In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the question for the answer based on the given article.

Article: Google Glass, a wearable computer, will not go on sale for many months. But the resistance is already under way. The glasses-like device, which allows users to access the Internet, take photos and shoot videos, has been banned by a bar in Seattle, because according to the bar' owner, the bar was "kind of a private place." Besides, large parts of Las Vegas will not welcome wearers. Google Glass is a pair of glasses with a tiny computer attached to the right earpiece and has the ability to capture any chance encounter and broadcast it to millions. As personal technology becomes increasingly invisible, it is causing questions of whether it will rob people of privacy. As Google sees it, Glass is a revolutionary new way to quickly and effortlessly connect people with information. Google stresses that Glass is a work in its early stage, with test versions now being released to 2,000 developers. The company hopes they'll be seen as normal and become accepted in the same way smart phones are. The wearer has to speak or touch the device to activate it, and must look directly at someone to take a photograph or video of them. "We are thinking very carefully about how we design Glass because new technology always raises new issues," said Courtney Hohne, a Google spokeswoman. Critics view Glass as an unfriendly new technology that could rob people of what few privacy they have left. They think Google is downplaying the privacy and security risks. According to Google, it's obvious when someone is taking pictures or recording a video on Glass. Developers, however, are pushing the limits. One created a small sensation in tech circles with a program that eliminated the need for gestures or voice commands. To snap a picture, all the user needed to do was wink . Imagine a surveillance device that you could wear on your body all day without anyone being the wiser. Out on the street, in the subway, at a bar or cafe, people would never know whether the stranger next to them is secretly recording their every move. It is really a privacy disaster.
Answer: Google Glass is just as normal as a smart phone.
According to Google Company, which of the following statements about Google Glass is NOT true?

Article: For a long time, the traditional method of identifying liars was to watch their body language, including facial expressions. What if the person appears to be nervous? Is the person unable to look me in the eye? Is he or she look around the room? What about other nervous movements, such as fidgeting or shifting from side to side? Many people--from parents to police officers and airport security personnel--depend on this method. But does a person's body and face reveal the truth? Not according to a new study. Talking, it seems, is the best way to smoke out a liar. That is what researchers in the United Kingdom found out recently. Their investigation took place at one place where lying can get you into big trouble--an airport. The researchers asked volunteers to pretend they were real passengers and then lie to airport security agents. Some of the agents used spoke conversation-based methods to question these make-believe passengers. Others depended instead on the person's body language, like lack of eye contact and showing signs of nervousness. The agents talking with the passengers were 20 times more likely to catch the liars. The study found that these conversation-based techniques can help you recognize when a person is lying to you. Like many methods, this conversation method has a name. It is called Controlled Cognitive Engagement or CCE, for short. The British government partly financed this study. The American Psychological (APA) published the findings. Body language cannot be trusted. Using body language and facial expressions to catch someone in a lie is really hard. And it only works, seemingly, by chance. Thomas Ormerod is the head of the School of Psychology at the University of Sussex in England. On the APA website, he reported that the "suspicious-signs method"--or using body language--"almost completely fails" in finding lies.
Answer: Communicate with researchers by talking.
What should volunteers in the investigation do?

Article: It's really a tough job for automakers doing marketing and sales in China, where competition is acute and customers have little loyalty. They have tried a range of tricks in recent years. But there should be a moral bottom line. Unfortunately, a Buick dealership used the tragedy of a two-month-old infant to advertise its cars last week on Weibo - Micro blog. And Hyundai Motor followed suit. On March 4, an SUV was stolen with the infant left inside alone in the northeastern city of Changchun. The news spread widely on Weibo after the baby's father called the local police and radio station for help. The next day it was revealed that the infant was choked to death and buried in snow by the thief. The online community expressed its deeply felt sympathy and condolences. The Buick dealership posted a photo of the baby and two of its cars on its official Weibo account to advertise its GPS system that can locate the stolen car. "A few thoughts on the Changchun stolen car and baby incident: when buying a car it's entirely OK to choose a brand with advanced technology," said the post. Though the post was made before tragic fate of the infant was known, the action generated a storm of outrage on Weibo. Some online commentators said it is "marketing at the cost of lives" and "extremely _ ." Worse was the post on Hyundai's official Weibo account that advertised the anti - theft system on its new SUV Santa Fe, an entry made after the child was known to have died. The action also enraged micro bloggers. Both posts were soon deleted. The Buick dealership made an apology on Weibo to the family of the victim and the public. But screenshots saved by users continued to be posted and the negative impact on both brands persists. The two brands probably didn't expect such a firestorm of fury from the Internet community, but they really made a big mistake sinking below the moral bottom line. They certainly ruined their own brand images. The Chinese have the same proverb as the English language - a little leak will sink a great ship. It takes decades to build the great ship of a respectable brand but it can take just a moment of negligence to make it fail completely. For those in corporate marketing, two lessons should be learned: first, be careful in the era of social media when one wrong can be easily magnified and have disastrous impacts in just a few clicks. Second and more importantly, think with your brain and heart. Never break the moral bonds of respect for human life and sympathy for our fellow man.
Answer: Not clear
Who is to blame for the tragedy of Changchun infant according to the passage?