[C] People are more interested in unaffordable garments. [D] Pricing is vital to environment-friendly purchasing. 25. What is the subject of the text?

[A] Satire on an extravagant lifestyle. [B] Challenge to a high-fashion myth.

[C] Criticism of the fast-fashion industry. [D] Exposure of a mass-market secret. Text 2

An old saying has it that half of all advertising budgets are wasted—the trouble is, no one knows which half. In the internet age, at least in theory, this fraction can be much reduced. By watching what people search for, click on and say online, companies can aim “behavioural” ads at those most likely to buy.

In the past couple of weeks a quarrel has illustrated the value to advertisers of such fine-grained information: Should advertisers assume that people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioural ads? Or should they have explicit permission?

In December 2010 America’s Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proposed adding a “do not track” (DNT) option to internet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not want to be followed. Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and Apple’s Safari both offer DNT; Google’s Chrome is due to do so this year. In February the FTC and the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) agreed that the industry would get cracking on responding to DNT requests.

On May 31st Microsoft set off the row. It said that Internet Explorer 10, the version due to appear with windows 8, would have DNT as a default.

Advertisers are horrified. Human nature being what it is, most people stick with default settings. Few switch DNT on now, but if tracking is off it will stay off. Bob Liodice, the chief executive of

5

the Association of National Advertisers, says consumers will be worse off if the industry cannot collect information about their preferences. People will not get fewer ads, he says. “They’ll get less meaningful, less targeted ads.”

It is not yet clear how advertisers will respond. Getting a DNT signal does not oblige anyone to stop tracking, although some companies have promised to do so. Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft’s default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.

Also unclear is why Microsoft has gone it alone. After all, it has an ad business too, which it says will comply with DNT requests, though it is still working out how. If it is trying to upset Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising, it has chosen an indirect method: There is no guarantee that DNT by default will become the norm. DNT does not seem an obviously huge selling point for windows 8—though the firm has compared some of its other products favourably with Google’s on that count before. Brendon Lynch, Microsoft’s chief privacy officer, blogged: “We believe consumers should have more control.” Could it really be that simple?

26. It is suggested in Paragraph 1 that “behavioural” ads help advertisers to

[A] ease competition among themselves. [B] lower their operational costs. [C] avoid complaints from consumers. [D] provide better online services.

27. “The industry” (Line 6, Para.3) refers to [A] online advertisers. [B] e-commerce conductors. [C] digital information analysis.

6

[D] internet browser developers.

28. Bob Liodice holds that setting DNT as a default. [A] may cut the number of junk ads. [B] fails to affect the ad industry. [C] will not benefit consumers. [D] goes against human nature.

29. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 6?

[A] DNT may not serve its intended purpose. [B] Advertisers are willing to implement DNT. [C] DNT is losing its popularity among consumers. [D] Advertisers are obliged to offer behavioural ads.

30. The author's attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of

[A] indulgence. [B] understanding. [C] appreciation. [D] skepticism. Text 3

Up until a few decades ago, our visions of the future were largely — though by no means uniformly — glowingly positive. Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity, leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.

Now utopia has grown unfashionable, as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us, from asteroid strike to epidemic flu to climate change. You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.

But such gloominess is misplaced. The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years — so why shouldn’t we? Take a broader look at our species’ place in the universe, and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatened species of the International Union for the

7

Conversation of Nature (IUCN), and you will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline.”

So what does our deep future hold? A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question. For example, the Long Now Foundation has as its flagship project a mechanical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.

Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of today’s technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and it’s perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. That’s one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.

But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.

This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.

31. Our vision of the future used to be inspired by [A] our desire for lives of fulfillment. [B] our faith in science and technology. [C] our awareness of potential risks. [D] our belief in equal opportunity.

32. The IUCN’s “Red List” suggests that human beings are

[A] a sustained species.

[B] a threat to the environment. [C] the world’s dominant power. [D] a misplaced race.

33. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?

[A] Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies. [B] Technology offers solutions to social problem. [C] The interest in science fiction is on the rise. [D] Our immediate future is hard to conceive.

34. To ensure the future of mankind, it is crucial to [A] explore our planet’s abundant resources.

8