Read the following context and answer the question. Context: My dream. I dreamt that is was living in France in the 1920. I was living my apartment, I glanced at my reflection, I was wearing a knee length pencil length green skirt, white silk blouse, green jacket to match, white wrist length gloves. On my head I wore a green felt hat, with a long green head pin, to keep the hat on my head. Green shoes and clutch to match. I was afraid, so I took a breath, opened the door, walked out and locked the door. I walked down the stairs, waved to Jean Paul the night concierge, he told me to be careful and have a goodnight, I told him I will see him later. I walked out the front door, turned left and walked down the alley to get to the boulevard. When I got half way through the alley, I heard footsteps. I began walking a little faster. Then a man called my name.. Ana, I turned and saw he had a gun. I screamed and began running. Before I got to the boulevard he shot me in the back, I fell knees first, then I tried to brace myself with my hands. But it was useless, I fell face to the ground, it was an excruciating burning pain. I began to cry, I could see my clutch not to far from me, the content from my clutch lipstick, compact and money scattered. Then I heard his footsteps, he stopped at my head, crunch down, he took his thumb and wiped my lipstick from my bottom lip. I asked him why, in a whisper, because it hurt to talk. He laughed, and said that I was a stupid girl, and that if he could not have me no one else should. He got up and walked away. He left me there dying, I felt that I could not breath and litterly jumped out of the dream. The weird part was that for several days after, I had that burning sensation in the same place I got shot. Question: Why did Ana get killed in the dream? Answer:

OPTIONS:
- She screamed.
- A man shot her.
- not enough information
- She ran away.

Answer: A man shot her.

Problem: OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- he has let his voters down
- He is a good leader
- He will be re elected
Q: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: Randy Poskin, a soybean farmer in rural Illinois, voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. But ask him now he feels about that decision, and you get a tepid response. "I'm not sure," Poskin said. Like many farmers in the Midwest, Poskin is concerned about getting caught in the middle of a trade war, as Trump ramps up economic pressure on China. Those fears were heightened after Trump announced plans Thursday to impose tariffs on as much as $60 billion worth of Chinese imports. "I'm fearful they will retaliate on those tariffs," Poskin said. "Soybean exports, wheat, poultry, chicken, beef [there are] any number of products that we export to their country that they could retaliate with." The announcement has unnerved many in Trump's base of supporters in U.S. agriculture. The trade tensions have also rattled global markets, which until recently had performed strongly. Trump's tariff decision was meant to punish Chinese companies that benefit from unfair access to U.S. technology. U.S. businesses have long bristled at Beijing's requirement that they transfer technology to Chinese companies as a condition of entering the Chinese market. U.S. businesses have also had their technology stolen through cyberattacks. "We have a tremendous intellectual property theft situation going on," Trump said during the signing ceremony Thursday. Some U.S. companies in China cheered the move and suggested that concerns about a trade war were overblown. William Zarit, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, dismissed the "hair on fire" concern that Trump's proposed moves would hurt the global economy. "That the U.S. is willing to risk these disruptions indicates how serious the U.S. administration finds China's forced technology transfer, cybertheft and discriminatory industrial policies," he said in a statement to VOA. Zarit pointed to a recent survey suggesting members of his organization wanted the White House to "advocate more strongly for a level playing field and for reciprocal treatment to... Question: how does Randy Poskin feel about Trump? Answer:
Answer: he has let his voters down

input with options: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: The battle lines are drawn once again. U.S. law enforcement agencies and Silicon Valley are getting ready to face off on the issue of privacy. This latest battle is focused on a 30-year-old law on government access to electronic communications and associated data. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act was a forward-looking statute when enacted in 1986, but technology has dramatically outpaced the ECPA. The U.S. Congress has been looking into ways to revise the law in order to preserve the privacy of internet users while also preserving the legal tools necessary for government agencies to enforce the law and protect the public. The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called privacy "the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by a free people." The Senate Judiciary Committee this week is considering an amendment to the ECPA that would expand the government's ability to collect data using a National Security Letter, which doesn't require a court order. The amendment would authorize the FBI to demand a person's internet browser history and internet protocol address, enabling investigators to see what websites a person visits, how much time is spent on a particular site and the location of the internet user all without judicial oversight. The FBI contends that such data is covered implicitly under current statute, which was written years ago and only explicitly covers data normally associated with telephone records. FBI Director James Comey has said the amendment is needed to fix "a typo" in the ECPA that has hindered the bureau's ability to work in "a very, very big and practical way." But a letter sent earlier this week warned Congress that such an amendment is opposed by tech giants and civil liberties organizations. "This expansion of the NSL statute has been characterized by some government officials as merely fixing 'a typo' in the law," the letter said. "In reality, however, it would dramatically expand the ability of the FBI to get sensitive information about users' online... Question: What does Google think of James Comey's position? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- They disagree with his position
- They agree with his position
- They like his position
- not enough information
output:
They disagree with his position