English improvement of IT Test（2018）

Section I Use of English

        Trust is a trickly【adj. 难对付的，棘手的；狡猾的，诡计多端的】 business. On the one hand, it's a necessary condition for many worthwhile things: child care, friendships, etc. On the other hand, putting your faith in the wrong place often carries a high price.

        Then, why do we trust at all? Well, because it feels good. When people place their trust in an individual or an institution, their brains release oxytocin【n. [药] 催产素；缩宫素；脑下垂体后叶荷尔蒙之一种】, a hormone that produces pleasurable feelings and triggers【n. [电子]触发器；触发物】 the herding【n. 集中畜群；畜牧】 instinct【n. 本能，天性；直觉；天分，天赋；adj. 充满的】 that prompts【v. 促使，导致；鼓励，提示；adj. 迅速的，立刻的；利索的，敏捷的；及时的，准时的；n. 提词；adv. 准时地】 humans to connect with one another. Scientists have found that exposure【n. 暴露，接触；曝光，揭发；报道，宣传；单张胶片；曝光时间，曝光量；受冻；朝向】 to this hormon puts us in a trusting mood: In a Swiss【adj. 瑞士的】 study, researchers sprayed【v. 喷射，喷射；】 oxytocin into the noses of half the subjects; those subjects were ready to lend significantly higher amounts of money to strangers than were their counterparts【n. 相当的人；相对应的事物】 who inhaled【吸入】 something else.

        Lucky for us, we also have a sixth sense for dishonesty that may protect us. A Canadian study found that children as young as 14 months can differentia between a credible person and a dishonest one. Sixty toddlers【n. 学步的小孩；幼童装】 were each introduced to an adult tester holding a plastic container. The tester would ask, "What's in here?" before looking into the container, smiling, and exclaiming, "Wow!" Each subject was then invited to look inside. Half of them found a toy; the other half discovered the container was empty——and realized the tester had fooled them.

        Among the children who had not been tricked, the majority were willing to cooperate with the tester in learnign a new skill, demonstrating【v. 证明；示范，演示；表露；游行，示威】 that they trusted his leadership. In contrast, only five of the 30 children paired with the "unreliable" tester participated in a follow-up activity.

翻译：

        信任是件棘手的事。一方面，它是许多有价值的事情的必要条件:孩子照顾，友谊等。另一方面，把你的信念放在错误的地方往往要付出高昂的代价。

        那么，我们为什么要相信呢?因为感觉很好。当人们信任某个人或某机构时，他们的大脑就会释放催产素，这是一种能产生愉悦感觉的荷尔蒙，并引发促使人们相互联系的群聚本能。科学家们发现，接触这种荷尔蒙会让我们产生一种信任的情绪:在瑞士的一项研究中，研究人员将催产素喷到一半的研究对象的鼻子里;与那些吸入其他东西的人相比，这些人愿意借给陌生人的钱要多得多。

        幸运的是，我们对不诚实也有第六感，这可能会保护我们。加拿大一项研究发现，14个月大的孩子就能分辨出诚实的人和不诚实的人。60名幼儿被介绍给一个拿着塑料容器的成人测试者。测试者会问:“这里面是什么?”然后看着容器，微笑着惊呼:“哇!”然后每个实验对象都被邀请去看里面。其中一半人找到了一个玩具;另一半人发现容器是空的，并意识到测试者愚弄了他们。

        在那些没有被欺骗的孩子中，大多数愿意与测试者合作学习一项新技能，这表明他们信任他的领导能力。相比之下，与“不可靠”测试者配对的30个孩子中只有5个参与了后续活动。

Section II        Reading Comprehension

Part A

Text 1

        Among the annoying challenges facing the middle class is one that will probably go unmentioned【adj. 未提到的；未说起的】 in the text presidential campaign:What happens when the rebots come for their job?

        Don't dismiss that possibility entirely. About half of U.S. jobs are at high risk of being automated, according to a University of a Oxford study, with the middle class disproportionately【adv. 不成比例地】 squeezed【v. 挤压，捏；挤出，榨出（液体等）；（使）挤入，塞入；为……挤出时间；n. 挤压，捏；拥挤，塞满；】. Lower-income jobs like gardening or day care don't appeal【v. 呼吁，恳求；上诉，申诉；有吸引力，引起兴趣；启发，打动】 to robots. But many middle-class occupations——trucking, financial advice, software engineering——have aroused their interest, or soon will. The rich own the robots, so they will be fine.

        This isn't to be alarmist【adj. 危言耸听的，大惊小怪的；n. 大惊小怪者，杞人忧天者】. Optimists【n. 乐观主义者，乐天派】 point out that technological upheaval【n. 剧变；隆起；举起】 has benefited workers in the past. The Industrial Revolution didn't go so well for Luddites【n. 卢德派；卢德分子】 whose jobs were displaced by mechanized looms【n. 织布机】, but it eventually raised living standards and created more jobs that it destroyed. Likewise, automation should eventually boost productivity, stimulate【v. 促进，激发】 demand by driving down prices, and free workers from hard, boring work. But in the middle term, middle-class may need a lot of help adjusting.

        The first step, as Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argued in The Second Machine Age, should be rethinking education and job training. Curriculums【n. 课程】——from grammer school to college——should evolve【v. 进化，演化；逐步发展，逐渐演变】 to focus less on memorizing facts and more on creativity and complex communication. Vocational schools should do a better job of fostering【v. 养育】 problem-solving skills and helping students work alongside robots. Online education can supplement the traditional kind. It could make extra training and instruction affordable【adj. 便宜的，付得起的】. Professionals trying to acquire new skills will be able to do so without going into debt.

        The challenge of coping with automation underline the need for the U.S. to revive【v. （使）复原，（使）复苏；重新唤起，重新记起；重新使用，使复兴；重新上演】 its fading business dynamism【n. 活力；动态；物力论；推动力；精神动力作用】:Starting new companies must be made easier. In previous eras【n. 时代，纪元】 of drastic【adj. 极端的，激烈的】 technological change, entrepreneurs【n. 企业家】 smoothed the transition【n. 过渡，转变；】 by dreaming up ways to combine labor and machines. The best uses of 3D printers and virtual reality haven't been invented yet. The U.S. needs the new companies that will invent them.

        Finally, because automation threatens to widen the gap between capital income and labor income, taxes and the safety net will have to be rethought. Taxes on low-wage labors need to be cut, and wage subsidies【补助金，补贴，津贴】 such as the earned income tax credit should be expanded: This would boost incomes, encurage work, reward companies for job creation, and reduce inequality.

        Technology will improve society in ways big and small over the next few years, yet this will be little comfort to those who find their lives and careers upended by automation. Destroying the machines that are coming for our jobs would be nuts. But policies to help workers adapt will be indispensable【adj. 不可或缺的，必需的；不能撇开的，责无旁贷的】.

21. Who will be most threatened by automation?

[A] Leading politicians.

[B] Low-wage laborers.

[C] Robot owners.

[D] Middle-class workers.

22. Which of the following best represents the author's view?

[A] Worries about automation are in fact groundless.

[B] Optimists' opinions on new tech find little support.

[C] Issues arising from automation need to be tackled.

[D] Negative consequences of new tech can be avoided.

23. Education in the age of automation should put more emphasis on ?

[A] creative potential.

[B] job-hunting skills.

[C] individual needs.

[D] coperative spirit.

24. The author suggests that tax policies be aimed at?

[A] encouraging the development of automation.

[B] increasing the return on capital investment.

[C] easing the hostility between rich and poor.

[D] preventing the income gap from widening.

25. In this text, the author presents a problem with ?

[A] opposing views on it.

[B] possible solutions to it.

[C] its alarming impacts.

[D] its major variations.

翻译：

        在中产阶级面临的恼人挑战中，有一个可能不会在总统竞选词中提及的问题:当机器人来抢他们的工作时会发生什么?

        不要完全否定这种可能性。根据牛津大学(University of Oxford)的一项研究，大约一半的美国工作面临着被自动化的高风险，中产阶级受到了不成比例的挤压。园艺或日托等低收入工作对机器人没有吸引力。但许多中产阶级职业——卡车运输、金融咨询、软件工程——已经引起了他们的兴趣，或者很快就会引起他们的兴趣。富人拥有机器人，所以他们会没事的。

        这不是危言耸听。乐观主义者指出，技术变革在过去曾使工人受益。工业革命对那些工作被机械化织布机取代的卢德派来说并没有那么顺利，但它最终提高了生活水平，创造了更多的工作，而它摧毁了更多的工作。同样，自动化最终应该会提高生产率，通过压低价格来刺激需求，并将工人从艰苦乏味的工作中解放出来。但在中期，中产阶级可能需要很多帮助来调整。

        正如埃里克·布林约尔松(Erik Brynjolfsson)和安德鲁·迈克菲(Andrew McAfee)在《第二次机器时代》(The Second Machine Age)一书中提出的，第一步应该是重新思考教育和职业培训。从文法学校到大学，学校的课程应该逐渐减少对记忆的关注，而更多地关注创造力和复杂的交流。职业学校应该在培养解决问题的能力和帮助学生与机器人一起工作方面做得更好。网络教育可以作为传统教育的补充。它可以使额外的培训和指导负担得起。想要学习新技能的专业人士将能够在不负债的情况下这样做。

        应对自动化的挑战凸显出美国需要重振其日益衰退的商业活力:必须降低创办新公司的难度。在过去技术变革剧烈的时代，企业家们通过设想将劳动力和机器结合起来的方法，使转型变得顺利。3D打印机和虚拟现实的最佳用途还没有发明出来。美国需要新公司来发明它们。

        最后，由于自动化可能扩大资本收入和劳动收入之间的差距，税收和社会保障体系将不得不重新考虑。需要削减对低收入劳动者的税收，应该扩大劳动所得税抵免等工资补贴:这将增加收入，鼓励工作，奖励创造就业机会的公司，并减少不平等。

        在未来几年里，技术将在大大小小的各个方面改善社会，但对于那些发现自己的生活和职业被自动化颠覆的人来说，这不会带来多少安慰。摧毁那些来抢我们工作的机器是愚蠢的。但帮助工人适应环境的政策将是不可或缺的。

Text 2

        A new survey by Harvard University finds more than two-thirds of young Americans disapprove of President Trump's use of Twitter. The implication【n. 可能的影响（或作用、结果）；含意，暗指；牵连，涉及】 is that Millennials prefer news from the White House to be filtered through other source, not a president's social media platform.

        Most Americans rely on social media to check daily headlines. Yet as distrust has risen toward all media, people may be starting to beef up their media literacy【n. 识字，读写能力；专业知识；精通文学】 skills. Such a trend is badly needed. During the 2016 presidential campaign, nearly a quater of web content shared by Twitter users in the politically critical state of Michigan was fake news, according to the University of Oxford. And a survey conducted for BuzzFeed News found 44 persent of Facebook users rarely or never trust news from the media giant.

        Young people who are digital natives are indeed becoming more skillful at sepatating fact from fiction in cyberspace【n. （电子计算机创造的） 通讯、信息空间】. A knight Foundation focus-group survey of young people between ages 14 and 24 found they use "distributed trust" to verify【验证】 stories. They cross-check sources and prefer news from different perspectives【方面】——especially those that are open about any bias. "Many young people assume【v. 假定，假设，认为；装出，做出；承担，就职；呈现，具有；夺取，篡夺】 a great deal of personal responsibility for eduacting themselves and actively seeking out opposing viewpoints," the survey concluded.

        Such active research can have another effect. A 2014 survey conducted in Australia, Britain, and the United States by the University of Wisconsin-Madison found that young people's reliance on social media let to greater political engagement【参与】.

        Social media allows users to experience news events more intimately【adv. 熟悉地；亲切地；私下地】 and immediately while also permitting them to re-share news as a projection 【n. 估算，预测；投射，投影；（声音的）发送，放开；（思想感情的）体现，】of their values and interests. This forces users to be more conscious of their role in passing along information. A survey by Barna research group found the top reason given by Americans for the fake news phenomenon is "reader error", more so than made-up stories or factual mistakes in reporting. About a third say the problem of fake news lies in "misinterpretation【n. 误解；误释】 or exaggeration【n. 夸张，言过其实】 of actual news" via social media. In other words, the choice to share news on social media may be the heart of the issue. " This indicates there is a real personal responsibility in counteracting【v. 抵制，抵消，中和】 this problem," says Roxanne Stone, editor in chief at Barna Group. 

        So when young people are critical of an over-tweeting president, they reveal a mental discipline in thinking skills——and in their choices on when to share on social media.

26. According to Paragraphs 1 and 2, many young Americans cast doubt on ?

[A] the justification of the new-filtering practice.

[B] people's preference for social media platforms.

[C] the administration's ability to handle information.

[D] social media as a reliable source of news.

27. The phrase "beef up"(Para 2) is closest in meaning to ?

[A] sharpen

[B] define

[C] boast

[D] share

28. According to the Knight Foundation survey, young people ?

[A] tend to voice their opinions in cyberspace.

[B] verify news by referring to diverse sources.

[C] have s strong sense of social responsibility.

[D] like to exchange views on "distributed trust"

29. The Barna survey found that a main cause for the fake news problem is ?

['A] reader's outdated values.

[B] journalists' biased reporting.

[C] reader's misinterpretation

[D] journalists' made-up stories.

30. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

[A] A Rise in Critical Skills for Sharing News Online.

[B] A Counteraction Against the Over-tweeting Trend.

[C] The Accumulation of Mutual Trust on Social Media.

[D] The Platforms for Projection of Personal Interest.

翻译：

        哈佛大学的一项新调查发现，超过三分之二的美国年轻人不赞成特朗普总统使用Twitter。这意味着，千禧一代更喜欢通过其他渠道过滤来自白宫的新闻，而不是通过总统的社交媒体平台。

        大多数美国人依赖社交媒体查看每日头条。然而，随着对所有媒体的不信任上升，人们可能开始加强他们的媒体素养技能。这种趋势是迫切需要的。牛津大学(University of Oxford)的数据显示，2016年总统竞选期间，在政治上持批评态度的密歇根州，推特用户分享的网页内容有近四分之一是假新闻。一项为BuzzFeed News进行的调查发现，44%的Facebook用户很少或从不相信这家媒体巨头的新闻。

        作为数字原生代的年轻人确实越来越善于在网络空间中区分事实和虚构。骑士基金会对14岁至24岁的年轻人进行的焦点小组调查发现，他们使用“分布式信任”来验证故事。他们反复核对消息来源，喜欢从不同角度看新闻——尤其是那些公开承认任何偏见的新闻。调查总结道:“许多年轻人承担了自我教育和积极寻找反对意见的巨大责任。”

        这种积极的研究还会产生另一种影响。2014年，威斯康辛大学麦迪逊分校(University of Wisconsin-Madison)在澳大利亚、英国和美国进行的一项调查发现，年轻人对社交媒体的依赖让他们有更多的政治参与。

        社交媒体允许用户更亲密、更及时地体验新闻事件，同时也允许他们重新分享新闻，作为他们的价值观和兴趣的投射。这迫使用户更加意识到他们在传递信息中的角色。巴纳研究集团的一项调查发现，美国人对假新闻现象给出的最主要原因是“读者错误”，而不是编造的故事或报道中的事实错误。约三分之一的人表示，假新闻的问题在于通过社交媒体“对真实新闻的误解或夸大”。换句话说，选择在社交媒体上分享新闻可能是问题的核心。”这表明，应对这一问题，个人确实有责任，”巴纳集团(Barna Group)主编罗克珊•斯通(Roxanne Stone)表示。

        因此，当年轻人批评一位在推特上发得太多的总统时，他们在思维技能方面表现出了一种精神上的自律，在选择何时在社交媒体上分享方面也表现出了这种自律。

Text 3

        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 intellegence(AI) companies in the world. The potential of this work applied to healthcare is very great, but it could also lead to further concentration of power in the tech giants. It is against that background that the information commissioner【n. 理事；委员；行政长官；总裁】, Elizabeth Denham, has issued her damning【adj. 咒骂的；毁灭的；受永罚的】 verdict【n. （法庭的）裁定，判决；（权威的）评判，定论；意见，决定】 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【adj. 不明确的，不清楚的；（形状）模糊的】 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【v. 修改】 its ways. Further arrangements——and there may be many——between the NHS and DeepMind will be carefully scrutinised【v. 详细检查】 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【v. 赞同，准许，同意】 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【n. 差别，区分；杰出，卓越；特点；荣誉】 misses the point that it is processing and aggregation【n. [地质][数] 聚合，聚集；聚集体，集合体】, 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【n. 监视，监察】 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【v. 控制，抑制】 the tech giants in this instance feels slightly maladapted【adj. 不适应的】. 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【n. 垄断，垄断权；垄断企业，专卖者；独占，专利品；大富翁】 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【n. 制药公司】 has done. We are still at the beginning of this revolution and small choices now may turn out to have gigantic【adj. 巨大的，庞大的】 consequences later. A long struggle will be needed to avoid a future of digital feudalism【n. 封建主义；封建制度】. Ms Denham's report is a welcome start.

31.What is true of the agreement between this NHS and DeepMind?

[A] It caused conflicts among tech giants.

[B] It failed to pay due attention to patients' rights.

[C] It fell short of the latter's expectations.

[D] It put both sides into a dangerous situation.

32. The NHS trust responed to Denham's verdict with ?

[A] empty promises.

[B] tough resistance.

[C] necessary adjustments.

[D] sincere apologies.

33. The author argues in Paragraph 2 that ?

[A] privacy protection must be secured at all costs.

[B] leaking patients' data is worse than selling it.

[C] making profits from patients' data is illegal.

[D] the value of data comes from the processing of it.

34. According to the last paragraph, the real worry arising from this deal is ?

[A] the vicious【adj. 凶险的，会造成伤害的；严厉的，恶毒的】 rivalry【n. 竞争，较量】 among big pharmas

[B] the ineffective enforcement of privacy law.

[C] the uncontrolled use of new software.

[D] the monopoly of big data by tech giants.

35. The author's attitude toward the application of AI to healthcare is ?

[A] ambiguous.

[B] cautious.

[C] appreciative.

[D] contemptuous.【adj. 轻蔑的；侮辱的】

 翻译：

        对英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)和DeepMind之间的协议的危险进行任何公正的评估，都必须首先承认双方都是好意。DeepMind是全球领先的人工智能公司之一。这项工作应用于医疗保健的潜力非常大，但它也可能导致权力进一步集中在科技巨头身上。正是在这样的背景下，信息专员伊丽莎白·德纳姆(Elizabeth Denham)对英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)下的皇家自由医院信托基金(Royal Free hospital trust)做出了致命的判决，2015年，基于一份模糊的协议，该公司将160万名患者的记录交给了DeepMind，该协议对患者的权利和隐私期望考虑得太少。

        DeepMind几乎已经道歉了。国民保健服务信托制度已经改邪归正。英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)和DeepMind之间的进一步安排(可能会有很多安排)将受到仔细审查，以确保所有必要的许可都已得到患者的同意，所有不必要的数据都已被清除。关于患者知情同意，有一些教训值得学习。但隐私不是本案的唯一角度，甚至不是最重要的。德纳姆选择将责任集中在NHS信托机构身上，因为根据现有法律，该机构“控制”了数据，而DeepMind只是“处理”了数据。但这种区别忽略了一点，即它是处理和聚合，而不仅仅是拥有比特才能赋予数据价值。        

        DeepMind几乎已经道歉了。国民保健服务信托制度已经改邪归正。英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)和DeepMind之间的进一步安排(可能会有很多安排)将受到仔细审查，以确保所有必要的许可都已得到患者的同意，所有不必要的数据都已被清除。关于患者知情同意，有一些教训值得学习。但隐私不是本案的唯一角度，甚至不是最重要的。德纳姆选择将责任集中在NHS信托机构身上，因为根据现有法律，该机构“控制”了数据，而DeepMind只是“处理”了数据。但这种区别忽略了一点，即它是处理和聚合，而不仅仅是拥有比特才能赋予数据价值。

        最大的问题是，谁应该从我们生活中产生的所有数据的分析中受益。隐私法建立在关于个人的可识别的知识对其造成损害的概念之上。这就忽略了监视经济的运作方式。在那里，个人的数据只有与其他无数人的数据相比较，才有价值。

        在这种情况下，利用隐私法来遏制科技巨头的做法有点不合时宜。这种做法并不能解决真正的担忧。仅仅说DeepMind开发的算法将使患者受益并拯救生命是不够的。重要的是，它们将属于利用公共资源开发它们的私人垄断企业。如果软件能像现在的药物一样拯救生命，那么大数据可能会像大型制药公司一样发挥作用。我们仍处于这场革命的开端，现在的小选择可能会在以后产生巨大的后果。要避免未来的数字封建主义，还需要一场长期的斗争。丹汉姆女士的报告是一个值得欢迎的开始。

Text 4

        The U.S Postal Service(USPS) continues to bleed red ink. It reported a net loss of $5.6 billion for fiscal【adj. （政府）财政的；<美>财政年度的；<美>金融的】 2016, the 10th straight year its experiences have exceeded【adj. 非常的；过度的；溢出的】 revenue【n. （企业、组织的）收入，收益；】. Meanwhile, it has more than $120 billion in unfunded liabilities【n. [会计]负债；债务（liability 复数形式）；碍事的人或物】, mostly for employee health and retirement costs. There are many reasons this formerly stable federal institution finds itself on the verge【n. 边缘；<英>（道路旁的）植草路肩，绿地；极限，临界点；山墙突瓦；权杖】 of bankruptcy. Fundamentally, the USPS is in a historic squeeze【v. 挤压，捏；挤出，榨出】 between technological change that has permanently decreased demand for its bread-and-butter product, first-class mail, and a regulatory【adj. 管理的，控制的，监管的】 structure that denies management the flexibility to adjust its operations to the new reality.

        And interest groups ranging from postal unions to greeting-card makers exert【v. 运用，施加（影响）；努力，尽力】 self-interested pressure on the USPS's ultimate【adj. 最终的，最后的；最根本的；n. 最好的事物，最终的事物；v. 结束】 overseer【n. 监督；工头】——Congress——insisting that whatever else happens to the Postal Service, aspects of the status quo【v. <古>说】 they depend on get protected. This is why repeated attempts at reform legislation【n. 法规，法律；立法，制订法律】 have failed in recent years, leaving the Postal Service unable to pay its bills except by deferring【推迟】 vital【adj. 至关重要的，必不可少的；】 modernization.

        Now comes word that everyone involved——Democrats, Republicans, the Postal Service, the unions and the system's heaviest【adj. 最重的】 users——has finally agreed on a plan to fix the system. Legislation is moving through the House that would save USPS an estimated $28.6 billion over five years, which could help pay for new vehicles, among other survival measures. Most of the money would come from a penny-per-letter permanent rate increase and from shifting postal retirees into Medicare. The latter step would largely offset【v. 补偿，抵销；衬托出；】 the financial burden of annually pre-funding retiree health care, thus addressing a long-standing complaint by the USPS and its unions.

        If it clears the House, this measure woult sill have to get through the Senate【n. 参议院；大学理事会，大学评议会；（古罗马的）元老院】——where someone is bound to point out that it amounts to the bare, bare minimum necessary to keep the Postal Service afloat【adj. 经济上周转得开的，不欠债的；漂浮的；】, not comprehensive reform. There's no change to collective bargaining【n. 讨价还价；交易；交涉】 at the USPS, a major omission【n. 省略，遗漏；被省略】 considering that personnel accounts for 80 percent of the agency's costs. Also missing is any discussion of eliminating【adj. 排除的；v. 消除】 Saturday letter delivery. That common-sense change enjoys wide public support and would save the USPS $2 billion per year. But postal special-interest groups seem to have killed it, at least in the House. The emerging consensus【n. 一致看法，共识】 around the bill is a sign that legislators are getting frightened about a  politically embarrassing short-term collapse at the USPS. It is not, however, a sign that they're getting serious about transforming the postal system for the 21st century.

翻译：

        美国邮政服务(USPS)继续亏损。该公司报告称，2016财年净亏损56亿美元，这是其经历连续第10年超过收入。与此同时，它还有超过1200亿美元的无资金准备的负债，大部分用于员工的健康和退休成本。这个曾经稳定的联邦机构发现自己处于破产的边缘有许多原因。从根本上说，美国邮政署正处于历史性的两难境地，一方面是技术变革永久性地减少了对其首要产品——头等邮件的需求，另一方面是监管结构剥夺了管理层调整运营以适应新现实的灵活性。

        现在有消息称，所有参与其中的人——民主党人、共和党人、邮政服务、工会和该系统最大的用户——终于就一项修复该系统的计划达成了一致。众议院正在通过一项法案，该法案将在未来五年内为美国邮政节省估计286亿美元，这将有助于支付新车的费用，以及其他生存措施。大部分资金将来自每封信一便士的永久费率提高，以及将邮政退休人员转为医疗保险。后一步骤将在很大程度上抵消每年为退休人员提供医疗保健资金的财政负担，从而解决美国邮政及其工会长期以来的抱怨。

        如果众议院通过了这项法案，这项法案还必须得到参议院的通过，而参议院肯定会有人指出，这只是维持邮政服务运转所必需的最低限度，而不是全面的改革。美国邮政的集体谈判没有变化，考虑到人员占该机构成本的80%，这是一个重大的遗漏。另外，也没有讨论取消星期六的信件递送。这种常识性的改变得到了公众的广泛支持，每年将为美国邮政节省20亿美元。但邮政特殊利益集团似乎已经扼杀了它，至少在众议院是这样。围绕该法案达成的共识表明，立法者正对美国邮政在政治上令人尴尬的短期崩溃感到害怕。然而，这并不是他们在认真考虑为21世纪改变邮政系统的标志。