Given a document and an entity the task is to select the author's sentiment towards the entity. Sentiments can be Positive, Neutral and Negative. Select Positive if the article expresses a positive view towards the given entity or praises its quality or skills. Select Neutral if the document expresses no clear view towards the entity or has equal amounts of positive and negative statements or expressing some fact/quote by someone else. Select Negative if the article expresses a negative view towards like harsh remarks, criticizing entities action/decision etc. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Input: Consider Input: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Daniel Pinto ? Daniel Pinto's eyes lit up.
Daniel Pinto: I think that it is about momentum. If you look at 2016  the whole industry had a weaker-than-expected first quarter  and then the momentum gathered from the second quarter to the third quarter  and it continues into the fourth quarter  obviously with the normal seasonality. The fourth quarter is typically weaker than the third quarter  but the momentum continues. That 15% year-on-year increase in markets isn't different than what we saw in the previous quarters.
 Pinto : There's been a strong performance in rates  in emerging markets  in credit â it's all along the fixed-income complex.
 Pinto : When you listen to  his  potential policies  the market reaction is pretty much the mirror image of what  he  might do.
When you listen to  his  potential policies  the market reaction is pretty much the mirror image of what  he  might do.
 He  is pro-US growth  so therefore what you have is higher interest rates and the potential for the Fed to be more aggressive than it would have been otherwise. The equity-market valuations we're seeing aren't low  but there could be additional momentum  particularly in financials. It is not such a surprise.
Turner: There is an argument that the market has priced in all of the best bits of  his  policies and ignored some of the potential negative consequences.
 Pinto : We've been doing a lot of work. Some portions of the business are more electronic than they used to be  and that process may continue. For me  I've made it very clear  it is a business where success relates to your scale. To maintain your success  you have to maintain your scale. To maintain your scale  you have to adjust to however your clients want to execute. That is why David Hudson  who runs markets execution services  is creating an environment for the clients to execute through us in any way they want. That is not over. It will continue. We will continue to adjust because we're mirroring what our clients want.
 Pinto : The SEF aggregator is something we built  and no one uses it. Maybe they will one day. The world for me â the way I see it  for asset managers  more and more of their business is going to passive. That is the trend. Margins are compressing. Efficiency in the way they execute is more and more important  and so we need to face that. We need new ways to do things that are more effective for them.
 Pinto : This is fully loaded ROE for all the business lines in fixed income. This is what we produce. This line is the cost of capital  and every single business  on a fully loaded basis  is delivering a return ahead of the cost of capital  except for commodities  which is going through a process of adjustment. The most important part is if you were to eliminate one of those  not all of the capital goes away  not all of the cost goes away  so essentially the marginal impact  the ROE you would lose by closing the business  is far higher than 15%. That's why  for me  the completeness is very important.
 Pinto : It is shared infrastructure. Revenue flows go away  but capital related to operational and credit risk doesn't. That doesn't change just because you close a line of business. It just gets reassigned to different businesses. That's why when you start cutting you say  "I don't like rates â I'm going to cut rates " well  the marginal ROE of what is left is worse. And as you cut more  it gets worse and worse. In my view  when you start trying to cut costs in this type of business  you don't know when you'll stop cutting. The more you do  the more painful it will become â all in an environment where the wallet has been shrinking.
 Pinto : That's absolutely true. An example of that is equities. We will see how it plays out when equities goes into a down cycle. Everyone said  "We'll cut fixed income and focus all of our energy on protecting our equities franchise." Fine. Equities was growing. Now we have the first year where the equities wallet shrinks  and we may have another one. I don't know.
 Pinto : We look at client profitability on a long-term basis  not just this year. We measure quite accurately all of the resources we provide to the clients  capital  liquidity  the cost of everything  and then we give them credit for the resources they provide to us. They could leave their deposits with us. And then any other business we do  we calculate a marginal ROE  an absolute ROE  and we look at cycles rather than just one year. What it does is it gives you information to manage the relationship with the client. You can sit down with the client and say  "This is what it is  over the last number of years it has been X " so they know where they stand with us. It helps the salespeople to have an intelligent conversation with the client.
 Pinto : It is often easier when you partner with someone  make some progress  and then bring other people in  rather than getting a bunch of banks together and get them developing something from zero.
 Pinto : I think that in order to attract talent  you have to run the company in a way that is appealing to them. That's why we have a clear technology strategy  and have communicated externally about how vibrant and flexible JPMorgan is. It's a way to attract top talent into the organization. The more people you hire from top tech companies  the more talent comes along with them. You have to do what is right  and you have to communicate it too. The reality is that it is a vibrant institution  we're looking forward  we're successful  so therefore people want to join. We haven't had a problem attracting talent. Seventy-seven percent of our new hires into the corporate and investment bank last year were millennials  and they already make up more than 50% of the organization.

Output: Positive


Input: Consider Input: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Jensen Huang ? TAIPEI (Reuters) - Nvidia Corp chief executive Jensen Huang said on Thursday artificial intelligence would enable fully automated cars within 4 years  but sought to tamp down expectations for a surge in demand for its chips from cryptocurrency miners.
FILE PHOTO: Nvidia co-founder and CEO Jensen Huang attends an event during the annual Computex computer exhibition in Taipei  Taiwan May 30  2017. REUTERS/Tyrone Siu
âIt will take no more than 4 years to have fully autonomous cars on the road. How long it takes for the vast majority of cars on the road to become that  it really just depends â  Huang  told media after a company event in Taipei.
But  Huang  joined peers taming expectations of strong revenue growth from a wave of interest in cryptocurrencies. Advanced Micro Devices Inc expected this week that there will be some leveling off of cryptocurrency demand. [nL4N1MZ5RP]
âRevenue for us in crypto is over $100 million a quarter. For us  itâs a small percentage... Itâs obviously not a target market â  Huang  said.

Output: Positive


Input: Consider Input: What is the sentiment of the following document towards the entity John McCain ? It was deja vu all over again. With Senate Republicans inching closer to passing an Obamacare replacement bill  a potential fulfillment of seven years of campaign promises   Arizona Senator John McCain  once again intervened to save the failing law.  He  dramatically cast the deciding vote to kill a drastically pared-down "skinny repeal" bill over the summer  then reprised the spoiler role on Friday afternoon by announcing  his  opposition to legislation championed by  his  close friend and ally  Sen. Lindsey Graham. Between  McCain 's statement and Rand Paul's unconvincing 'purity' posture  Mitch McConnell can't afford to lose a single additional member of his caucus. The truth is  he already has. Anyone who's followed Susan Collins' record on this issue knows that Graham-Cassidy is dead. She's technically only "leaning" no  but that's tantamount to a hard no; I'm fairly certain she'd vote against her own Obamacare replacement plan at this point. In revealing his intention to torpedo the latest bill -- with just days remaining before the GOP's reconciliation authority expires  according to the Senate Parliamentarian  -- McCain  used process concerns as  his  primary fig leaf:
In what way is working with Democrats  who are either staunch Obamacare defenders or already moving on to an even bigger government power-grab  likely make healthcare reform better? Like Rand Paul's weak excuse for opposing Graham-Cassidy (given his vote in favor of skinny repeal  which did far less to uproot Obamacare)   McCain 's justification makes little sense. Part of  his  Hamlet act on the previous Senate repeal bill (BCRA) was an insistence that  he  couldn't approve a plan that didn't have the full backing of  his  state's governor  Doug Ducey. "My position on this proposal will be largely guided by Governor Ducey's analysis of how it would impact the people of our state "  McCain  claimed at the time. "My friends  this is legislation that directly affects the people of my state. I trust my governor." Ducey had raised objections to the BCRA  publicly stating that he agreed with  McCain  that it was fatally flawed. While the governor eventually cleared  McCain  to back "skinny repeal" as a means to advancing the process to a conference committee  his concerns about the legislation's underlying content made  McCain 's 'no' vote easier. But guess who explicitly supported the passage of Graham-Cassidy this time? Governor Doug Ducey. Apparently "trusting his governor" no longer mattered to McCain. And then there's this:
General election ad from way back in 2016: "John McCain is leading the fight to stop Obamacare." [Link] pic.twitter.com/3a74vrDMkz â Guy Benson (@guypbenson) July 28  2017
McCain rightly and ruthlessly blasted his Democratic opponent as a supporter of a law that was inflicting disproportionate harm on Arizonans. Then he proceeded to vote exactly as she would have. The Senator's new position is that a bipartisan "fix" is in order. How would his campaign have gone if he'd told voters  "by 'we must repeal and replace Obamacare ' what I really mean is  'we must work with Patty Murray and the Democrats to tweak Obamacare after promising to abandon repeal'"? Perhaps he'd be former Senator John McCain  no longer in a position to be hailed as a "hero" by the exact same people who passionately opposed and slandered him during his presidential run  and who would have called him every name under the sun if he'd reached a different conclusion about a bill written and sponsored by his best friend in Congress. I'll leave you with some journalists wondering if Graham-Cassidy may still have a glimmer of life:


Output: Positive