i spent 16 minutes on this question. i get tripped up which to make sufficient and none of the ACs matched

my head hurts so much

For D, i thought weakening questions will not attack the premise. Doesn't AC D do just that, yet the explanation still says it weakens?

can someone please explain more when JY was doing the negations in the videos? slashing and equivalent versus contradiction statements

Is AC D explanation wrong? It says "the conclusion makes a claim about the set of consumers who don't bother acquiring such information. That they are behaving irrationally." I thought the stim is asserting that they ARE thereby behaving RATIONALLY. #help