Read the following passage and questions, then choose the right answer from options, the answer should be one of A, B, C, D.

<passage>:
People act and learn together for a rich mixture of reasons. The current complicated things together” would do. Online social networks can be powerful amplifiers of collective action precisely because they augment and extend the power of ever-complexifying human sociality. To be sure, sociality, and those parts of human behavior can be amplified, too. But altruism, fun, community and curiosity are also parts of human sociality−and I propose that the Web is an existence proof that these capabilities can be amplified, as well. Indeed, our species’ social inventiveness is central to what it is to be human. The parts of the human brain that evolved most recently, and which are connected to what we consider to be our “higher” faculties of reason and forethought, are also essential to social life. The neural information-processing required for recognizing people, remembering their reputations, learning the rituals that remove boundaries of mistrust and bind groups together, from bands to communities to civilizations, may have been enabled by sociality and the amplification of collective action. Like all of the that Internet social media have made possible. And like the other Friends and Enthusiasts To me, direct experience of what I later came to call virtual communities preceded theories about the ways people called “the Electronic Networking Association,” a small group of the notion that our tiny subculture might grow into a worldwide, many-to-many, multimedia network of a billion people.  We started to experiencing something new, moving and authentic in our webs of budding friendship and collaboration. In recent years, cyberculture studies has sociologists, anthropologists, historians, psychologists, economists, a form of community, there was no body of empirical evidence to serve as a foundation for scientific argument−all theory was anecdotal. By now, One particularly useful affordance of online sociality is that a great it suitable for systematic study. One effect of the digital Panopticon another effect is a rich body of data about online behavior. Every one people online, and why. Does knowing something about the way technical architecture influences beginning to learn a little about the specific sociotechnical affordances of online social networks, is it possible to derive a normative design? How should designers think about the principles of beneficial social software? Can inhumane or dehumanizing effects of digital socializing be mitigated or eliminated by better media design? In what ways does the design of social media enable or prevent heartfelt communitas, organized collective action, social capital, cultural and life online−from lifelong friends like Joi Ito to the other people vlogosphere, twitterverse and other realms of digital discourse, I’ve continued to track new research and theory about what cyberculture might mean and the ways in which online communication media influence and are shaped by social forces. The Values of Volunteers then in The Wealth of Networks, Benkler contributed to important theoretical foundations for a new way of thinking about online activity−”commons based peer production,” technically made possible by a billion PCs and Internet connections−as a new form of organizing is right, the new story about how humans get things done includes an important corollary−if tools like the PC and the Internet make it easy create software, encyclopedias and archives of public domain literature. While the old story is that people are highly unlikely to cooperate with strangers to voluntarily create public goods, the new altruism is now a byproduct of daily life online. So much of what we take for granted as part of daily life online, from the BIND software Google stacks into its global datacloud, was created by volunteers who we know it. To some degree, the explosion of creativity that followed the debut of the Web in 1993 was made possible by deliberate design decisions on the part of the Internet’s architects−the end-to-end principle, built into the TCP/IP protocols that make the Internet possible, which deliberately decentralizes the power to innovate, to build something new and even more powerful on what already exists. Is it possible to understand exactly what it is about the web that makes Wikipedia, Linux, FightAIDS@Home, the Gutenberg Project and Creative Commons possible? And now turn our attention to building systems that support human sociality.” That sounds right. But how would it be done? It’s easy to say and not as easy to see the ways in which social codes and power structures mold the design of communication media. We must develop a participative pedagogy, assisted by digital media and networked publics, that focuses on catalyzing, inspiring, nourishing, facilitating, and guiding literacies essential to individual and collective life. pedagogy, assisted by digital media and networked publics, that focuses on catalyzing, inspiring, nourishing, facilitating, and guiding literacies essential to individual and collective life in the 21st century. Literacies are where the human brain, human sociality and communication technologies meet. We’re accustomed to thinking about the tangible parts of communication media−the devices and networks−but the less visible social practices and social affordances, from the alphabet to TCP/IP, are where human social genius can meet the augmenting power of technological networks. Literacy is the most important method Homo sapiens has used to introduce systems and tools to other humans, to train each other to partake of and contribute to culture, and to humanize the use of instruments that might otherwise enable individuals to encode and decode knowledge and power via speech, writing, printing and collective action, and which, when learned, introduce the individual to a community. Literacy links technology and populations, enabled by the printing press, devised systems for citizen governance and collective knowledge creation. The Internet did not cause open source production, Wikipedia or emergent collective responses to alphabets, presses and digital networks to create wealth, alleviate suffering and invent new institutions. If the humans currently alive are to take advantage of digital technologies to address the most severe problems that face our species and the biosphere, computers, telephones and digital networks are not enough. We need new literacies around participatory media, the dynamics of cooperation and collective action, critical discourse necessary for a healthy public sphere. In Using Participatory Media and Public Voice to Encourage Civic participatory media might similarly shape the cognitive and social shift in the way our culture operates). For this reason, participatory Participatory media include (but aren’t limited to) blogs, wikis, RSS, tagging and social bookmarking, music-photo-video sharing, mashups, podcasts, digital storytelling, virtual communities, social network services, virtual environments, and videoblogs. These distinctly different media share three common, interrelated characteristics: Many-to-many media now make it possible for every person connected audio, video, software, data, discussions, transactions, computations, tags, or links to and from every other person. The the structure of pre-digital technologies has changed radically. Participatory media are social media whose value and power derives from the active participation of many people. Value derives not just from the size of the audience, but from their power to link psychological and social characteristic. Social networks, when amplified by information and communication networks, enable broader, faster, and lower cost coordination of activities. This is an economic and political characteristic. Like the early days of print, radio, and television, the present social and cultural institutions that constrain and empower the way the new medium can be used, and which impose structures on flows of regulatory battles, business competition, and social institutions vie participatory potential, the number of people who participate in using participatory culture in which most of the population see themselves as technological infrastructure for participatory media has grown rapidly, piggybacking on Moore’s Law, globalization, the telecom bubble and the innovations of Swiss physicists and computer science students. Increasingly, access to that infrastructure−the ability to economically accessible. Literacy−access to the codes and communities of vernacular video, microblogging, social bookmarking, wiki collaboration−is what is required to use that infrastructure to create a participatory culture. A population with broadband infrastructure and ubiquitous computing could be a captive audience for a cultural media to learn, inform, persuade, investigate, reveal, advocate and organize, the more likely the future infosphere will allow, enable and

<question>:
What makes digital social communities useful for scientific study?

<options>:
A It costs less money to use participants of studies online
B There are fewer laws and regulations surrounding them
C There are large quantities of data associated with them
D They were recently invented and remain relatively unknown

<answer>:

C