Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: SHIELD have been holding the Tesseract for a very long time since Howard Stark found it not long after Captain America went missing (close to World War 2). They have been studying its properties ever since. Also, Loki knows some of its power and secrets from Thanos as explained in the movie. Connect that with the slight influence Loki has over Selvig in credits scene for Thor. So Selvig probably has some breakthroughs in that research, maybe because of his own intellect and maybe because of Loki. The conclusion Hawkeye makes that "doors open from both sides" is just a guess, which is soon proven correct. But Hawkeye and Fury and Selvig are all in the same room a whole lot before this moment, studying the same thing basically. So it's safe to assume they all share any knowledge about that, at least in principle even though Selvig probably more deeply.  <sep>  Q: How does everyone know so much about the Tesseract? A: Loki knows some of its power and secrets from Thanos as explained in the movie  Q: How do all of the Avengers know about the 'powers' of the tesseract? A: Hawkeye and Fury and Selvig are all in the same room a whole lot before this moment, studying the same thing basically. So it's safe to assume they all share any knowledge  Q: So, everyone knows that the Tesseract is powerful, yet, they don't know what it can do? A: They have been studying its properties ever since  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: I first learned of the Tesseract when reading 'A wrinkle in time', do you think that was used as the inspiration for his Tesseract?
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever. An alternate (possibly revisionist) version of a movie cannot detract from the original viewing experience, it can only add an additional positive (or negative) experience. In the case of Ridley and Blade Runner, I have every version, and his “Final Cut” is my favorite, and I am pleased-giddy that he was able to get yet another version released. It is my opinion that, given 4+ versions, you have the luxury of choosing the one you enjoy most. You have nothing but upside! Any downside is for pessimists, or people who have undue hatred for capitalist who play their little games – while we are still free to play ours. In the case of his refusal to agree to a Director's Cut of Prometheus – that is cool too. I enjoy the fact that as an artist Ridley Scott wraps his arms fully around the meta concept of additional releases, and indeed incorporates that into the overall art – like Claude Monet's Water Lilies, or Haystacks – as long as HE is making the decisions. (You might argue the opposite for 99% of all other director/studio combos.)  <sep>  Q: Does Ridley Scott's Director's Cut releases hurt his movies? A: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What was his first director's cut?
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: My guess is that Vinay did not know Anjali before their meeting at the jewelry shop. I infer this from analyzing the character of Vinay. He doesn't appear like someone who will use crooked methods. Also, regarding the sog sequence, I think it was a mere coincidence, intentionally plotted by the director to create mystery.  <sep>  Q: Does Vinay know Anjali before meeting her at the jewelry shop? A: My guess is that Vinay did not know Anjali before their meeting at the jewelry shop  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why do you think that he did not know her?
[EX A]:
Yes