首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
With the constructor of the railways in the 19th century, a new sociological phenomenon was born: the traveling criminal. Until
With the constructor of the railways in the 19th century, a new sociological phenomenon was born: the traveling criminal. Until
admin
2012-03-23
41
问题
With the constructor of the railways in the 19th century, a new sociological phenomenon was born: the traveling criminal. Until then, police had relied on local communities to recognize a bad apple in their midst, but now the felons were on the move, wreaking havoc in communities which had no knowledge of their past and hence no reason to be wary. For law enforcers trying to contain the problem by sharing descriptions of known recidivists, it became imperative to answer one question, what is it that identifies someone as a particular person?
This question has long troubled humanity, of course, and it is explored in all its facets in a new exhibition at the Welcome Collection in London. One practical application lies in the forensic arena. The first solution offered, branding, was simple and effective. But even in a society that preferred to believe that criminals were born and not made, this was soon deemed unacceptable. So there was a need to find something innate to human beings that remains constant from the cradle to the grave, and that is sufficiently differentiated in the population to make it useful in identifying individuals.
Alphonse Brillion, who appears in one of the identity cards he invented, came up with a system that combined photography (the profile and face-on photos that police still use today) with a range of bodily measurements. His system was widely taken up until Sir Francis Galeton, a colleague, rival and inveterate classifier, realized the individualizing potential of fingerprints. These held sway for a century until, in 1984, Sir Alec Jeffrey’s of Leicester University stumbled on an even more powerful personal barcode: DNA.
Embedded in this short history is all the elusiveness of human identity; each new advance reveals the flaws in earlier systems. Go to the website of the New York-based Innocence Project to see the latest tally of exonerations that have taken place in America, after DNA evidence showed those convictions to be unsafe. At the time of writing, the figure comes to 246. Mistaken eyewitness identification is a major culprit, but fingerprint misidentification is cited too.
Ironically, our facility for recognizing faces may be to blame. The brain has evolved to look for patterns, and when one is incomplete it will fill in the gaps, sometimes leaping to the wrong conclusion, as Brandon Mayfield, an Oregon lawyer, discovered when he was wrongly implicated in the 2004 Madrid bombings on the basis of a single, poor-quality fingerprint.
So what of DNA? Within hours of reaching a crime scene, police may now have information that helps identify suspects. In the courtroom, DNA trumps all other identifiers. But it has its limitations. With ever more minute quantities becoming detectable, contamination is a serious issue. The Phantom of Heilbronn murdered her way across Europe until, last March, she was discovered not to exist. The DNA found at each crime scene actually came from a female worker in the factory that manufactured the cotton swabs used to collect evidence.
There is another problem with DNA. When the technology allows for a person’s entire genome to be read from a single drop of blood, it may well constitute a gold standard for identification. But for now analysts work with a snapshot of that genome, represented by an arbitrary number of markers spaced along it. If there are gaps to be filled, the brain will fill them, which could make it vulnerable to the same kind of errors as its predecessors.
From the very real traveling criminal, via the Phantom of Heilbronn, the Welcome exhibition returns to the central question. Perhaps identity, like beauty, lies in the eye of the beholder, and if people want to see one and not the other, they need to invent a new way of looking.
It can be concluded from the passage that
选项
A、the facility for identifying faces needs improving.
B、there may be two identical fingerprints.
C、DNA testing is a gold standard for identification.
D、DNA testing might be replaced in the future.
答案
D
解析
推断题。根据原文第六、七段可知,DNA在识别人类身份的时候也存在误差。再由第七段最后一句“If there are gaps to be filled,the brain will fill them.which could make it vulnerable to the sale kind of errors as its predecessors.”可推测出DNA识别系统有可能被新的识别系统代替,故答案为[D]。[A]说“识别人脸的设备需要改进”,而根据原文第五段第一句提到“也许要怪罪于识别人脸的设备”只是为了引出指纹识别和DNA识别系统的缺陷.并没有[A]所表达的意思,因此排除。[B]说“有可能有两个相同的指纹”,而原文只是提到指纹辨识错误是由于指纹不够清晰,排除。[C]说“DNA是身份识别的黄金标准”,但原文却指出了DNA识别系统还存在缺陷,因此与原文不符,排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/mniO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
ThatLouiseNevelsonisbelievedbymanycriticstobethegreatesttwentieth-centurysculptorisallthemoreremarkablebecaus
Nooneknowswhenthefirstcalendarwasdeveloped.Butitseemspossiblethatitwasbasedonlunarmonths.Whenpeoplestarted
In17th-centuryNewEngland,almosteveryonebelievedinwitches.Strugglingtosurviveinavastandsometimesunforgivingland
LanguageFamiliesAllofthelanguageswithinalanguagefamilyare【1】andallofthemhaveasimilarhistory.Let’stakeabr
A、TommySuhartowassentencedto15yearsinprisonforthemurderofajudge.B、Prosecutorshavedecidedagainstdemandingaha
Inrecentyears,wehaveallwatchedtheincreasingcommercializationofthecampus.Thenumerousadvertisingpostersandthego
Nowadays,manyprivateinstitutesofadvancededucationhaveappearedinChina.Somepeoplethinkstudentsmaybenefitfromthem
WhowasthefirstgreatprosestylistofAmericanromanticism?
A、Airlinesplantodevelopnewoperatingprocedures.B、Thehardwareinstalledinaircrafthasbeenapproved.C、UKAirlineswill
随机试题
2017年第一季度,某省农林牧渔业增加值361.78亿元,比上年同期增长5.9%,高于上年同期0.2个百分点,具体情况如下:该省种植业增加值119.21亿元,比上年同期增长8.2%。其中蔬菜种植面积358.80万亩,比上年同期增加18.23万亩,蔬菜产量
在国际单位制的基本单位中,物质量的单位符号是()。
二尖瓣面容
A.8对B.9对C.10对D.11对E.12对脑神经共有
扁瘊患者,皮疹淡红,数目较多,口干不欲饮,身热,大便不畅,尿黄,舌红,脉滑数,应选何法治疗
氯霉素可以导致新生儿
(),银行从业人员应遵守信息保密原则。
请阅读下列材料:“视频信息的加工”是“信息加工与表达”这一章第一节“信息的加工”中的内容。其中信息的加工主要从加工需求、文本、数据、图片、声音、视频、动画等方面,由浅入深地逐步学习,前课时是为后课时做准备和铺垫。比如“图片信息的加工”和“声音信息的
史密斯:根据《国际珍稀动物保护条例》的规定,杂种动物不属于该条例的对象。《国际珍稀动物保护条例》的保护对象中,包括赤狼。而最新的基因研究技术发现,一直被认为是纯种动物的赤狼实际上是山狗与灰狼的杂交。由于赤狼明显需要保护,所以条例应当修改,使其也保护杂种动物
WhichofthefollowingstatementsisINCORRECT?
最新回复
(
0
)