题目内容
Advances in computers and data networks inspire visions of a future "information economy" in which everyone will have (1) to gigabytes of all kinds of information anywhere and anytime. (2) information has always been a (3) difficult commodity to deal with, and, in some ways, computers and high-speed networks make the problems of buying, (4) , and distributing information goods worse (5) better. The evolution of the Internet itself (6) serious problems. (7) the Internet has been privatized, several companies are (8) to provide the backbones that will carry traffic (9) local networks, but (10) business models for interconnection—who pays how much for each packet (11) , for example—have (12) to be developed. (13) interconnection standards are developed that make (14) cheap and easy to transmit information across independent networks, competition will (15) . If technical or economic (16) make interconnection difficult, (17) transmitting data across multiple networks is expensive or too slow, the (18) suppliers can offer a significant performance (19) ; they may be able to use this edge to drive out competitors and (20) the market. 17（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Advances in computers and data networks inspire visions of a future "information economy" in which everyone will have (1) to gigabytes of all kinds of information anywhere and anytime. (2) information has always been a (3) difficult commodity to deal with, and, in some ways, computers and high-speed networks make the problems of buying, (4) , and distributing information goods worse (5) better. The evolution of the Internet itself (6) serious problems. (7) the Internet has been privatized, several companies are (8) to provide the backbones that will carry traffic (9) local networks, but (10) business models for interconnection—who pays how much for each packet (11) , for example—have (12) to be developed. (13) interconnection standards are developed that make (14) cheap and easy to transmit information across independent networks, competition will (15) . If technical or economic (16) make interconnection difficult, (17) transmitting data across multiple networks is expensive or too slow, the (18) suppliers can offer a significant performance (19) ; they may be able to use this edge to drive out competitors and (20) the market. 8（）
Advances in computers and data networks inspire visions of a future "information economy" in which everyone will have (1) to gigabytes of all kinds of information anywhere and anytime. (2) information has always been a (3) difficult commodity to deal with, and, in some ways, computers and high-speed networks make the problems of buying, (4) , and distributing information goods worse (5) better. The evolution of the Internet itself (6) serious problems. (7) the Internet has been privatized, several companies are (8) to provide the backbones that will carry traffic (9) local networks, but (10) business models for interconnection—who pays how much for each packet (11) , for example—have (12) to be developed. (13) interconnection standards are developed that make (14) cheap and easy to transmit information across independent networks, competition will (15) . If technical or economic (16) make interconnection difficult, (17) transmitting data across multiple networks is expensive or too slow, the (18) suppliers can offer a significant performance (19) ; they may be able to use this edge to drive out competitors and (20) the market. 16（）
(46) A long-held view of the history of the English colonies that became the United States has been that England’ s policy toward these colonies before 1763 was dictated by commercial interests and that a change to a more imperial policy, dominated by expansionist militarist objectives, generated the tensions that ultimately led to the American Revolution. In a recent study, Stephen Saunders Webb has resented a formidable challenge to this view. According to Webb, England already had a military imperial policy for more than a century before the American Revolution. He sees Charles Ⅱ, the English monarch between 1660 and 1685, as the proper successor of the Tudor monarchs of the sixteenth century and of Oliver Cromwell, all of whom were bent on extending centralized executive power over England’ s possessions through the use of what Webb calls "garrison government." Garrison government allowed the colonists a legislative assembly, but real authority, in Webb’ s view, belonged to the colonial governor, who was appointed by the king and supported by the "garrison," that is. by the local contingent of English troops under the colonial governor’ s command.According to Webb, the purpose of garrison government was to provide military support for a royal policy designed to limit the power of the upper classes in the American colonies. (47) Webb argues that the colonial legislative assemblies represented the interests not of the common people but of the colonial upper classes, a coalition of merchants and nobility who favored self-rule and sought to elevate legislative authority at the expense of the executive. It was, according to Webb, the colonial governors who favored the small farmer, opposed the plantation system, and tried through taxation to break up large holdings of land. Backed by the military presence of the garrison, these governors tried to prevent the gentry and merchants, allied in the colonial assemblies, from transforming colonial America into a capitalistic oligarchy.(48) Webb’ s study illuminates the political alignments that existed in the colonies in the century prior to the American Revolution, but his view of the crown’ s use of the military as an instrument of colonial policy is not entirely convincing. England during the seventeenth century was not noted for its military achievements. Cromwell did mount England’s most ambitious overseas military expedition in more than a century, but it proved to be an utter failure. Under Charles Ⅱ, the English army was too small to be a major instrument of government. (49) Not until the war in France in 1697 did William Ⅲ persuade Parliament to create a professional standing army, and Parliament’ s price for doing so was to keep the army under tight legislative control. (50) While it may be true that the crown attempted to diminish the power of the colonial upper classes, it is hard to imagine how the English army during the seventeenth century could have provided significant military support for such a policy. 50
Some drug makers pay key leaders in a field of medicine, such as chairs of departments in medical schools, tens of thousands of dollars if they are saying the right things about their product. They manipulate medical education sessions, lectures, articles in medical journals, research studies, even personal conversations between physicians to get their product message across. Now a huge collection of drug company internal documents—revealed as part of a law-suit-offers a wealth of detail. In 1996, Dr. David Franklin, an employee of the drug company Parke-Davis, filed the lawsuit under federal whistleblower statutes alleging that the company was illegally promoting a drug called Neurontin for so called "off-label" uses. Under federal law, once the FDA approves a drug, a doctor can prescribe it for anything. But the law specifically prohibits the drug company from promoting the drug for any unapproved uses. In 2004, the company, by then a division of Pfizer admitted guilt and agreed to pay $ 430 million in criminal and civil liability related to promoting the drug for off-label use. Spokespeople for Pfizer say that any wrong doing occurred before Pfizer acquired the company. But Pfizer fought hard to keep all the papers related to the suit under seal. A judge denied the request and they are now part of the Drug Industry Document Archive at the University of California, San Francisco. What is most interesting is not the illegal actions they reveal, but the details of activities that are perfectly legal. And according to people familiar with the industry, the methods detailed in these company memos are routine. One tactic identifies certain doctors as "thought leaders,"—those whose opinions influence the prescribing pattern of other doctors. Those whose views converge with the company goals are then showered with rewards, research and educational grants. In the Parke-Davis case 14 such big shots got between $10,250 and $158,250 between 1993 and 1997. "Medical education drives this market," wrote the author of one Parke-Davis business plan in the files. Many state licensing boards require physicians to attend sessions in what is called continuing medical education (CME) to keep current in their field. At one time, medical schools ran most CME courses. Now, an industry of medical education and communications committees(MECCs) run most of the courses. These companies with innocent sounding names like Medical Education Systems set up courses, sometimes in conjunction with medical meetings, at other times often in fancy restaurants and resorts. The drug companies foot the bill, with the program usually noting it was financed by an "unrestricted educational grant" from the company. Using MECCs, Parke-Davis set up conference calls so that doctors could talk to one another about the drugs. The moderators of the calls, often thought leaders or their younger assistants, received $ 250 to $ 500 a call. Drug company reps were on the line, instructed to stay in a "listen only" mode, but monitoring to be sure the pitch met their expectations. Clearly, many of the physicians in these schemes are not innocent bystanders. Whether it is ghost writing, making telephone calls to colleagues or leading a CME session, many of the doctors got paid well. Others received a free meal or transportation to a resort to listen to an "educational session." Physicians often claim they are not influenced by payments from the pharmaceutical industry. But with the methods so thoroughly detailed in these papers, drug companies clearly believe they are getting their money’s worth. According to the passage, drug company representatives
微信支付 
支付宝支付