Going to bring this back up. Sorry!

Hey so take a look at Yolanda's argument. when she compares computer crimes to joyriding in stolen cars she says "both involve ..." .

-Which is pretty absolute. They both have similar characteristics.

But Isn't Yolanda's conclusion that joyriding is MORE dangerous than computer crimes? If so, then doesn't Arjun fail to provide evidence that the relative is false, by simply saying it is also (albeit only potentially) dangerous? (Arjun doesn't give any evidence that joyriding is LESS dangerous than computer crimes, only posits that computer crimes could be dangerous. Or do I have the conclusion wrong?)