Read the passage. Paragraph 1: Courts confronting a new technology often begin by analogy: a digital file may be compared with a physical document, or a location-tracking device with an officer following a person in public. Analogy connects unfamiliar facts to established doctrine. Paragraph 2: Surface resemblance can mislead. Digital storage may preserve far more information than a paper folder, and automated tracking can aggregate movements at a scale no individual observer could sustain. Paragraph 3: Rejecting analogy altogether is no solution, because precedent supplies the legal principles that constrain judicial discretion. The task is to identify which features of the earlier case carried the principle and whether the technology changes those features materially. Paragraph 4: Good technological precedent therefore moves back and forth between continuity and difference. It uses old cases neither as mechanical labels nor as historical curiosities, but as tests of which underlying interests remain stable under new capacities. Which choice best maps the passage's sequence of functions in its treatment of legal precedent for new technologies?