国防科技大学
Four legal approaches may be followed in attempting to channel technological development in socially useful direction: specific directives, market incentive modifications, criminal prohibitions, and changes in decision-making structures. Specific directives involve the government’s identifying one or more factors controlling research, development, or implementation of a given technology. Directives affecting such factors may vary from administrative regulation of private activity to government ownership of a technological operation. Market incentive modifications are deliberate alterations of the market within which private decisions regarding the development and implementation of technology are made. Such modifications may consist of imposing taxes, to cover the costs to society of a given technology, granting subsidies to pay for social benefits of a technology, creating the right to sue to prevent certain technological development, or easing procedural rules to enable the recovery of damages to compensate for harm caused by destructive technological activity. Criminal prohibitions may modify technological activity in areas impinging on fundamental social values, or they may modify human behavior likely to result from technological applications—for example, the deactivation of automotive pollution control devices in order to improve vehicle performance. Alteration of decision-making structures includes all possible modifications in the authority, constitution, or responsibility of private and public entities deciding questions of technological development and implementation. Such alterations include the addition of public-interest members to corporate boards, the imposition by statute of duties on governmental decision-makers, and the extension of warranties in response to consumer action.
After a period of introversion and stunned self-disbelief, continental European governments will recover their enthusiasm for pan-European institution-building in 2007. Whether the European public will welcome a return to what voters in two countries had rejected so short a time before is another matter.There are several reasons for Europe’s recovering self-confidence. For years European economies had been lagging dismally behind America (to say nothing of Asia), but in 2006 the large continental economies had one of their best years for a decade, briefly outstripping America in terms of growth. Since politics often reacts to economic change with a lag, 2006’s improvement in economic growth will have its impact in 2007, though the recovery may be ebbing by then.The coming year also marks a particular point in a political cycle so regular that it almost seems to amount to a natural law. Every four or five years, European countries take a large stride towards further integration by signing a new treaty: the Maastricht treaty in 1992, the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, the Treaty of Nice in 2001. And in 2005 they were supposed to ratify a European constitution, laying the ground for yet more integration—until the calm rhythm was rudely shattered by French and Dutch voters. But the political impetus to sign something every four or five years has only been interrupted, not immobilized, by this setback.In 2007 the European Union marks the 50th anniversary of another treaty—the Treaty of Rome, its founding charter. Government leaders have already agreed to celebrate it ceremoniously, restating their commitment to “ever closer union” and the basic ideals of European unity. By itself, and in normal circumstances, the EU’s 50th-birthday greeting to itself would be fairly meaningless, a routine expression of European good fellowship. But it does not take a Machiavelli to spot that once governments have signed the declaration (and it seems unlikely anyone would be so uncollegiate as to veto it) they will already be halfway towards committing themselves to a new treaty. All that will be necessary will be to incorporate the 50th-anniversary declaration into a new treaty containing a number of institutional and other reforms extracted from the failed attempt at constitution-building and—hey presto—a new quasi-constitution will be ready.According to the German government—which holds the EU’s agenda-setting presidency during the first half of 2007—there will be a new draft of a slimmed-down constitution ready by the middle of the year, perhaps to put to voters, perhaps not. There would then be a couple of years in which it will be discussed, approved by parliaments and, perhaps, put to voters if that is deemed unavoidable. Then, according to bureaucratic planners in Brussels and Berlin, blithely ignoring the possibility of public rejection, the whole thing will be signed, sealed and a new constitution delivered in 2009-10. Europe will be nicely back on schedule. Its four-to-five-year cycle of integration will have missed only one beat.The resurrection of the European constitution will be made more likely in 2007 because of what is happening in national capitals. The European Union is not really an autonomous organization. If it functions, it is because the leaders of the big continental countries want it to, reckoning that an active European policy will help them get done what they want to do in their own countries. That did not happen in 2005-2006. Defensive, cynical and self-destructive, the leaders of the three largest euro-zone countries—France, Italy and Germany—were stumbling towards their unlamented ends. They saw no reason to pursue any sort of European policy and the EU, as a result, barely functioned. But by the middle of 2007 all three will have gone, and this fact alone will transform the European political landscape. The upshot is that the politics of the three large continental countries, bureaucratic momentum and the economics of recovery will all be aligned to give a push towards integration in 2007. That does not mean the momentum will be irresistible or even popular. The British government, for one, will almost certainly not want to go with the flow, beginning yet another chapter in the long history of confrontation between Britain and the rest of Europe. More important, the voters will want a say. They rejected the constitution in 2005. It would be foolish to assume they will accept it after 2007 just as a result of an artful bit of tinkering. 62. Which of the following statements is true of European economic development?63. The word “immobilized” in the third paragraph means ______.64. Which of the following statements about the treaties in European countries is NOT TRUE?65. The European constitution failed to be ratified in 2005-2006, because ______.
It should be obvious that cetaceans-whales, porpoises, and dolphins are mammals. They breathe through lungs, not through gills, and give birth to live young. Their streamlined bodies, the absence of hind legs, and the presence of a fluke and blowhole cannot disguise their affinities with land dwelling mammals. However, unlike the cases of sea otters and pinnipeds (seals, sea lions, and walruses, whose limbs are functional both on land and at sea), it is not easy to envision what the first whales looked like. Extinct but already fully marine cetaceans are known from the fossil record. How was the gap between a walking mammal and a swimming whale bridged? Missing until recently were fossils clearly intermediate, or transitional, between land mammals and cetaceans.Very exciting discoveries have finally allowed scientists to reconstruct the most likely origins of cetaceans. In 1979, a team looking for fossils in northern Pakistan found what proved to be the oldest fossil whale. The fossil was official named Pakicetus in honor of the country where the discovery was made. Pakicetus was found embedded in rocks formed from river deposits that were 52 million years old. The river that formed these deposits was actually not far from an ancient ocean known as the Tethys Sea.The fossil consists of a complete skull of an archaeocyte, an extinct group of ancestors of modern cetaceans. Although limited to a skull, the Pakicetus fossil provides precious details on the origins of cetaceans. The skull is cetacean-like but its jawbones lack the enlarged space that is filled with fat or oil and used for receiving underwater sound in modern whales. Pakicetus probably detected sound through the ear opening as in land mammals. The skull also lacks a blowhole, another cetacean adaptation for diving. Other features, however, show experts that Pakicetus is a transitional form between a group of extinct flesh-eating mammals, the mesonychids, and cetaceans. It has been suggested that Pakicetus fed on fish in shallow water and was not yet adapted for life in the open ocean. It probably bred and gave birth on land.Another major discovery was made in Egypt in 1989. Several skeletons of another early whale, Basilosaurus, were found in sediments left by the Tethys Sea and now exposed in the Sahara desert. This whale lived around 40 million years ago, 12 million years after Pakicetus. Many incomplete skeletons were found but they included, for the first time in an archaeocyte, a complete hind leg that features a foot with three tiny toes. Such legs would have been far too small to have supported the 50-foot-long Basilosaurus on land. Basilosaurus was undoubtedly a fully marine whale with possibly nonfunctional, or vestigial, hind legs.58. Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 1 about early sea otters?59. Pakicetus and modern cetaceans have similar ______.60. The hind leg of Basilosaurus was a significant find because it showed that Basilosaurus ______.61. It can be inferred that Basilosaurus bred and gave birth in which of the following locations?
Viruses, infectious particles consisting of nucleic acid packaged in a protein coat (the capsid), are difficult to resist. Unable to reproduce outside a living cell, viruses reproduce only by subverting the genetic mechanisms of a host cell. In one kind of viral life cycle, the virus first binds to the cell’s surface, then penetrates the cell and sheds its capsid. The exposed viral nucleic acid produces new viruses from the contents of the cell. Finally, the cell releases the viral progeny, and a new cell cycle of infection begins.The human body responds to a viral infection by producing antibodies: complex, highly specific proteins that selectively bind to foreign molecules such as viruses. An antibody can either interfere with a virus’s ability bind to a cell, or can prevent it from releasing its nucleic acid.Unfortunately, the common cold, produced most often by rhinoviruses, is intractable to antiviral defense. Humans have difficulty resisting colds because rhinoviruses are so diverse, including at least 100 strains. The strains differ most in the molecular structure of the proteins in their capsids. Since disease-fighting antibodies bind to the capsid, an antibody developed to protect against-one rhinovirus strain is useless against other strains. Different antibodies must be produced for each strain.A defense against rhinoviruses might nonetheless succeed by exploiting hidden similarities among the rhinovirus strains. For example, most rhinovirus strains bind to the same kind of molecule (delta-receptors) on a cell’s surface when they attack human cells. Colonno, taking advantage of these common receptors, devised a strategy for blocking the attachment of rhinoviruses to their appropriate receptors. Rather than fruitlessly searching for an antibody that would bind to all rhinoviruses, Colonno realized that an antibody binding to the common receptors of a human cell would prevent rhinoviruses from initiating an infection. Because human cells normally do not develop antibodies to components of their own cells, Colonno injected human cells into mice, which did produce an antibody to the common receptor. In isolated human cells, this antibody proved to be extraordinarily effective at thwarting the rhinovirus. Moreover, when the antibody was given to chimpanzees, it inhibited rhinoviral growth, and in humans it lessened both the severity and duration of cold symptoms.Another possible defense against rhinoviruses was proposed by Rossman, who described rhinoviruses’ detailed molecular Structure. Rossman showed that protein sequences common to all rhinovirus strains lie at the base of a deep “canyon” scoring each face of the Capsid. The narrow opening of this canyor possibly prevents the relatively large antibody molecules from binding to the common sequence, but smaller molecules might reach it. Among these smaller, nonantibody molecules, some might bind to the common sequence, lock the nucleic acid in its coat, and thereby prevent the virus from reproducing.54. The primary purpose of the passage is to ______.55. It can be inferred from the passage that the protein sequences of the capsid that vary most among strains of rhinovirus are those ______.56. Which of the following research strategies for developing a defense against the common cold would the author be likely to find most promising?57. It can be inferred from the passage that the purpose of Colonno’s experiments was to determine whether ______.
1 / 70
本模块为学员专用
学员专享优势
老师批改作业 做题助教答疑
学员专用题库 高频考点梳理
成为学员