阅读理解     Any fair-minded assessment of the dangers of the deal between Britain's National Health Service (NHS) and DeepMind must start by acknowledging that both sides mean well. DeepMind is one of the leading artificial intelligence (AI) companies in the world. The potential of this work applied to health-care is very great, but it could also lead to further concentration of power in the tech giant. It is against that background that the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, has issued her damning verdict against the Royal Free hospital trust under the NHS, which handed over to DeepMind the records of 1.6 million patients in 2015 on the basis of a vague agreement which took far too little account of the patients' rights and their expectations of privacy.
    DeepMind has almost apologized. The NHS trust has mended its ways. Further arrangements—and there may be many—between the NHS and DeepMind will be carefully scrutinised to ensure that all necessary permissions have been asked of patients and all unnecessary data has been cleaned. There are lessons about informed patient consent to learn. But privacy is not the only angle in this case and not even the most important. Ms Denham chose to concentrate the blame on the NHS trust, since under existing law it 'controlled' the data and DeepMind merely 'processed' it. But this distinction misses the point that it is processing and aggregation, not the mere possession of bits, that gives the data value.
    The great question is who should benefit from the analysis of all the data that our lives now generate. Privacy law builds on the concept of damage to an individual from identifiable knowledge about them. That misses the way the surveillance economy works. The data of an individual there gains its value only when it is compared with the data of countless millions more.
    The use of privacy law to curb the tech giants in this instance feels slightly maladapted. This practice does not address the real worry. It is not enough to say that the algorithms DeepMind develops will benefit patients and save lives. What matters is that they will belong to a private monopoly which developed them using public resources. If software promises to save lives on the scale that drugs now can, big data may be expected to behave as big pharma has done. We are still at the beginning of this revolution and small choices now may turn out to have gigantic consequences later. A long struggle will be needed to avoid a future of digital feudalism. Ms Denham's report is a welcome start.
单选题     What is true of the agreement between the NHS and DeepMind? ______
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】根据题干关键信息agreement between the NHS and DeepMind可定位至文章首段。本段末句提到，伊丽莎白·德纳姆指控NHS下属的一个医院信托机构，该机构于2015年基于一个不甚明确的协议把160万患者的医疗记录交给了DeepMind公司，该协议基本没有考虑到患者的权利以及他们对于保护自己隐私的期望。由此可知，NHS和DeepMind之间的协议没有充分考虑到患者的权利。故选B。
单选题     The NHS trust responded to Denham's verdict with ______.
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】根据题干关键信息The NHS trust responded to Denham's verdict可定位至第二段第二句。该句指出NHS下属的英国皇家自由医院信托机构对德纳姆的裁决采取了补救措施。紧接着下文就具体介绍了做出的安排和调整。故选C。
单选题     The author argues in Paragraph 2 that ______.
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】文章第二段中提到，此案例中隐私并不是唯一的问题，甚至不是最重要的问题。德纳姆女士选择将责任归咎于NHS信托机构，是因为根据现行法律，NHS信托机构“掌控”着数据，而深度思维公司只是“处理”数据。最后一句明确指出，这种区分忽略了一个问题，即赋予数据价值的恰恰是对数据的处理和聚集，而不是拥有数据这种行为本身。故选D。
单选题     According to the last paragraph, the real worry arising from this deal is ______.
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】最后一段前两句提到，在此案例中使用隐私法来遏制科技巨头并没有解决真正的忧患。第三、四句提到了真正的问题，这不足以说明深度思维公司研发的算法将使患者受益并拯救生命。重要的是，这些利用公共资源研发出来的算法将归属于一个私人垄断企业。由此可知，利用大数据研发出来的成果将归属于私人垄断企业，推知大数据也被这些企业所垄断。故选D。
单选题     The author's attitude toward the application of AI to healthcare is ______.
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】文章第一段第三句提到，将科技成果应用于医疗保健的潜力非常大，但它也可能导致科技巨头对技术的进一步垄断。最后一段第四句也提到，利用公共资源研发出来的算法将归属于一个私人垄断企业。接着又提到，如果应用软件能以现有药物的规模拯救生命，那么可以寄望于大数据像大制药公司那样运作。而我们仍处于这场革命的起步阶段，现在所做的任何一个小的选择都可能会在日后产生深远的影响。所以为了避免未来的数字封建主义，我们需要进行长期的斗争。可见作者对于将科技和人工智能运用到医疗保健领域是很谨慎小心的。故选B。