每天一篇英文文章

　　社會生活的資訊化和經濟活動的全球化使外語,特別是英語,已經成為我國對外開放和與國際交往的重要工具。下面是小編帶來的，歡迎閱讀!

　　1

　　新加坡擬讓公務員斷網工作

　　Singapore is planning to cut off web access for public servants as a defence against potential cyber attack – a move closely watched by critics who say it marks a retreat for a technologically advanced city-state that has trademarked the term “smart nation”.

　　新加坡計劃切斷公務員的網路連線以防止潛在網路攻擊。新加坡是一個科技發達的城市國家， 擁有“智慧國家”之稱。批評人士都在密切關注此舉，他們認為這對於新加坡來說是一種退步。

　　Some security experts say the policy, due to be in place by May, risks damaging productivity among civil servants and those working at more than four dozen statutory boards, and cutting them off from the people they serve.

　　該計劃預計在明年5月實施，一些安全專家認為該政策可能會降低公務員和四十多個法定機構的工作人員的效率，並且將他們與他們的服務物件隔離開來。

　　It may only raise slightly the defensive walls against cyber attack, they say.

　　專家說，對於網路攻擊來說，此舉只是建了一道微不足道的防禦牆。

　　Ben Desjardins, director of security solutions at network security firm Radware, called it “one of the more extreme measures I can recall by a large public organisation to combat cyber security risks”.

　　瑞得韋爾網路安全公司安全解決方案部門主管本•德雅爾丹稱此舉是他“見過的大型公共組織為對抗網路安全問題而採取的極端手段之一。”

　　Stephen Dane, a Hong Kong-based managing director at networking company Cisco Systems, said it was “a most unusual situation” and Ramki Thurimella, chair of the computer science department at the University of Denver, called it both “unprecedented” and “a little excessive”.

　　思科系統駐香港總經理斯蒂芬•戴恩認為這是“非常少見的情況”。丹佛大學電腦科學教授拉姆基·土瑞梅拉也稱此舉“前所未有、有點過分”。

　　But other cyber security companies said that with the kind of threats governments face today, Singapore had little choice but to restrict internet access.

　　但是其他的網路安全公司認為鑑於目前各國政府面臨的威脅，新加坡除了限制網路使用外，別無選擇。

　　FireEye, a cyber security company, found that organisations in south-east Asia were 80% more likely than the global average to be hit by an advanced cyber attack.

　　網路安全企業火眼公司發現，東南亞的組織機構遭遇高階網路攻擊的概率比全球平均要高80%。

　　Singapore officials said no particular attack triggered the decision but noted a breach of one ministry in 2015. David Koh, chief executive of the newly formed Cyber Security Agency, said officials realised there was too much data to secure and the threat “is too real”.

　　新加坡官員稱該決定並非由特定攻擊事件導致，但他提到了2015年一次政府部門資訊洩露事件。大衛•戈是新成立的網路安全機構的負責人。他說政府官員們意識到有太多的資料需要保護而威脅也“真實存在”。

　　Public servants would still be able to surf the web but only on separate personal or agency-issued devices.

　　公務員們還是可以瀏覽網頁，不過只能用自己的電腦或機構分發的裝置。

　　Anthony James, chief marketing officer at cyber security company TrapX Security, recalled one case where an attacker was able to steal data from a law enforcement client after an employee connected his laptop to two supposedly separated networks.

　　網路安全公司TrapX Security的總經理安東尼•詹姆斯回憶起曾經有過這樣一個案件：一個執法機關的員工將他的筆記本連線到兩個應該毫無關聯的網路後，黑客成功偷出了執法機關客戶的資料和資料。

　　“Human decisions and related policy gaps are the number one cause of failure for this strategy,” he said.

　　他說：“人們的決定及相關的政策漏洞是此項策略失敗的首要原因。”

　　Singapore’s Infocomm Development Authority IDA said it had worked with agencies on managing the changes “to ensure a smooth transition” and was “exploring innovative work solutions to ensure work processes remain efficient”.

　　新加坡資訊通訊發展管理局表示他們已經在與一些機構合作來應對這些變化“以確保平穩過渡”。他們也在“探索新的解決方法，保證工作流程仍然高效。”

　　One 23-year-old manager, who gave only her family name, Ng, said blocking web access would only harm productivity and may not stop attacks.

　　一位23歲不願透露名字的伍姓經理認為，封鎖網路只會降低工作效率，也不能制止網路攻擊。

　　“Information may leak through other means, so blocking the internet may not stop the inevitable from happening,” she said.

　　她說：“資訊可能會從其他渠道洩露，所以封鎖網路並不能防止這個不可避免的事情發生。”

　　It’s not just the critics who are watching closely.

　　關注此事的不只有批評人士。

　　Local media cited one Singapore minister as saying other governments, which he did not name, had expressed interest in its approach.

　　當地媒體援引新加坡一位部長的話，稱還有別的國家政府對此政策有興趣，不過他並沒有說是哪個國家。

　　William Saito, a special cyber security adviser to the Japanese government, said some Japanese companies had cut internet access in the past year, usually after a breach.

　　日本政府特別網路安全顧問威廉•西戶說，去年有些日本公司切斷了網際網路連線，而這大多是在發生了資訊洩露之後採取的措施。

　　“They cut themselves off because they thought it was a good idea,” he said, “but then they realised they were pretty dependent on this internet thing.”

　　他說：“他們切斷網路連線因為他們認為這是個好辦法，但是之後，他們都意識到他們對網際網路有多依賴。”

　　2

　　英國隊奧運佳績招來歐洲國家羨慕嫉妒恨

　　Britain’s stunning medals success in the Rio Olympics may have been a cause for elation athome — but in parts of Europe it has met with sneers, incredulity and withering criticism of UKsports policy.

　　英國運動員在里約奧運會上的獎牌“大豐收”或許令英國國內民眾歡欣鼓舞，但在歐洲的一些地方，英國這一成就卻招來了對英國體育政策的嘲笑、質疑和刻薄的批評。

　　Great Britain achieved its best Olympic performance in more than a century, garnering a totalof 67 medals, including 27 golds. It ended the Rio games second in the overall medals tableafter the US and ahead of China.

　　英國在這屆奧運會上取得了上百年來最好的成績，共獲得67塊獎牌，其中金牌達27塊。里約奧運會落下帷幕後，英國在金牌榜上排在第二位，落後於美國，但領先於中國。

　　Some fellow Europeans were impressed. Others were sceptical.

　　有些歐洲國家對此讚歎不已，也有些歐洲國家對此報以懷疑。

　　Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper, for example, singled out Team GB’s spectacularsuccess in cycling, which it said “has led its rivals to wonder if there isn’t something fishy goingon with the Brits”.

　　比如，德國《法蘭克福匯報》Frankfurter Allgemeine就把矛頭指向了英國隊在自行車專案上的驚人成就，稱這“讓英國隊的對手們懷疑英國人是不是玩了什麼貓膩”。

　　The paper also had harsh words for the Britain’s “no compromise” approach to funding,which allocates money to sports with a realistic chance of earning medals and has withheld itfrom disciplines that failed to meet their medals target in 2012.

　　該報還對英國的“不折中”no compromise資助方式提出了嚴厲批評。英國把資金撥給有現實可能奪牌的專案，而拒絕撥給那些在2012年未實現獎牌目標的專案。

　　“It made no difference how popular the sport was with the public, how suitable it was for themass market,” the paper said. “Volleyball and table tennis were excluded from fundingprogrammes, despite their broad appeal and wide take-up in the population.”

　　“公眾對該專案的歡迎程度以及該專案是否適合於大眾市場，都變得無關緊要。”該報表示，“排球和乒乓球都被排除出了資助計劃，儘管它們廣受歡迎、在民眾中普及程度很高。”

　　The article was headlined: “No compromise: why the Brits win more often in Rio than China,and what a high price they pay for it.”

　　該報這篇文章的標題是：“不折中：為什麼英國人在里約比中國人拿牌還多，他們為此付出了多麼高的代價。”

　　There was a similar reaction in Spain, where the El País daily described Britain’s pursuit ofOlympic glory as “brutal and heartless”, stating: “Every medal is the product of calculation,not the spirit of a nonconformist athlete.”

　　西班牙國內也有類似的反應。西班牙《國家報》El País把英國對奧運榮耀的追求描繪為“殘酷無情”。該報稱：“每塊獎牌都出於算計，而不是源自不墨守成規的運動員的精神。”

　　Perhaps even more irritating to British sports fans was the approach taken by the EuropeanParliament. In a tweet it airbrushed out the Britain’s performance, instead congratulating thewhole of the EU on the 325 medals it had collectively won.

　　更令英國體育迷惱火的或許是歐洲議會European Parliament的做法。歐洲議會在Twitter上發的一條帖子略掉了英國隊的成績，改為慶祝整個歐盟EU合計贏得的325塊獎牌。

　　That earned this terse response from one @JDrewer: “If you want to know why the Britsdecided to leave the EU, this tweet pretty much sums it up.”

　　使用者@JDrewer用簡練的語言回覆這條帖子道：“如果你想知道英國人為什麼決定離開歐盟，這條帖子差不多總結出了原因。”

　　Yet in other countries, there was outright envy at Team GB’s medal haul, and especially theextraordinary turnround achieved since Atlanta in 1996, when it won just one gold. OnMonday, Poland’s sports minister called for the country to copy the British approach in orderto win more medals.

　　但也有些國家對英國隊的獎牌大豐收表現出了極大的羨慕，尤其是考慮到這是英國隊相對於1996年亞特蘭大奧運會實現的一次驚天逆轉，英國隊在那屆奧運會上只獲得1塊金牌。週一，波蘭體育部長呼籲本國仿效英國的做法，以贏得更多獎牌。

　　“In Rio, Great Britain won 67 medals. And this shows that their model, which involves theselection of key disciplines, passed the test,” said Witold Banka.

　　“在里約，英國贏得了67塊獎牌。這表明他們的模式——涉及對關鍵專案的遴選——通過了考驗，”維托爾德•班卡Witold Banka稱。

　　He said Poland should emulate UK Sport’s targeted policy, rather than splitting funding equallybetween all disciplines. “[This approach] will play a very important role in the development ofPolish sport,” he added.

　　他說，波蘭應該效仿英國體育有的放矢的政策，而不是把經費平分給各個專案。“該模式將在波蘭體育事業發展上扮演非常重要的角色，”他補充稱。

　　The Frankfurter Allgemeine’s sniping at Britain’s success in the velodrome came in the wake ofcomments by a number of athletes and coaches at Rio hinting at skulduggery in the Britishranks.

　　在《法蘭克福匯報》把矛頭對準英國在場地自行車專案上的成功之前，不少運動員和教練在里約就此發表了評論，暗示英國隊在玩貓膩。

　　Michael D’Almeida, a French cyclist who was in the bronze medal-winning men’s sprint team,said last week: “We are human beings like them, we are made of the same stuff, we have a bikelike they do, so why are they better?”

　　法國自行車選手米夏埃爾•德阿爾梅達Michael D’Almeida是贏得本屆奧運會場地自行車爭先賽男子團體銅牌的運動員之一。他上週表示：“我們和他們一樣都是人、都是同種材料製成的，我們的自行車也和他們的一樣，那為什麼他們的成績更好?”

　　German track cyclist Kristina Vogel, who won the women’s sprint, said there was something“questionable” about Britain’s cycling success. “They all come here at their best level, and Ihave no idea how they do it,” she said.

　　德國場地自行車選手克里斯蒂娜•福格爾Kristina Vogel贏得了本屆奧運會場地自行車女子爭先賽金牌。她表示，英國在自行車專案上的成功有點“可疑”。“他們都是以最佳狀態來參賽的，我不知道他們是怎麼做到的，”她說。

　　She later backtracked, saying: “I never said they take any drugs or have a bike with engines,but they always seem faster at the Games.”

　　她後來用一種弱化的語氣稱：“我從沒說過他們嗑了藥或往自行車上裝了發動機，但他們在本屆奧運會上似乎總是更快些。”

　　It’s not the first time that Britain’s success in the velodrome has raised eyebrows. At the 2012London Olympics the French director of cycling suggested that GB was winning so many cyclingmedals because its racers were using different wheels to everyone else. This prompted DaveBrailsford, the British cycling director, to joke that Team GB did have a secret — they used“specially round wheels”.

　　英國在場地自行車專案上的成功並非首次引來質疑。2012年倫敦奧運會上，法國自行車隊領隊曾暗示，英國隊在自行車專案上贏得如此多的獎牌，是因為其選手所用的車輪與其他任何選手都不一樣。英國自行車隊領隊戴夫•佈雷斯福德Dave Brailsford對此戲言道，英國隊確實有個祕密——他們用了“特別圓的車輪”。