Legal Scholar: The recent Supreme Court ruling, which expanded the scope of digital privacy, will undoubtedly stifle technological innovation. Companies will now face increased regulatory burdens and legal risks when developing new data-driven services, leading to a significant slowdown in progress in the tech sector.
- AConsumers are increasingly demanding stronger privacy protections, and companies that offer them often gain a competitive advantage.
- BMany tech companies have already begun investing heavily in privacy-enhancing technologies to comply with evolving regulations.
- CHistorically, periods of increased regulation in other industries have sometimes correlated with reduced innovation.
- DThe Supreme Court ruling only applies to a narrow subset of highly sensitive personal data, not all digital information.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: A. Consumers are increasingly demanding stronger privacy protections, and companies that offer them often gain a competitive advantage.
The scholar argues that expanded digital privacy will 'stifle technological innovation' due to burdens and risks. Option D weakens this by suggesting that privacy protection is *itself* a driver of innovation (companies innovating to meet consumer demand and gain advantage). If companies can innovate *in the area of privacy* and gain competitive advantage, then the ruling might not stifle innovation overall, but rather redirect it, thus undermining the scholar's prediction of a 'slowdown in progress'.
Why the other options are wrong
- B. This suggests companies are adapting, but doesn't directly challenge the idea that this adaptation is a 'burden' that could stifle overall innovation.
- C. This provides historical context that *supports* the scholar's claim, suggesting a general trend of reduced innovation with increased regulation.
- D. This slightly weakens the argument by limiting the scope of the ruling, but it doesn't challenge the core idea that *within that scope*, innovation could be stifled. It's not as strong as showing innovation could actually be *driven* by the ruling.
Identifying an Unstated Assumption
An unstated assumption is a belief or premise that is not explicitly stated in an argument but is necessary for the conclusion to logically follow from the stated premises. If the assumption is false, the argument falls apart.
- It's a missing link between premises and conclusion.
- The argument relies on its truth without proving it.
- Often reveals a gap in the arguer's reasoning.
Memory trick: The ghost in the machine is the hidden key that links the logic.