Question: Yes, and I am not proud of it, but grief makes you do some really stupid things. My wife walked out of our 9 year marriage and into relationship on the same day with a (so-called) friend of mine that I had known for 25 years. I was completely blindsided and in shock. I was devastated, I was lost, and I was grieving terribly. I had not only lost my wife, but I had also lost my best friend (her, not the asshole so-called friend), and her family. While I was not particularly close to her family (most did not like me according to my ex-wife) I did care about them and they were are part of my life. I absolutely loved her sister and always enjoyed hanging out with her, as well as one of her cousins. Luckily they are both still friends with me on FB so I get to keep in touch. Anyway, I am not proud of the fact that I created a fake FB account to check her page and even talked to her through IM's. I thought that if I could just talk to her, even if not as me, that I would be okay. However, seeing photos of her with someone else just about broke me. It was a very stupid thing to do and only made matters worse. One day I forgot to block my location and she figured out it was me. I felt so stupid, but I had loved her so much that I needed her in my life. She called me out on it. I was busted. I was the grieving idiot that did not want to give up. She just married that person 2 weeks ago, and honestly.I just want her to be happy. I miss her, I always will, and in hindsight, I don't know why she stayed with me as long as she did. I was not an easy person to love. Question: When did your wife leave you? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- After 9 years of marriage
- After 8 years of marriage
- not enough information
- After being married only a year
Answer: After 9 years of marriage

input with options: In the shadow of the Seattle Space Needle, almost alien crystalline forms wrap their deft tendrils through the Chihuly Garden and Glass. Every single petal, bowl, stem and branch of cascading glass has been handblown under the guidance of Washington State native Dale Chihuly (in fact he grew up in nearby Tacoma), and we couldn't quite believe our eyes. Having discovered this exhibit through the magic of Jaime's instagram (she's a self-named Angloyankophile who grew up in Seattle before moving to London) I knew we would have to visit. My photos don't do the undulating forms any kind of justice; but they might just convey the incredible scale of the exhibition. I'd always been curious to learn more about Chihuly, after being introduced to his incredible sculpture suspended over the V&A Museum information desk, a glowing confection of green and white glass whisps. In 1968, after receiving a Fulbright Fellowship, he went to work at the Venini glass factory in Venice, observing the team approach to blowing glass, which is critical to the way he works today. In 1971, Chihuly cofounded Pilchuck Glass School in Washington State. With this international glass center, Chihuly has led the avant-garde in the development of glass as a fine art. His work is included in more than 200 museum collections worldwide. He has been the recipient of many awards, including twelve honorary doctorates and two fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts. He has also lost an eye to his passion, and now mostly directs the sculpture design and assembly. It was truly amazing. In 1999, Chihuly started an ambitious exhibition, Chihuly in the Light of Jerusalem; where more than 1 million visitors attended the Tower of David Museum to view his installations. In 2001, the Victoria and Albert Museum in London curated the exhibition Chihuly at the V&A. Chihuly's lifelong fascination for glasshouses has grown into a series of exhibitions within botanical settings. Question: What do museums think about Chihuly's works becoming part of their exhibits? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- they probably wouldn't be interested
- they may or may not have interest
- not enough information
- they probably would be thrilled
output: not enough information

Q: Recently the news broke that Microsoft are acquiring GitHub. Effusive opinions flowed from all directions: some saw the acquisition as a sensible fit for Microsoft to better support developers, and some saw it as a tyrant getting their grubby fingers on open source's ecosystem. I am thrilled for Microsoft and GitHub for many reasons, and there will be a bright future ahead because of it, but I have been thinking more about the reaction some of the critics have had to this, and why. I find it fascinating that there still seems to be a deep-seated discomfort in some about Microsoft and their involvement in open source. I understand that this is for historical reasons, and many moons ago Microsoft were definitely on the offensive against open source. I too was critical of Microsoft and their approach back in those days. I may have even said 'M$' instead of 'MS' (ugh.) Things have changed though. Satya Nadella, their CEO, has had a profound impact on the company: they are a significant investor and participant in open source across a multitude of open source projects, they hire many open source developers, run their own open source projects (e.g. VSCode), and actively sponsor and support many open source conferences, events, and initiatives. I know many people who work at Microsoft and they love the company and their work there. These are not microserfs: they are people like you and me. Things have changed, and I have literally never drunk Kool-aid; this or any other type. Are they perfect? No, but they don't claim to be. But is the Microsoft of today a radically different company to the Microsoft of the late nineties. No doubt. Still though, this cynicism exists in some. Some see them as a trojan horse and ask if we can really trust them? A little while ago I had a discussion with someone who was grumbling about Microsoft. After poking around his opinion, what shook out was that his real issue was not with Microsoft's open source work (he was supportive of this), but it was with the fact that they still produce... Question: What did Microsoft do? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- changed the way they view open source
- changed the logo on their software
- changed the cost of proprietary software

A:
changed the way they view open source