GRE Prep Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 28Live Online Class with Top GRE Expert Mike Butville
08:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GRE course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP GRE OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon/Wed Sept. 28, 2026 - Dec. 9, 2026, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
Campaigners for global oversight of digital-asset markets have long
[#permalink]
17 Aug 2026, 13:49
17 Aug 2026, 13:49
Expert Reply
1
Bookmarks
00:00
Question Stats:
8% (00:56) correct
91% (02:07) wrong based on 12 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Campaigners for global oversight of digital-asset markets have long had to contend with technological unpredictability and financial-sector resistance, two obstacles that, in political terms, are frequently difficult to disentangle, since industry resistance — often channeled through well-funded lobbying campaigns — has routinely (i)_______ the profound unpredictability surrounding these new financial instruments in order to (ii)_______ oversight altogether, insisting not that such markets are too complex to police but that they remain too embryonic to warrant policing in the first place.
| Blank (i) | Blank (ii) |
|---|---|
| A. disregarded | D. bolster the authority of |
| B. instrumentalized | E. dismiss the practicality of |
| C. conceded | F. call into question the necessity of |
- Part of the project: GRE Hard and Tricky Verbal Practice: NEW Questions Daily
- Also replying to the unanswered questions
- The Definitive GRE Vocabulary Masterclass - 3,000 Words List
- GRE Beginner: The Definitive Guide
Re: Campaigners for global oversight of digital-asset markets have long
[#permalink]
21 Aug 2026, 04:41
21 Aug 2026, 04:41
This is a little tricky, would appreciate an explaination here Carcass.
I marked my answer to be B,D.
But here F seems a little hard for me to understand.
I marked my answer to be B,D.
But here F seems a little hard for me to understand.
Re: Campaigners for global oversight of digital-asset markets have long
[#permalink]
21 Aug 2026, 05:59
21 Aug 2026, 05:59
Expert Reply
Official Answers
Blank (i): B. instrumentalized
Blank (ii): F. call into question the necessity of
Detailed Explanation \& Logic Breakdown
1. The Logical Skeleton
The Core Premise: Industry lobbying uses the inherent complexity and unpredictability of digital assets as a political weapon or tool to avoid regulation.
The Mechanism (Blank i): Industry resistance does not ignore or deny the unpredictability; instead, it actively uses or leverages (instrumentalized) this unpredictability to serve its own goals.
The Shift/Argument (Blank ii): The sentence concludes by clarifying the industry's specific legal argument: not that regulation is technically impossible ("too complex to police"), but that it is fundamentally unnecessary right now ("too embryonic to warrant policing in the first place").
Blank (ii): We need a phrase that matches the assertion that digital assets do not "warrant policing." This is an argument aimed at challenging or disputing whether oversight is even required (call into question the necessity of).
2. Why the Correct Options Work
\begin{itemize}
B. instrumentalized (verb): To convert something into an instrument or tool to achieve a specific goal. The industry actively exploits the erratic nature of digital assets to build their anti-regulatory argument.
F. call into question the necessity of (verb phrase): To challenge whether something is actually needed. Claiming these markets are "too embryonic to warrant policing" directly challenges whether regulation is necessary at all.
3. Why the Distractors Fail
Blank (i):
A. disregarded (verb): To ignore or pay no attention to. The text states industry resistance uses the unpredictability as a weapon, so they are not ignoring it.
C. conceded (verb): To admit or acknowledge something reluctantly. Conceding unpredictability implies a passive surrender, whereas lobbying campaigns actively deploy it strategically.
Blank (ii):
D. bolster the authority of (verb phrase): To strengthen or support governance/oversight. This directly contradicts the lobby's goal of preventing regulation.
E. dismiss the practicality of (verb phrase): To argue that something is impossible or impractical to execute. The text explicitly rules this out: "insisting not that such markets are too complex to police..." (which would be dismissing its practicality), but rather that policing is simply not needed yet.
Blank (i): B. instrumentalized
Blank (ii): F. call into question the necessity of
Detailed Explanation \& Logic Breakdown
1. The Logical Skeleton
The Core Premise: Industry lobbying uses the inherent complexity and unpredictability of digital assets as a political weapon or tool to avoid regulation.
The Mechanism (Blank i): Industry resistance does not ignore or deny the unpredictability; instead, it actively uses or leverages (instrumentalized) this unpredictability to serve its own goals.
The Shift/Argument (Blank ii): The sentence concludes by clarifying the industry's specific legal argument: not that regulation is technically impossible ("too complex to police"), but that it is fundamentally unnecessary right now ("too embryonic to warrant policing in the first place").
Blank (ii): We need a phrase that matches the assertion that digital assets do not "warrant policing." This is an argument aimed at challenging or disputing whether oversight is even required (call into question the necessity of).
2. Why the Correct Options Work
\begin{itemize}
B. instrumentalized (verb): To convert something into an instrument or tool to achieve a specific goal. The industry actively exploits the erratic nature of digital assets to build their anti-regulatory argument.
F. call into question the necessity of (verb phrase): To challenge whether something is actually needed. Claiming these markets are "too embryonic to warrant policing" directly challenges whether regulation is necessary at all.
3. Why the Distractors Fail
Blank (i):
A. disregarded (verb): To ignore or pay no attention to. The text states industry resistance uses the unpredictability as a weapon, so they are not ignoring it.
C. conceded (verb): To admit or acknowledge something reluctantly. Conceding unpredictability implies a passive surrender, whereas lobbying campaigns actively deploy it strategically.
Blank (ii):
D. bolster the authority of (verb phrase): To strengthen or support governance/oversight. This directly contradicts the lobby's goal of preventing regulation.
E. dismiss the practicality of (verb phrase): To argue that something is impossible or impractical to execute. The text explicitly rules this out: "insisting not that such markets are too complex to police..." (which would be dismissing its practicality), but rather that policing is simply not needed yet.
