For a moment, Paul wasn't even sure who had walked into the room. Chloe had totally transformed herself since he'd last seen her. She wore a wig for starters, and a very good one. It was light brown and shoulder length. It looked so natural that if he didn't know she had much shorter hair, he would have guessed that she had dyed it. But it was the outfit that made the change. She wore a well-tailored, very professional, gray woman's skirt/blazer combo with a yellow silk blouse. Her wrist sported what looked to Paul's uneducated eye like an expensive and fashionable gold lady's watch from which he thought he detected a glint of diamond. In short, she looked just like the high priced lawyer she was supposed to be. She was certainly the best-dressed person in the room. Chloe reached across the table to shake Greg's hand, stretching forward as she did so. Paul watched Greg glance down at her cleavage while he shook her hand. "I'm Rachel Roth, here on behalf of Mr. Paul Reynolds." "Hi," said Greg. "I'm Greg Driscol, and this is..." "I know the rogues gallery here," said Chloe cutting Greg off and looking around at the assembled board members. "I've learned all about you gentlemen." Marie stood up and shook Chloe's hand. "Marie Cooper, from Johnson, Myers, and Wick," she said. "Nice to meet you," she said. "Ok, we've got the intros down, shall we get on with the dirty business?" "Um, sure," Greg said as he sat back down. "I was just about to turn things over to Marie." The plan was now in action, and so far so good. But Paul knew that this was a crucial moment. Chloe didn't really know the law - just a few points that her friend had helped her out with. She couldn't let the real lawyer take over the meeting. Her dramatic, unexpected entrance had them off guard, and Paul hoped she seized the moment and pressed on. What was Chloe wearing on her wrist? A. A real lawyer's watch B. A fancy piece of jewelry C. not enough information D. A diamond bracelet
B

(Question)
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... Why was Fred bored? A. not enough information B. because John ate all the cake C. because the event was lengthy D. because John got married
(Answer)
C

WHITE HOUSE U.S. President Donald Trump told a group of Republican lawmakers at a meeting Tuesday he backs a pair of their immigration bills under consideration in the House of Representatives. The meeting came as criticism continued over the Trump administration's policy of separating children from their parents and other adults at the southern border with Mexico as they illegally enter the United States. In his remarks to lawmakers, according to White House principal deputy press secretary Raj Shah, Trump "endorsed both House immigration bills that build the wall, close legal loopholes, cancel the visa lottery, curb so-called "chain migration," and solve the border crisis and family separation issue by allowing for family detention and removal." Republican Rep. Mark Meadows said Trump told the lawmakers they need to get something done on immigration "right away." House Homeland Security chairman Michael McCaul described the meeting with Trump as excellent, and confirmed that the president embraced the bill he and Congressman Bob Goodlatte are pushing. "The president is a thousand percent behind it," McCaul said. Asked whether the legislation would end the family separations, he responded, "They will not be separated if the bill passes," which he explained includes $18 billion for a border wall Trump desires. The House is set to vote later in the week on the two bills. It is not clear that either piece of legislation has enough votes to win passage. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday "all of the members of the Republican conference support a plan that keeps families together," adding he intends to ask Democrats to support the measure. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday, 28 percent of people said they support the policy, while 57 percent opposed it and the other 15 percent said they did not know. Trump administration officials have defended the policy. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pushed back at the negative media coverage in a Monday briefing, asserting... How long was Trump's meeting with Republican lawmakers Tuesday? A. about 15 minutes B. a few minutes C. not enough information D. a few hours
D