(Q).
Article: The way people in the US travel to and from work has changed a lot in the last fifty years. Before the Second World War, most people lived in the town or the city where they worked. Almost everyone either walked to work or used a good inexpensive transportation system Many of these systems were electrified and ran on tracks, so they used very little energy. After 1945, the US government built many new roads and highways. People moved farther and farther form the cities where they worked because they could drive their cars on these new roads from their suburban homes to work in the city. Some of the big car makers also bought the electrified transportation systems and destroyed them. As people stopped using public transporation , cities spent less money fixing old buses and trains or buying new ones. Public transportation got worse and worse. In the late 1960s, people found out that the increase in the use of cars led to many problems. There were always too many cars for the highway system, and terrible traffic problems developed. People were spending hours in traffic jams getting to and from work every day. In addition, the air in many cities became dirty because of pollution from millions of cars, and many people died in traffic accidents. As people began to get worried about how the use of cars was hurting the environment, cities began to spend more money on public transportation again, so fewer people would have to drive cars. When gas became very expensive in the mid-1970s, the number of people taking public transportation began to increase .It's terribly expensive to build new public transportation systems. so it's very difficult to make big changes in the way people travel .However ,an increase in the use of public transportation has begun. Question: Why did some car companies buy and destroy public transportation systems? Yes or no, is the answer "They wanted to sell more of their products."?
(A).
No

(Q).
Article: 66-year-old Dai once worked as a boat tracker along the Yangtze River. "It was something that required brute strength,but not that alone, "Dai said at his home in Xialong village, which sits at the entrance to Wuxia Gorge, one of the famous Three Gorges in Southwest China. "You needed a lot of skills to do what we did." When outboard motors became available in the 1980's,boat trackers became a thing of the past. Today, they are seen only occasionally along the river during festivals and cultural events. However, Dai can still remember a time when being pulled by tracker along the Yangtze was the only way for people to travel from village to village in the mountainous Wushan county. Due to the area's rich mining resources,his services were vital for companies that wanted to ship their goods. "I was 15 or 16 when I started", said the retiree,explaining that his father also worked as a tracker. "He died in 1964, when I was a teenager. I can't even remember us tracking together, but we did. It was so long ago." Dai said that boats crews worked in teams with a first, second and third master. The first master was the most essential because he sat in the boat and steered it along the safest route. "It was a key role. He had to guide the boat past jagged rocks and whirlpools," he said, adding that first masters were often the most experienced boatmen and the most familiar with the Yangtzer River. "My tracker days were dangerous," Dai said. "If the boat got caught in a whirlpool, it could have swallowed the boat and all the trackers down with it. The same thing would have happened if the halter broke." Dai's days as a tracker finally came to an end when his family invested in a motorboat in the early 1980s. He successfully applied for a license from Wushan shortly after. Question: For about how many years did Dai work as a tracker? Yes or no, is the answer "20 years."?
(A).
No

(Q).
Article: For some years the big drugmakers have been worrying about an approaching "patent cliff"--a fall in sales as the patents on their most popular pills expire or are struck down by legal challenges, with few new potential _ to take their place. This week the patent on the best-selling drug in history expired--Lipitor, an anti-cholesterol pill which earned Pfizer nearly $11 billion in revenues last year.In all, pill like Lipitor with a combined $170 billion in annual sales will go off-patent by the end of 2015. What is supposed to happen now is that lots of copycat firms rush in with "generic" (ie, chemically identical) versions of Lipitor at perhaps one-fifth of its price.Patients and health-care payers should reap the benefit.Pfizer's revenues should suffer. The same story will be repeated many times, as other best-selling drugs march over the patent cliff But generics makers may face delays getting their cheaper versions to market.Ranbaxy, a Japanese-owned drugmaker, struggled to get regulators' approval for its generic version of Lipitor, and only won it on the day the patent expired.More importantly, research-based drug firms are using a variety of tactics to make the patent cliff slope more gently. Jon Leibowitz, chairman of America's Federal Trade Commission (FTC), is concerned by drugmakers filing additional patents on their products to put off the day when their protection expires. Another tactic is "pay-for-delay", in which a drugmaker facing a legal challenge to its patent pays its would-be competitor to put off introducing its cheaper copy. In the year to October the FTC identified what it believes to be 28 such settlements. American and European regulators are looking into these deals. However, legal challenges against them have been delayed, and a bill to ban them is stuck in Congress. To encourage generics makers to challenge patents on drugs, and introduce cheaper copies, an American law passed in 1984 says that the first one to do so will get a 180-day exclusivity period,in which no other... Question: Pfizer exploit a loophole in the 1984 law mainly by _ . Yes or no, is the answer "cooperating with Watson to beat Ranbaxy"?
(A).
No