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

<passage>:
had to reduce the essence of Homo sapiens to five words, “people do 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, 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 structure, the neocortex. But I didn’t start out by thinking about the evolutionary dynamics of sociality and the amplification of collective action. Like all of the that Internet social media have made possible. And like the other role in my experiences of the possibilities of life online. communities preceded theories about the ways people called “the Electronic Networking Association,” a small group of enthusiasts who thought that sending black and white text to BBSs with 1200 baud modems was fun. Joi, like Stewart Brand, was and is what Fred occupies what Ronald Burt would call key structural roles−what talking, planning, debating and helping each other online came before friendship and collaboration. In recent years, cyberculture studies has sociologists, anthropologists, historians, psychologists, economists, programmers and political scientists. Back when people online argued in a form of community, there was no body of empirical evidence to serve as however, there is plenty of data. One particularly useful affordance of online sociality is that a great deal of public behavior is recorded and structured in a way that makes 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 economic production? I’ve continued to make a direct experience of my life online−from lifelong friends like Joi Ito to the other people continued to track new research and theory about what cyberculture might mean and the ways in which online communication media influence and are online was the question of why people in online communities should spend Benkler in pursuit of my curiosity about the reason people would work then in The Wealth of Networks, Benkler contributed to important theoretical foundations for a new way of thinking about online 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 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 exactly what it is about the web that makes Wikipedia, Linux, if so, can this theoretical knowledge be put to practical use? I am 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 that focuses on catalyzing, inspiring, nourishing, facilitating, and guiding literacies essential to individual and collective life. To accomplish this attention-turning, 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 in the 21st communication technologies meet. We’re accustomed to thinking about 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 train each other to partake of and contribute to culture, and to following on Neil Postman and others, the set of skills that 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 sociality. The alphabet did not cause the Roman Empire, but made it possible. Printing did not cause democracy or science, but literate 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 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, the effective deployment of attention and the relatively rational and critical discourse necessary for a healthy public sphere. In Using Participatory Media and Public Voice to Encourage Civic Engagement, I wrote: If print culture shaped the environment in which the Enlightenment blossomed and set the scene for the Industrial Revolution, participatory media might similarly shape the cognitive and social environments in which twenty first century life will take place (a shift in the way our culture operates). For this reason, participatory curriculum as job training for knowledge workers. 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 audio, video, software, data, discussions, transactions, computations, tags, or links to and from every other person. The asymmetry between broadcaster and audience that was dictated by the structure of pre-digital technologies has changed radically. This is a technical- structural characteristic. 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 to each other, to form a public as well as a market. This is a 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 structure of the participatory media regime−the political, economic, social and cultural institutions that constrain and empower the way the new medium can be used, and which impose structures on flows of information and capital−is still unsettled. As legislative and regulatory battles, business competition, and social institutions vie the population produces culture that the majority passively consume. The 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 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 organize, the more likely the future infosphere will allow, enable and of how to use it, but in the ways people use knowledge and technology to

<question>:
Why does the author think the technical design of online communities important?

<options>:
A It can dictate how much money there is to be made from certain communities
B It's important to always make progress when changing the designs
C It  can dictate whether or not users have positive or negative experiences
D Older social medias had much better designs that modern ones

<answer>:

C