GMAT CLUB OLYMPICS: Internet search engines record the search history

The answer is C.

Start negating.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1-----> We are not concerned with amount they can record. Doesnt affect the conclusion

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.----> If they find it conveninet why would they benefit?

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.----> Yes!! It will benefit if they stop tracking

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. ----> even if it is significantly less time consuming but the ads apearing is bothering so what?

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.----> Intention is not the contention here

Premise : nternet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking
Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories

Conclusion : Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking
need to weaken the conclusion based on fact of taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking

we need to find assumption of the argument use negation test to weaken the conclusion

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1

Search engines are not capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history ; does not weaken the conclusion

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
Internet users find it inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. does not weaken the conclusion

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
Regular advertising in search results is not a frequent complaint of many internet users. does not weaken the conclusion

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising.

Ignoring targeted advertising is significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising.
weakens the conclusion correct option

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
argument does not discuss about revenues ; not correct

OPTION D is correct

Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking. Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories. Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?

Conclusion is: "internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking"

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1
Even if search engines can record only limited amount of any individual’s search history, the users would continue receiving targeted advertising with old search history data. Also the engines could delete oldest data to save new data. Incorrect

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
If it were true, the conclusion would be false, Incorrect

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
Correct

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. I
If it were true, the conclusion would be false, Incorrect

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
If it were true, making the opt outs steps extremely difficult the conclusion could be false, Incorrect

IMO C

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1
We cannot determine the same with the given information therefore out

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
if they don't find it inconvinent they will never learn the complex steps

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
We are not sure whether users complaint or not may be they don't know how to report a complaint therefore out

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. I
THis has to be the case otherwise there is no point in learning the nuances of advertisement if ignoring the advertisement is relatively minor and having a huge difference

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
We don't whether the search engine is doing it for establishing their dominance this is thoroughly out of context

Therefore IMO D

Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?

Assumption type

Conclusion: Internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1 OFS, Doesn't impact the conclusion.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. Weakens the argument.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. Fails the negation test; As this method benefiting even a few will support the conclusion.

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time-consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. I
Yeah, It passes the Negation test. If negated this shatters the conclusion.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
OFS

IMO D

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. Who cares? Does the user benefit if its not unlimited? Nope.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. Not incovenient = convenient. Then how would they benefit by opting out? Nope.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. - This would be the reason why internet user would benefit by opting out

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. Out of scope here. We only care about opting out.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. Don't care. Only want to know how opting out would benefit.

My answer C

(C) IMO

Conclusion -> Internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.
Premise -> Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories.

we have to find the assumption which tells us the reason for why Internet users will benefit from opting out of search history tracking.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. -> Not useful as it would get us more ads. Not helping our conclusion.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. -> Negating it supports our conclusion. This is a weakener.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. -> Correct. If regular ads is a problem for internet users, it would be beneficial for them to learn those steps

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. -> Saving time is not our objective. (B) is a better choice.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. -> This might be a reason for users to avoid learning the steps. But, this choice doesn't tell us how learning those steps would be beneficial.

IMO C

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history: This is not something that must be assumed to believe the conclusion. A is out

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results: If the internet users don't find it inconvenient to receive advertising then the argument doesn't hold. We can eliminate B

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users: Best choice. Regular advertising must be a frequent complaint for opting out of search history tracking otherwise there's no need to learn to opt out

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising: Not something that must be assumed.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertiser: Definitely not something that needs to be assumed for the conclusion. It doesn't matter if the complexity is high.

Option D is the correct answer. If ignoring the ads is not very time-consuming, then the user need not spend significant time in learning how to opt out from targeted ads.

Option A : This has no connect with opting out. Hence, incorrect.
Option B : Good choice. But it does not attack the conclusion stated in the paragraph. Hence, incorrect.
Option C : No connect with opting out. Hence, incorrect.
Option E : Doesn't answer anything about the user opting out. Hence, incorrect.

Posting answer for the first time on GMAT Club. Hope it is correct. My answer is C.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.--That is irrelevant. It is given they can record search history.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. --This might be a trap. Users do find it inconvenient that is why they should learn to opt out of this tracking of search history as per the conclusion.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.--This fits very well as an assumption and bridges the gap between the premise and conclusion.

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising.--We are not concerned about the time each will result in. It is out of scope as per passage.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.--The passage is saying there are steps to avoid recording of their search histories, however complex, if the users want to avoid such ads, they will need to learn it ; complexity is not the gap here.

Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking. Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories. Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?


A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. not a necessary assumption

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. actually weakens the conclusion

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. strengthens but not a necessary assumption

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. eliminating alternative cause. clear assumption

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. irrelevant

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1
––– ok to some degree but maybe there are better options below.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
––– this actually goes against the passage.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
––– targeted advertising ≠ regular advertising.

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. I
––– this again undermines the conclusion.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
––– the conclusion is built on the premise that opting out needs time to learn. Time to learn comes from complexity, so answer E is likely correct.

Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking. Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories. Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

Premise 1: Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking.
Premise 2: Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories.
Conclusion: Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.


Asked: Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?


A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.
The statement does not affect the conclusion. Out of context. Incorrect.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
If the internet users do not find it inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results, then the conclusion falls apart since internet search users would NOT benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking. Incorrect

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
The argument is about targeted advertising in search results and not about regular advertising. Incorrect

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising.
If the statement is true, then ignoring targeted advertising is significantly more time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising and conclusion holds true. Correct.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
If the statement is true, then the efforts required to to learn how to opt out of search history tracking will be significantly more time consuming than ignoring targeted advertising and the conclusion falls apart.
Incorrect

IMO D

We need to prove that target advertising is something that people should not prefer.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history.1
So what? Even if it was not unlimited this assumption doesn't help to prove why target ad is bad

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results.
This is a weakener. If this is true then conclusion is weak.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users.
we are talking about targeted ads in premise not regular ads

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising.
This is perfect. So it takes more time to ignore the ads. Therefore it makes sense to change the settings.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers.
Again this is out of context. Doesn't prove why targeted ads are bad.

Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking. Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories. Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?


A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. It doesn't matter if the engines are capable of tracking unlimited data or not, if it tracks then that could be a problem for certain people - we don't know. Irrelevant.

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. Double negative, the option basically says internet users find it convenient to receive advertising in their search results, opposite of a possible assumption.

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. This makes sense, if users don't complain about the advertising then it doesn't make sense for the author to conclude as he/she did.

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. maybe this is important, but no where in the passage the author indicates that time is the reason why the ads could be annoying. This could act as a good strengthener but not necessarily an assumption.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. okay, but how does this affect the conclusion - totally irrelevant

Internet search engines record the search history of users, unless a user follows a specific set of frequently complex steps to opt out of such tracking. Users who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories. Therefore, internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking.

Which of the following must be assumed to believe the conclusion about opting out of search history tracking?


A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. : No even if they are not able to record unlimited amount of history, the conclusion still holds true: Eliminate A

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. : No the authors assumptions cannot be that the users do not find it inconvenient. It can be the users find it inconvenient and hence thinking how to opt out. Eliminate B

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. The users may not like it but may not frequently complain. Hence even after negating the conclusion still holds true. Eliminate C

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. Yes, if this is negated the conclusion breaks apart. Hence this is correct.

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. No, why it is complex is not the concern of the argument. Eliminate E.

IMO D is correct.

The author says "who do not successfully complete these steps can find themselves subjected to regular, targeted advertising in search results based on their search histories" and based on this he concludes that "internet search users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out of search history tracking".

The assumption would be any statement that helps us understand how users would benefit from taking the time to learn how to opt out instead of just ignoring them.

A. Search engines are capable of recording an unlimited amount of any individual’s search history. --> does not help us understand how learning to opt out is beneficial for the users. INCORRECT

B. Internet users find it not inconvenient to receive advertising in their search results. --> "not inconvenient" i.e. convenient, if they find it convenient why would they want to opt out. INCORRECT

C. Regular advertising in search results is a frequent complaint of many internet users. --> Many users complain but what if the time taken to ignore is significantly less than the time taken to learn opting out. If that is the case, it will weaken the conclusion. INCORRECT

D. Ignoring targeted advertising is not significantly less time consuming than learning how to opt out of such advertising. --> It matches the prethought assumption. if time taken to ignore is similar to the time taken to learn to opt out, its better to learn. CORRECT

E. The complexity of search engine opt out steps is intentionally high, since search engines derive revenues from the number of viewers they deliver to advertisers. --> complexity of the search engine is out of scope for this discussion here. INCORRECT