Text 1: Technology ethicist Dr. Lisa Moore advocates algorithmic transparency. "Users deserve to know how platforms rank and filter content," Moore argues. "Secret algorithms shape public discourse without accountability. Transparency enables informed choices."
Text 2: Computer scientist Dr. Robert Zhang notes trade-offs. "Full transparency would enable gaming algorithms," Zhang observes. "Publishers would exploit revealed criteria. Some opacity protects system integrity. Complete transparency might degrade the user experience it aims to improve."
What paradox does Zhang identify in Moore's transparency advocacy?
That algorithms don't actually exist
That transparency could undermine the system qualities it seeks to protect
That users never interact with platforms
That publishers have no incentive to game systems
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Zhang argues transparency would enable gaming that degrades user experience—the very thing transparency aims to improve. The solution undermines its own goals.
- Evidence: Zhang: transparency "might degrade the user experience it aims to improve."
- Reasoning: Revealing criteria enables manipulation that harms users.
- Conclusion: Transparency for accountability could harm accountability.
Choice A is incorrect because both discuss algorithms. Choice C is incorrect because both discuss user experience. Choice D is incorrect because Zhang says publishers would exploit.