I would also like to see an explanation as well thanks!
mandykuehnSeptember 19, 2020
Me too
MoradSeptember 23, 2020
Me too
StasDAllenFebruary 3, 2021
I would as well
EugeneAugust 6, 2023
can we get an explanation for C please?
Emil-KunkinAugust 7, 2023
Hi, let's start by looking at the passage. Here Yolanda argues that while digital vandalism is comparable to joyriding, it is less dangerous, since joyriding poses real danger but vandalism only harms IP.
Arjun counters this by showing that digital vandalism could in fact cause physical harm.
On the whole, Arjun raises a good point. Yolanda has overstated her case, it is totally possible that digital vandalism could lead to real world harm. However, Arjun hasn't made his case that well either. While he has shown that Yolanda went too far, he hasn't shown that they are equally dangerous. He is relying on a hypothetical extreme case of vandalism. I would actually agree with Y in the vast majority of cases that digital vandalism causes no real world danger, while joyriding almost always does.
C is a good reflection of this critique. Arjun relies on a situation that is purely theoretical, and one that is not typical of vandalism in order to undermine a mostly strong argument.
