2. 职称英语
  3. At PARC, we have lived with ubiquitous computing for almost ten years. Early

At PARC, we have lived with ubiquitous computing for almost ten years. Early

游客2025-03-27  7
问题     At PARC, we have lived with ubiquitous computing for almost ten years. Early on we confronted the question of how to do this work most ethically. We concluded that it is vitally important for everyone, scientists and consumers alike, to remain alert to the ethical issues we may face as the world becomes filled with embedded, invisible computers.
    Computer chips have been inserted into everyday objects since the earliest days of the microprocessor. Today, an average home might have 40 chips in various devices, from remote controls to alarm clocks to wristwatches. This fact has raised few new ethical issues. But as computers become more and more ubiquitous, and less visually obvious, three questions arise. Firstly, will these chips thinking for us make us forget how to think for ourselves? Secondly, will an "information underclass" without access to these devices be created? And thirdly, will these chips invade our privacy?
    The goal of ubiquitous computing is to make technology invisible and, by embedding computers into everyday things, make the things themselves smarter. But will this lead to dumber people with less control over their technology? Automobiles, for example, use embedded computers for a host of functions that improve their performance and reliability. But fewer people now know enough about their car to be their own mechanic. Should this loss of a once common skill concern us? I think not. Ever since the first pre-human shaped a stone into an axe, we have been improving our technology. The invention of the axe did represent a loss of control, because some people were better at making axes than others. But the axe also made life easier, so we had more time to develop other skills, like agriculture, art and writing. As another step along this continuum of invention, ubiquitous computing won’t make people dumber; it will give them time to get smart about other things.
    I believe, however, that everyone should be given an equal opportunity to get smart about other things. In this regard, there is legitimate concern that the new ubiquitous computers won’t be equally available to everyone, thus driving a wedge between high-tech "haves" and "have-nots". But it is important to realize that the prime mover behind the latest technology is not the technology itself, but an agreement—the Internet.
    Agreeing on low computers should talk to one another on the internet has tremendous advantages for exchanging information, decreasing the cost of technology and creating new market opportunities. If all chips are able to relate to each other, then information can be shared cheaply. This means that Internet access may eventually cost only a dollar or two. If the trend towards ever cheaper, more widespread access to information continues, there will be no information underclass.
    Ubiquitous computing will make our lives more convenient, but it will also allow computers to know everything about us. Private actions, such as reading the newspaper, may be shared with other computers—and their owners—all over the world. When computers know so much, whom will they tell?
    If a computer runs your toaster, for example, it knows when you make toast, and how many slices. By correlating toast-making activity with the license plate numbers of cars parked in front of your house, a computer could determine if a guest had spent the night. But if you were a married politician, and even if you were not, your might want to keep this information secret.
    Democracy is based on the principle that if people have enough information, wise decisions will be made. In an age in which embedded computers will provide us with ever more information, it is vital that the ethical implications of this new technology be openly debated. With a little vigilance and planning, we can reap the benefits of this new technology without compromising our intelligence, our opportunities or our freedom. [br] The expression "information underclass" in Paragraph 2 is closest in meaning to ______.
选项 A、information that is below par
B、information under study
C、people that provide information
D、people that do not get as much information as others
答案 D
解析 联系上下文可知，“information underclass”指的是“资讯弱势群体”，D项符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4015025.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)