题目内容：

By now, you’ve probably been warned that a robot is coming for your job. But rather than repeat the warning, I’ve decided to throw down a challenge: man against machine.

Start with the task we’re doing right now: communicating in fluent human. We’re sharing abstract ideas through words that we choose with an understanding of their slight difference and impact. We don’t just speak in human; we speak as humans. A robot who says that science is fun is delivering a line (念一句话). A human who says that science is fun is telling you something important about being alive.

Here’s another inbuilt advantage we take for granted: as humans we are limited by design. We are bound in time: we die. We are bound in space: we can’t be in more than one place at a time. That means when I speak to an audience, I am giving them something special. It’s a custom-made, one-off, 100% robot-free delivery, from today’s one-and-only Australian Chief Scientist.

True, I now come in digital versions, through Twitter and Facebook and other platforms, but the availability of those tools hasn’t stopped people from inviting me to speak in person. Digital Alan seems to increase the appetite for human Alan, just as Spotify (a digital music service) can increase the demand for a musician’s live performances.

Thanks to technology, many goods and services are cheaper, better and more accessible than ever before. We like our mass-produced bread, and our on-tap lectures and our automated FitBit advice. But automation hasn’t killed the artisan bakery (面包店). Online courses haven’t killed the booming, alongside their machine equivalents.

Here’s a third argument for the win. We humans have learned the habit of civilization. Let me explain this point by a story. A few years go, some researchers set out to study the way the people interact with robots. They sent out a small robot to patrol (巡逻) the local mall. That robot had a terrible time, and the villains of the story were children. They kicked him, bullied him, and smacked (掌击) him in the head.

The point is not that the children were violent. The point is that the adults were not. They restrained whatever primitive impulse (冲动) they might have felt in childhood to smack something smaller and weaker in the head, because they had absorbed the habit of living together. We call it civilization. If we want artificial intelligence for the people, we’ll need every bit of that civilizing instinct.

Together, these points suggest to me that humanity has a powerful competitive edge. We can coexist with our increasingly capable machines and we can make space for the full breadth of human talents to flourish.

1.What’s humans’ second advantage according to the author?

A. Our special personality.

B. Our super intelligence.

C. Our unique existence.

D. Our language ability.

2.What’s the author’s attitude towards Spotify and FitBit?

A. Negative.

B. Doubtful.

C. Grateful.

D. Reserved.

3.Why does the author tell the story of a small robot?

A. To prove humans are well-educated.

B. To show children are naughty in nature.

C. To suggest machines will become violent.

D. To indicate machines can serve humans well.

4.What’s the author’s final conclusion about humans and machines?

A. Both sides would be losers in the fight.

B. Humans will completely defeat machines.

C. Machines will replace humans in many fields.

D. Humans and machines will live in harmony with each other.