Read the following article from a website.
Manitoba lawmakers are weighing a bill that would give owners a legal right to fix their own phones, laptops and kitchen appliances. The bill would require manufacturers to sell spare parts, repair manuals and special tools to anyone who asks, from small shops to curious owners. A committee has spent six weeks on public hearings, and more than ninety speakers have signed up to give their views before a final vote in the spring.
Esmeralda Quintal, who runs a volunteer repair café in Brandon, says the current system wastes perfectly good devices. “About half the phones people bring us need nothing more than a new battery,” she said. “We could fix them in twenty minutes, but the maker will not sell us the part.” Quintal said owners often give up and buy something new. “When a battery costs almost as much as a new phone, people throw the old one away. It is a waste of money and metal.”
Gerrit Reinholt, who speaks for a group of electronics makers, says his members can accept selling batteries and screens. His concern is software. “The codes that unlock a phone’s security were never meant to be handed out like spare screws,” Reinholt said. “If anyone can get them, thieves and fraudsters will be first in line. Honest owners will pay the price.”
Lalitha Ravindran, a lawyer who studies competition law, says the bill needs firm dates. “Without a deadline, a company can wait until a model is five years old before it offers a single part,” she said. “By then nobody wants to fix it.” Ravindran would require batteries and screens from the day a device goes on sale, and security parts only once the warranty ends. Ewald Rybak, a security researcher, sees a middle path. “Let repair shops register, keep a record of every repair, and lose their access if they break the rules,” Rybak said. “That protects owners without locking everyone else out,” he added.
Using the drop-down menu (▾), choose the best option according to the information given on the website.
The main point of the article is that 2..
Lalitha Ravindran’s argument would likely be supported by 3..
According to Rybak, registering repair shops 4..
Paragraph two mainly presents 5..
The following is a comment by a visitor to the website page. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Correct Answer: a proposed law on fixing electronic devices
Why this is correct: Manitoba lawmakers are weighing a bill that would give owners a right to fix their own devices. Every speaker gives a view on that bill.
Passage Reference: a bill that would give owners a legal right to fix their own phones, laptops and kitchen appliances
Tips: The main idea is the thing every speaker argues about. An option that matches only one speaker’s words is a detail, not the topic.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a volunteer group that recycles old phones: Quintal’s volunteers fix phones. Nobody describes a group that recycles them.
- a rise in phone thefts across the province: Thieves come up only as a risk Reinholt fears. No rise in thefts is reported.
- a new tax on imported electronics: No tax of any kind is mentioned in the article.
Correct Answer: most speakers accept basic parts, but security codes divide them
Passage Reference: says his members can accept selling batteries and screens ... The codes that unlock a phone’s security were never meant to be handed out ... Rybak, a security researcher, sees a middle path.
Why this is correct: Quintal and Ravindran want batteries and screens, and the makers accept them. Reinholt fears handing out security codes, and Rybak suggests a middle path.
Tips: Read what Quintal, Reinholt, Ravindran and Rybak each say. Keep the option that is still true after you have read every quote.
Why the other options are wrong:
- the electronics industry wants no changes at all: Reinholt says his members can accept selling batteries and screens.
- volunteer repair cafés should replace phone stores: Quintal runs a repair café, but she never says cafés should replace stores.
- the bill would make new phones much cheaper: Nobody says the bill would change what a new phone costs.
Correct Answer: a maker that offered parts only for very old models
Passage Reference: Without a deadline, a company can wait until a model is five years old before it offers a single part
Why this is correct: Ravindran says that without a deadline a company can wait until a model is five years old. A maker that did exactly this would prove her point.
Tips: Go back to Ravindran’s sentences. Imagine each option as a news story, and ask whether it would help her case or someone else’s.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a thief who used unlocked security codes: This fits Reinholt, who fears thieves will get the codes.
- a café that fixed many phones with new batteries: This fits Quintal, who says many phones only need a battery.
- a shop that lost its access after breaking rules: This fits Rybak, who wants shops to lose access if they break the rules.
Correct Answer: would protect owners and still let shops fix devices
Passage Reference: Let repair shops register, keep a record of every repair, and lose their access if they break the rules ... That protects owners without locking everyone else out
Why this is correct: Rybak wants repair shops to register, keep records and lose access if they break the rules. He says that protects owners without locking everyone else out.
Tips: Look at what Rybak says in quotation marks. Keep the option that he himself claims, and cross out the rest.
Why the other options are wrong:
- would let thieves get the codes first: Reinholt fears thieves will get the codes. Rybak says his plan protects owners.
- should start only once the warranty ends: Ravindran links security parts to the warranty. Rybak does not.
- would cost shops too much to be worth it: Nobody talks about what registering would cost a shop.
Correct Answer: a volunteer’s account of good devices thrown away
Passage Reference: Esmeralda Quintal, who runs a volunteer repair café in Brandon, says the current system wastes perfectly good devices.
Why this is correct: “Paragraph two” quotes Quintal, who runs a volunteer repair café. She says the current system wastes perfectly good devices.
Tips: Name the purpose of “Paragraph two” in a few plain words first. Then pick the option that describes that purpose.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a lawyer’s call for firm dates in the bill: Ravindran asks for firm dates, but she is quoted after “Paragraph two”.
- a store’s plan to sell cheaper phones: No store plans to sell cheaper phones anywhere in the article.
- the details of the bill and the hearings: The bill and the hearings open the article, before “Paragraph two”.
Correct Answer: more than ninety
Passage Reference: more than ninety speakers have signed up to give their views
Why this is correct: More than ninety speakers have signed up to give their views to the committee.
Tips: Find the part of the article about the public hearings. Check how many people asked to speak.
Why the other options are wrong:
- about forty: Forty is not in the article. The number of speakers is far higher.
- nearly sixty: Sixty is not a count the article gives. Six is the number of weeks of hearings, not of speakers.
- over two hundred: Two hundred is not in the article. Fewer speakers than that signed up.
Correct Answer: twenty minutes
Passage Reference: We could fix them in twenty minutes
Why this is correct: Quintal says her volunteers could fix the phones in twenty minutes if they could buy the part.
Tips: The commenter is quoting the café owner. Find how long she says one repair would take.
Why the other options are wrong:
- ten minutes: The time Quintal gives is longer than ten minutes.
- an hour: Quintal gives a shorter time than an hour.
- two days: No repair in the article takes days.
Correct Answer: money and metal
Passage Reference: It is a waste of money and metal.
Why this is correct: Quintal says that throwing an old phone away is a waste of money and metal.
Tips: Look at what the café owner says is lost when people throw a phone away. Notice that she names two things.
Why the other options are wrong:
- time and effort: Quintal does not talk about wasted time or effort.
- glass and plastic: Glass and plastic are not mentioned in the article.
- space and energy: Space and energy are not mentioned in the article.
Correct Answer: spare screws
Passage Reference: The codes that unlock a phone’s security were never meant to be handed out like spare screws
Why this is correct: Reinholt says the codes were never meant to be handed out like spare screws.
Tips: The industry spokesperson uses a comparison to describe the codes. Find the small, cheap item he names.
Why the other options are wrong:
- house keys: Reinholt does not compare the codes with keys.
- loose change: Coins are not mentioned in the article.
- free samples: Reinholt does not mention samples.
Correct Answer: six weeks
Passage Reference: A committee has spent six weeks on public hearings
Why this is correct: The committee has spent six weeks on public hearings.
Tips: Find the part of the article about the committee’s work. Check how long the hearings have run.
Why the other options are wrong:
- two weeks: The hearings have run longer than two weeks.
- three months: The hearings have run for a shorter time than three months.
- ten days: Ten days is not the length the article gives.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation