Dear Reader, Today I'm going to ask you to support Wikipedia with a donation. Sounds unusual: Why does one of the world's five most popular websites ask for financial support from its users? Wikipedia is built differently from almost every other top 50.We have a small number of paid staff, just twentythree. Wikipedia content is free to use by anyone for any purpose. Wikipedia is run by the nonprofit Wikipedia Foundation, which I founded in 2003. Wikipedia's driven by a global community of more than 150,000 volunteers, all devoted to sharing knowledge freely. More than 275 million people come to our website every month to access information, free of charge and free of advertising. Your donation helps us in several ways. Most importantly, you will help us cover the increasing cost of managing global traffic to one of the most popular websites on the Internet. Funds also help us improve the software that runs Wikipedia, making it easier to search, easier to read, and easier to write for. We're bent on growing the free knowledge movement worldwide, by employing new volunteers, and building strategic partnerships with institutes of culture and learning. Wikipedia is different. It's the largest encyclopedia in history, all written by volunteers. Like a national park or a school, we don't believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia. We want to keep it free and strong, but we need the support of thousands of people like you, for your donation will help keep Wikipedia free for the whole world. Thank you! Jimmy Wales Which of the following is TRUE about Wikipedia? A) Due to its less popularity, Wikipedia is no longer attractive to advertising at all. B) Over 275 million people come to Wikipedia to access information for free weekly. C) Wikipedia, the world's most popular website, is run by the Wikipedia Foundation. D) Unlike others, Wikipedia, the largest encyclopedia in history, is written by volunteers.
D
(Question)
One day,four lawyers were riding their horses along a country road. There had been a rain. Water was dripping from the trees,and the grass was wet. They rode slowly,talking and laughing. Suddenly they heard some noises from the tree above them. "What is the matter?" asked the first lawyer. "Oh, it's only some old birds!" said the second lawyer. "The storm made one of the babies fall out of the nest. It is too young to fly, and the mother bird is very worried." "What a pity! It'll die down there in the grass," said the third lawyer. "It doesn't matter. It's only a bird," said the second lawyer. Then they rode on, talking and laughing as before. But the fourth lawyer, whose name was Abraham Lincoln, stopped. He got down from his horse and took the little one in his big warm hands. "Never mind, my _ ," said Mr. Lincoln. "I will put you back in your little nest." He climbed up the tree and put the bird softly into their warm little home. A few minutes later, Mr. Lincoln joined them again. His shoes were covered with mud and he was wet. Then the other three laughed at him. They thought it was foolish for a strong man to do so much just for a young bird. "Gentlemen," said Mr. Lincoln, "I could not sleep tonight if I had left the helpless bird in the grass." Later Abraham Lincoln became very famous as a lawyer. He also became the president of America. He was one of the greatest American presidents. From the passage we know Lincoln _ . A) liked riding horses B) was very kind and loved birds and animals C) liked being laughed at D) wanted to be the president of America then
(Answer)
B
Ques: "If we can set it up so you can't unlock your phone unless you've got the right fingerprint ," Barack Obama asked last Tuesday, "why can't we do the same thing for our guns?" For this reasonable-sounding question, the president was praised throughout the media. As it happens, though, there is a good answer to this question: there is no market for guns that work just some of the time. Guns are simple things designed to operate as easily and reliably as possible. The introduction of electronics eats away this simplicity, and to a degree that is absolutely unacceptable to the consumer. As President Obama well knows, the fingerprint software on his phone works rather _ : Often it takes a user two or three tries to log in; occasionally, it falls asleep deeply and obeys the password. When this happens on an phone, the user is mildly inconvenienced. If this were to happen on a gun, the user would be dead. There is a reason that modern smartphones put the camera function outside of the authentication process. How could we possibly think that guns are the same as other commercial products? It is true that, say, cars have become considerably safer over the last few decades; true, too, that "research" has contributed to this improvement. But it matters enormously that a car is not intended to hurt people, and that in a perfect world nobody would ever be injured by one. Can we say the same of guns? Of course not. Guns are killing machines, designed to do damage to living things. In fact, they have no other purpose. As such, the salient question before any free people is not "are guns dangerous?" they are, but "who gets them, and why?" This is not to say that nothing at all can be done to improve public safety. On an individual level, gun owners should do everything to ensure that their guns are kept away from children, and, where possible, they should train themselves in case they are ever called upon to shoot in anger. At the national level, the combination of better policing and economic growth can help to reduce... Which of the following might the writer NOT agree with? A) Few know how to deal with guns-related deaths. B) Efforts to improve public safety have partly paid off. C) The nature of guns makes them different from other products. D) Guns using fingerprint software can risk the lives of the users.
Ans: A
Question: My friend had mentioned the other day that her father had a lot of children's toys he was looking to give away. She knew I have a three-year-old daughter so she thought of me first. I told her I would love it if I could get some nice things for my daughter, which I wouldn't otherwise have been able to afford. When I met her father, he began to explain he was too poor once and that he would hate to throw away things that can be very useful. Before he showed me what he was giving away, I thought the toys would be mostly lego's or things like that. When he was showing me around I saw a bed, a slide, a kitchen set and many other things that just blew my mind. He told me to write a list of everything my daughter could use and as my eyes were wide, he told me not to feel guilty. He said I was helping him by getting rid of the stuff. As I was looking around I did feel guilty, but I tried to remain more grateful than guilty. Every time I tried to thank him for giving me and my daughter all this wonderful stuff he would thank me right back. I wanted to believe that he was just thanking me so that I wouldn't feel so guilty but in reality I believe that he was as grateful as I was that these toys would be put to good use. In the eyes of charity, it makes sense to feel grateful, but guilt is just as normal. I know that we could have lived without a slide, which is why I do feel guilty, but I am grateful all the same because my daughter really does enjoy all these nice things! What can we know from the passage? A) The writer took all the toys home. B) The old man was a kind and thoughtful person C) The writer wanted to refuse the stuff when she first saw them. D) The writer's daughter enjoyed the slide most among all the stuff.
Answer:
B