【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 also has different grades. Wendy Walsh, a professor of psychology from Boston University told us, There are different grades of ghosting: If you just read on social software but never answer, you are only a lightweight ghosting player ； if you meet a person several times but try to avoid him , you are an ordinary ghosting player； if you let your partner fall in love with you, but you suddenly disappear , which will give the other a heavy blow, you are a heavyweight ghosting player. ”Why are some people accustomed to this kind of escapist social behavior? The Times reports that ghosting has a lot to do with how fortable people feel and how they deal with their emotions. When they are in a plex interpersonal relationship, or it is too heavy for their weak mind to carry, they will have to choose to escape.When you find yourself being ghosted, you may lose your selfrespect, question yourself, or even hesitate to start the next friendship or love. How to get out of this emotional trouble? It39。s important to remember that when you39。re ghosted, it39。s the other39。s fault rather than yours. In addition, it‘s good to risk telling others how you really feel, even if it39。s not what they want to hear. Have you ever been ghosted? What do you think of this way of dealing with a relationship?28. Which sort of the following Internet social behavior can be described as ghosting?A. Leaving your friend after a quarrel.B. Love breaking up after a fight.C. Not replying to net friends on purpose.D. Missing after getting friends39。 money.29. According to professor Walsh, if you just read but never reply online, you are a( n) player.A. heavyweight ghosting B. nonghostingC. ordinary ghosting D. lightweight ghosting30. Which paragraph tells us the reasons why people are used to ghosting?A. Paragraph 2. B. Paragraph 3. C. Paragraph 4. D. Paragraph 5.31. How should you deal with it when you are ghosted according to the writer?A. Never blame yourself and pour out your trouble to others bravely .B. Search out their identification on the Internet and ruin their reputation.C. Keep the trouble in mind and never tell others about it.D. Turn to police for help and put them in prison.DSelfdriving cars are just around the corner. Such vehicles will make getting from one place to another safer and less stressful. They also could cut down on traffic, reduce pollution and limit accidents. But how should driverless cars handle emergencies (突發(fā)情況)? People disagree on the answer. And that might put the brakes on this technology, a new study concludes.To understand the challenge, imagine a car that suddenly meets some pedestrians in the road. Even with braking, it’s too late to avoid a crash. So the car’s artificial intelligence must decide whether to swerve (急轉彎). To save the pedestrians, should the car swerve off the road or swerve into oning traffic? What if such options would likely kill the car’s passengers?Researchers used online surveys to study people’s attitudes about such situations with driverless cars. Survey participants mostly agreed that driverless cars should be designed to protect the most people. That included swerving into walls (or otherwise sacrificing their passengers) to save a larger number of pedestrians. But there is a hitch (困境). Those same surveyed people want to ride in cars that protect passengers at all costs—even if the pedestrians would now end up dying. Jean Bonnefon is a psychologist at the Toulouse School of Economics in France. He and his colleagues reported their findings in Science.“Autonomous cars can pletely change transportation”, says study coauthor Iyad Rahwan. But, he adds, this new technology creates a moral dilemma (道德兩難) that could slow its acceptance.Makers of driverless cars are in a tough spot, Bonnefon’s group warns. Most buyers would want their car to be programmed to protect them in preference to other people. However, regulations might one day instruct that cars must act for the greater good. That would mean saving the most people. But the scientists think rules like this could drive away buyers. If so, all the potential benefits of driverless cars would be lost.Compromises might be possible, Kurt Gray says. He is a psychologist at the University of North Carolina. He thinks that even if all driverless cars are programmed to protect their passengers in emergencies, traffic accidents will decrease. Those vehicles might be dangerous to pedestrians on rare occasions. But they “won’t speed, won’t drive drunk and won’t text while driving, which would be a win for society.”32. The underlined word “challenge” in paragraph 2 refers to____________.A. people’s negative attitudes towards selfdriving carsB. how selfdriving cars reduce traffic accidentsC. the technical problems that selfdriving c