I frankly haven't the slightest idea what the difference is between a moka pot and a cafetiere, but I'm going to pretend I do. "Delicious," I say, setting down my cup. "Way better than that stuff you get at Starbucks." Everyone else nods their heads in agreement, but I can't help but wonder if they're just being polite. Jason is pouring cream into his cup with a practiced hand, letting the white stream fall from the pitcher's lip in a smooth and slender column that blooms across his coffee's surface like a carnivorous plant photographed in stop-motion. "Did you hear about Tibet?" he asks. "Yeah," I say, "Terrible." "What's really shocking," says my boss, "is the complete ignorance of, well, most of America about what's going on right now." "Terrible." chimes in Jason. "and what with the death of newspapers, soon practically no one will be able to easily come by a well-formed opinion." "Did you hear the New York Times might be going bankrupt?" my boss asks. "Now that," Jason says, draining his cup, "would be a tragedy." Our biscotti has arrived and I'm reluctant to take the first piece. Is Dr. Burns paying again? It makes me feel awkward, because and despite the fact that she paid the last time--and this was at her invitation. Jason, for all his savior faire, did not appear to know how a Turkish coffee tasting was really supposed to go last time, and did not question when Dr. Burns ordered for all of us. Tracy, similarly, followed the doctor's lead and silently acquiesced when she took the check from the waiter dressed in a vest and what I took be MC Hammer pants. At any rate, it's not too weird for the boss to pay, right? After last time, I had gone home and dug out a 1984 copy of Emily Post, but that wasn't much help. There was no heading for "Research Assistants" nor did I find a chapter on "Student/Professor Luncheons." Question: Who is Tracy? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- Jason's younger sister
- The bosses daughter
- A waitress
- not enough information

Answer: not enough information

Problem: OPTIONS:
- They were not willing
- They militarize the Spratly Islands.
- They attacked America
- not enough information
Q: China's Defense Ministry said Thursday that a U.S. decision to disinvite China from a major international maritime exercise is "unconstructive." A ministry statement said despite the decision, China will continue playing a role in "maintaining peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region." The United States announced its move Wednesday, saying Beijing's "destabilizing behavior" in the South China Sea is inconsistent with the principles of the U.S.-led drill. "China's continued militarization of disputed features in the South China Sea only serve to raise tensions and destabilize the region," read a statement from Lt. Col. Christopher Logan, a Pentagon spokesman. The statement said that disinviting China from the 2018 RIMPAC is an "initial" response to Beijing's South China Sea activities. It did not specify what other steps may be taken. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said China's activity in the South China Sea was for self-defense and that it was a "much smaller scale" than what the United States had done in Hawaii and Guam. "We hope that the U.S. will change such a negative mindset," he said at a joint news conference with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Since 2014, China has taken part in RIMPAC, the world's largest international maritime drill, which is held every two years in Hawaii. It's a reflection of expanding U.S.-China military ties, despite tensions over Beijing's construction of man-made islands in the South China Sea, some of which have been militarized. "We have strong evidence that China has deployed anti-ship missiles, surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, and electronic jammers to contested features in the Spratly Islands region of the South China Sea. China's landing bomber aircraft at Woody Island has also raised tensions," the Pentagon statement said. "We have called on China to remove the military systems immediately and to reverse course on the militarization of disputed South China Sea features," the statement added. "We believe these recent deployments and the continued... Question: Why was China not invited to 2018 RIMPAC? === The answer to the above question is
Answer: They militarize the Spratly Islands.

input with options: This was 20 years ago, maybe. My girlfriend (at the time) and I were planning to go on a day trip on a Saturday, and so the Friday night before, we decided to celebrate our mini vacation by having a few drinks at a local bar. It was a known hangout for bikers, and had a reputation of being a rowdy place, but I was on good terms with a few of the regulars, and felt safe enough. As the night wore on, I started getting out of control, and didn't even realize it. I loved my girlfriend deeply, and had no desire to be with anyone else, but that night I was most definitely not myself. I was told that I openly flirted with the barmaid in front of my girlfriend, bet and lost on the pool table several times, and tried to start fights with some of the patrons, as I strongly suspected that someone had slipped something into my drink. At the time, I was a seasoned drinker, and the amount of alcohol I had consumed that night was pretty minimal in comparison, so naturally I was convinced that someone was messing with me. To this day I'm still not sure if my drinks were spiked, or it was just one of those nights. I do know that I hadn't eaten prior to that, so I would tend to choose the latter culprit, even though it pained me to admit it. I woke up the next afternoon in my own bed, with no memory of the trip home, a screaming hangover headache, and no girlfriend. She eventually forgave me, and we were together off and on for a few more years before we grew apart. I haven't set foot in that bar since, so I have no idea if I'm barred, or how the people there felt about me. I hope they've moved on, but I'm still too scared to find out. It's an experience I never want to repeat, even though I didn't actually experience anything. :/ Question: What is probably true about the person who had a blackout? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- he is impulsive
- he is cautious
- he is extremely religious
- not enough information
output:
he is impulsive