Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 3...

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 31 to 40.

        The nineteenth-century “Mill Girls” remind us that solidarity can transmute private hardship into public leverage. They refused the oppressing hand of avarice, stitched wages to dignity, and helped seed modern unions. Today, something analogous is happening: individuals no longer merely vend hours; they continuously emit monetizable traces. [I] If those traces are corralled collectively – rather than siphoned asymmetrically by platforms – then communities can bargain for remuneration the way workers once bargained for safer looms, shorter shifts, and transparent accounts.

        Across jurisdictions, lawmakers are cautiously legitimising intermediaries that pool personal data on behalf of members. The EU’s forthcoming Data Governance Act explicitly entertains “data cooperatives” as brokers between subjects and users; GDPR already distinguishes controllers and processors. Because personal data is non-rival, multiple firms can exploit the same records simultaneously without depletion. [II] This abundance intensifies power imbalances unless communities acquire vehicles – unions, cooperatives, collectives – to negotiate access terms, constrain misuse, and redirect flows of value back to participants.

        Data pricing remains skewed because incumbents both define the product and set its price; arbitrageurs are scarce. Swash, for instance, surfaces how browsers monetise clickstreams and invites counter-offers; litigation campaigns like the Data Dividend Project contest mispricing and misuse in court. Even when people are not organizing for wages, they can still organise their data to create community income, shifting value from platforms to participants. [III] When legal victories and transparent markets converge, third parties can finally “arb” fairer prices for communities’ digital exhaust.

        There are three mutually reinforcing paths: Policy that recognises data-subject cooperatives; Lawsuits that indemnify communities for misuse; and Tech that automates consent, measurement, and distribution. [IV] If these paths mature together, they could reframe economics, ethics, and human rights around #DataIsLabor, normalising the idea that participation entitles people to a dividend. Dozens of emergent unions already incubate this future, from browser-level plugins to nonprofit trusts, each experimenting with governance that returns agency – and proceeds – to those who generate the raw material.

(Adapted from CoinDesk, “Data Is Labor: Why We Need Data Unions”)

Question 31. According to paragraph 2, because data is non-rival, ______.

A. several firms can exploit identical datasets without reducing anyone else’s usable supply

B. exclusive ownership rights always prevent duplication across interoperable digital markets

C. regulators must license a single controller to maintain scarcity and orderly competition

D. platforms necessarily destroy originals whenever purchasers request processed derivatives