Las Vegas， where every born loser is told he is a potential winner， has always had a way with words. Prostitution is technically illegal in the city. But a private “dance” in one’s hotel room is not——even if that’s just a euphemism for what a “Hot Nude Blonde” does to cheer up a visiting conventioneer.

How exactly these private dancers know which hotel rooms to visit， though， has become a thorny question. On March 14th， as The Economist went to press， a hearing began at the Nevada Public Utilities Commission to investigate a complaint brought by Eddie Munoz against Central Telephone， a local subsidiary of Sprint. Mr Munoz operates an in-room “adult entertainment” service. He also publishes the Las Vegas Informer， a free paper that lists telephone numbers for his dancing troupe.

He alleges that rival operators have hacked into the Las Vegas telephone network and systematically diverted calls made from hotel rooms to the numbers listed in the Informer to their own services. These rivals then send out their own entertainers to do the dancing——and to collect the fees that should rightfully be his. Mr Munoz says that in the heady days of the early 1990s he was making $20，000 a month from his cut of the money earned by his dancers.

Telephone firms habitually deny that hackers can break in. Sprint maintains that it “has neither found nor been presented with any evidence to date that calls have been diverted”。 Others are not so sure. Hilda Brauer， who protested that call-poachers had driven her “Sexy Girls” service out of business， brought a lawsuit against Sprint and her rivals in 1998， but dropped it when her money ran out. In 1998 the FBI arrested six gangsters who were scouring Las Vegas to recruit a telephone hacker they believed was working for a successful call-girl service (although nobody found him)。

Mr Munoz has now hired Kevin Mitnick， a hacker who boasted last year to SecurityFocus， an online technology journal， that he used to break into Las Vegas switching systems. Mr Mitnick has diverted Mr Munoz’s telephone lines to an office in Los Angeles; a temp there relays the requests for dancers back to Mr Munoz in Las Vegas. The aim is to cut Sprint out of the loop.

The hearings may shed more light on how the world’s oldest profession has taken phone-hacking in its well-practised stride. And then， no doubt， as the fuss dies down， it will discreetly dim the lights and get on with business as usual.

注(1)：本文选自Economist;3/16/2002， p36-36， 1/3p;

注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象2002年真题text 4第1题(1)，text 3第5题(5)，第4题(4);2001年真题text2第2题(2);2004年真题text 1第3题(3);

1. From the first paragraph we learn that in Las Vegas_________________.

[A] prostitution is strictly prohibited

[B] prostitution goes on in the name of private dance

[C] private dance has taken the place of prostitution

[D] people lose money more often than they win

2. Mr. Munoz made the complaint because____________.

[A] the local telephone company failed to provide satisfactory service

[B] his rivals competed with him through illegal means

[C] his dancers stopped dancing for him

[D] he could no longer collect fees from his dancing troupe

3. The word “call-poacher” (Line 3， Paragraph 4) most probably means __________.

[A] a person who breaks in other people‘s telephone conversations

[B] a person who eavesdrops other people‘s telephone conversations

[C] a person who harasses others by making telephone calls

[D] a person who diverts other people‘s telephone calls

4. We can draw a conclusion from the text that_____________.

[A] the competition in call-girl service is a fierce one

[B] public attention on the hearings will last for a relatively long period

[C] people know very little about the world‘s oldest profession

[D] telephone-hacking will be used less due to the hearings

5. The author‘s attitude towards the issue seems to be ___________.

[A] critical

[B] positive

[C] biased

[D] objective

答案：BADAA