input with options: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: 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... Question: After the end of this story, John is probably Answer:
OPTIONS:
- married
- hungry
- annoyed
- not enough information
output: married

Q: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: Think outside the box, whilst inside the box (studio): As this studio is about working with constraints, I thought i'd google 'constraints in filmmaking' and see what comes up. One of the first links was to a journal article by Heidi Philipsen entitled 'Constraints in Film Making Processes Offer an Exercise to the Imagination'. Interestingly enough the first sentence of her article states: "I would like filmmakers interested in thinking "outside the box" to recognize that they can benefit from being placed "inside a box." I wonder if Paul had contemplated this whilst choosing the name for this studio. Throughout her article Philipsen challenges the notion that creativity is an intangible innate quality, existing within the mind of one source, but rather creativity arises from a multitude of sources. Alike all things shared she suggests that creativity is easier to enhance by changing environmental conditions, rather than encouraging people to 'think more creatively'. Perceiving creativity in this way allows you to see it as an organisationally influenced phenomenon, rather than a psychological and individual phenomenon. Which enables you to have more control over creativity and to encourage creativity once being aware of how it can be environmentally enhanced. As Csikzentmihalyi (1996) states "a genuinely creative accomplishment is almost never the result of a sudden insight, a lightbulb flashing on in the dark, but comes after years of hard work". Constraints, as Philipsen suggests is one such way to manipulate the environment to enhance creativity. Students who attended The Film School in Denmark, who were forced into working with constraints for their projects eventually considered constraints to be both useful and inspirational. Such constraints included: making a scene with a specific theme, within a specific deadline and with other specific conditions concerning the use of camera, sound, actors etc. Students stated that these constraints ultimately made them feel secure, inspired and focused and... Question: After this passage, the writer probably Answer:

OPTIONS:
- thought about it
- researched more about it
- wrote more
- not enough information

A: researched more about it

Read the following context and answer the question. Context: For active people, regular training is as important part of maintaining and increasing fitness. About the only real downside to regular exercise is the transient toll it takes on the body after a hard training session. The pain and soreness after training needs sufficient time to recover from before another hard session can be performed. A very plausible theory pushed for many years is that the post-exercise oxidative stress in the body is the primary cause of the muscle damage and fatigue experienced. If you could reduce this oxidative stress, then it would allow quicker recovery, and then more time spent training. What this theory ignores though is that oxidative damage is a natural part of how the body adapts to stressful exercise, allowing the body to repair and grow stronger to allow higher levels of performance in the future. A small scale study has previously found that trained and untrained individuals who dose up on antioxidant supplements impair important exercise training adaptations such as improved insulin sensitivity and production of oxidative stress defence proteins. Now researchers have extended this study by looking at the effect of antioxidants in trained female runners, and published their findings in the European Journal of Sports Science. Twenty-three well trained female runners took part in three separate 3-week training blocks where they took either 1 gram of vitamin C, blackcurrant juice, or a placebo drink for each of the training blocks. Each of the dietary interventions involved drinking a similar volume of fruit drink of a total of half a litre per day split over the morning and evening. The training performance of each runner was carefully measured at the beginning and end of each 3-week treatment period. The runners stuck to a set training schedule which allowed a more accurate assessment of any changes in performance over the training period. Question: Why was a set training schedule used in a study of training performance of runners? Answer:

OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- the runners had a regimen to begin with
- it was easier to study
- it allowed for a more accurate assessment of any changes

Answer:
it allowed for a more accurate assessment of any changes