Imagine you’re an employer, looking to hire me for a job. You subscribe to a

游客2023-12-05 69

问题 Imagine you’re an employer, looking to hire me for a job. You subscribe to a Web site that gives you background information, and this is what you find. Jessica Rose Bennett, 29, spends 30 hours a week on social-networking sites — while at work. She is an excessive drinker, a drug user, and sexually promiscuous. She swears a lot, and spends way beyond her means shopping online. Her writing ability? Superior. Cost to hire? Cheap.
In reality, only part of this is true: yes, I like a good bourbon. But drugs? That conies from my reporting projects — and one in particular that took me to a pot farm in California. The promiscuity? My boyfriend of five years would beg to differ on that, but I did once write a story about polyamory. I do spend hours on social-networking sites, but it’s part of my job. And I’m not nearly as cheap to hire as the Web would have you believe. (Take note, future employers!)
The irony, of course, is that if this were a real job search, none of this would matter — I’d have already lost the job. But this is the kind of information surmisable to anybody with a Web connection and a bit of background data, who wants to take the time to compile it all. For this particular experiment, we asked ReputationDefender, a company that works to keep information like this private, to do a scrub of the Web, with nothing but my (very common) name and e-mail address to go on. Three Silicon Valley engineers, several decades of experience, and access to publicly available databases like Spokeo, Facebook, and LinkedIn (no, they didn’t do any hacking)—and voila. Within 30 minutes, the company had my Social Security number; in two hours, they knew where I lived, my body type, my hometown, and my health status. (Note: this isn’t part of Reputation Defender’s service; they did the search — and accompanying graphic — exclusively for Newsweek, to show how much about a person is out there for the taking.)
It’s scary stuff, but scarier when you realize it’s the kind of information that credit-card companies and data aggregators are already selling, for pennies, to advertisers every day. Or that it’s the kind of data, as The Wall Street Journal revealed last week, that’s being blasted to third parties when you download certain apps on Facebook. (Under close watch by Congress, Facebook has said it’s working to "dramatically limit" its users’ personal exposure.) "Most people are still under the illusion that when they go online, they’re anonymous," says Nicholas Carr, the author of The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains. "But in reality, every move they make is being collected into a database."
This, say tech experts, is the credit score of the future — a kind of aggregated ranking for every aspect of your life. It’s an assessment that goes beyond the limits of targeted advertising — you know, those pesky shoe banners that follow a visit to Zappos, made possible by tracking devices we know as "cookies" — by making use of the data in ways that are more personal and, potentially, damaging. Think HMOs, loan applications, romantic partners. Let’s say you’ve been hitting up a burger joint twice a week, and you happen to joke, in a post on Twitter, how all the meat must be wreaking havoc on your cholesterol. Suddenly your health-insurance premiums go up. Now imagine your job is listed on Salary.com; your vacation preferences linked to Orbitz. Think how this could affect your social standing, or your ability to negotiate a raise or apply for a loan. Finally, what if you could know, based on Web history and location tracking, that a prospective mate had a communicable disease. Wouldn’t you pay to find out? "Most of us just don’t realize the potential consequences of this," says Lorrie Cranor, a Web-privacy expert at Carnegie Mellon University. [br] Which of the following can be inferred from the first two paragraphs?

选项 A、The Internet has become inseparable in people’s lives.
B、The information gained online is not necessarily reliable.
C、The author is hunting for a well-paid job online.
D、The employers are not advised to get information about applicants online.

答案 B

解析文章第一段举例说明从网上能够找到想要的背景资料，比如可以知道作者的信息，如大部分工作时间泡在交友网站，酗酒嗜毒，生活作风不检点，脏话连篇，沉迷网购，入不敷出，雇佣成本低廉等；但第二段紧接着说这些信息并不完全准确：说“我”吸毒，不过是因为“我”去加州的一座大麻种植园做过报道；说我生活不检点，是因为我写过一篇有关多角恋的文章；“我”是泡在社交网站上，因为那是“我”的工作，而且想要雇用我费用并不低。由此可以推断，网络上的个人信息并不一定完全可靠，因此[B]是答案。作者只是在举招聘的例子引入本文讨论的主要问题，即个人信息不再成为隐私，并不是作者真的要找一份高薪的工作，排除[C]。网络上查到的求职者信息并非完全准确，但文章并没有建议雇主别到网络上查找求职者信息，所以[D]属于推断过度。前两段和[A]之间不存在关系，可以排除。

转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3247592.html

相关试题推荐

随机试题

最新回复(0)

Imagine you’re an employer, looking to hire me for a job. You subscribe to a

FilmloversarelookingtoLondonforthenexttwoweeks,todiscoverthebe

FilmloversarelookingtoLondonforthenexttwoweeks,todiscoverthebe