hce_nthu
113年
英文
第 30 題
📖 題組：
Reading 2 The Justice Department and 38 states and territories on Tuesday laid out how Google had systematically wielded its power in online search to cow competitors, as the internet giant fiercely parried back, in the opening of the most consequential trial over tech power in the modern internet era. In a packed courtroom at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington, the Justice Department and states painted a picture of how Google had used its deep pockets and dominant position, paying $10 billion a year to Apple and others to be the default search provider on smartphones. Google viewed those agreements as a “powerful strategic weapon” to cut out rivals and entrench its search engine, the government said. “This feedback loop, this wheel, has been turning for more than 12 years,” said Kenneth Dintzer, the Justice Department’s lead courtroom lawyer. “And it always turns to Google’s advantage.” Google denied that it had illegally used agreements to exclude its search competitors and said it had simply provided a superior product, adding that people can easily switch which search engine they use. The company also said that internet search extends more broadly than its general search engine and pointed to the many ways that people now find information online, such as Amazon for shopping, TikTok for entertainment and Expedia for travel. “Users today have more search options and more ways to access information online than ever before,” said John E. Schmidtlein, the lawyer who opened for Google. The back-and-forth came in the federal government’s first monopoly trial since it tried to break up Microsoft more than two decades ago. This case — U.S. et al. v. Google — is set to have profound implications not only for the internet behemoth but for a generation of other large tech companies that have come to influence how people shop, communicate, entertain themselves and work. A government victory could set limits on Google and change its business practices, sending a humbling message to the other tech giants. If Google wins, it could act as a referendum on increasingly aggressive government regulators, raise questions about the efficacy of century-old antitrust laws and further embolden Silicon Valley.
Reading 2 The Justice Department and 38 states and territories on Tuesday laid out how Google had systematically wielded its power in online search to cow competitors, as the internet giant fiercely parried back, in the opening of the most consequential trial over tech power in the modern internet era. In a packed courtroom at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse in Washington, the Justice Department and states painted a picture of how Google had used its deep pockets and dominant position, paying $10 billion a year to Apple and others to be the default search provider on smartphones. Google viewed those agreements as a “powerful strategic weapon” to cut out rivals and entrench its search engine, the government said. “This feedback loop, this wheel, has been turning for more than 12 years,” said Kenneth Dintzer, the Justice Department’s lead courtroom lawyer. “And it always turns to Google’s advantage.” Google denied that it had illegally used agreements to exclude its search competitors and said it had simply provided a superior product, adding that people can easily switch which search engine they use. The company also said that internet search extends more broadly than its general search engine and pointed to the many ways that people now find information online, such as Amazon for shopping, TikTok for entertainment and Expedia for travel. “Users today have more search options and more ways to access information online than ever before,” said John E. Schmidtlein, the lawyer who opened for Google. The back-and-forth came in the federal government’s first monopoly trial since it tried to break up Microsoft more than two decades ago. This case — U.S. et al. v. Google — is set to have profound implications not only for the internet behemoth but for a generation of other large tech companies that have come to influence how people shop, communicate, entertain themselves and work. A government victory could set limits on Google and change its business practices, sending a humbling message to the other tech giants. If Google wins, it could act as a referendum on increasingly aggressive government regulators, raise questions about the efficacy of century-old antitrust laws and further embolden Silicon Valley.
According to the author, what is likely the ramification of a Google win?
- A More high-tech companies would attempt to use fair practices to compete with each other.
- B More new comers are willing to put in more resources to create a healthy business environment.
- C More Silicon Valley companies will withdraw from foreign markets.
- D More high-tech companies will put in more resources to drive their competitors out of the market.
- E More companies are likely to stay put and weather the storm.
思路引導 VIP
請試著思考：在文章最後一段中，如果法院最終判定這家大企業的競爭手段合法（即勝訴），這對於其他同樣在矽谷觀察這場審判的科技巨頭來說，會產生什麼樣的心理暗示？他們會因此變得更加謹慎守法，還是會更有信心地採取更大膽的手段來擴張版圖呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你精準地捕捉到了文章末段的深層意涵！這道題目考驗的是讀者對於「因果推論」以及特定動詞在語境中影響力的掌握，你能正確選出 (D)，說明你對文章的邏輯架構有非常清晰的理解。
法律判決與產業行為的連鎖反應
文章最後一節提到，若 Google 在這場反壟斷訴訟中獲勝，將會「進一步鼓舞（further embolden）矽谷」。結合前文政府對 Google 「利用優勢地位排擠對手」、「鞏固壟斷地位」的指控，這裡的「鼓舞」顯然並非指促進公平競爭，而是暗示其他科技巨頭將更有信心採取類似的強硬策略。因此，選項 (D) 提到企業會投入更多資源將競爭對手趕出市場，完全符合文中「鼓勵激進擴張」的推論邏輯。
▼ 還有更多解析內容