input with options: Once again, I've analysed my year of travel to see if I'm any closer to reducing it year on year. It's an annual habit, and if often kicks off new ideas that might affect my team's next year of work. The good answer is: yes, there is less travel! And not just that, but having reduced the schlepping I do, I've been able to hire more amazing people to lead on our work, and celebrate one of NoTosh's best years ever in terms of the quality, quantity and breadth of work we're doing. Key to traveling less has been a marked increase in the number of folk who see and are now reaping the value of working with us online. I've avoided as many as 20,000 miles of travel thanks to greener clients, who are also many dollars better off having not paid for the airmiles that are wrapped up in our regular fee structure. The quality of our work is better, too, thanks to this. We are doing fewer of those day-long workshops with teachers or leaders, when an hour or even thirty minutes before the day gets started is more worthwhile. We're seeing more school leaders take this up, although it's harder to get teachers into the habit of taking 30 minutes 'me time' to jump into a coaching session on the day or week ahead. But it's starting, and the value to us all is huge. Coaching is very different to 'consulting a Personal Learning Network' on Twitter. It's intense, targeted, focussed and involves a one-on-one discussion that arrives quickly at resolutions to current day challenges that will have a long-term impact. And we come back to measure whether that impact actually happened. I don't think it's a way of working that many are used to in Education, although many corporate clients have had some rare experience with it. Encouraging both groups to take more regular time out for coaching, little and often, is a real challenge, but we're beginning to see some huge impact from relatively little input (and relatively few dollars!). Question: Who is the company seeing more of? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- somebody lonely
- somebody professional
- not enough information
- somebody angry
output: somebody professional

Q: In a rare display of bipartisan unity during an election year, Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump for his comments about the ethnicity of a judge overseeing a class action suit against Trump University. Members of both parties lambasted the real estate mogul for remarks that they assert were racist. Trump said he felt U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel, because of his "Mexican heritage," would not rule fairly in the case that charged Trump with fraud. Curiel is an American who was born and raised in the midwestern U.S. state of Indiana. U.S. Senator Ben Sasse, a Republican from Nebraska who has criticized Trump on multiple occasions during the campaign, tweeted: "Saying someone can't do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of 'racism.''' Also leading the charge Monday were Trump's two former rivals for the Republican nomination. Ohio Governor John Kasich tweeted that Trump's offensive "is flat out wrong.'' Trump, Kasich wrote, should "apologize to Judge Curiel & try to unite this country.'' Florida Senator Marco Rubio agreed. "It's wrong and I hope he stops.'' But no mea culpa was forthcoming from the candidate. Trump insisted earlier Monday that Curiel could not be impartial in the legal action against him because the jurist's parents were born in Mexico and Trump wants to build a wall along the Mexican border. Republican Senator Susan Collins called Trump's comments "absolutely unacceptable." Democratic Congressman Filemon Vela said in an open letter published Monday that Trump's "ignorant anti-immigrant opinions," border wall rhetoric and continued attacks on a sitting federal judge "are just plain despicable." Vela, who represents a district along the U.S.-Mexico border, says his great-great-grandfather came to the U.S. in 1857 well before Trump's ancestors. Vela wrote, "Mr. Trump you are a racist and you can take your border wall and shove it." Kasich, Rubio and Collins joined other top... Question: What is probably true about Trump === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- he is trusting of most Federal Judges
- he is a racist
- not enough information
- he is skeptical of most Federal Judges

A: he is skeptical of most Federal Judges

The U.S. Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may be open to new limits on the government's ability to track someone's movements by accessing data on that person's cellphone. A case before the high court could result in a landmark decision in the ongoing debate over civil liberties protections in an era of rapid technological change. At issue is whether law enforcement will be able to access cellphone data that can reveal a person's whereabouts without having to first obtain a court-issued search warrant. The case stems from the conviction of Timothy Carpenter for a series of robberies back in 2010 and 2011. Prosecutors were able to obtain cellphone records that indicated his location over a period of months, information that proved crucial to his conviction. On Wednesday, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union argued that law enforcement should be required to obtain a court-ordered search warrant before obtaining such information. They also argued that allowing law enforcement to access the cellphone data without a warrant would violate the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizures contained in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "It is impossible to go about our daily lives without leaving a trail of digital breadcrumbs that reveal where we have been over time, what we have done, who we spent time with," said ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler, who spoke to reporters outside the Supreme Court following oral arguments. "It is time for the court, we think, to update Fourth Amendment doctrine to provide reasonable protections today." Some of the justices also raised concerns about privacy in the digital age. "Most Americans, I think, still want to avoid Big Brother," Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who often sides with the liberal wing of the court, said. Chief Justice John Roberts, who often sides with conservatives on the court, said the central question was whether the cellphone information should be accessible to the government "without a warrant." Question: What amendment is related to unreasonable search and seizure? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- 3rd
- 2nd
- not enough information
- 4th

Answer:
4th