“鸦有反哺之情，羊有跪乳之恩。”这句俗语告诉我们（    ）

①人不同于动物，动物没有思想和情感       ②子女对父母要有感恩之心

③成年子女应尽赡养扶助父母的义务           ④父母要奉侍、赡养子女

    The online economy—from search to email to social media—is built in large part on the fact that consumers are willing to give away their data in exchange for products that are free and easy to use. The assumption behind this trade-off is that without giving up all that data, those products either couldn't be so good or would have to come at a cost.

    But a new working paper, released this week by Lesley Chiou of Occidental College and Catherine Tucker of MIT, suggests that the trade-off may not always be necessary. By studying the effects of privacy regulations in the EU, they attempted to measure whether the anonymization(匿名化) of search data hurts the quality of search results.

    Most search engines capture user data, including IP addresses and other data that can identify a user across multiple visits. This data allows them search companies to improve their algorithms(算法) and to personalize results for the user. At least, that's the idea. To determine whether storage of users' personal data improves search results, Chiou and Tucker looked at how search results from Bring and Yahoo differed before and after changes in the European Commission's rules on data retention(数据保存). In 2008 the Commission recommended that search engines reduce the period over which search engines kept user records. In response, Yahoo decided to strengthen its privacy policy by anonymizing user data after 90 days. In 2010 Microsoft changed its policy, and began deleting IP addresses associated with searches on Bring after six months and all data points intended to identify a user across visits after 18 months. In 2011 Yahoo changed its policy again, this time deciding to store personal data longer—for 18 months rather than 90 days—allowing the researchers yet another chance to measure how changes in data storage affected search results.

    The researchers then looked at data from UK residents' web history before and after the changes. To measure search quality, they looked at the number of repeated searches, a signal of dissatisfaction with search results. In all three cases, they found no statistically significant effect on search result quality following changes in data retention policy. In other words, the decision to anonymize the data didn't appear to impair the search experience. “Our results suggest that the costs of privacy may be lower than currently perceived,” the authors write, though they note that previous studies have come to different conclusions.

    崔弘度，字摩诃衍，博陵安平人也。年十七，周大冢宰宇文护引为亲信。寻授都督，累转大都督。时护子中山公训为蒲州刺史，令弘度从焉。尝与训登楼，至上层，去地四五丈，俯临之，训曰：“可畏也。”弘度曰：“此何足畏！”欻然掷下，至地无损伤。训以其拳捷，大奇之。及尉迥作乱，以弘度为行军总管，从韦孝宽讨之。弘度妹先适迥子为妻，及破邺城，迥弯弓将射弘度，弘度脱兜鍪谓迥曰：“相识不？今日各图国事不得顾私以亲戚之情谨遏乱兵不许侵辱事势如此早为身计何所待也？”迥掷弓于地，骂大丞相极口而自杀。弘度顾其弟弘升曰：“汝可取迥头。”弘升遂斩之，进位上柱国。时行军总管例封国公，弘度不时杀迥，致纵恶言，由是降爵一等，为武乡郡公。开皇初，纳其妹为秦孝王妃。寻迁襄州总管。弘度素贵，御下严急，动行捶罚，吏人詟气，闻其声，莫不战栗。所在之处，令行禁止，盗贼屏迹。以行军总管出泉门道，隶于杨素。弘度与素，品同而年长，素每屈下之，一旦隶素，意甚不平，素言多不用。素亦优容之。上甚礼之，复以其弟弘升女为河南王妃。每诫其僚吏曰：“人当诚恕，无得欺诳。”皆曰：“诺。”后尝食鳖，侍者八九人，弘度一一问之曰：“鳖美乎？”人惧之，皆云：“鳖美。”弘度大骂曰：“佣奴何敢诳我？汝初未食鳖，安知其美？”俱杖八十。官属百工见之者，莫不流汗，无敢欺隐。然弘度理家如官，子弟斑白，动行捶楚，闺门整肃，为当时所称。未几，秦王妃以罪诛，河南王妃复被废黜。弘度忧恚，谢病于家，诸弟乃与之别居，弥不得志。炀帝即位，河南王为太子，帝将复立崔妃，遣中使就第宣旨。使者诣弘升家，弘度不之知也。使者返，帝曰：“弘度有何言？”使者曰：“弘度称有疾不起。”帝默然，其事竟寝。弘度忧愤，未几，卒。

（节选自《隋书·列传第三十九》）