Question:
Sometimes traits can vary from parent to offspring. These changes are due to mutations. Mutations are a random change. Mutations are natural. Some mutations are harmful. In this case, the organism may not live to reproduce. The trait will not be passed onto offspring. Others variations in traits have no effect on survival. Can some mutations be good for a living thing? Other mutations can have great benefits. Imagine being the first moth that can blend into its background. It would have a better chance of survival. A living thing that survives is likely to have offspring. If it does, it may pass the new trait on to its offspring. Thats good news for the offspring. The offspring may be more likely to survive. Mutations are one way living things adapt to new conditions. After reading the above, is "Yes" the correct answer to the question "Do mutations always affect survival?"?

Answer:
no

Question:
(Financial Times) -- The increasing amount of personal information that can been gleaned by computer programs that track how people use Facebook has been revealed by an extensive academic study. Such programmes can discern undisclosed private information such as Facebook users' sexuality, drug-use habits and even whether their parents separated when they were young, according to the study by Cambridge university academics. In one of the biggest studies of its kind, scientists from the university's psychometrics team and a Microsoft-funded research centre analysed data from 58,000 Facebook users to predict traits and other information that were not provided in their profiles. The algorithms were 88 per cent accurate in predicting male sexual orientation, 95 per cent for race and 80 per cent for religion and political leanings. Personality types and emotional stability were also predicted with accuracy ranging from 62-75 per cent. Facebook declined to comment. The study highlights growing concerns about social networks and how data trails can be mined for sensitive information, even when people attempt to keep information about themselves private. Less than 5 per cent of users predicted to be gay, for example, were connected with explicitly gay groups. Michal Kosinksi, one of the report's authors, told the Financial Times that the university's techniques could easily be replicated by companies to infer personal attributes a person did not wish to share, such as sexual orientation or political views: "We used very simple and generic methods. Marketing companies and internet companies could spend much more time and resources, and hence get much higher accuracy than we did." Last week , the EU agreed to water down proposals for a radical overhaul of data privacy regulation. The move reflects governments' reluctance to impede internet businesses that might spur economic growth, and follows fierce lobbying from technology companies including Facebook and Google. Personal data has become big business. Wonga, the UK online lender, makes credit judgments within seconds based on thousands of pieces of information, including an applicant's Facebook profile. Tesco, the supermarket chain, this month started to use its customers' shopping histories to sell targeted online advertising. The report also revealed some unexpected correlations -- such as people who liked 'curly fries' having higher IQs, while those who like Facebook's "Sliding on Floors With Your Socks On" page were unlikely to use drugs. After reading the above, is "Dayata privacy" the correct answer to the question "What does the EU's agreement to water down proposals for a radical overhaul of data privacy regulation signify?"?

Answer:
no

Question:
While this process moved along, diplomacy continued its rounds. Direct pressure on the Taliban had proved unsuccessful. As one NSC staff note put it, "Under the Taliban, Afghanistan is not so much a state sponsor of terrorism as it is a state sponsored by terrorists." In early 2000, the United States began a high-level effort to persuade Pakistan to use its influence over the Taliban. In January 2000, Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth and the State Department's counterterrorism coordinator, Michael Sheehan, met with General Musharraf in Islamabad, dangling before him the possibility of a presidential visit in March as a reward for Pakistani cooperation. Such a visit was coveted by Musharraf, partly as a sign of his government's legitimacy. He told the two envoys that he would meet with Mullah Omar and press him on Bin Laden. They left, however, reporting to Washington that Pakistan was unlikely in fact to do anything," given what it sees as the benefits of Taliban control of Afghanistan." President Clinton was scheduled to travel to India. The State Department felt that he should not visit India without also visiting Pakistan. The Secret Service and the CIA, however, warned in the strongest terms that visiting Pakistan would risk the President's life. Counterterrorism officials also argued that Pakistan had not done enough to merit a presidential visit. But President Clinton insisted on including Pakistan in the itinerary for his trip to South Asia. His one-day stopover on March 25, 2000, was the first time a U.S. president had been there since 1969. At his meeting with Musharraf and others, President Clinton concentrated on tensions between Pakistan and India and the dangers of nuclear proliferation, but also discussed Bin Laden. President Clinton told us that when he pulled Musharraf aside for a brief, one-on-one meeting, he pleaded with the general for help regarding Bin Laden." I offered him the moon when I went to see him, in terms of better relations with the United States, if he'd help us get Bin Laden and deal with another issue or two." The U.S. effort continued. After reading the above, is "South Africa" the correct answer to the question "Where was President Clinton's one day stop-over on March 25, 2000?"?

Answer:
no

Question:
Jack and Mackenzie wanted to do something fun during their day off from school. They knew that the library had story time on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. Their mother told them they could go to the library every Tuesday for their story time. They packed up the car and drove to the library, ready for a fun morning. When they arrived to the story room, there were lots of other children their age, all sitting cross-legged and ready for the story of the day. The teacher told them they would be reading "The Wild Horse". She began to tell the story of Majestic, the wild horse who could not be calmed. His people had tried and tried to break him, but he was wild at heart. Every time they took him to the river to drink, he would run straight into the water and get soaking wet! He would splash and play until he was ready to go back home, where he would sleep for hours, having worn himself out playing. After reading the above, is "Their best friend" the correct answer to the question "When Jack and Mackenzie arrived at the library, who did they see?"?

Answer:
no