115年 - 115 臺北市公立國民小學教師聯合甄選初試基礎類科知能試題:英文#139883

科目:教甄◆英文-國小 | 年份:115年 | 選擇題數:18 | 申論題數:0

試卷資訊

所屬科目:教甄◆英文-國小

選擇題 (18)

36. An organization involving two or more countries which have mutually agreed to eliminate tariffs, quotas, and other
restrictions on trade. Member nations are free to set their own tariffs with the rest of the world.
In what way is a free trade association similar to a custom union?
(A) In both, members share the same external trade policy.
(B) Both make it easier for members to trade with other members.
(C) In both, members eliminate tariffs and quotas.
(D) Both make it possible for members to collect more tariffs from other members.
Some governments are beginning to use artificial intelligence, or AI, to provide public services. Recently, the United Arab
Emirates announced a plan to have AI run half of its government services within two years. The AI would not only give advice, but
also analyze information, make decisions, carry out actions, and improve itself without human help. Some experts worry that this
plan is too risky.
The main concern is that government services affect people’s daily lives. If AI makes a mistake, people may lose money, care,
housing, or legal status. In the Netherlands, an AI system wrongly accused many families of childcare benefit fraud. Some parents
had to pay back money they did not owe, and many families suffered serious harm. The system also used unfair risk factors, such as
dual nationality and foreign-sounding names.
Australia had a similar problem. A government program called Robodebt sent debt notices to hundreds of thousands of welfare
recipients. Many people were told they owed money, even when the system was not fair or legal. In the United States, some states
used algorithms to decide home care support. Some people with serious health conditions suddenly had their care reduced.
These examples show three major risks. First, AI mistakes can happen on a large scale. If one worker makes a mistake, one
person may be affected. If an AI system makes a mistake, thousands of people may be affected before anyone notices. Second, AI
decisions can be difficult to understand. Some systems make many decisions step by step, so it may be hard to know why a final
decision was made. This becomes even harder when companies keep their technology secret. Third, AI can make citizens
responsible for proving that the government is wrong. People may have to prove their innocence or correct the mistake themselves.
This is especially difficult for people with less time, money, language ability, or legal support.
The article does not say that governments should never use AI. Instead, it argues that governments should not replace human
judgment with AI just to work faster. Public services need accountability, transparency, and care. People should be able to ask who
made a decision, why it was made, and how they can appeal it.
In short, AI can help governments, but it should support human decision-making rather than take over important decisions.
Efficiency is useful, but governments also have a duty to protect people from harm.
39. According to the article, what should governments AVOID using as the main measure of success when adopting AI?
(A) How quickly ministries adopt and master AI
(B) Whether citizens can understand and question decisions
(C) Whether public services protect people from harm
(D) Whether human judgment remains part of important decisions

CRISPR, which stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, is often described as a clever tool invented
by humans for gene editing. However, it can be more accurately viewed as a technosymbiosis, a unique collaboration between
conscious human intelligence and the non-conscious intelligence of bacteria. In this partnership, both parties achieve results that
neither could accomplish alone.
This collaboration relies on semiosis, or the creation and interpretation of signs. Humans use symbolic languages like English and
mathematics to guide the process. Meanwhile, bacteria perform actions that function as interpretations, recognizing specific DNA
sequences and cutting them at the correct site.
Shifting our view of CRISPR from a "tool" to a "collaboration" has profound implications for our place in the world. It helps us
combat anthropocentrism, the mistaken belief that humans have the right to dominate all other species. By recognizing the cognitive
capacities of bacteria, we acknowledge that meaning-making is not exclusive to humans.
Non-human lifeforms constantly create and interpret signs within their own embodied contexts. Accepting this opens the entire
biosphere to a complex web of intersecting and overlapping meanings. Ultimately, understanding CRISPR as a partnership
encourages us to respect all lifeforms and move away from the idea that only humans are capable of intelligent action.

申論題 (0)