Questões de Inglês - UFPR | Gabarito e resoluções

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) According to the author:

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) Based on the reading, mark the correct alternative.

Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) Consider the following characteristics of the new Google self-driving car: 1. It runs on batteries and petrol. 2. It can be used in extreme weather conditions. 3. It has a design which requires further modifications. 4. It can reach the speed of 25 miles per hour. Mark the correct alternative.

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) The word they, in boldface and underlined, in section 3, refers to:

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) The text points out that the design of the self-driving car is deliberately attractive because:

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) In the sentence They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer, the underlined word can be substituted, without losing its meaning, by:

(UFPR - 2016 - 1aFASE) Six things I learned from riding in a Google self-driving car 1 - Human beings are terrible drivers. We drink. We doze. We text. In the US, 30,000people die from automobile accidents every year. Traffic crashes are the primary cause of death worldwide for people aged 15-24, and during a crash, 40%of drivers never even hit the brakes. Were flawed organisms, barreling around at high speeds in vessels covered in glass, metal, distraction, and death. This is one of Googles moonshots to remove human error from a job which, for the past hundred years, has been entirely human. 2 - Google self-driving cars are timid. The car we rode in did not strike me as dangerous. It drove slowly and deliberately, and I got the impression that its more likely to annoy other drivers than to harm them. In the early versions they tested on closed courses, the vehicles were programmed to be highly aggressive. Apparently during these tests, which involved obstacle courses full of traffic cones and inflatable crash-test objects, there were a lot of screeching brakes, roaring engines and terrified interns. 3 - Theyre cute. Googles new fleet was intentionally designed to look adorable. Our brains are hardwired to treat inanimate (or animate) objects with greater care, caution, and reverence when they resemble a living thing. By turning self-driving cars into an adorable Skynet Marshmallow Bumper Bots, Google hopes to spiritually disarm other drivers. I also suspect the cuteness is used to quell some of the road rage that might emerge from being stuck behind one of these things. Theyre intended as moderate-distance couriers, not open-road warriors, so their max speed is 25miles per hour. 4 - Its not done and its not perfect. Some of the scenarios autonomous vehicles have the most trouble with are the same human beings have the most trouble with, such as traversing four-way stops or handling a yellow light. The cars use a mixture of 3D laser-mapping, GPS, and radar to analyze and interpret their surroundings, and the latest versions are fully electric with a range of about 100 miles. Despite the advantages over a human being in certain scenarios, however, these cars still arent ready for the real world. They cant drive in the snow or heavy rain, and theres a variety of complex situations they do not process well, such as passing through a construction zone. Google is hoping that, eventually, the cars will be able to handle all of this as well (or better) than a human could. 5 - I want this technology to succeed, like yesterday. Im biased. Earlier this year my mom had a stroke. It damaged the visual cortex of her brain, and her vision was impaired to the point that shell probably never drive again. This reduced her from a fully-functional, independent human being with a career and a buzzing social life into someone who is homebound, disabled, and powerless. When discussing self-driving cars, people tend to ask many superficial questions. They ignore that 45% of disabled people in the US still work. They ignore that 95%of a cars lifetime is spent parked. They ignore how this technology could transform the lives of the elderly, or eradicate the need for parking lots or garages or gas stations. They dismiss the entire concept because they dont think a computer could ever be as good at merging on the freeway as they are. They ignore the great, big, beautiful picture: that this technology could make our lives so much better. 6 - It wasnt an exhilarating ride, and thats a good thing. Riding in a self-driving car is not the cybernetic thrill ride one might expect. The car drives like a person, and after a few minutes you forget that youre being driven autonomously. You forget that a robot is differentiating cars from pedestrians from mopeds from raccoons. You forget that millions of photons are being fired from a laser and interpreting, processing, and reacting to the hand signals of a cyclist. You forget that instead of an organic brain, which has had millions of years to evolve the cognitive ability to fumble its way through a four-way stop, youre being piloted by an artificial one, which was birthed in less than a decade. The unfortunate part of something this transformative is the inevitable, ardent stupidity which is going to erupt from the general public. Even if in a few years self-driving cars are proven to be ten times safer than human-operated cars, all its going to take is one tragic accident and the public is going to lose their minds. There will be outrage. There will be politicizing. There will be hashtags. I say look at the bigger picture. All the self-driving cars currently on the road learn from one another, and possess 40 years of driving experience. And this technology is still in its infancy. (Adapted from: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car. 21/08/2016.) Based on the text, it is correct to affirm that the author:

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Forget Texting While Driving: ATT Survey reveals drivers do a lot more with their smartphones By Menchie Mendoza, Tech Times | May 20, 10:10 AM Drivers who continue to use their smartphones while driving are not only distracted when they call and text. Apart from calling and texting, drivers are also browsing the Internet, tweeting, video chatting, taking selfies and sending email with their devices, according to a study by ATT. The research was conducted as part of the carriers It Can Wait campaign launched in 2010. It hopes to increase awareness of the dangers posed by using smartphones while one is behind the wheel. The study polled 2,067 U.S. residents ages 16-65 who use their smartphone and drive once or more per day. Seventy percent of those surveyed admit they use their smartphones for a number of activities while they are driving: 61 percent say they text and 33 percent send email while they are behind the wheel. Posting or interacting on social media is also one of the most common activities that drivers engage in. Using Facebook ranks first on the list, with 27 percent of drivers logging in while driving. Other social media channels that keep drivers multitasking include Instagram and Twitter (14percent) and Snapchat (11 percent). The results also show that there is a deeper problem involved when peopleuse social media while driving. Among those surveyed, 22 percent blame their addiction to social media. Other revelations show 62 percent keep their smartphones within easy reach, and that 30 percent of those who post to Twitter while driving do it all the time. Drivers also dont seem to run out of other activities using their smartphones since most apps are now easily accessed with just a simple tap. Because of this, 28 percent of drivers browse the web; 17 percent take selfies (or groupies); and 10 percent video chat. One in 10 say they do video chat while driving, said Lori Lee, ATTs senior VP for global marketing. I dont even have words for that. ATT plans to expand the It Can Wait campaign in order to add more focus on the topic of texting while driving by including other driving distractions that result from using the smartphones. When we launched It Can Wait five years ago, we pleaded with people to realize that no text is worth a life, said Lee. The same applies to other smartphone activities that people are doing while driving. For the sake of you and those around you, please keep your eyes on the road, not on your phone. ATT will also launch a nationwide virtual reality tour in summer in order to spread the word that driving and using a smartphone dont and will never mix. Adapted from http://www.techtimes.com/. Identify the statements below as true (T) or false (F). According to the text, the results of the ATT survey show that while driving, people use their smartphones to: ( ) take pictures. ( ) chat by using video. ( ) interact in social media. ( ) send text messages. ( ) watch video clips. Mark the alternative which presents the correct sequence, from top to bottom.

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Forget Texting While Driving: ATT Survey reveals drivers do a lot more with their smartphones By Menchie Mendoza, Tech Times | May 20, 10:10 AM Drivers who continue to use their smartphones while driving are not only distracted when they call and text. Apart from calling and texting, drivers are also browsing the Internet, tweeting, video chatting, taking selfies and sending email with their devices, according to a study by ATT. The research was conducted as part of the carriers It Can Wait campaign launched in 2010. It hopes to increase awareness of the dangers posed by using smartphones while one is behind the wheel. The study polled 2,067 U.S. residents ages 16-65 who use their smartphone and drive once or more per day. Seventy percent of those surveyed admit they use their smartphones for a number of activities while they are driving: 61 percent say they text and 33 percent send email while they are behind the wheel. Posting or interacting on social media is also one of the most common activities that drivers engage in. Using Facebook ranks first on the list, with 27 percent of drivers logging in while driving. Other social media channels that keep drivers multitasking include Instagram and Twitter (14percent) and Snapchat (11 percent). The results also show that there is a deeper problem involved when peopleuse social media while driving. Among those surveyed, 22 percent blame their addiction to social media. Other revelations show 62 percent keep their smartphones within easy reach, and that 30 percent of those who post to Twitter while driving do it all the time. Drivers also dont seem to run out of other activities using their smartphones since most apps are now easily accessed with just a simple tap. Because of this, 28 percent of drivers browse the web; 17 percent take selfies (or groupies); and 10 percent video chat. One in 10 say they do video chat while driving, said Lori Lee, ATTs senior VP for global marketing. I dont even have words for that. ATT plans to expand the It Can Wait campaign in order to add more focus on the topic of texting while driving by including other driving distractions that result from using the smartphones. When we launched It Can Wait five years ago, we pleaded with people to realize that no text is worth a life, said Lee. The same applies to other smartphone activities that people are doing while driving. For the sake of you and those around you, please keep your eyes on the road, not on your phone. ATT will also launch a nationwide virtual reality tour in summer in order to spread the word that driving and using a smartphone dont and will never mix. Adapted from http://www.techtimes.com/. Consider the following statements about the ATT study about the use of smartphones while driving: 1. More than two thousand residents in the United States were interviewed. 2. 70% of the people surveyed said they use smartphones to perform several activities. 3. Less than one tenth of the polled people said they use Snapchat. 4. About one third of the polled people said they send e-mails. 5. People said it is all right to use smartphones provided that they are able to multitask. Which of the statements above are TRUE, according to the text?

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Forget Texting While Driving: ATT Survey reveals drivers do a lot more with their smartphones By Menchie Mendoza, Tech Times | May 20, 10:10 AM Drivers who continue to use their smartphones while driving are not only distracted when they call and text. Apart from calling and texting, drivers are also browsing the Internet, tweeting, video chatting, taking selfies and sending email with their devices, according to a study by ATT. The research was conducted as part of the carriers It Can Wait campaign launched in 2010. It hopes to increase awareness of the dangers posed by using smartphones while one is behind the wheel. The study polled 2,067 U.S. residents ages 16-65 who use their smartphone and drive once or more per day. Seventy percent of those surveyed admit they use their smartphones for a number of activities while they are driving: 61 percent say they text and 33 percent send email while they are behind the wheel. Posting or interacting on social media is also one of the most common activities that drivers engage in. Using Facebook ranks first on the list, with 27 percent of drivers logging in while driving. Other social media channels that keep drivers multitasking include Instagram and Twitter (14percent) and Snapchat (11 percent). The results also show that there is a deeper problem involved when peopleuse social media while driving. Among those surveyed, 22 percent blame their addiction to social media. Other revelations show 62 percent keep their smartphones within easy reach, and that 30 percent of those who post to Twitter while driving do it all the time. Drivers also dont seem to run out of other activities using their smartphones since most apps are now easily accessed with just a simple tap. Because of this, 28 percent of drivers browse the web; 17 percent take selfies (or groupies); and 10 percent video chat. One in 10 say they do video chat while driving, said Lori Lee, ATTs senior VP for global marketing. I dont even have words for that. ATT plans to expand the It Can Wait campaign in order to add more focus on the topic of texting while driving by including other driving distractions that result from using the smartphones. When we launched It Can Wait five years ago, we pleaded with people to realize that no text is worth a life, said Lee. The same applies to other smartphone activities that people are doing while driving. For the sake of you and those around you, please keep your eyes on the road, not on your phone. ATT will also launch a nationwide virtual reality tour in summer in order to spread the word that driving and using a smartphone dont and will never mix. Adapted from http://www.techtimes.com/. The word they, in boldface and italics, last paragraph, refers to:

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Forget Texting While Driving: ATT Survey reveals drivers do a lot more with their smartphones By Menchie Mendoza, Tech Times | May 20, 10:10 AM Drivers who continue to use their smartphones while driving are not only distracted when they call and text. Apart from calling and texting, drivers are also browsing the Internet, tweeting, video chatting, taking selfies and sending email with their devices, according to a study by ATT. The research was conducted as part of the carriers It Can Wait campaign launched in 2010. It hopes to increase awareness of the dangers posed by using smartphones while one is behind the wheel. The study polled 2,067 U.S. residents ages 16-65 who use their smartphone and drive once or more per day. Seventy percent of those surveyed admit they use their smartphones for a number of activities while they are driving: 61 percent say they text and 33 percent send email while they are behind the wheel. Posting or interacting on social media is also one of the most common activities that drivers engage in. Using Facebook ranks first on the list, with 27 percent of drivers logging in while driving. Other social media channels that keep drivers multitasking include Instagram and Twitter (14percent) and Snapchat (11 percent). The results also show that there is a deeper problem involved when peopleuse social media while driving. Among those surveyed, 22 percent blame their addiction to social media. Other revelations show 62 percent keep their smartphones within easy reach, and that 30 percent of those who post to Twitter while driving do it all the time. Drivers also dont seem to run out of other activities using their smartphones since most apps are now easily accessed with just a simple tap. Because of this, 28 percent of drivers browse the web; 17 percent take selfies (or groupies); and 10 percent video chat. One in 10 saytheydo video chat while driving, said Lori Lee, ATTs senior VP for global marketing. I dont even have words for that. ATT plans to expand the It Can Wait campaign in order to add more focus on the topic of texting while driving by including other driving distractions that result from using the smartphones. When we launched It Can Wait five years ago, we pleaded with people to realize that no text is worth a life, said Lee. The same applies to other smartphone activities that people are doing while driving. For the sake of you and those around you, please keep your eyes on the road, not on your phone. ATT will also launch a nationwide virtual reality tour in summer in order to spread the word that driving and using a smartphone dont and will never mix. Adapted from http://www.techtimes.com/. Because of the results of its survey, ATT is planning: 1. to expand its campaign and include other smartphone distractions. 2. to expand its campaign to other parts of the world. 3. to improve smartphone use with new apps. 4. to invest in a virtual reality tour as part of their awareness efforts. According to the text, the correct items are:

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Voices: The Popes powerful message to Cubans Rick Jervis, September 24, 2015 SANTIAGO DE CUBA Ive always been fairly skeptical about how much power one man can exercise, even if that man commands the attention of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. I understand that Pope John Paul II visited Poland in the 1970s and 80s and gave speeches so stirring that they helped launch the Solidarity opposition movement and lead to the collapse of communism in the country. And I know that popes throughout history have had influential moments. But, really, how much can one man and one microphone do? How literally do people take his message? These were the questions that kept my mind busy when I left for Cuba last week to cover Pope Francis four-day trip. I was curious to see how much impact the words of this 78-year-old man can have on a population of 11 million. Im becoming fairly familiar with Cuba. Ive been to the island three timesthis year, five times overall, and grew up in southern Florida. My parents are Cubans who left the country in 1962. Cuba today continues to fascinate and dismay. Its a place of beauty and jolting contradictions. The re-establishment of relations between the U.S. and Cuban governments, begun last December, continue to stir excitement and hope in Cubans, and changes are trickling in. I followed Pope Francis from Havana to Santiago and heard him talk of reconciliation, love for mankind and the importance of family. I interviewed Cubans who glowed with the fervor of the faithful as they pledged their love for the Pope and promised to follow his message. But my question remained: What does all of this mean? How does it translate to actual change on the island? To help me sort through this, I visited Father Jorge Catasus, a popular parish priest here who helped welcome the Pope to the city. We sat in the cool, cavernous back room of his 18th-century church, safe from the 37-degree heat outside. Catasus said dont focus on any grand political or social changes stemming from the papal visit. The most important changes, he said, come from within. Thats what Pope Francis offered as a first step, and thats what Cubans across the island, in chants, cheers and tearful acceptance, agreed to abide by. The lives of men are decided in their hearts, Catasus told me. Thats where well see the change. This may not be 1980s Poland, and Solidarity may still not be anywhere in sight. But first things first. A change of heart can often lead to a world of good. Adapted from http://www.usatoday.com/. Concerning the author of the text, identify the statements below as true (T) or false (F): ( ) He was raised in the south of Florida, USA. ( ) His parents are Cubans who left the country and moved to the USA. ( ) He feels fascinated by the beauty and contradictions of Cuba. ( ) He considers that Cubans are not interested about the re-establishment of relations with the USA. ( ) He was born in 1962 when his parents left Cuba. Mark the alternative which presents the correct sequence, from top to bottom.

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Voices: The Popes powerful message to Cubans Rick Jervis, September 24, 2015 SANTIAGO DE CUBA Ive always been fairly skeptical about how much power one man can exercise, even if that man commands the attention of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. I understand that Pope John Paul II visited Poland in the 1970s and 80s and gave speeches so stirring that they helped launch the Solidarity opposition movement and lead to the collapse of communism in the country. And I know that popes throughout history have had influential moments. But, really, how much can one man and one microphone do? How literally do people take his message? These were the questions that kept my mind busy when I left for Cuba last week to cover Pope Francis four-day trip. I was curious to see how much impact the words of this 78-year-old man can have on a population of 11 million. Im becoming fairly familiar with Cuba. Ive been to the island three timesthis year, five times overall, and grew up in southern Florida. My parents are Cubans who left the country in 1962. Cuba today continues to fascinate and dismay. Its a place of beauty and jolting contradictions. The re-establishment of relations between the U.S. and Cuban governments, begun last December, continue to stir excitement and hope in Cubans, and changes are trickling in. I followed Pope Francis from Havana to Santiago and heard him talk of reconciliation, love for mankind and the importance of family. I interviewed Cubans who glowed with the fervor of the faithful as they pledged their love for the Pope and promised to follow his message. But my question remained: What does all of this mean? How does it translate to actual change on the island? To help me sort through this, I visited Father Jorge Catasus, a popular parish priest here who helped welcome the Pope to the city. We sat in the cool, cavernous back room of his 18th-century church, safe from the 37-degree heat outside. Catasus said dont focus on any grand political or social changes stemming from the papal visit. The most important changes, he said, come from within. Thats what Pope Francis offered as a first step, and thats what Cubans across the island, in chants, cheers and tearful acceptance, agreed to abide by. The lives of men are decided in their hearts, Catasus told me. Thats where well see the change. This may not be 1980s Poland, and Solidarity may still not be anywhere in sight. But first things first. A change of heart can often lead to a world of good. Adapted from http://www.usatoday.com/. Consider the following statements about what the author of the text did in the island during the Popes visit: 1. He visited a priest who also gave speeches during the Popes stay in Cuba. 2. He talked to the Cuban people and observed their faith. 3. In order to escape from the warm weather, he decided to go to an old church. 4. He followed Pope Francis and heard his speeches. Which of the statements above are TRUE, according to the text?

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Voices: The Popes powerful message to Cubans Rick Jervis, September 24, 2015 SANTIAGO DE CUBA Ive always been fairly skeptical about how much power one man can exercise, even if that man commands the attention of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. I understand that Pope John Paul II visited Poland in the 1970s and 80s and gave speeches so stirring that they helped launch the Solidarity opposition movement and lead to the collapse of communism in the country. And I know that popes throughout history have had influential moments. But, really, how much can one man and one microphone do? How literally do people take his message? These were the questions that kept my mind busy when I left for Cuba last week to cover Pope Francis four-day trip. I was curious to see how much impact the words of this 78-year-old man can have on a population of 11 million. Im becoming fairly familiar with Cuba. Ive been to the island three timesthis year, five times overall, and grew up in southern Florida. My parents are Cubans who left the country in 1962. Cuba today continues to fascinate and dismay. Its a place of beauty and jolting contradictions. The re-establishment of relations between the U.S. and Cuban governments, begun last December, continue to stir excitement and hope in Cubans, and changes are trickling in. I followed Pope Francis from Havana to Santiago and heard him talk of reconciliation, love for mankind and the importance of family. I interviewed Cubans who glowed with the fervor of the faithful as they pledged their love for the Pope and promised to follow his message. But my question remained: What does all of this mean? How does it translate to actual change on the island? To help me sort through this, I visited Father Jorge Catasus, a popular parish priest here who helped welcome the Pope to the city. We sat in the cool, cavernous back room of his 18th-century church, safe from the 37-degree heat outside. Catasus said dont focus on any grand political or social changes stemming from the papal visit. The most important changes, he said, come from within. Thats what Pope Francis offered as a first step, and thats what Cubans across the island, in chants, cheers and tearful acceptance, agreed to abide by. The lives of men are decided in their hearts, Catasus told me. Thats where well see the change. This may not be 1980s Poland, and Solidarity may still not be anywhere in sight. But first things first. A change of heart can often lead to a world of good. Adapted from http://www.usatoday.com/. According to the text, Jorge Catasus is:

(UFPR - 2015- 1 FASE) Voices: The Popes powerful message to Cubans Rick Jervis, September 24, 2015 SANTIAGO DE CUBA Ive always been fairly skeptical about how much power one man can exercise, even if that man commands the attention of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. I understand that Pope John Paul II visited Poland in the 1970s and 80s and gave speeches so stirring that they helped launch the Solidarity opposition movement and lead to the collapse of communism in the country. And I know that popes throughout history have had influential moments. But, really, how much can one man and one microphone do? How literally do people take his message? These were the questions that kept my mind busy when I left for Cuba last week to cover Pope Francis four-day trip. I was curious to see how much impact the words of this 78-year-old man can have on a population of 11 million. Im becoming fairly familiar with Cuba. Ive been to the island three timesthis year, five times overall, and grew up in southern Florida. My parents are Cubans who left the country in 1962. Cuba today continues to fascinate and dismay. Its a place of beauty and jolting contradictions. The re-establishment of relations between the U.S. and Cuban governments, begun last December, continue to stir excitement and hope in Cubans, and changes are trickling in. I followed Pope Francis from Havana to Santiago and heard him talk of reconciliation, love for mankind and the importance of family. I interviewed Cubans who glowed with the fervor of the faithful as they pledged their love for the Pope and promised to follow his message. But my question remained: What does all of this mean? How does it translate to actual change on the island? To help me sort through this, I visited Father Jorge Catasus, a popular parish priest here who helped welcome the Pope to the city. We sat in the cool, cavernous back room of his 18th-century church, safe from the 37-degree heat outside. Catasus said dont focus on any grand political or social changes stemming from the papal visit. The most important changes, he said, come from within. Thats what Pope Francis offered as a first step, and thats what Cubans across the island, in chants, cheers and tearful acceptance, agreed to abide by. The lives of men are decided in their hearts, Catasus told me. Thats where well see the change. This may not be 1980s Poland, and Solidarity may still not be anywhere in sight. But first things first. A change of heart can often lead to a world of good. Adapted from http://www.usatoday.com/. According to the text, in the beginning the writer was skeptical about the results of the Popes visit to Cuba because: