Input: Oscar-winning actress Joan Fontaine died Sunday, her longtime friend Noel Beutel said Monday. She was 96. Fontaine died "very peacefully" in her sleep of natural causes, Beutel said. She was in her Carmel, California, home. She is survived by her older sister, actress Olivia de Havilland -- with whom she had not spoken for decades. Fontaine was born Joan de Beauvoir de Havilland in 1916 in Tokyo, Japan, where her British father was a patent lawyer and teacher. She and her sister moved to Saratoga, California, with their mother in 1919 when her parents separated. Fontaine was a teenager when she began her acting career as Joan Burfield in the 1935 film "No More Ladies." She later adopted the stage name Fontaine -- the name of her mother's second husband. She wrote in her 1978 autobiography, "No Bed of Roses," that her mother, who was an actress, began encouraging the rivalry with her older sister at an early age. The feud extended to their careers when both sisters were nominated for best actress Oscars in 1942. Fontaine, who was nominated for Alfred Hitchcock's "Suspicion," beat her sister Olivia de Havilland, who was nominated for "Hold Back the Dawn." De Havilland won the first of her two Oscars in 1947 when she was given the best actress award for "To Each His Own." De Havilland and Fontaine remain the only sisters who have best-actress Academy Awards. The long-standing feud with de Havilland was at such a peak during one Oscar winners' reunion in 1979 that they had to be seated on opposite ends of the stage. "I was shocked and saddened to learn of the passing of my sister, Joan Fontaine ... and I appreciate the many kind expressions of sympathy that we have received," a statement released by Olivia de Havilland to CNN said.

Does the response "Texas" correctly answer the question "Which two countries did Fontaine live in?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

The White Rajahs of Borneo: In the 19th century, Borneo remained relatively undeveloped. Balanini pirates, fervent Muslims, disputed the coast of northeastern Borneo (modern Sabah) with the sultanate of Brunei. Sarawak's coast and jungle interior were controlled by the IbanSea Dayak pirates and Land Dayak slash-and-burn farmers. (The Dayaks practiced head-hunting, a ritual that was believed to bring spiritual energy to their communities. ) The region was unproductive and without great resources, except for the Sarawak river valley, where the Chinese mined for gold and antimony. Brunei chiefs traded the metals through Americans in Singapore. In 1839, the governor of Singapore sent James Brooke (18031868) to promote trade links with the Sultan of Brunei. He had been an audacious cavalry officer in the Anglo-Burmese wars and now exploited the situation for his own benefit. In exchange for helping the regent end a revolt of uppity Malay chiefs, Brooke was made Rajah of Sarawak in 1841, with his capital in Kuching (founded by the Malays just 11 years earlier). He tried to halt the Dayaks' piracy and head-hunting while defending their more "morally acceptable" customs. His attempts to limit the opium trade met with resistance by the Chinese in Bau, who revolted. His counter-attack with Dayak warriors drove the Chinese out of Bau and across the Sarawak border. Thereafter, Chinese settlement was discouraged and did not achieve the commercial dominance it enjoyed on the peninsula. In 1863, Brooke retired to Britain, handing Sarawak over to his nephew Charles. More reserved and remote but a better administrator and financier than his uncle, Charles Brooke imposed on his men his own austere, efficient style of life. He brought Dayak leaders onto his ruling council but favored the time-honored colonial practice of divide-and-rule by pitting one tribe against another to keep the peace. Northeast Borneo (Sabah) was "rented" from the Sultan of Brunei by British businessman Alfred Dent. Dent was operating a royal charter for the British North Borneo Companya charter similar to that of the EIC.

Question: "Which groups fought for control of Borneo in the 19th Century?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Japanese Samurai"

Response: no

A married couple and their three young adult children , a son and two daughters , live in a large compound with a garden and a swimming pool . A tall fence surrounds the property and the children have never been on the other side of it , for their parents have kept them unaware of the outside world , even of the existence of the telephone . They are taught different meanings for everyday words . For example , they are told that a '' zombie '' is '' a small yellow flower , '' and that '' sea '' is a chair . The parents promise that each child will be ready to venture outside the compound once she or he has lost a dogtooth . Although the children are told they have a brother just on the other side of the barrier , he never appears . The only non-family member to come into the house is Christina , a young woman who works as a security guard at the father's factory . She is driven by the father to the compound traveling both ways blindfolded where she performs sexual favors for the son . Dissatisfied with his preference for intercourse , Christina seeks oral sex from the elder daughter in exchange for a headband. The elder daughter obliges but does not recognize the significance of performing cunnilingus . Later , she gives the headband to her younger sister , in exchange for being licked on the shoulder , Which is marked by an unexplained scar . The parents have tricked the children into believing that overhead planes are merely toys . They allow the children to search for toy planes that they have planted on the grounds , and the child that finds the toy owns it .

Question: "Who performs sexual favors in the story?"

Response: "Christina"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: yes

Taliban and American aid. After the September 11 attacks, it was necessary for conservatives to somehow explain away the fact that the US government gave 245 million dollars to the new evildoers du jour. Never mind the fact that authors such as Robert Scheer warned of aiding the Taliban as early as in May 2001. Never mind that they did so not out of some humanitarian motivation, but because of the Taliban's violent enforcement of the ban on opium poppies. Never mind that in a regime that is controlled by warlords, it does not matter who is authorized to distribute the aid -- the ruling regional warlords will seize control of it and use it to their own advantage. Never mind that this very argument has been used by hawks in opposition to sending humanitarian aid to Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Never mind that the Taliban continued selling opium in spite of the deal. Never mind that this is all documented on Michael Moore's website about the film. Gun homicides. Statistics are Moore's weakest point, and it is surprising that his critics don't dwell on them longer. That's because they know all too well that Moore is correct: The United States have a far greater homicide rate (both gun- and non-gun) than most other first world countries. His main mistake is that he does not use population corrected data, his second mistake is that he does not cite his sources (and, as you correctly point out, he probably uses different reporting methods for the different countries). A good comparison of international homicide rates can be found on the relatively neutral guncite.com website.

Question: "Who are the "evildoers du jour" that received $245 Million from the US Government?"

Response: "Iraq's Saddam Hussein"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A:
no