首页 >> 新闻 >> 正文


2019年06月17日 11:55:18来源:排名在线

In the ed States, automakers conduct their own emissions tests and submit the results to the government. In Europe, automakers pick who conducts the tests and where they are done. And these two regulatory systems are considered the world’s gold standards.在美国,汽车制造商自己进行排放测试,然后把结果提交给政府。在欧洲,汽车制造商挑选由谁在哪里进行测试。这两种监管机制被视为全球最佳标准。Questions about the wisdom of allowing automakers so much sway in how air pollution standards are enforced grew this week after the resignation of Volkswagen’s chief executive, following the company’s diesel emissions cheating scandal.在大众汽车(Volkswagen)爆出柴油车排放作弊丑闻,其首席执行官辞职之后,本周出现了一些疑问的声音:让汽车制造商在空气污染标准的执行上发挥这么大的作用,是否明智?Regulators in several European countries have opened investigations, attorneys general in the ed States have joined federal inquiries, and there has been broader criticism of Volkswagen, and diesels, in markets from South Korea to Brazil.欧洲一些国家的监管机构已经在开展调查,美国检察长们也加入联邦调查的行列,而从韩国到巴西的很多市场出现了对大众和柴油车的广泛批评。Volkswagen has admitted installing software in 11 million vehicles that was used to provide false results about emissions, though it was not clear if it was used in all countries where the cars were sold. But the bth of the scandal could finally threaten to bring change to an industry with a record of cheating since cars were first regulated.大众汽车已经承认,公司在1100万辆汽车上安装了软件,以提供有关排放的虚假结果,目前还不清楚,它是否在所有销售大众汽车的国家都使用了这种软件。但这起丑闻的广泛影响可能最终会给这个行业带来变化;汽车业自从受到监管的那一天起,作弊事件就陈出不穷。While ed States automakers are allowed to test their own cars, the Environmental Protection Agency does its own random checking, and the vast majority of enforcement actions are undertaken by American regulators.虽然美国汽车制造商获许自己进行车辆测试,但美国国家环境保护局(Environmental Protection Agency,简称EPA)也会进行抽查,而绝大部分执法行动是由美国监管机构开展的。In the European Union, by contrast, automakers can get new car models tested in any member state and can hire private companies, which regard them as clients, to conduct the testing. Member states have regulatory jurisdiction, and enforcement is scant.相比之下,欧盟的汽车制造商可以在任何一个成员国测试新车型,也可以聘请私人公司进行测试;对于这些私人公司来说,汽车制造商就是客户。欧盟成员国拥有监管管辖权,执法行动非常不足。One of the testing firms used by automakers in Europe is Applus Idiada of Spain, which has counted the major automakers, including Volkswagen, among its clients, though no company beyond Volkswagen has been implicated in the current scandal.欧洲汽车制造商常用的一家测试公司是西班牙的Applus Idiada。其客户包括大众汽车和其他一些大牌汽车制造商,但除大众之外,没有哪家公司卷入当前的丑闻。But advocates say tactics used by such companies highlight flaws in the European system. Applus Idiada markets itself as being able to provide “optimization of engine behavior to fulfill emissions and F.E. targets” — F.E. refers to fuel economy — in one of its publications, and uses similar language in others.但一些维权者认为,这些公司使用的策略突显了欧洲机制的缺陷。 Applus Idiada在一份宣传资料中称自己能够“优化发动机行为,以满足排放和FE目标”—— FE指燃油经济性。该公司在其他宣传资料中也使用了类似语言。What does that mean for automaker clients?对于汽车制造商客户来说,这意味着什么呢?“They will find ways to artificially lower the test results using flexibilities in the testing methods,” Greg Archer, a former director at Britain’s renewable-fuels regulator who now works at Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based advocacy group that has done its own testing, said in an interview.“他们会找到办法,使用灵活的测试方法,人为地降低测试结果,”格雷格·阿彻(Greg Archer)在接受采访时说。阿彻是英国可再生燃料监管机构的前总监,现在在权益团体“交通运输和环境“(Transport and Environment)工作。这个总部设在布鲁塞尔的组织进行了自己的测试。The way the system is set up creates inherent problems, Mr. Archer added.这种制度的安排存在其固有问题,阿彻说。“Carmakers ‘shop’ for the best deal from agencies across Europe and directly pay for their services,” he said in a recent statement on the Volkswagen scandal. “The job of the engineer overseeing the test is ultimately dependent on the next contract from the carmaker.”“汽车制造商在欧洲各地的测试机构中‘选购’最划算的务,并直接为这种务买单,”他近日在关于大众丑闻的一份声明中说。“负责测试的工程师能不能保住饭碗,最终取决于和汽车制造商签订的下一份合同。”The company did not have an immediate comment.该公司没有当即予以置评。Automakers have the same incentive to shop around for lenient testing companies that bond issuers have long had to shop around for the credit rating agency that would give them the highest credit rating. Overgenerous ratings of complex financial instruments based on mortgage prices were widely blamed as helping to set off the global financial crisis.就像债券发行人长期以来“选购”可以给予他们最高信用评级的信用评级机构一样,汽车制造商同样也会“选购”比较宽松的测试公司的务。那些基于抵押贷款价格的复杂金融工具获得了过分高的评级,被广泛指责为引爆全球金融危机的原因之一。Volkswagen’s rivals have had a clear response to the emissions cheating scandal: not us. “There is no evidence that this is an industrywide issue,” the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association said in a statement on Wednesday, adding, “We cannot comment on an issue affecting one individual company.”大众汽车公司的竞争对手对排放作弊丑闻做出了明确回应:我们不这样。“没有据表明,这是整个行业的问题,”欧洲汽车制造商协会(European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association)本周三在一份声明中表示:“对于影响个别公司的问题,我们不予置评。”Lawmakers in the European Parliament on Wednesday debated the implications of the scandal at length, with members in several parties advocating a greater regulatory and oversight role for the European government, instead of the member states.本周三,欧洲议会(European Parliament)的议员深入辩论了丑闻的影响,有几方的成员主张由欧盟政府而不是成员国自己发挥更大的监管和监督作用。“Of course that will be a big fight with the member states,” said Bas Eickhout, a Dutch Green Party member who sits on the Parliament’s committee on Environmental, Public Health and Food Safety.“当然,这会是与成员国之间的一场大争斗,”荷兰绿党成员、欧洲议会环境、公共卫生和食品安全(Environmental, Public Health and Food Safety)委员会成员巴斯·埃克豪特(Bas Eickhout)说。He said he wanted the European Commission, the government’s executive branch, to move quickly on plans to put new emissions testing into effect that will take place at independent laboratories. And he wanted commission officials to quickly determine if the Volkswagen software was used to evade European tests, something that has still not been disclosed by Volkswagen.他说,他希望欧盟的行政机构欧盟委员会(European Commission)能迅速让新的排放测试计划生效;该计划要求在独立实验室进行测试。他希望委员会的官员迅速确定大众汽车是否用软件来逃避欧洲的测试;大众汽车尚未披露相关情况。He said some lawmakers also lamented that Europe lagged on enforcement, leaving American regulators to take on such cases.他说,一些议员还哀叹欧洲的执法落后了,要让美国监管机构去应对这些问题。“We are better in talking. The U.S. is better in acting,” he said, adding, “That’s a bit of a painful conclusion.”“我们善于谈论。美国善于行动,”他说,“这个总结有点让人难受。”In the ed States, as attorneys general across the country opened investigations, Dan Becker, director of the safe climate campaign at the Center for Auto Safety, said the country also needed to rethink how emissions were tested. Independent testing has shown a widening gap between results in laboratories and the real world, raising suspicion.在美国,各地的检察长开启了调查行动。汽车安全中心(Center for Auto Safety)的安全气候活动主管丹·贝克尔(Dan Becker)表示,美国需要重新考虑如何进行排放测试。独立测试显示,实验室和现实世界测试结果之间的差距正在拉大,已经引起了一些人的怀疑。“The automakers have proven that they’re not trustworthy,” Mr. Becker said. “The government has to overhaul the testing to make sure that independent parties ensure that the cars that are put on the road pollute less and are safe.”“汽车制造商已经明了他们不值得信赖,”贝克尔说。“政府必须对测试机制进行全面修改,让独立机构来确保路上的汽车污染更少,更加安全。”The new scandal could also crush the efforts of German automakers to open more export markets to diesel. Volkswagen had struggled for many years to win governments’ permission to sell diesel cars outside Europe, and that goal now seems especially challenged.德国汽车制造商正在努力为柴油车开辟更多的出口市场,这起新丑闻可能会让他们的努力付诸东流。多年来,大众汽车一直在试图获得一些政府的许可,以便在欧洲以外的地方销售柴油车,现在要实现这个目标似乎变得特别困难。In China, there has been little official response to the Volkswagen revelations. Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency, made a terse mention, referring to reports that South Korea would investigate three Volkswagen models. But Chinese regulators may have unintentionally saved Volkswagen from bigger problems.在中国,官方几乎没有对大众汽车丑闻做出回应。中国官方通讯社新华社简短地提到此事,主要是报道韩国将调查大众的三种车型。但中国监管机构可能在无意中让大众汽车免于陷入更大的麻烦。Although China only uses Euro 4 emissions standards for diesel cars, government officials have exercised their considerable regulatory discretion to discourage mass production within China of diesel engines for cars. Volkswagen has lobbied unsuccessfully for years against that policy, and sells fewer than 1,000 diesels a year in China, all imported, out of overall annual sales of about 3 million cars, virtually all of them gasoline-powered.中国对于柴油车仅仅采用了欧4排放标准,但政府官员行使了相当大的监管自由裁量权,阻止了柴油车在中国的大规模生产。关于这项政策,大众汽车进行了多年的游说,但都不成功,公司每年在中国销售的柴油车不到1000辆,而且全部是进口的。大众在中国的年销量约300万辆,几乎全都是汽油动力车。But there was much chatter online in China, with little positive for the company#39;s image.但是中国网民对此事的议论相当多,而且对该公司看法几乎都是负面的。“I just want to ask, as a world famous corporation that ranks the second in the industry,” wrote Zhong Xiaoyi on the website Zhihu, “why is it so difficult for you to manufacture good cars, to do something good?”“作为世界知名企业,作为行业前二,好好做好汽车本身,好好做些实事,真的那么难吗?”知乎网站的钟小逸问道。Many commenters lamented the state of Chinese regulation, with a Weibo user writing: “They must have sold cars that should have been exported to China to the U.S.”很多者对中国的监管状况发出了感概,一名微用户写道:“他们肯定是把本应出口到中国的汽车出口到了美国。” /201509/401143。

  • The US Supreme Court has thrown out the conviction of a man who posted violent messages about his wife and co-workers on Facebook, in a case that was being closely watched over its potential implications for online speech.美国最高法院(US Supreme Court)推翻了一名在Facebook上对其妻子和同僚发出威胁性言论的男子的罪名。该案由于对网上言论具有的潜在影响,受到了密切的关注。Anthony Elonis was convicted on four counts of transmitting threatening content in 2011 after ranting online about wanting his wife dead and, in one photograph posted on the social media network, holding a toy knife to the neck of a co-worker at an amusement park with the caption “I wish”.2011年,安东尼#8226;埃罗尼斯(Anthony Elonis)因四次传播威胁性内容而被定罪。他在社交媒体网络Facebook上大放厥词,称要杀死自己的妻子——在上传的一张照片中,他手握一把玩具刀指向游乐场一名同僚的脖子,同时配上文字称“我希望”(I wish)。Mr Elonis argued that he was under emotional duress after his wife of nearly seven years left with their two children and that he was merely venting through Facebook.埃罗尼斯辩称,他与妻子结婚近7年,当妻子带着他们的两个孩子离开之后,他感到很郁闷,他只不过是通过Facebook泄愤。The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, threw out his conviction on Monday, ruling that the jury was not properly instructed in the case. The US high court said that it was not enough for the government to establish that a “reasonable” person would have viewed Mr Elonis’s posts as threatening.周一,美国最高法院以7票赞同、2票反对的比例,推翻了他被判的罪名。最高法院认定,陪审团在该案中对案情掌握不当。最高法院表示,美国政府没有足够据明一位“有理性的”人会把埃罗尼斯的发言视为威胁。In a narrow ruling that dodged the First Amendment issues some free speech advocates expected the court to address, the justices found that the government must show that a defendant intended their posts to be threatening, or at least understood there was a possibility they would be viewed as a crime, to be convicted under the federal law barring the transmission of threatening content.在一份避开了美国宪法第一修正案问题(有些倡导言论自由的人希望法庭提到这些问题)的狭义裁决中,法官们认定,政府必须明一名被告人故意用言论来发出威胁,或者起码要明白该言论有可能被视为一项犯罪行为,唯有这样,才能依据阻止传播威胁性内容的联邦法律对其定罪。 /201506/378537。
  • LET me hazard a guess that you think a real person has written what you’re ing. Maybe you’re right. Maybe not. Perhaps you should ask me to confirm it the way your computer does when it demands that you type those letters and numbers crammed like abstract art into that annoying little box.让我来猜猜看,你认为你所阅读的内容是由一个真实存在的人写的。你可能是对的,也可能是错的。或许你应该让我确认这种说法,就像你的电脑要求你将抽象艺术般的字母和数字输入那个令人厌烦的小盒子一样。Because, these days, a shocking amount of what we’re ing is created not by humans, but by computer algorithms. We probably should have suspected that the information assaulting us 24/7 couldn’t all have been created by people bent over their laptops.因为,目前有相当多的阅读内容不是由人类编写的,而是由计算机算法完成的。我们可能应该会猜想,每天24小时向我们袭来的信息可能不完全是由人类俯在笔记本电脑前编写的。It’s understandable. The multitude of digital avenues now available to us demand content with an appetite that human effort can no longer satisfy. This demand, paired with ever more sophisticated technology, is spawning an industry of “automated narrative generation.”这是可以理解的。人类的努力已经无法满足我们现在能够使用的各种数字渠道对内容的需求。这种需求,再加上更加成熟的技术,滋生了一个“文本自动生成”产业。Companies in this business aim to relieve humans from the burden of the writing process by using algorithms and natural language generators to create written content. Feed their platforms some data — financial earnings statistics, let’s say — and poof! In seconds, out comes a narrative that tells whatever story needs to be told.该领域中的公司旨在利用算法和自然语言生成器编写内容,使人类摆脱写作过程中的负担。将一些数据——比如金融收益数据——输入它们的平台,然后“嗖”的一声!几秒钟之内就会产生一些内容,提供人们需要的各种报道。These robo-writers don’t just regurgitate data, either; they create human-sounding stories in whatever voice — from staid to sassy — befits the intended audience. Or different audiences. They’re that smart. And when you the output, you’d never guess the writer doesn’t have a heartbeat.这些机器人写手并不只是重复数据;它们以适合目标受众的风格——从古板到活泼——写出看起来像是人类编写的报道。它们非常聪明。当你阅读这些报道时,你绝不会猜到这个作者没有心跳。Consider the opening sentences of these two sports pieces:看看这两篇体育报道的开篇语句。“Things looked bleak for the Angels when they trailed by two runs in the ninth inning, but Los Angeles recovered thanks to a key single from Vladimir Guerrero to pull out a 7-6 victory over the Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park on Sunday.”“周日,天使队(Angels)在第九局中落后两分时,情况看起来不妙,但凭借弗拉迪米尔·葛雷诺(Vladimir Guerrero)赢得的关键一分,洛杉矶天使队挽回败局,在芬威球场(Fenway Park)以七比六的比分击败波士顿红袜队(Boston Red Sox)。”“The University of Michigan baseball team used a four-run fifth inning to salvage the final game in its three-game weekend series with Iowa, winning 7-5 on Saturday afternoon (April 24) at the Wilpon Baseball Complex, home of historic Ray Fisher Stadium.”“周六下午(4月24日),密歇根大学(University of Michigan)棒球队在威尔彭棒球场(Wilpon Baseball Complex)——具有历史意义的雷·费舍尔体育场(Ray Fisher Stadium)的所在地,通过赢得四分的第五局比赛,扭转局势,最终以七比五的比分赢得了与爱荷华棒球队在周末举行的三场比赛中的最后一场。”If you can’t tell which was written by a human, you’re not alone. According to a study conducted by Christer Clerwall of Karlstad University in Sweden and published in Journalism Practice, when presented with sports stories not unlike these, study respondents couldn’t tell the difference. (Machine first, human second, in our example, by the way.)如果你无法分辨哪一篇是由人类写的,那你不是唯一一个。瑞典卡尔斯塔得大学(Karlstad University)的克里斯特·克莱瓦尔(Christer Clerwall)开展了一项研究,并在《新闻实践》(Journalism Practice)上发表了相关论文。研究显示,当看到类似的体育报道时,调查对象无法辨别其中的区别。(顺便说一下,在我们提供的例子中,第一篇是机器写的,第二篇是人写的。)Algorithms and natural language generators have been around for a while, but they’re getting better and faster as the demand for them spurs investment and innovation. The sheer volume and complexity of the Big Data we generate, too much for mere mortals to tackle, calls for artificial rather than human intelligence to derive meaning from it all.算法和自然语言生成器已经存在了一段时间,但随着对它们的需求刺激了投资和创新,它们变得越来越好,越来越快。我们产生海量的大数据(Big Data),而且很复杂,凡人难以处理,需要人工智能,而不是人类智能,来从中获取有意的信息。Set loose on the mother lode — especially stats-rich domains like finance, sports and merchandising — the new software platforms apply advanced metrics to identify patterns, trends and data anomalies. They then rapidly craft the explanatory narrative, stepping in as robo-journalists to replace humans.将之应用于大量资源,特别是在金融、体育和销售规划等数据繁多的领域,这种新的软件平台就会应用先进的度量标准,去确认模式、趋势和反常数据。然后,它们会迅速产生解释性文本,成为代替人类的机器人记者。The Associated Press uses Automated Insights’ Wordsmith platform to create more than 3,000 financial reports per quarter. It published a story on Apple’s latest record-busting earnings within minutes of their release. Forbes uses Narrative Science’s Quill platform for similar efforts and refers to the firm as a partner.美联社(The Associated Press)每季度利用自动化洞察力公司(Automated Insights)的Wordsmith平台撰写3000多篇金融报道。他们在苹果(Apple)公司公布最新创纪录收益几分钟之后,就发表了一篇报道。福布斯(Forbes)利用叙述科学公司(Narrative Science)的Quill平台撰写类似报道,并称该公司是他们的合作伙伴。Then we have Quakebot, the algorithm The Los Angeles Times uses to analyze geological data. It was the “author” of the first news report of the 4.7 magnitude earthquake that hit Southern California last year, published on the newspaper’s website just moments after the event. The newspaper also uses algorithms to enhance its homicide reporting.然后又出现了Quakebot,《洛杉矶时报》(The Los Angeles Times)利用这种算法分析地质数据。它是第一篇有关南加利福尼亚州去年发生的4.7级地震的新闻报道的“作者”。地震发生后,该报立即在其网站了发表了这篇报道。该报还利用算法加强命案报道。But we should be forgiven a sense of unease. These software processes, which are, after all, a black box to us, might skew to some predicated norm, or contain biases that we can’t possibly discern. Not to mention that we may be missing out on the insights a curious and fertile human mind could impart when considering the same information.如果我们对此感到一丝不安,这也是可以理解的。这些软件程序毕竟对我们来说是一个黑盒子,它们可能偏向于一些特定的基准,或包含我们可能无法辨别的倾向性。更不用说,我们可能会错失一个好奇的、具有创造力的人类在思考相同的信息时所能产生的那种洞见。The mantra around all of this carries the usual liberation theme: Robo-journalism will free humans to do more reporting and less data processing.这一切所表达的呼声,包含着常见的解放主题——机器新闻将会解放人类,使人类能够更多地进行报道,减少数据处理工作。That would be nice, but Kristian Hammond, Narrative Science’s co-founder, estimates that 90 percent of news could be algorithmically generated by the mid-2020s, much of it without human intervention. If this projection is anywhere near accurate, we’re on a slippery slope.这不失为一件美事。但是,据叙述科学联合创始人克里斯蒂安·哈蒙德(Kristian Hammond)估计,到本世纪20年代中期,将有90%的新闻由计算机算法生成,其中大多都无需人工干预。倘若这个预测接近事实,那么我们就会处在一个滑坡之上。It’s mainly robo-journalism now, but it doesn’t stop there. As software stealthily replaces us as communicators, algorithmic content is rapidly permeating the nooks and crannies of our culture, from government affairs to fantasy football to reviews of your next pair of shoes.目前,机器新闻已经占据主导,但它并未就此止步。随着软件悄悄取代我们成为传播者,从政府事务到梦幻足球,再到对你下一双鞋子的评价,算法生成的内容也在迅速向我们文化中的各个角落和缝隙渗透。Automated Insights states that its software created one billion stories last year, many with no human intervention; its home page, as well as Narrative Science’s, displays logos of customers all of us would recognize: Samsung, Comcast, The A.P., Edmunds.com and Yahoo. What are the chances that you haven’t consumed such content without realizing it?自动化洞察力公司指出,其软件去年一共创作了10亿个报道,许多都没有人工干预;它和叙述科学公司的主页上,展示着我们耳熟能详的客户标志:三星(Samsung)、康卡斯特(Comcast)、美联社、Edmunds.com和雅虎(Yahoo)。所以你极有可能在没有意识的情况下消费了这种内容。Books are robo-written, too. Consider the works of Philip M. Parker, a management science professor at the French business school Insead: His patented algorithmic system has generated more than a million books, more than 100,000 of which are available on Amazon. Give him a technical or arcane subject and his system will mine data and write a book or report, mimicking the thought process, he says, of a person who might write on the topic. Et voilà, “The Official Patient’s Sourcebook on Acne Rosacea.”机器人还在写书。来看看法国的欧洲工商管理学院(Insead)管理科学教授菲利普·M·帕克(Philip M. Parker)的作品:他的专利算法系统已经生成了超过100万本图书,其中有10万多本在亚马逊上销售。他说,给他一个技术性或晦涩难懂的话题,他的系统就能模仿可能就此题目进行写作的人的思维过程,挖掘数据,撰写一本书或一篇报告。比如,《红斑痤疮患者官方资料》(The Official Patient’s Sourcebook on Acne Rosacea)。Narrative Science claims it can create “a narrative that is indistinguishable from a human-written one,” and Automated Insights says it specializes in writing “just like a human would,” but that’s precisely what gives me pause. The phrase is becoming a de facto parenthetical — not just for content creation, but where most technology is concerned.叙述科学声称它可以创作“与出自人类的作品分毫不差的文本”。自动化洞察力则称它的专长是“像一个人一样”写作,但这正是让我担忧的地方。这种说法事实上已经成为一段插入语——不只是对内容创作,而且对于大多数科技都是如此。Our phones can speak to us (just as a human would). Our home appliances can take commands (just as a human would). Our cars will be able to drive themselves (just as a human would). What does “human” even mean?我们的手机可以(像一个人一样)和我们说话。我们的家用电器能够(像一个人一样)接受指令。我们的汽车将能(像一个人一样)自行驾驶。那么,“人”究竟是什么意思?With technology, the next evolutionary step always seems logical. That’s the danger. As it seduces us again and again, we relinquish a little part of ourselves. We rarely step back to reflect on whether, ultimately, we’re giving up more than we’re getting.在科技的帮助下,下一个革命性的进展似乎总显得顺理成章。这就是危险所在。鉴于它反复引诱我们,我们就会放弃一小部分自己。我们很少会后退一步,反思我们最后放弃的东西是否比得到的更多。Then again, who has time to think about that when there’s so much information to absorb every day? After all, we’re only human.再者,当每天都有这么多信息需要吸收的时候,谁还有时间去思考这那个问题?毕竟,我们只是人类。Related: Interactive Quiz: Did a Human or a Computer Write This? A shocking amount of what we’re ing is created not by humans, but by computer algorithms. Can you tell the difference? Take the quiz.相关内容:互动问答:这是人还是计算机写的?现在我们读到的内容中,由计算机算法而非人类编写的比例相当之高。你能区分吗?来试试。 /201503/364601。
分页 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29