购买
下载掌阅APP,畅读海量书库
立即打开
畅读海量书库
扫码下载掌阅APP

Unit 13

Text 1

“California has always been a place for people with big ambitions and big dreams... We are proud to call California our home.” It is unclear why Tim Cook, Apple's boss, prefaced the launch of the iPhone 13 on September 14th with a serenade to the State. It was certainly not a reaction to the ruling handed down days earlier by federal judge there, Yvonne González Rogers. Her decision in a lawsuit brought against Apple by Epic Games will make Mr. Cook's life tougher.

Broadly speaking, Epic had accused the iPhone-maker of abusing a monopoly over its App Store by, among other things, forcing app developers to use Apple's in-app payment system and to pay excessive commissions of up to 30%. Not so, the judge argued. In her view, the relevant market is not the iPhone or the App Store, but “digital mobile gaming transactions”, where Apple competes with Google's Android operating system. Although Apple controls more than half of this market, that does not amount to wrongdoing.

Kate Adams, Apple's general counsel, called it “a resounding victory”. On closer inspection, the bag begins to look decidedly mixed for the tech giant. The court did not say it is impossible to show that Apple is an illegal monopolist-only that Epic had failed to do so. The judge also found that, contrary to Apple's protestations, the App Store's operating margins, which one of Epic's expert witnesses put at 75%, are “extraordinarily high”. Most important, Ms. González Rogers ruled that although Apple did not violate federal antitrust law, it had engaged in anticompetitive conduct under California's competition law. It did so by banning developers from including information in their apps that tells users how they can subscribe or buy digital wares outside the App Store.

The case could end up in America's Supreme Court. Whatever its final outcome, it will pile more pressure onto Apple to loosen its tight control of the App Store. This could lower its margins and weaken Apple's services business, which analysts expect to be a big source of growth and profits. Apple's share price fell by more than 3% after the verdict was handed down, lopping $85bn off its market capitalisation, three times unlisted Epic's private valuation.

Perhaps in anticipation of the verdict, Apple has recently made some concessions. In a settlement with app developers, it agreed to allow them to email users about payment methods outside the App Store. In another settlement, this time with Japan's Fair Trade Commission, it consented to letting apps that provide access to digital content, such as books and music, direct users to other ways to pay. Apple may, just about, be able to claim a victory in the courtroom battle against Epic. But the drawn-out regulatory world war is far from over.

1.Cook's address in Paragraph 1 is cited to______.

[A] promote iPhone 13 vigorously

[B] react to the federal judge's ruling

[C] draw forth the lawsuit to be discussed

[D] sing highly of the virtues of California

2.According to the judge, what market does Apple control?

[A] Digital mobile gaming transactions.

[B] Google's Android operating system.

[C] iPhone and App Store.

[D] In-app payment system.

3.Rogers holds that Apple may violate California's competition law because______.

[A] it controls more than half of the payment market

[B] it deprives users of the right to choose the payment method

[C] it conceals the excessive operating profits of its App Store

[D] it prohibits developers from publishing information in their apps

4.What is considered to be the big source of Apple's growth and profits?

[A] Its sales of iPhone.

[B] Its commanding market share.

[C] Its huge stock market valuation.

[D] Its profitable services business.

5.What can we learn from the last paragraph?

[A] The author anticipates that Apple may lose the lawsuit.

[B] Consumers are likely to use digital content for free.

[C] Events similar to this lawsuit may occur in future.

[D] Developers are to charge extra fees outside the App Store.

Text 2

Edieal Pinker, deputy dean of the Yale School of Management, bristles at the suggestion that the MBA, long seen as a stepping stone to corporate success, has been made less relevant by the COVID-19 crisis. The traditional two-year degree remains vital, he insists. “Do you think the problems the pandemic created for society and the economy are narrow specialised problems or complex ones that cut across sectors and disciplines?” His words would have sounded odd a year ago. The MBA was falling out of fashion. With the global economy booming, the opportunity cost of this pricey degree (top schools charge $100,000 or more a year) did not seem worthwhile to many.

Surely Mr. Pinker's defence of the MBA seems even odder in the new pandemic reality? On the contrary. “Students held up and schools stepped up,” says Sangeet Chowfla, head of the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC), an industry body. GMAC's latest annual global survey of more than 300 business schools found that 66% of programmes saw applications rise. Has COVID-19 saved the MBA?

At first the virus looked lethal. Lectures moved online, team exercises became socially distant and study-trips abroad were cancelled. Some students, angry about social isolation and online education, demanded refunds. Many foreigners, a cash cow for Western schools, stayed away. America's loss was Europe's gain. With more direct connections to Asia, London Business School, HEC Paris and other top European schools reported rises in applications. Some Asian schools, too, benefited. They kept their doors open to international students, thanks to their countries' better handling of the pandemic. Travel and visa complications boosted domestic applications everywhere. In 2020 mainland applicants to China Europe International Business School (CEIBS), a top-rated business school in Shanghai, rose by 30%.

Most surprising of all, given all that, American schools look poised for a banner 2021. After a few years of declining applications, MIT's Sloan School of Management, Columbia Business School, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and other top American programmes now report double-digit growth.

MBA applications typically rise in recessions, when a weaker job market means lower forgone salaries. But business schools deserve credit for adapting their business models-as their professors preach others to do. Many delayed the start of semesters, offered generous scholarships, waived exam requirements and liberalised policies on deferrals.

Schools also boosted online and flexible degrees, which are surging, and integrated digital teaching into core MBA courses. Far from being “giant killers”, digital technology can help a top school “ensure its gold-plated MBA programme shines even brighter”. And to graduates' relief, recruiters are back. GMAC's survey of firms that recruit at business schools found that 89% intended to hire MBAs in 2021, up from 77% last year.

6.According to Edieal Pinker, the MBA programme is______.

[A] really out of fashion

[B] unworthy for most people

[C] still important in its domain

[D] undermined by the pandemic

7.Sangeet Chowfla is cited to______.

[A] prove Pinker's point wrong

[B] back up the opinion of Pinker

[C] predict the future of the MBA

[D] highlight the effect of the pandemic

8.It can be learned from Paragraphs 3 and 4 that the MBA applications______.

[A] are declining due to social isolation

[B] are growing fastest in Europe and Asia

[C] start turning to domestic institutes

[D] rebound sharply after the recession

9.According to the author, the MBA applications rise partly because______.

[A] people's income has decreased

[B] the curricula have been improved

[C] the enrollment has been expanded

[D] management posts have increased

10.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

[A] The MBA Is Emerging Stronger from the Pandemic

[B] Why Is the MBA Seen as a Stepping Stone to Success?

[C] The Biggest Winner in the MBA Market: America or Europe?

[D] In Search for an Innovative Way to Save the MBA

Text 3

In a speech given at Columbia University last December, United Nations Secretary General António Guterres said, “Humanity is waging war on nature. This is suicidal. Nature always strikes back-and it is already doing so with growing force and fury.”

The triple global crises of biodiversity loss, climate change and the increasing risks of emerging pandemic diseases are all interrelated, all three reflecting the appallingly destructive toll that human activity has taken on our planet over the past two centuries. In that time, we have transformed 73 percent of the land on Earth. A mere 23 percent of terrestrial ecosystems remain intact.

To conserve and restore nature, we must maintain as much of the Earth's remaining intact forests as possible. In addition to their carbon storing capacity and their containment of pathogens that might otherwise devastate human populations, these areas also conserve the lifestyles and resources needed by millions of the world's most marginalized and impoverished indigenous peoples and other local communities.

We need major initiatives to support recovery of species and natural areas if the planet is to be more resilient in future. Reestablishing ecological integrity includes restoring predator-prey relationships in a given landscape to facilitate the return of species that once thrived there. It requires repairing the relationship between humans and the natural world, and conserving and restoring the spiritual and cultural values of indigenous peoples and local communities.

We will never succeed in restoring our balance with nature unless we fundamentally change the ways in which we do business. We need to get out of our silos and break down sectoral boundaries so that planning is truly holistic-that agencies overseeing infrastructure development and natural resource extraction make their decisions in the same room as, and informed by, those overseeing biodiversity conservation.

We need fundamental change to our economic systems so that financial incentives go to those whose activities result in the conservation of nature rather its destruction. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an estimated loss of GDP globally of $5 trillion, and recent estimates suggest that, by comparison the cost of nature-based solutions to prevent future pandemics could be around $31 billion per year. Those figures alone should make us recognize the need to change the way we operate.

The year 2021 marks the start of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, focused on preventing, halting and reversing the degradation of forests, land, and other ecosystems worldwide. As we convene virtually this year to celebrate World Wildlife Day 2021, we should pause to assess fully what we have learned from the tragedy of the past year and commit ourselves to restoring our relationship with nature. It is our strongest ally if only we allow it to be.

11.The speech given by António Guterres emphasizes______.

[A] his anger at environment destroyers

[B] the negative effects of wars on nature

[C] his awe of the tremendous nature power

[D] the serious aftermath of destroying nature

12.According to the author, intact forests can protect______.

[A] landscapes

[B] pathogens

[C] endangered species

[D] local communities

13.To successfully restore our balance with nature, we need to______.

[A] suspend existing businesses

[B] strengthen overall planning

[C] eliminate inherent prejudices

[D] merge interrelated institutions

14.The data compared in Paragraph 6 illustrate that______.

[A] taking preventive measures is more economical

[B] the world economy is facing great difficulties

[C] damage to the environment will cause huge economic losses

[D] clear reward and punishment is the key to solve the problem

15.The author ends up the text by calling on people to______.

[A] respect the decision of the UN

[B] celebrate World Wildlife Day 2021

[C] improve the relationship with nature

[D] establish a powerful alliance

Text 4

This year's fire season is outpacing last year's record-breaking season in California, consuming more than double the acreage burned by this time last year, which poses an extended threat to communities throughout the region. But besides the devastating damage fire can inflict on communities, experts are only beginning to understand the mental health risk of fire and smoke, according to a recent report from the University of California-Los Angeles.

“Wildfires are occurring with increasing frequency and severity each year, and each year their impacts on people become clearer,” one of the report's authors, May M.T. Kyaw, said in a press release. “They displace entire communities, and their smoke can affect regions hundreds of miles away, and for days, weeks, or months at a time. However, very little is understood about how wildfires affect mental health.”

The report examined “solastalgia”, a term coined by Australian sustainability professor Glenn Albrecht in 2005, describing a “place based-distress people feel when environments and landscapes are transformed (but not necessarily lost) due to such occurrences as environmental degradations and droughts,” the report says, which has since been extended to include wildfires. The suffering can range from “generalized distress to serious health problems including physical and mental illness and drug abuse.”

“After a wildfire, residents who return home to a devastated landscape face, in addition to the financial, health and social stresses of rebuilding homes and community, face an ever-present reminder through sight of their trauma,” the report says, noting that fires leave visual daily reminders of loss that can lead to solastalgia.

Of the existing research on the effects of wildfire smoke on mental health, the report highlighted a study on children and adolescents who were exposed to smoke, which suggested that proximity and the perceived threat of fire were factors that affect stress and emotional well-being.

Another study found that persistent smoke had an effect on mental and emotional health following fires in the Canadian Northwest Territories. Community members reported feelings of fear, stress, isolation and uncertainty, and a majority reported a “direct connection between the wildfires and smoke and a decrease in their mental and emotional health,” as they were confined to their homes.

David Eisenman, lead author of the report, likened the isolation of wildfire and wildfire smoke conditions to the lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Living under the lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic gives some sense of what this is like,” Eisenman said in a press release. “The isolation from community and the dread that leaving the house to go into the world outside is fundamentally dangerous-this might sum up the isolating and fearsome experience of the pandemic and persistent wildfire smoke events.”

16.This year's fire season in California is mentioned to______.

[A] analyze possible causes of frequent fires

[B] make a comparison with previous disasters

[C] show the damage to the local communities

[D] draw out the discussion about fire's impact

17.The word “displace” (Line 3, Para. 2) is closest in meaning to______.

[A] substitute for

[B] drive away

[C] change the pattern of

[D] damage vegetation in

18.We can learn from Paragraphs 3 and 4 that “solastalgia”______.

[A] focuses on the psychological influence

[B] can be relieved with medication

[C] highlights social sustainable development

[D] emphasizes the environmental deterioration

19.David Eisenman considered wildfire similar to the COVID-19 pandemic in that they both______.

[A] triggered a wide range of lockdowns

[B] made people feel isolated all the time

[C] reduced people's contact with the outside

[D] caused a considerable degree of social panic

20.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

[A] To Look at Mental Problems in Disaster-hit Regions

[B] This Year's Fire Season Beating Historic Records

[C] Mental Health Impacts of Persistent Wildfires

[D] Feeling Lonely and Frightened in Lockdown IxO5dz3W+WZNgx9yW1nTdekgZhq/F0c+/VLLXfUXC6e9i+uHl4fsJdhC3kVqWRlR

点击中间区域
呼出菜单
上一章
目录
下一章
×