B

    This month, Germany’s transport minister, Alexander Dobrindt,  proposed the first set of rules for autonomous vehicles(自主驾驶车辆). They would define the driver’s role in such cars and govern how such cars perform in crashes where lives might be lost.
The proposal attempts to deal with what some call the “death valley” of autonomous vehicles:  the grey area between semi-autonomous and fully driverless cars that could delay the driverless future.
Dobrindt wants three things:  that a car always chooses property(财产) damage over personal injury; that it never distinguishes between humans based on age or race;  and that if a human removes his or her hands from the driving wheel—to check email,  say—the car’s maker is responsible if there is a crash.
“The change to the road traffic law will permit fully automatic driving,” says Dobrindt. It will put fully driverless cars on an equal legal footing to human drivers, he says.
Who is responsible for the operation of such vehicles is not clear among car makers, consumers and lawyers. “The liability(法律责任) issue is the biggest one of them all, ” says Natasha Merat at the University of Leeds, UK.
An assumption behind UK insurance for driverless cars, introduced earlier this year, insists that a human “be watchful and monitoring the road” at every moment.
But that is not what many people have in mind when thinking of driverless cars. “When you say ‘driverless cars’, people expect driverless cars, ” Merat says. “You know—no driver. ”
Because of the confusion, Merat thinks some car makers will wait until vehicles can be fully automated without human operation.
Driverless cars may end up being a form of public transport rather than vehicles you own, says Ryan Calo at Stanford University, California. That is happening in the UK and Singapore, where government-provided driverless vehicles are being launched.
That would go down poorly in the US, however. “The idea that the government would take over driverless cars and treat them as a public good would get absolutely nowhere here, ” says Calo.
5. What does the phrase “death valley” in Paragraph 2 refer to?
A. A place where cars often break down.
B. A case where passing a law is impossible.
C. An area where no driving is permitted.
D. A situation where drivers’ role is not clear.
6. The proposal put forward by Dobrindt aims to ______.  
A. stop people from breaking traffic rules
B. help promote fully automatic driving
C. protect drivers of all ages and races
D. prevent serious property damage
7. What do consumers think of the operation of driverless cars?
A. It should get the attention of insurance companies.
B. It should be the main concern of law makers.
C. It should not cause deadly traffic accidents.
D. It should involve no human responsibility.
8. Driverless vehicles in public transport see no bright future in ______.  
A. Singapore　 B. the UK　 C. the US　　 D. Germany
9. What could be the best title for the passage?
A. Autonomous Driving:  Whose Liability?
B. Fully Automatic Cars:  A New Breakthrough.
C. Autonomous Vehicles:  Driver Removed!
D. Driverless Cars:  Root of Road Accidents.
B篇
5. 选D。推理判断题。根据第二段中的the grey area between semi-autonomous and fully driverless cars that could delay the driverless future可知, death valley指的是半无人驾驶汽车与无人驾驶汽车之间的灰色地带。
6. 选B。推理判断题。根据第一段中的They would define the driver’s role in such cars and govern how such cars perform in crashes where lives might be lost. 和第二段中的The proposal attempts to deal with what some call the “death valley” of autonomous vehicles可知, 灰色地带会阻碍无人驾驶汽车的发展, Dobrindt的提议正是解决这个问题的。
7. 选D。细节理解题。根据第七段中的But that is not what many people have in mind when thinking of driverless cars. 和You know—no driver. 可知, 消费者认为无人驾驶不应该涉及人的责任。
8. 选C。细节理解题。根据最后一段中的That would go down poorly in the US可知, 美国对于无人驾驶的公共交通工具不太看好。
9. 选A。标题归纳题。通读全文可知, 本文主要谈论了谁应该对无人驾驶的机动车辆负责。故选A。