Problem: OPTIONS:
- It does not affect the way we understand IP rights.
- It sells songs and films.
- It makes IP rights harder to protect.
- It prevents the production of artwork.
Q: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: Intellectual property (IP) is a product of the mind that has commercial value. The concept dates back to 1623, when the first patent law to protect IP rights was passed. IP rights protect an artist from having his/her creative ideas copied by another. For example, if somebody generated an idea for a novel, that idea is protected by IP rights. If someone else wishes to represent the idea or develop it further, he/she must consult the original artists, who will normally be rewarded financially for its use. Back in the 17thcentury, IP rights were primarily carried out to protect newly developed manufacturing processes against stealing, but today intellectual property rights are also enjoyed by those who create music, art and literature. In recent years, IP rights have been the focus of a great deal of discussion because of a technology which looks set to weaken them altogether: the Internet. Many years ago, if you wanted a recoding of a song, you would have to purchase it from a music store; if a novel, from a book store. In those days, IP rights were easily protected since it was very difficult to obtain intellectual property without paying for it. However, a lot of IP, including songs, films, books and artwork, can be downloaded today free of charge using the internet. This practice has now taken the world by storm, dramatically affecting the way in which we view IP rights. Question: What do we know about the Internet according to the passage? Answer:
Answer: It makes IP rights harder to protect.

Problem:OPTIONS:
- Human memory can fail sometimes.
- Bumblebees make false memories too.
- Humans are not as clever as bumblebees.
- Bumblebees have extraordinary memory.

Read the following article and answer the question. Article: It's well known that our human memory can fail us. People can be forgetful, and they can sometimes also "remember" things incorrectly, with damaging consequences in the classroom, courtroom, and other areas of life. Now, researchers show for the first time that bumblebees can be unreliable witnesses too. Bumblebees are rather clever animals, which explains why Chittka has been studying learning and memory in the insects for the last 20 years. Most times when people have studied memory in animals, errors in performance have been taken to mean that the animals failed to learn the task or perhaps learned it and then forgot. But what if animals can experience a more interesting type of memory failure? To find out, Chittka first trained bumblebees to expect a reward when visiting a yellow artificial flower followed by one with black-and-white rings. During subsequent tests, bees were given a choice between three types of flowers. Two were the types they'd seen in the training before. The third had yellow-and-white rings, representing a mixed-up version of the other two. Minutes after the training, the bees showed a clear preference for the flower that recently rewarded them. One or three days later, however, something very different happened when the bumblebees' memory was put to the test. At first, the bees showed the same preference displayed in the earlier tests, but as the time went on, they began selecting the flower with yellow rings, even though they'd never actually seen that one in training before. Chittka says that insects make similar errors in the conjunction of long-term memories as humans do. The ability to extract common features between different events in the environment might come at the expense of remembering every detail correctly. In bees, with their limited brain capacity , the pressure to store main features of several objects rather than each individual object might be much greater, compared with humans. Question: Which of the following might be the best title of the passage? Answer:
****
A: Bumblebees make false memories too.

Read the following article and answer the question. Article: As the population of the planet increases, so does the number of homes, businesses, parking lots, schools, airports and roadways. All these structures use electricity and need to be lighted. Humans demand these lights. They want their homes more comfortable and they want their streets safe. The problem is that researchers are finding that all the light is having a negative effect on humans and wildlife as well. Less than 10 years ago I drove to a thinly populated section of my town, lay down in the middle of the road and watched an attractive meteor shower . The area was short of homes, street lights and traffic. If I did that today, I wouldn't be able to see the meteor shower as well. Due to the increase in street lights, I would surely be run over by a car. Nowadays scientists are finding light pollution can be almost as bad as carbon dioxide pollution. If you've ever taken a flight at night, the view is beautiful, but you must remember that all the light you see wastes electricity. The crew of the space shuttles see an even bigger picture of how extensive the wasted electricity is worldwide. One of the saddest parts of light pollution is that most of it is unnecessary and most of the outdoor light that we use is wasted. One only needs to look at a row of street lights to see how much of the light shines upwards and lights the sky; a total waste of electricity. Additionally, somewhere electricity needs to be produced, and the production of electricity creates pollution by releasing greenhouse gases. This affects the air we breathe and our quality of life. Scientists are also studying the effects of light pollution on wildlife. Thousands of birds die each year when they crash into highly lighted buildings, as they become puzzled by the light. It has been long known that tiny baby sea turtles become lost and follow lights on the shore instead of heading towards the sea. Fortunately, light pollution is one of the easiest sources of pollution that can be corrected without a negative effect. Following some... Question: What can be inferred from the text? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- We are almost at a loss how to deal with light pollution.
- Global warming results in light pollution in some way.
- Astronauts can't see clearly in space nowadays.
- Some animals use natural light to direct their movements.
Some animals use natural light to direct their movements.

input: OPTIONS:
- They enjoy little popularity.
- Multi-storey ones are common.
- Building passive houses is impractical.
- Their advantages are still unclear. Now, answer this question: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: We may not be aware of it, but ordinary family homes in the U.S. and the rest of the world are not energy-efficient. Most of their energy goes to heating and cooling, and a lot of it is wasted, as warm air and cool air escape through fireplace chimneys and thin or poorly fitting windows and doors. A passive house loses almost none."Imagine a thermos ,"said housing developer Brendan O'Neill."You have insulation everywhere, and it's basically completely sealed. And so the idea is to build a house like a thermos. So the windows are sealed. There's insulation completely surrounding the building. We make it as sealed as possible." A 147-square-meter passive house, presented by O'Neill Development Corp. as a demonstration unit just outside Washington, was brought to the site in two boxes."Once it's set and put together, it takes about four weeks to complete the outside construction, to put down carpets,"O'Neill said."If everything is set in place, you put a house like this together in about four months."The total cost of building it was $325,000, or about 17 percent more than constructing an ordinary house. But its utility bill is only around $20 monthly, or one-tenth the amount for the average house of the same size. While passive houses have been around for a long time, the idea has never taken root in the U.S. There was no driving force to push it. However, David Peabody, an architect who designs passive houses said,"I think climate change is now becoming a larger issue. And I think building standards are catching on to that. So people are becoming more aware of energy."Peabody said the cost of building passive houses could come down."What really makes sense for truly affordable housing,"he said,"is to build multi-storey buildings." Question: How are passive houses in the U.S. now? Answer:
A:
output:
They enjoy little popularity.