项目建设的必要性评估不包括( )。A．项目所属行业当前整体状况分析 B．贷款项目是

原始投资额不同，特别是项目计算期不同的多方案比较决策，最适合采用的评价方法是( )。

A．净现值率法
B．内部收益率法
C．差额投资内部收益率法
D．年等额净回收额法

“成祖即位，特简解缙、胡广、杨荣等直文渊阁，参预机务。阁臣之预务自此始。然其时，入内阁者皆编、检、讲读之官，不置官属，不得专制诸司。诸司奏事，亦不得相关白。”这说明当时的内阁

A．是国家主要决策结构　

B．成为国家正式的行政机构　　

C．成为位高权重的事实上的宰相　

D．属于皇帝的参谋、秘书机构

某同学在探究规格为“6 V，3W”的小电珠伏安特性曲线实验中：

（1）在小电珠接入电路前，使用多用电表直接测量小电珠的电阻，则应将选择开关旋至____档进行测量。（填选项前的字母）

A．直流电压10 V

B．直流电流5 mA

C．欧姆×100

D．欧姆×1

（2）该同学采用图甲所示的电路进行测量。图中R为滑动变阻器(阻值范围0～20 Ω，额定电流1.0 A)，L 为待测小电珠，V为电压表(量程6 V，内阻20 kΩ)，A为电流表(量程0.6 A，电阻1 Ω)，E为电源(电动势8V，内阻不计)，S为开关。

I．在实验过程中，开关S闭合前，滑动变阻器的滑片P应置于最____端；（填“左”或“右”）

Ⅱ．在实验过程中，已知各元器件均无故障，但闭合开关S后，无论如何调节滑片P，电压表和电流表的示数总是调不到零，其原因是___点至___点的导线没有连接好；（图甲中的黑色小圆点表示接线点，并用数字标记，空格中请填写图甲中的数字，如“2 点至3点”的导线）

Ⅲ．该同学描绘出小电珠的伏安特性曲 线示意图如图乙所示，则小电珠的电阻值随工作电压的增大而___。（填“不变”、“增大”或“减小”）

To date, the bulk of the public debate about copyright and new technology has focused on an issue that I consider to be secondary, the issue of how new technology alters the balance of power between consumers and a relatively narrow group of producers, primarily the producers of certain types of music and film. By focusing so narrowly on that issue, and framing that issue as being about "kids’ stealing music," we run the risk of overlooking how bad copyright laws are increasingly affecting a much more important group of cultural producers.
I am the founder of Wikipedia, a charitable effort to organize thousands of volunteers to write a high-quality encyclopedia in every language of the world. We the Wikipedians have achieved remarkable success in our five-year history, and we’ve done it as volunteers freely sharing our knowledge. And yet, strangely enough, in addition to researching facts on hundreds of thousands of topics, we are forced to become copyright experts, because so much of our cultural heritage is being threatened by absurd limits on fair use of information in the public domain. I get two to three threatening lawyergrams each week; one I just received from a famous London museum begins, typically. "We notice you have a number of images on your website which are of portraits in the collection of [our museum] ... Unauthorized reproduction of such content may be an infringement ... "
I now respond with a two-part letter. First, I patiently and tediously explain that museums do not and cannot own the copyrights to paintings that have been in the public domain for hundreds of years. And then I simply say: "You should be ashamed of yourselves." Museums exist to educate the public about our shared cultural heritage. The abuse of copyright to corner that heritage is a moral crime.
The excuse normally given, that producing digital reproductions is costly and time-consuming, and museums need to be able to recoup that cost, is entirely bogus. Just give us permission, and Wikipedians will go to any museum in the world immediately to make high-quality digital images of any artwork. The solution to preserving our heritage and communicating it in a digital form is not to lock it up, but to get out of our way.
This issue, public-domain artworks, is about an abuse of existing law. But the law itself is also a problem. Copyrights have been repeatedly extended to absurd lengths for all kinds of works, whether the author aims to protect them or not. Even works that have no economic value are locked away under copyright, preventing Wikipedians from rewriting and updating them.
Every school system in the world faces the problem of expensive texts. Wikipedia shows a way to a solution, and we have founded a supporting project called Wikibooks to implement that solution. Here, thousands of volunteers are working to write textbooks. If we still lived in an era of reasonable copyright lengths (14 to 28 years, with registration), it would be no problem for us to seek out works of lapsed copyright, abandoned by their owners, and update them quickly. We could cut the costs of textbooks in schools radically, not just in the United States and other wealthy countries, but in the developing world as well.
And finally, the example set by Wikipedia and Wikibooks is beginning to spread, in an explosion of creativity. Another of my projects, the for-profit Wikicities, allows communities to form and build knowledge bases or other works on any topic of interest. Again, thousands of people are working to write the definitive guides to humor, films, books, etc., and they are doing this work voluntarily and placing it all under free licenses as a gift to the world. And, of course, here we have again all the same problems of abusive application of copyright law as at Wikipedia and Wikibooks. We obey the law; we are not about civil disobedience. We want only to be good, to do good and to share knowledge in a million different ways.
We have the people to do it. We have the technology to do it. And we will do it, bad law or no. But good law, law that recognizes a new paradigm of collaborative creativity, will make our job a lot easier. Copyright reform is not about kids’ stealing music. It is about recognizing the astounding possibilities inherent in the honest and intelligent use of new technologies.

What are Wikipedia and Wikibooks Why did the author start such projects

Both the teammates of the former and present football clubs of Beckham were amazed when they discovered his behavior. True False