PT149.S3.Q7 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

Gerald concludes that people who access other’s wireless internet aren’t doing anything illegal. This is because such access is just like enjoying someone else’s music as you pass by them, which isn’t illegal.

Kendra’s implicit conclusion is that accessing someone else’s wireless internet can be considered illegal. This is because such access requires stopping for a long time, unlike listening to a stranger’s music while walking by. Stopping for a long time to access someone else’s wireless internet could be considered the crimes of loitering or harassment.

We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether accessing someone else’s wireless internet can be considered illegal.

This is a point of disagreement. Gerald thinks it isn’t illegal under current laws. Kendra’s implicit point is that it can be considered illegal under current law, because it can be considered loitering or harassment.

Not a point of disagreement. Kendra characterizes accessing another’s wireless internet as loitering or harassment, but does not indicate whether it can be characterized as trespassing.

Neither speaker expresses an opinion. The dispute is about whether accessing another’s internet is illegal under current law. Whether it should be illegal is a separate issue.

Gerald doesn’t express an opinion about this. He doesn’t comment time or how much time is required to access someone else’s wireless internet.

Neither speaker expresses an opinion. They don’t refer to intention or whether accessing wireless internet would be done without intention.

PrepTest 149 - Section 3 - Question 7

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action