A recent survey found that more computers than copies of computer prog

Hi VeritasKarishma AndrewN CrackVerbal

How does option B act as a counter. Few(almost no) free non-commercial programs don't mean remaining there are only paid commercial programs. There could be paid non-commercial programs, hence in that case illegal duplicating of commercial programs is not correct.

Hello, shanks2020. A paid non-commercial program is like saying free parking fees. Either something is commercial—sold for money—or non-commercial in the context of this question. You may find this earlier explanation by VeritasKarishma useful.

Thank you for thinking to ask me about this old nightmare of a question. (I hate double negatives—counter an objection... [grumble]... [grumble].)

- Andrew

(C) Some Germans purchase computers outside of Germany for use in Germany, and such purchases were counted in the survey.
(E) Many Germans legally make duplicates of commercial computer programs, but such duplicates were counted as purchased copies in the survey.

Why is the right answer about Germany while the Survey is about Germans, which means not necessarily in Germany ?
E slightly strenghtens but it does

Can someone please help me on that ?

This particular question is worded in a way that can easily be confusing. So, a good first step would be to reword the question in a way that is easier to follow. Because we always want to look to eliminate answers, we could say “cross out everything that counters a reasonable objection to the interpretation that German illegally duplicate computer programs.”

With that in mind, here’s (E):


Someone could object to the author’s interpretation and claim that the Germans are copying computer programs, but the copying is legal. However, (E) counters that objection by indicating that legal copies were included as purchased copies. So, legal copies would not explain the discrepancy between the number of computers and the number of programs purchased. Eliminate (E).


The argument described a discrepancy in which too many computers were purchased and too few programs were purchased. (C) begins by detailing that some Germans purchased computers outside of Germany, and then it goes on to explain that even these purchases were counted in the survey.

But would the fact that Germans purchased computers outside of Germany be reason to object to the conclusion in the first place? Not really. If anything, we would think that maybe the computers weren’t counted in the survey, and we would have reason to believe that the discrepancy between the number of computers purchased and the number of programs purchased was even greater.

So when (C) indicates that “such purchases were counted in the survey,” it does not counter a reasonable objection because the fact that computers were UNDER-counted would not be a reasonable objection. For that reason, we cannot cross out (C), and it is correct.

I hope that helps!

Tricky question!!!

Conclusion: The illegal duplication of commercial computer programs is widespread among Germans
There are several possible objections to the above conclusion.
Four of the five answers choices counter those objections.
Our goal is to find the one answer choice that does NOT couch of the objections.

So for each answer choice, let's find a possible objection that the answer choice is countering.

Objection: The Germans aren't illegally duplicating commercial computer programs. Most of the computer programs found on computers were written by the Germans themselves.
(A) Few German computer users write their own computer programs.
Answer choice A nicely counters the objection.
Eliminate A.

Objection: The Germans aren't illegally duplicating commercial computer programs. Most of those programs non-commercial programs that are available for free
(B) There are few free noncommercial computer programs available in Germany.
Answer choice B nicely counters the objection.
Eliminate B.

Objection: The Germans aren't illegally duplicating commercial computer programs. Most Germans have very few commercially written programs on his computer.
(D) The typical German computer user has several commercially written computer programs on his or her computer.
Answer choice D nicely counters the objection.
Eliminate D.

Objection: The Germans aren't illegally duplicating commercial computer programs. Legal duplicates can be made in Germany, but they weren't counted in the survey.
(E) Many Germans legally make duplicates of commercial computer programs, but such duplicates were counted as purchased copies in the survey
Answer choice E nicely counters the objection.
Eliminate E.

By the process of elimination, the correct answer is C

How is option E countering the objection? if duplicates were also counted as purchased copies then the number of computer programs sold should have been at par or more than the number of computers sold, right?

The question is tricky. The question is not like other typical question we often see. The question ask which 4 options can be used to argue . Find one option which can not be used to argue against the interpretation.
In C option, even nothing is mentioned about computer programs, what can you argue without any clue about computer programs.

For E option, you can argue in favour OR disfavor. At least you can argue about computer programs.




I hope it clarifies your doubt.

I am still confused between C & E. I am not able to get it form any of the interpretation mentioned here.Please help

Let's go from the start, just for clarity. First thing to do is read the question:

Each of the following, if true, would counter some reasonable objection to the interpretation advanced above EXCEPT:


It's a doozy of a question. Before I even read the argument, I want to know what this is asking. What does my right answer choice need to do or be in relation to the argument?

"Each of the following would counter some reasonable objection to the interpretation advanced above..."

Okay, so a 'reasonable objection' to the interpretation basically means a 'weakener.' Thoughts that show the interpretation might be flawed.

But then it says each of the following WOULD COUNTER those... So these are *counters* to reasonable interpretations, meaning they would show those 'weakening' thoughts to not successfully weaken the arguments. They would WEAKEN THE WEAKENERS, which would STRENGTHEN the argument. (Note that this means the 'negation' of the answer choices WOULD weaken the argument).

So each of the following would STRENGTHEN THE ARGUMENT (by eliminating a 'weakener'), EXCEPT:

So I'm looking for the answer that either WEAKENS THE ARGUMENT, or HAS NO EFFECT ON THE ARGUMENT.

So then I read the argument:

A recent survey found that more computers than copies of computer programs were purchased by Germans last year. The best interpretation of this finding is that the practice of illegally duplicating commercial computer programs is widespread among Germans.

Okay so there's a bunch of computers purchased by Germans, but fewer computer PROGRAMS. The author thinks that must mean 'piracy.' People are illegally copying programs to put on these computers.

Before I got to my arguments, since I need four answers to 'counter-weaken,' I might consider some weakeners. The 'general form' of the weakeners will be 'the computers don't HAVE programs at all, OR, the programs are on the computers by *some other way besides illegal copying*. Like, maybe many programs can be transferred from an old computer to a new one? Maybe a single software purchase can put the software onto multiple computers?

Then I remind myself of the goal of the right answer: "To WEAKEN or to have NO EFFECT on the argument," and I go to my answers (you only asked about C and E, but we're here, so... I'll do all of them):

(A) Few German computer users write their own computer programs.

I hadn't thought of this when thinking about 'weakeners,' but if a lot of Germans could write their own programs, there would be no NEED to purchase programs, so that would weaken the argument. Since this says that is NOT the case, this counters a weakener (or, strengthens). So eliminate A.

(B) There are few free noncommercial computer programs available in Germany.

Well, if there were a lot of free noncommercial programs, people might not need to buy commercial programs. So B also strengthens the argument. Eliminate B.

(C) Some Germans purchase computers outside of Germany for use in Germany, and such purchases were counted in the survey.


So this says many Germans buy 'foreign' computers and bring them in, and the survey counted these... So these were counted in the 'computers purchased by Germans.' But we know nothing about the SOFTWARE used/purchased on these computers. If the computers came with software that didn't need to be purchased, that would weaken the argument, or if these computers could not use software purchased in Germany? (though the argument doesn't mention any specifications about where the software had to be purchased to count?)

This answer choice just seems totally irrelevant.

(D) The typical German computer user has several commercially written computer programs on his or her computer.

Well if many of the computers just did not have commercial programs on them, that would explain by so few were bought. But since this isn't the case, the answer choice strengthens the argument. Eliminate D.

(E) Many Germans legally make duplicates of commercial computer programs, but such duplicates were counted as purchased copies in the survey.

The argument mentioned illegal copies, but if some Germans could make LEGAL duplicates, that might explain why people didn't have to purchase software. However, if the legal duplicates were COUNTED AS PURCHASED in the survey, then these legal copies can be thought of as 'no different' than a purchase. So we still have the same 'imbalance' between computers purchased and software purchased. If E did not have the second clause (but such duplicates were counted...) it would be right, as the first half seems to weaken the argument. The second half, though, says "But actually it's not a weakener at all."

So the answer must be C. Whether the computers were purchased in or out of Germany has no bearing on the phenomenon the author noticed: "Much fewer programs purchased than computers purchased."

For C to be correct "The computers were mostly purchased in Germany" (or "the computers not purchased in Germany were not counted in the survey") would have to weaken the argument. But neither does.

What's wrong with few noncommercial computer programs? It's not like few users writing their own code. There could be ONE program used by MOST Germans, which would well object the assumption. So it doesn't really weaken the argument, that Germans might be using noncommercial programs, instead of buying them..

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
More computers than computer programs are sold.

Conclusion:
Illegally duplicating commercial computer programs is widespread.

The trickiest thing about this question is its question stem:
Each of the following, if true, would counter some reasonable objection to the interpretation advanced above EXCEPT

Interpretation advanced above - Illegally duplicating commercial computer programs is widespread.

Reasonable objections to this could be many - there are sources of legal duplication, some popular brands sell computers with pre-loaded softwares as incentive which are not counted, many Germans write their own softwares and do not use the commercial ones etc

Each of the following would counter - So we need each option to counter one of the reasonable objections. Mind you, we are not given the reasonable objections. We will need to judge whether an option could be used to counter an objection. There will be one option which will not counter a reasonable objection.

(A) Few German computer users write their own computer programs.
Counters the objection - Germans write their own programs. Hence, illegal duplication is not widespread.
Note that "few" means "almost none"

(B) There are few free noncommercial computer programs available in Germany.
Counters the objection - In Germany, free non commercial programs are available. Hence, illegal duplication is not widespread.
Again, "few" means "almost none"

(C) Some Germans purchase computers outside of Germany for use in Germany, and such purchases were counted in the survey.
Some computers are purchased outside Germany and these are counted. From where do these people purchase programs, we don't know. If from outside Germany, are they counted in the number of programs purchased too, we don't know.
This does not clarify anything and is not a counter to any objection.

(D) The typical German computer user has several commercially written computer programs on his or her computer.
Counters the objection - typical German computer user has few, if any commercially written programs on his computer. Hence, illegal duplication is not widespread.

(E) Many Germans legally make duplicates of commercial computer programs, but such duplicates were counted as purchased copies in the survey.
Counters the objection - Legal duplicates can be made in Germany and they are not counted. Hence illegal duplication is not widespread.

Answer (C)[/quote]
VeritasKarishma
conclusion delas with illegally duplicating commerical programs
B) deals with non commerical programs
so if there are few non commerical progreams ,we have no idea of how many commerical proagrams are free.
say if lots of commerical are free then we cannt say they are illegally duplicating ,they are legal then .
Why we are ignoring commercial vs non commercial here ?[/quote]

Commercial, by definition, implies for-profit. Hence, commercial programs implies paid programs.
Option (B) says that there aren't free programs in Germany. That counters the objection that Germans install free programs instead of commercial ones (paid one) and hence illegal duplication is not rampant.[/quote]

KarishmaB MartyTargetTestPrep

How does D support the argument?
A typical computer user has several programs. Hence, 1 computer has several loaded programs. This makes the number of programs sold to be lesser than the number of computers sold. Hence, not illegal. Where is my thinking going wrong?

The point is that computer without programs is pointless. Hence, people who buy computers need programs too. But if programs sold are fewer than computers sold then from where are these people getting the programs? Are they illegally duplicating?
One explanation could be that Germans don't use commercial programs much. They use freely available programs.

(D) The typical German computer user has several commercially written computer programs on his or her computer.

A typical user has many commercially written programs so from where are they getting the commercial programs if they are not buying them? (Number of programs bought are less than the number of computers sold.) After all, commercial programs need to be paid for. Then it seems that they may be illegally duplicating them.

KarishmaB

That is where the confusion is. Since it is given that the typical computer has several programs, then it means that programs are coming loaded with computers. Hence, don't need to be bought separately, which in turn means that the "bought" programs number would be much lesser than the computers. Hence, the issue of illegality reduces.
What's wrong in this thinking here?

Option (D) says a typical user has many programs on the computer, not that the computer comes pre-loaded with many programs.

Also, the question stem says: "which does not counter a reasonable objection?"

There is a reasonable objection: Users don't use/need commercial programs and hence don't buy/duplicate them.
Counter: Users do have many commercial programs on their computers.

Hence (D) is a counter to a reasonable objection.

The question stem is tricky - counter (attack) the objection - double negative, so four will support except one, and that one could be weakner/out of scope or whatever but strengthener

Each of the following, if true, would counter some reasonable objection to the interpretation advanced above EXCEPT:

(A) Few German computer users write their own computer programs. - strengthens the interpretation that piracy is prevalent.

(B) There are few free noncommercial computer programs available in Germany. - there are few free, and they buy less paid, so it strengthens the interpretation that piracy is prevalent.

(C) Some Germans purchase computers outside of Germany for use in Germany, and such purchases were counted in the survey. - If the purchase is outside of Germany, and if they may have even gotten the pirated software, that's a problem with people of another country from where they bought the computers, not Germans. The conclusion is that piracy is widespread amongst Germans, but if they purchase from outside Germany, then the people of that country, instead of selling Germans authentic software, sold the pirated its problem with people of that country and not Germans - weakens the conclusion.
Another way of looking at it is - even if say, the German bought a computer from outside Germany and got the original (non-pirated) copy of the SW - the option says the Computer (Hardware) is counted in the survey. But from wherever they may have purchased the non-pirated Software - is that counted in the survey - we don't know. Might be or Might not be - not a strengthener.

(D) The typical German computer user has several commercially written computer programs on his or her computer. - If there are several commercially written computer programs on their computer but the sales of commercially written computer programs are less, what does it mean - they are illegally copying. Strengthens the interpretation.

(E) Many Germans legally make duplicates of commercial computer programs, but such duplicates were counted as purchased copies in the survey. - Even worse. Pure strengthener.

AjiteshArun, GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, KarishmaB, ScottTargetTestPrep, mikemcgarry

Can you explain how option E counters an objection, please? I shortlisted the options to C and E but I'm not able see how we can eliminate E.

Since the legal duplicates are counted towards the total number of purchased computer programs, the gap in the number of computers and computer programs remains the same.

Hi Dumsy_1711,

We know that there's a difference between number of computers (let's call that hardware, H) and number of copies of computer programs (let's call that software, S) purchased by Germans last year. Specifically, H > S.

This (H − S > 0) is taken as a sign that "the practice of illegally duplicating commercial computer programs is widespread among Germans". We can object to this by bringing H − S closer to 0. We can do this by showing that {H is an overestimate}, {S is an underestimate}, or {both}.

This is option E:

What would happen if such (legal) duplicates were NOT counted as purchased copies? It would mean that S is an underestimate (the actual value of S is higher). This would be a valid objection to the statement "the practice of illegally duplicating commercial computer programs is widespread among Germans".

To counter this objection, we can say that S is accurate. That is, legal duplicates of computer programs are included in S.