its artwork. Some of the pieces at the Prado, in Madrid, Spain, have reproductions that can be touched. But the piece in Vienna has one special part: it is made with widely available 3-D printing technology. That means one day, blind art fans anywhere in the world could download the source files and print the reproductions themselves.
1. What is “The Kiss”?| A．A European Union project. | B．A popular painting |
| C．A 3-D technology. | D．A famous museum. |
| A．The painting was reproduced detailedly. |
| B．The original artwork was made in 1908. |
| C．Blind art fans can’t download the source files. |
| D．The 3-D technology is not available. |
| A．A European Union Program for Museum Visitors |
| B．How to Reproduce the World-famous Paintings |
| C．A Special Museum for Art Fans in Vienna, Austria |
| D．3-D Printing Lets the Blind Experience Famous Paintings |
【推荐3】Electric vehicles are close to the “turning point” of rapid mass adoption thanks to the decreasing cost of batteries, experts say.
Global sales of electric vehicles rose 43% in 2020, but even faster growth is expected when continuing falls in battery prices result in the price of electric cars under the same petrol and diesel (柴油) models, which may happen between 2023 and 2025. According to a study by Prof Tim Lonton, at the University of Exeter, the tuning point has already been passed in Norway, where tax breaks (税收减免) mean electric cars are cheaper and the market share of battery-powered cars increased to 54% in 2020 in Norway, compared with less than 5% in most European nations.
The falls in battery prices in the last decade have been dramatic and faster than predicted thanks to a massive production and cuts in costs, such as reducing the amount of expensive cobalt (钻) required. BloombergNEF’s analysis predicts lithium-ion (锂离子) battery cots will fall so sharply that electric cars can match the price of petrol and diesel cars by 2023. McKin-sey’s Global Energy Perspective 2021, published on 15 January, forecasts that “electric vehicles are likely to become the most economic choice in the next five years worldwide”.
Electric cars, vital in efforts to fight climate crisis, are quieter and start to go faster, so people do not want to return to a petrol or diesel vehicle once they have one. A survey of 2,000 electric car owners found 91% said they did not want to go back.
“The survey shows the strong and lasting impact of switching to a clean car. The evidence in favor of electric vehicles grows more convincing even in a year as destructive as 2020,” said Melanie Shufflebotham, at Zap-Map, which maps charging points.
1. What leads to the growing sales of electric vehicles?| A．The rise in petrol prices. | B．The desire for a lower tax. |
| C．The drop in battery costs. | D．The need for a cleaner life. |
| A．Policies in Norway support electric vehicles. |
| B．Economy in Norway outgrows other nations. |
| C．The market share of electric vehicles will decline. |
| D．The tax breaks in Europe will continue to increase. |
| A．By increasing the demand for cobalt. |
| B．By boosting the sales of electric cars. |
| C．By reducing the production of batteries. |
| D．By cutting the costs of lithium-ion batteries. |
| A．People do not tend to use a petrol vehicle. |
| B．Electric vehicles have a strong impact on our daily life. |
| C．The prices of battery are decreasing because of electric vehicles. |
| D．The prospect of electric vehicles will be improving because of the falls in the battery prices. |
【推荐1】In Mark Turin’s article “Protecting Our Public Spaces” in Issue 14, he claims that “all graffiti (涂鸦) is vandalism (故意破坏财物), pure and simple, and offers no benefit to our public spaces.” I would like to point out that many people believe that graffiti is an art form that can benefit our public spaces just as much as sculptures, fountains, or other more accepted art forms.
People who object to graffiti usually do so more because of where it is, not what it is. They argue that posting graffiti in public places is considered an illegal act of property damage. But the location of such graffiti should not prevent the images themselves from being considered real art.
I would argue that graffiti is the most important public art form. Spray paint is a medium unlike any other. Through graffiti, the entire world has become a canvas (画布). These works of art dotting the urban landscape are available, free of charge, to everyone who passes by.
To be clear, I do not consider random words or names sprayed on stop signs to be art. Plenty of graffiti is just vandalism, pure and simple. However, there is also graffiti that is breathtaking in its complex detail, its realism, or its creativity. It takes great talent to create such involved designs with spray paint. Are these creators not artists just because they use a can of spray paint instead of a paintbrush?
To declare that all graffiti is vandalism, and nothing more, is a too simplistic statement. Furthermore, graffiti is not going anywhere, so we might as well find a way to live with it and enjoy its benefits. One choice could be to make a percentage of public space open to graffiti artists. By doing this, the public might feel like part owners of these works of art, rather than just the victims of a crime.
1. Mark Turin apparently believes that graffiti ________.| A．is not an art form |
| B．is too simple to be considered art |
| C．can only sometimes be considered a work of art |
| D．should be restricted to places where it is allowed |
| A．is the only art form that is free |
| B．is best viewed on public walls rather than a canvas |
| C．provides more public benefits than sculptures do |
| D．should be judged on artistic qualities rather than places |
| A．restating his position | B．questioning the magazine |
| C．offering an answer to the matter | D．identifying the benefits of graffiti |
【推荐2】How could we possibly think that keeping animals in cages in unnatural environments－mostly for entertainment purposes－is fair and respectful?
Zoo officials say they are concerned about animals. However, most zoos remain “collections” of interesting “things” rather than protective habitats. Zoos teach people that it is acceptable to keep animals bored, lonely, and far from their natural homes.
Zoos claim to educate people and save endangered species, but visitors leave zoos without having learned anything meaningful about the animals’ natural behavior, intelligence, or beauty. Zoos keep animals in small spaces or cages, and most signs only mention the species’ name, diet, and natural range(分布区). The animals’ normal behavior is seldom noticed because zoos don’t usually take care of the animals’ natural needs.
The animals are kept together in small spaces, with no privacy and little opportunity for mental and physical exercise. This results in unusually self-destructive behavior called zoochosis. A worldwide study of zoos found that zoochosis is common among animals kept in small spaces or cages. Another study showed that elephants spend 22 percent of their time making repeated head movements or biting cage bars, and bears spend 30 percent of their time walking back and forth, a sign of unhappiness and pain.
Furthermore, most animals in zoos are not endangered. Captive breeding(圈养繁殖) of endangered big cats, Asian elephants, and other species has not resulted in their being sent back to the wild. Zoos talk a lot about their captive breeding programs because they do not want people to worry about a species dying out. In fact, baby animals also attract a lot of paying customers. Haven’t we seen enough competitions to name baby animals?
Actually, we will save endangered species only if we save their habitats and put an end to the reasons people kill them. Instead of supporting zoos, we should support groups that work to protect animals’ natural habitats.
1. In the state of zoochosis, animals _________.| A．remain in cages | B．behave strangely |
| C．attack other animals | D．enjoy moving around |
| A．Zoos are not worth the public support. |
| B．Zoos fail in their attempt to save animals. |
| C．Zoos should treat animals as human beings. |
| D．Zoos use animals as a means of entertainment. |
| A．pointing out the faults in what zoos do |
| B．using evidence he has collected at zoos |
| C．questioning the way animals are protected |
| D．discussing the advantages of natural habitats |
| A．zoos have to keep animals in small cages |
| B．most animals in zoos are endangered species |
| C．some endangered animals are reproduced in zoos |
| D．it’s acceptable to keep animals away from their habitats |
【推荐3】If you could have one superpower, what would it be?
Dreaming about whether you would want to read minds, see through walls, or have superhuman strength may sound silly, but it actually gets to the heart of what really matters in your life.
Every day in our work, we are inspired by the people we meet doing extraordinary things to improve the world.
They have a different kind of superpower that all of us possess: the power to make a difference in the lives of others.
We’re not saying that everyone needs to contribute their lives to the poor. Your lives are busy enough doing homework, playing sports, making friends, seeking after your dreams. But we do think that you can live a more powerful life when you devote some of your time and energy to something much larger than yourself. Find an issue you are interested in and learn more. Volunteer or, if you can, contribute a little money to a cause. Whatever you do, don’t be a bystander. Get involved. You may have the opportunity to make your biggest difference when you’re older. But why not start now?
Our own experience working together on health, development, and energy the last twenty years has been one of the most rewarding parts of our lives. It has changed who we are and continues to fuel our optimism about how much the lives of the poorest people will improve in the years ahead.
1. What does the underlined part in Paragraph 2 refer to?| A．Your life style. | B．Your life value. |
| C．Your trouble in life. | D．Your life experience. |
| A．They possess different kinds of superpowers. |
| B．They have got the power to change the world. |
| C．Some people around them are making the world better. |
| D．There are many powerful people in their life and work. |
| A．Learning more and contributing more to a cause. |
| B．Rising above self and acting to help others. |
| C．Working hard to get a bigger opportunity. |
| D．Trying your best to help the poor. |
【推荐1】I recently spent half a weekend sitting on the sofa watching the Davis Cup. I thought about going for a run, but I did not want to miss the rest of the match. Soon it was starting to get dark, so I did not bother. Whenever I watch tennis, I think how nice it would be to play it regularly. But I have been thinking that for almost 20 years without actually setting foot on a court. The evidence would suggest that I'm not the only one.
When a country or city bids to host an international sporting event, it often promises that more people will take up sports as a result. London was no exception. In the end it did not turn out quite like that. Just over one-third of people in Britain take part in sports once a week. A report on Olympic legacy （后续）has said that a big change in participation levels simply has not happened.
Why isn't there a big increase in people taking part in sports after most sporting events? Perhaps it is a mistake to assume an automatic link between watching sports and playing it. While the games are on, they actually encourage people to do just the opposite — to spend whole sunny days not out playing sports, but inside sitting on the sofa with the curtains shut to stop the sun shining on the TV screen and spoiling the view. We don't expect half the audience of a hit musical to apply to drama school the next day, yet we seem to expect it of sporting events.
We might have sat on the sofa doing an impression of Usain Bolt's bow — and — arrow signature pose. But how many of us have been inspired by watching him sprint （短跑）100 meters? The high-level performances on show only remind people that they could never match the elite （精英）athletes in their sporting achievements even if they trained full time.
Maybe participation in sports is not the right legacy to expect after a major sporting event. It's not so much that the Olympics failed to get people to participate but rather that this was never going to be the result. The Olympics can do many things, but maybe this cannot necessarily be one of them.
1. What can we learn from the first paragraph?| A．The author prefers playing tennis to running. |
| B．The author watches tennis matches very rarely. |
| C．The author hasn't played tennis in nearly one fifth of a century. |
| D．The author didn't go for a run because the match lasted longer than expected. |
① it takes people a longer time to play sports than watch it
② watching sports actually discourages people from going out
③ sporting events make people aware that they could never be as good as elite athletes
④ people are too busy to get into the habit of taking part in sports
| A．①② | B．②③ | C．③④ | D．①④ |
| A．how to make people do more sport |
| B．the things that I he Olympics can do |
| C．the disadvantages of watching big sporting events |
| D．whether big sporting events make us do more sport |
【推荐2】There was a time when a trip to the supermarket in the United States often ended with a seemingly simple question from the cashier, "Paper or plastic？"Well, which type of bag would you choose？
While both types of bags have some influence on the environment, it has long been supposed that paper bags are kinder. They are made from a renewable source, are broken down easily, burn without giving off thick smoke and can be recycled. However, the producing process behind paper bags uses more energy than that of plastic ones. How can this be true？
Studies show that paper bag production requires four times as much energy as plastic bag production.
And the amount of water used to make them is twenty times higher. Besides, the influence on forests is very serious. It takes about fourteen million trees to produce ten billion paper bags, which happen to be the number of bags used in the United States yearly. In terms of recycling, the idea that paper bags are more environment friendly than plastic ones can be quickly discarded. Research shows it requires about 98% less energy to recycle plastic than it does to recycle paper.
Even though paper bags might be more harmful than plastic ones, plastic still seems to be considered as the more harmful of the two by governments. In Ireland, for example, a tax has been introduced to discourage the use of plastic bags. People have to pay 22 cents for every plastic bag, and as a result, their use has dropped quickly.
There’s no doubt that it makes more sense to reuse these bags. However, we don’t seem to be doing that at present. That may be because they fall apart quickly. If so, cloth bags are a better choice, but still, their production also has a bad influence on the environment. So what to do? How should we answer the question of “Paper or plastic?” It seems that we first need to ask ourselves one more general question: “What can I do to help the environment?”
1. The question at the end of Paragraph 1 is used to ________.| A．introduce points for discussion |
| B．tell readers how to save money |
| C．express the author's doubts |
| D．show the kindness of the cashier |
| A．take more time to break down |
| B．require less energy to recycle |
| C．need more water to produce |
| D．have less influence on forests |
| A．share | B．put forward |
| C．discuss | D．give up |
| A．Paper or cloth? |
| B．A new bag or your own one? |
| C．A small bag or big one? |
| D．Paper or plastic？ |
【推荐3】New Zealand introduced its new climate change curriculum (课程) to schools in January, but not everyone is happy about it. Dairy farmer Malcolm Lumsden told reporters, “If they're going to continue to bite the hand that feeds them, they're going to lose out in the long term.”
The curriculum, which is available to any schools that choose to use it, does point to industrial agriculture as being a major source of greenhouse gas emission. It encourages students to “eat less dairy and meat, have meatless days each week, eat more fruit and vegetables, drive less, recycle and buy second-hand products when possible”. Some of these suggestions, however, are being challenged for not being scientifically sound.
But animal agriculture is widely accepted in the scientific world as a driver of emissions, particularly methane (甲烷), which warms the Earth 86 times faster than carbon dioxide. A brand new study has shown that cutting the consumption of animal products by 50% would reduce dietary-related greenhouse gas emissions by 35%. It is just one of countless other studies that have made similar conclusions.
Kids aren’t clueless (笨的). They hear about the coming global catastrophe (灾难). They deserve to be given the tools with which to comprehend it and to take action. They deserve the knowledge with which to make their own decisions. The curriculum is a response to kids “really crying out for something like this”, in the words of an official from New Zealand.
There isn't about biting the hand that feeds, but rather engaging in thoughtful debate over how humans could be fed in ways that are better and gentler for the planet. Livestock farmers shouldn't be so offended, but rather be open to this debate so as not to become outdated or irrelevant.
1. What's Lumsden's attitude towards the new curriculum?| A．Unconcerned. | B．Disapproving. | C．Ambiguous. | D．Skeptical. |
| A．Advocating green lifestyles. | B．Blaming traditional agriculture. |
| C．Challenging experts' suggestions. | D．Forbidding eating dairy and meat. |
| A．A chance to get knowledge. | B．The global catastrophe. |
| C．The new curriculum. | D．A farming tool. |
| A．Stop Biting the Hand That Feeds One |
| B．A New Curriculum Favoured by New Zealanders |
| C．A Heated Debate Between Scientists and Farmers |
| D．Farmers Are Offended by a Climate Change Curriculum |
