明火熬制沥青，支搭的沥青锅灶，应距建筑物至少30m，距电线垂直下方在（）。 A.5m

Years ago, when I first started building websites for newspapers, many journalists told me that they saw the Internet as the end of reliable journalism. Since anyone could publish whatever they wanted online, "real journalism" would be overwhelmed, they said. Who would need professional reporters and editors if anyone could be a reporter or an editor I would tell them not to worry. While my personal belief is that anyone can be a reporter or editor, I also know that quality counts. And that the "viral" nature of the Internet means that when people find quality, they let other people know about it. Even nontraditional media sites online will survive only if the quality of their information is trusted. The future of online news will demand more good reporters and editors, not fewer.
So I was intrigued when Newsweek recently published a story called Revenge of the Expert. It argued that expertise would be the main component of "Web 3.0". "The wisdom of the crowds has peaked," says Jason Calacanis, founder of the Maholo "people-powered search engine" and a former AOL executive. "Web 3.0 is taking what we’ve built in Web 2.0—the wisdom of the crowds—and putting an editorial layer on it of truly talented, compensated people to make the product more trusted and refined." Well, yes and no. Sure, it is important for people to trust the information they find online. And as the Newsweek article argues, the need for people to find trusted information online is increasing, thus the need for more expertise. But the article fails to mention the most important feature of the world of digital information. It’s not expertise—it’s choice.
In many cases the sites that people come to trust are built on nontraditional models of expertise. Look at sites like Digg. com, Reddit. com, or Slashdot. com. There, users provide the expertise on which others depend. When many users select a particular story, that story accumulates votes of confidence, which often lead other users to choose that story. The choices of the accumulated community are seen as more trustworthy than the "gatekeeper" model of traditional news and information. Sometimes such sites highlight great reporting from traditional media. But often they bring forward bits of important information that are ignored (or missed) by "experts". It’s sort of the "open source" idea of information—a million eyes looking on the Web for information is better than a few.
Jay Rosen, who writes the PressThink blog, says in an e-mail that he’s seen this kind of story before, calling it a "kind of pathetic" trend reporting. "I said in 2006, when starting NewAssignment. Net, that the pest editorial combinations will be pro-am. I still think that. Why Because for most reporters covering a big sprawling beat, it’s still true what Dan Gillmor said. ’My readers know more than I do.’ And it’s still the case that tapping into that knowledge is becoming more practical because of the Internet."
J. D. Lasica, a social-media strategist and former editor, also says he sees no departure from the "wisdom of the crowds" model. "I’ve seen very little evidence that the sweeping cultural shifts we’ve seen in the past half dozen years show any signs of retreating," Mr. Lasica says. "Young people now rely on social networks...to take cues from their friends on which movies to see, books to read... And didn’t ’Lonely Planet Guide’ explore this terrain for travel and Zagat’s for dining back in the ’90s"
In many cases, traditional media is still the first choice of online users because the reporters and editors of these media outlets have created a level of trust for many people— but not for everyone. When you combine the idea of expertise with the idea of choice, you discover nontraditional information sites that become some of the Internet’s most trusted places. Take SCOTUSblog. com, written by lawyers about cases in the Supreme Court. It has become the place to go for other lawyers, reporters, and editors to find in-depth information about important cases. The Internet also allows individuals to achieve this level of trust. For instance, the Scobleizer. corn blog written by Robert Scoble. Mr. Scoble, a former Microsoft employee and tech expert, is widely seen as one of the most important people to read when you want to learn what’s happening in the world of technology. He built his large audience on the fact that people trust his writing.
To me, it’s the best of all possible information worlds.

The author introduces the Newsweek article Revenge of the Expert ______.

A．as a starting point for his argument and discussion

B．to show it has won the support of Jay Rosen, J.D. Lasica, Dan Gillmor and many others

C．as an example to indicate the end of "real journalism"

D．to prove that the future of digital information will be based more on expertise.

毒物侵入人体的主要途径有三个，即呼吸道、皮肤和消化道。

某大型防洪工程由政府投资兴建。项目法人委托某招标代理公司代理施工招标。招标代理公司依据有关规定确定该项目采用公开招标方式招标，招标公告在当地政府规定的招标信息网上发布。招标文件中规定：投标担保可采用投标保证金或投标保函方式担保。评标方法采用经评审的最低投标价法。投标有效期为60天。
项目法人对招标代理公司提出以下要求：为避免潜在的投标人过多，项目招标公告只在本市日报上发布，且采用邀请方式招标。
项目施工招标信息发布后，共有9家投标人报名参加投标。项目法人认为报名单位多，为减少评标工作量，要求招标代理公司仅对报名单位的资质条件、业绩进行资格审查。开标后发生的事件如下：
事件1：A投标人的投标报价为8000万元，为最低报价，经评审推荐为中标候选人。
事件2：B投标人的投标报价为8300万元，在开标后又提交了一份补充说明，提出可以降价5%。
事件3：C投标人投标保函有效期为70天。
事件4：D投标人投标文件的投标函盖有企业及其法定代表人的印章，但没有加盖项目负责人的印章。
事件5：E投标人与其他投标人组成联合体投标，附有各方资质证书，但没有联合体共同投标协议书。
事件6：F投标人的投标报价为8600万元，开标后谈判中提出估价为800万元的技术转让。
事件7：G投标人的投标报价最高，故F投标人在开标后第二天撤回了其投标文件。
[问题]

G投标人的投标文件是否有效对其撤回投标文件的行为，项目法人可如何处理

根据MARPOL公约附则VI规定，每艘船舶应保存一份含消耗臭氧物质的设备清单和《消耗臭氧物质记录簿》。《消耗臭氧物质记录簿》中的物质应按其（）单位记录。

A.质量（g）

B.容量（L）

C.质量（kg）

D.体积（M³）