essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
a7dbcad | Sometimes called the Evening Star or the Earth's twin, Venus has caught many astronomers' attention. Astronomers are fascinated by how similar Venus and Earth are and are curious to find more information on the planet's enviroment, capacity, and conditions. The author of this article also takes great pride and hope towards the exploration of Venus,and has curiosity in their mind. The author uses the conditions, environment, technology, and details to express their support of the journey of researching Venus.
In the article,"The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author uses the conditions of the dangerous planet to spark some interest into the article and to express their own interest into the topic. As stated in paragragh four the author asks,"If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?" This question gives hope to the reader and to the author about figuring out more about the Evening Star. The author also includes in paragragh four the astronomer's interest as stating,"Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." If you include this factor and insight into an article, the reason may be the author's interest and respect of the topic.
The technology used to find more information about Venus sparks interest inside the author. The author includes this information to express the importance of technology to enable the search for information. As stated in paragraph six the author includes researchers by saying,"Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." The word "meaningfully" and "our knowledge" expresses how the author wants to contribute and spread information on the topic of Venus.
The author also has the belief of, as stated in paragragh eight,"striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." This quote directly states the study of Venus should be considered,respected, and contributed even if there is danger envolved. This is also directly stated in paragragh eight,"Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation."
This author belives the contribution and resepect is well needed and deserved to the research of the Earth's twin. They believe in possible life and are interested in the topic. | 4 |
a7dd51f | It would be a good and worthy pursuit because it is what we call are "twin" planet due to size and density but yet it is to dngerouse to be able to travle ther because it is to close to the sun and you would ony be able to be on Venus for no more than a few hours on the plant and we dont have the resources to be able to send men to Venus constantly due to the matelas that we are limited on and soon enough we would run out the things that men will need to be able to stay and make it to Venus alive and still have the resouces to be able to make it back to earth with out having complacations on weather there are going to make it there and back with the limited amout of resouces that they will be sent with | 2 |
a7deac0 | Have you ever thought what a student's emotions are accordding to their facial expression? Apparently, a computer can using FACS ( Facial Action Coding System ). But, some wonder; how is it useful using this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom valuable?
A computer software that can recognize someone's reaction( the FACS ) has been used on Leonardo Da Vinci's Renaissance painting, Mona Lisa. Dr. Paul Eckman,creator of FACS ( Facial Action Coding System), has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. The software uses all 44 major muscles to move human-like muscles in the computer. From there it calculates the percentage of the the person's emotions.
Now will this technoloy be valuable? I, myself, honestly don't see a use of Facial Action Coding System in a classroom, but instead in a nurse or counsiler, or even a school therapist. Some adults need to know a student's emotions for help. A student could be down, but doesn't want to show it or talk about. That's were the FACS comes in to detect the student's emotion and probably saving a student's life. The machine and therapist can also be able to diagnose students with depression, bipolar disorders, etc.
In conclusion, there is value in using this technology, the Facial Action Coding System, to read students' emotional expressions. Afterall, the machines are saving lifes. | 2 |
a7df23b | Using technology to read's student's emotional expressions is a good way of being able to detect exactly how other people are feeling, even when they are trying to hide their emotions. There is a new software, the Facial Action Coding System, has promising applications for a variety of industries. The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an ''action unit.'' The Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologists Dr. Paul Eckman, who he is the creator of FACS (Facial Action Coding System). Eckman ''has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surpise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness - and then associated each characteristic movements of the facial muscles. For example , your frontalis pars lateralis muscle (above your eyes) raises your eyebrows when you're surprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger. In the article '' Making Mona Lisa Smile .''
Eckman (paragraph 3).
It says in the article '' The facial expressions for each emotion are universal, even though individuals often show varying degrees of expressions.'' Huang, (paragraph 4)
In fact, us humans perfrom the same kinds of impressive ''clculation'' every day. For instance, you can probaly tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on there face. The author talks about how '' Most humans communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, So computers need to understand that, too.'' Huang, (paragraph 6)
Also in the article it says '' It's all about those muscular action units. They even indiccate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. In the real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at your cheek bones) lift the corners of your mouth.''
D ' Alto (paragraph 7) There is alot of stuff we can all learn about each other, Who knew it would invloe alot of science, facial expressions and emotions. Its always good to know how your students are feeling when you are teaching them something new. | 1 |
a7e1ea2 | Have you ever wanted to be apart of NASA or a scientist? Scientist get to explore many parts of the world, even outer space. Have you ever wanted to travel to Mars known as the, "Red Planet?" Mars has a long history, however some NASA scientists say that in 1967 they saw a face on Mars and some people thought that aliens created it.
Twenty-Five years ago from this date May 24, 2001 a spacecraft called Viking 1 was circling around the planet Mars taking pictures of possible landings for the sister ship named Viking 2. As the spacecraft was circling around the planet Mars, it saw something very odd which was, shadowy likeness of a human face with and enorumous head nearly two miles from the end it seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region on the red planet called Cydoina. Soon scientist figured it was just another Martian mesa, however this one had unsusual shadows which made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh.
As NASA looks at the images the caption said "huge rock formation." The Mars then started to reveal images of a face such as the, eyes, nose, and mouth. Mars has now became a famous planet. The planet Mars has starred in Hollwood flims, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows, and even in a haunted grocery story checkout line.
The agurment now is weither or not the face was made by aliens and the answer is NO. In passage seven, it says, "And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Micheal Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the orgional Viking photo. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landfrom. There was NO alien monument after all.
I believe if I was in the NASA or if I were a scientist I would use passage seven to back my answer up. It gives all the details about why the aliens did not make the face on the planet Mars. Even though everyone would not be satisfied with my agurement, I now have proof that it was not created by aliens. | 2 |
a7e49c9 | The author thinks that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents. Venus had previous missions that were unmanned. There would be no spacecraft that survived the landing for more than a few hours. These issues would explain why not a single spaceship would land on Venus in more than three decades. Venus is a very challenging planet for us humans to study it.
First of all, what would be more challenging would be studying the clouds of its highly corrosive sulfuric acid. "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an enviroment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest part of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." This means that with any condition that the Venus is having they would be very extreme. Venus has the hottest temperature than any other planet in our solar system.
Secondly, since the National Aeronutics and Space Administration have an idea of sending humans to study Venus. They have to make sure they are safe and that they are aware of what the humans are going to do. "Peering at Venus from ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmostphere." Researchers think that seeking to conduct a mission to understand Venus would have to get close to our planet.
Also, when the sientist had approached on studying the Venus they had simplified some electronics that made silicon carbide. These have been tested in a chamber stimulating the chaos of Venus's surface.
"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." Once the scientist had finished their research they have found their conclusion.
In conclusion I think the author is right because we have to be aware of what is close to our planet and if it's dangerous or not. The Venus was very challenging for humans to study. It had many things that would confuse the humans while they study. Venus is just another normal planet like ours but it has its own differences. Venus is a hotter planet even though Mercury is closer to the sun. | 3 |
a7e9a07 | If I was arguing with some one that the face on mars was not real and that it was some thing that just happend on its own I think that it could go both ways and that it could of been an alien but it really just probly happend on its own.
We could argue and argue about this subject but if I was a scientist I would make a camera that could go farther and depper into mars outmasphere so we could see what was going on for some days to mounths to see what would happen if nothing happend then I would be right if we seen aliens there then he would be right.
But it would be alot easyer said then done to make that camera that can go that far into space to see that much for that long it would not be a easy task. But for the sack of seeing if aliens were real then it would be worth making to see if aliens are real or not. Because that would change every thing that we now about a different life force then use. It would blow up I would become famus nowing im the one that made the camera.
But I would also be famous if i was the one that found out that it was just a big joke and it was realy just like sand and rock. So there would not be a big comspeisy of it. And not even that i would prove that guy in the lab wrong that it is not even aliens that it is just sand and rock.
But It would be pretty cool to see aliens and we only seen this way back in 1976 I wonder how long it has been there it could be billions to only 40 years old. But i would get to work to see if i could build the camera to send to mars and see what was going on on mars. And if I was to build it and if it would work I would keep it there on mars untill it ran out of battries and if there was yto be nothing then I would be right but if there was to besomething then that guy from the lab would of been right.
But that is what i woud do if I was a sientist that worked for NASA abd there was a big argument about what it was then that is what I would do to see just make a camera to see which one was right me or the guy in the lab. Hopfully I would even be able to build that if i was a scientist that worked for NASA. | 2 |
a7ec7ab | Hey there, it is Luke. And I am asking you to join the Seagoing Cowboys. We are running out of people and would really enjoy some more help with the program. I would believe that you would really like this program, you would have the opportunities of a life time! Yourself and many others on the ship would be able to see and explore places that you can only think of.
Are you starting to like the idea of it now? Well I am almost sure that you would love it even more if you were on the ship right now! Expecially if you are a big animal lover why, you might as well hop on right now. Here in the Seagoing Cowboys program there are lots of animals that you can never get tired of! And I know what you are thinking, you are probally thinking about you're family and how much you are going to miss them. I know, that is what I thought about to before I myself joined the Seagoing Cowboys program. But, you really have to think about this. You would be missing out on an adventure of a lifetime! And I think you're family would understand if you were leaving to help people around the world. Mine did! And see some very very cool things while you are out there. After all there is a world out there and you are just waiting to see it.
Now maybe you could at least consider being apart of the Seagoing Cowboys program? I mean, I love it and you could too! Maybe you couldeven pass this note around? Why not ask some close friends and family or some people you know if they might want to join the program too! I think they would love it! Well, maybe you could get back to me about this. And I hope that I can see you soon! | 2 |
a7efa1a | Everyday new thing are breing created because of the advances in technology. In the artitcles "Diverless Cars Are Coming" the author talks about the goods and bads of a diverless car. Although the idea of a diverless car hasn't been fully develope, they predicted that it will be by the year 2020. In the my perspective I think the idea of a diverless car is bad because of the many problem it could cause.
A diveless car is not exactly "diverless". In the ariticles it said, " The car can handle driving funtions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel...human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over." This tells us that a diver still need to keep hold the of wheel and stay alert. The human still have to be on the look out and take over when their is a problem.
A diverless car is not safe because it can bring technology problems and failuar. It said in the articles,"New laws will be needed in order to cover the liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the diver or the manufacturer?" This tell us that even if the diverless car is developed their will still be flaws. As it was mention in the article if someone got injured who would be at fault? If the person got injured they would blame it on the company and their would be problems.
Rule are their to keep us save and if it change it could cause many danger. In the aritcles it said, " traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all time." This is agreeble because its better to be safe then sorry. Things can happen when driving a diverless cars, so it way safer if that person was in full control of its car.
Diverless car can bring many accident if it is not fully developed or safe. It can bring disagreement between people if their was an accident and it is safer when the person is in control of its vehicles. Driving is already unsafe for most people and if diverless car is develope it can be more unsafe. | 4 |
a7f296e | In the article, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author suggests that studying Venus is a great idea despite the dangers it calls for. Venus may be safe from Earth, but the closer you get, the more dangerous it is. Temperatures at Venus are averaged at over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's. These conditions are very extreme, but the curiousity of humans will go above and beyond to find out as much as they can.
NASA is working on some solutions to help people study Venus. Due to such hostile conditions, their idea is allowing scientists to float above the fray. By hovering over thirty or so miles above the Venusian landscape, it would help NASA avoid harsh ground conditions. Hovering over Venus would be survivable for humans, but it wouldn't be easy. The temperature would still be very toasty at 170 degrees Fahrenheit. Getting that close to Venus would help them get more insight on the planet, but most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, so the forms of photography and videography may not be effective.
Scientists are trying to think of a way to get up closer so they can gain more knowledge about Venus. Researchers are trying to engineer a design that would allow our machines to last long enough to better understand our knowledge of Venus. | 2 |
a7f3634 | People are surrending their cars. these days, people do not see the need for them, and are switching to other means of trasportation such as bike riding, or public transport. This switch has lowered emissions, and greenhouse gasses, reducing smog.
Many cities are implementinng this reduction of cars, and have experienced a reduction in pollution.
cars emmit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, this is a fact. Reducing the amount of cars on the road reduces the co2 in the atmosphere. In paris bans driving due to smog , paris banned cars for a day; "the smog cleared enough monday... rescind the ban for odd-number plates on Teusday" (Duffer 19). this proves that the ban did indeed reduce the smog in paris. In
The end of car culture , "recent studies suggest that americans are buying fewer cars" (rosenthal 29). This means that pollution will go down in the next few years, which it has according to this article.
Also, the reduction of cars will reduce the greenhouse gasses being trapped in our atmosphere. "passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emmissions in europe... and uo to 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the united states" (rosenthal 5). This reduction in the amount of cars on the road has bean proven to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, making our atmosphere cleaner. where there are more cars, there is more greenhouse gas, and vise versa.
Many people have embraced giving up their car to help better the enviorment. Doing so will help reduce smog, and co2 emmissions, which are hurting our atmoshphere. If just enough people join in, and take different means of transportation, we can make our air safer to breathe and save our earth. | 3 |
a7f685b | If i was a NASA scientist and some one thought it created by alien and i had to tell a person it was not created by aliens this is how i would tell them. First, the human like figuer has become a priority to NASA. The image is not as human like as it was in 1976.
In pargraph 9 it reads mars global surveyor is mapping is normally looks straight down then scans the planet in narrow 2.5 km wide strips.
The image was taken with a 3D altimetry. Aliens are not real the are just things people beleived are real. Also it is dissappearing over the years.
The image that is called the face of mars is really a mesa. NASA's viking 1 was circling the planets for sites. When viking number 2 spotted the figuer. Jet propulsion lab when it appeared on the monitors. The imade appeared to be a huge rock formation a few days later. It engaged the public and attracted attention to mars. The image has become a huge pop icon it has been seen in books,magazines and also heared on the radio talk shows. There was no alien monument after all so that ment is was not created by an alien. It was a natural landformation. Most people were not satisfied with the answer. The malin's team captured an extraordinarty photo using the camera absolute maximum resolution. The image is vey small it was compared to sometimg in Eygpt.
That is how i would tell someone that it was not created by alien. Firslt i would tell them it was a nurtrual formation. That it looks that way because of the camera it was too with. Last that aliens are not real they are make believe.
That is how i would tell them if i was working for NASA. | 2 |
a7f84c4 | Venus is the hottest planet in our solar system and is extremely dangerous and deadly, but is also the planet that most like Earth. The author of the article supports his idea that going to Venus is a great idea reasonably well, although he doesn't use that much information to prove his claim. The author states a lot of the dangers of going to Venus and then addresses his points of wanting to study Venus more closely.
The author tells the reader that many Astronomers are fascinated with Venus because some people have a theory that Venus was once like Earth. He states that in Venus's past it might have been covered largely with oceans and could've had life on it, just like earth. The author even states that Venus still has some features on it that Earth has such as valleys, mountains, and craters. The author also decribes that Venus could sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. The author uses examples of technology that could help us research more about Venus, such as NASA's blimp-like vehicle which could allow scientists to float above the carbon dioxide littered atmosphere, but most of his points about technology wouldn't work because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, which would make most forms of photographs and videos ineffective.
The author of this article claims that Venus is worth the cost and risk just to learn more about it but doesn't support his claim well enough to presuade the reader to agree with him. He backs up technology that wouldn't work because of the atmosphere surrounding Venus and doesn't show ways how we can get past the deadly atmosphere without risk. The author doesn't show enough reason that scientist should study Venus besides that it might have closely resembled Earth in the past. | 3 |
a7f913e | Driverless cars are just a waste of people time money and safety. Driverless cars should not be invinted.
First and formost, driverless cars should not be used because what if the technology fails. If the technology fails and someone gets hurt the company would easily get blamed. Its going to cost alot for the company or the individual would have to make upgrades and more upgrades to fix the car if its not working. That's one reason driverless cars shouldn't be invinted.
Also driverless cars would be a major safety issue. Yes it would help cause less drunk drivers and texting while driving issues. Theirs laws that prevent that from happing for those people. Their should be more safety technolgoy then driverless cars that have more technology to drive insted of protect the individual. What abot the weather with the icy roads and the floods how is the car going to protect use from crashing or getting stuck. Thats another reason driver less cars shouldn't be used.
Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs to be driven. How is it going to park or pull out drive ways are go to specific places. Google is trying to invinte a car the drive on its own but they aren't truly driverless. last reason i think driverless cars shouldn't be used
Driverless cars shouldn't be used because what if the technology fails. A majior safty issue. Why drive a car that still needs to driven. Those are my reasons that the driverless car should not be used. | 3 |
a7fe09a | There are both positive and negative side to driverless cars. Just imagining cars that drive themselves is truly amazing. Though these cars seem very cool and amazing I feel as if it is not a good idea to make them the main way of transportation. I don't think driverless cars should be used by everyone.
Driverless cars are very interesting and sound like a good idea, but I don't think they are entirely safe. If there is any unknown damge to any of the sensors the car could very easily crash and potentially hurt people. The idea of a car that drives itself sounds amazing and would be very cool, but dangerous as I said before if sensors are damaged and the owner of the vehicle doesn't know then they could get in trouble for hurting someone. On the other hand is it truly the owner of the vehicles fault? well as stated in the article this is a good question. If the owner of the car is unaware of the damage it shouldn't be his fault but instead the producer's fault becuase they did not provide ways to know that it was damaged. These cars could be dangerous.
In conclusion I think the production of these cars is not needed and could be dangerous, but the production of driverless cars is most likely inevitable. There are many risks with the production of these cars. Farther into the future when there is newer and better technology these cars might become very common, but unless a way to garuntee safety of passengers and pedestrians these cars will not be in the streets any time soon. | 3 |
a7fee66 | Venus aka the evening star is one of the most stunning and complex plant we have in solors system. The reaeon why it is stunning and complex is because of how closely the density and size and also occasionally closest to the sun and in distance too, Earth, venus, and mars which make a challenging place to even examine more closely.
The reason why venus is such a dangersous place to pursuit studying up closer is becacuse of hot it is. The atomsphere is about 97% thick making cardon dioxide cover down on venus with strong persureof 90 times greater than what humans experience as it reads on paragraph 3. Another reason why its a challenge are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atomosphere which is a type of rain that is acid which is very harmful. But the overall temperatures is a average of 800 degrees fahrenheit. The terrians or surface of venus are like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking on its land which is supported by the author on paragraph 3
But it is it posslbe for us to study the up close the unbarably hotest of venus and fully understand the plant true mysteris, and the answer to that question is a 50% 50% yes and no. The reason why it is because arcodaring to NASA and the author on paragraph 5 they state that since 1940s during WWII NASA have been working on studyings and projects. Like looking back at old technology called "Mechanical computers" and these deveices help and play a role for 1st roll of envisioned. But mainly the "Mechanical computers" are upgrade to more modern computers that enormously powerful, flexible, and quick but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme condititons like venus supported by paragraph 7.
But overall these are the reason why is hard and complex to studying venus in a up close postion. | 3 |
a806bc5 | The system of the Electoral College is a widely argued debate as to if it should be continued or if it should be gotten rid of. The electoral system shouldn't be used as a system of voting, who honestly wants to vote for someone who will vote for you, and if we are truly a state thats votes for its own president then why doesn't the popular vote count as the offical vote?
The Electoral College is a system that is rather unfit as a system of the people's voting. When you vote for your president, you're really just voting for who you think should vote for them. The article "Does the Electoral College Work?" states, "...when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for you candidate's electors." The Constitution states that we are able to vote for our president, but then what do you call this? This is not an example of what America stands for, and this is certainly not the voting system that is described by our nation's properties. There is another issue with this violation of rights concerning our voting system, it's how the Electoral College votes and how dependable they are. The article "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong." talks about how you can't control who the electorals you chose vote for. "Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always." This statement helps prove that the president you may want may not even get you vote. The Electoral College not only takes away your right to assuringly vote for the president of your choice, but it also takes away right personal voting right as an American. Don't let someone else detain your freedom of speech, let you personal voice be heard by the people.
While the Electoral College may seem like a sure fire way to assure that we get a president, that doesn't really mean the majority wants that president. Think about it, we don't always get the president we voted for. Popular vote doesn't really matter, it's like saying you voice doesn't matter to the government. They took away the right as an American they gave you in the first place. Popular vote should replace the Electoral College. There have been instances where the popular vote reined supreme, but the Electoral College didn't agree. In the article, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" it mentions an election where Al Gore lost even though he won the popular vote. "...according to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after Al Gore-thanks to the quirks of the electoral college-won the popular vote but lost the presidency..." This helps show the people that it seems our vote isn't what is truly important, it's only what the Electoral College does that makes a true impact on choosing of president for the next two years. It's even stated in the very same article that, "...over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." If our vote truly matters then why not vote on keeping the Electoral College in play or getting rid of the flawed system once and for all.
The Electoral college is claimed to keep the voting system in line and prevent major mess, however this is not truly the case. There will still be flaws, but this is not the correct way to fix it. Listening strictly to the people's vote is what Amercia was built on and as an American I would like to see a change and let my voice be heard. If I want to vote I will vote, I don't want to vote on someone voting for me.
The Electoral College is unfair, unjust, and unamerican. The system takes away our right to vote for who we want not who we want to vote for us. If you are a true American you will understand why I know this is flawed. The Electoral College is not a proper way to handle our votes it must be a vote decided completely by the people of Amercia. | 5 |
a80818e | Wow! The use of the technology can read the emotional expression, the Facial Action Coding System is amazing. Some new computer software can recognize people expression. Computer can recognize our facial movements by using express how we feels. The author described basic emotions, by characteristic movements of the facial muscles. The action of muscular indicate between a genuine happy or smile and pretending to be happy. The author support that how much technology can do.
First, the FACS new sofeware would be helpful for psychologists doctor. The FACS will help them to tell how their petients are feelings and know what they need to improve in their life. The author indicated that whom are experts at technology, find a better ways to communicate humans and software technology. The expression of our facial can be predict.
Next, computer can recognize facial movements how we express our feelings. In the article, the author described movements of our facial muscles called 'action unit". How the movements of facial muscles work is for example, celebrity is not happy in inside but she/he can pretend to be happy and smile in front of her fans. The musculer movement work is like pretending and force to be smile but not movement of facial muscles only expresses emotions, but can help you to produce them.
Finally, in the article the author decribed six basic emotions. The basic emotions are "happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness" each of them related to movements of the facial muscles. For example, someone who surround us, we can probably tell how their feels by looking at them. The author explained, movements of facial express are "all about muscular action units'. According to 'Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion"
can make you actually produce smiling and creating emotions.
In conclusion, technology can read emottional expression of humans by the FACS.
Muscular action units indicate the difference between a real smile and forced one but making a fake smile can help you to produce them. The new software, Facial Action Coding System identify human emotions by looking at them. The author support, technology can develop humans and computers to communicate better ways. From the article, we can tell that technology can do much more than we think. | 3 |
a814db6 | I am going to try to convince you to join the Seagoing Cowboys.
It is a fun job to have.
you get to see the world.
You can have fun on the ship on the ride home after you delivered the cattle.
You will have many friends to ride with you so you will never have a bad time.
Now I am going to try and convince you to join.
A reason for you to join the seagoing Cowboys is it is a very fun job.
You get to do whatever you want after the cattle are taken care of.
You can play games with the other people.
You can play cards.
You can even play baseball after the cattle are dropped off.
You will have many people on board the ship.
You may not know them but you can make friends.
It would be fun and you would definitely not be alone.
If you had friends on the ship you could have fun all the time.
You could play all kinds of fun games with the people on board the ship.
After you drop off the cattle food and supplies what are you going to do.
Well all that space that the animals were in is now open for baseball game.
That's right you could play a baseball game on a ship like that.
Just don't hit a home run too far.
You could play games, read, and even play a baseball game and who says that isn't fun.
Another good thing about Seagoing Cowboys is that you can see amazing sights.
You could ride past China.
You could almost go anywhere you wanted, after the cattle were dropped off.
Sightseeing is a very fun thing to do.
You can see stuff you have never seen before.
I think it would be kind of fun to be a seagoing cowboys out would miss your relatives though.
Remember why being a seagoing cowboy is fun.
The job is a fun amazing job.
You will have friends on board.
The ride home will be amazing.
There would be a lot of sightseeing on the trip.
Those are the reasons you should be a seagoing cowboy. | 3 |
a815b01 | The use of technology like this has many benefits. It can be used in class or at home, it can even be used at a doctors office. Technology like this can even help teachers teach better. Technology like this can help teachers teach more effectively.
FACS can be a very important piece of technology. For use in classrooms, teachers can tell if you are confused and help you more. They can also tell if you aren't paying attention and they could help you stay on task. In paragraph 6
Dr. Huang is quoted saying
"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,...Then it could modify the lesson". As a student I have seen many students including myself get distracted in class. This can also tell if a student is interested in a subject.
FACS can also be used outside of class if needed it can be used at home. Your t.v. could recommend shows or movies based on how you feel. Or on a gaming system to pick games for you. In paragraph 6 it said "for example, if you smile when Web ad appears on your screen. a similar ad might follow". This could make internet easier.
Although you might think this technology maybe invading privacy and might be incorrect at times, it has more benefits. No on eshould fully depend on it. It could be used to help treat you at a doctors office. FACS can tell if something is really painful and how you're feeling mentally.
This technology should be in every classroom in the future. It should also be used by every teacher. Doctors might also get a lot of help using FACS. And you might also get it in your home sometime. | 3 |
a8171b6 | Driverless cars seem like an impossibility.
They seem like something out of a futuristic movie or comic book.
However, today's evidence proves that driverless cars are a realistic possibility.
Advancements in technology today provide tangible evidence that driverless cars could play a prominent role in the near future.
Driverless cars should be developed and dissimenated because they are more efficient, would increase safety, and would increase the quality of life for drivers.
Driverless cars are much more efficient.
The article "Driverless cars are coming" states, "The cars [Google cofounder Sergey Brin] foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus."
Obviously, driverless cars would increase the efficiency of vehicles and use half as much fuel.
This would benefit both the owner of the car and the environment.
Pollution from cars is a real problem and, if cars only used half of the fuel, then this terrible pollution would be minimized.
Also, if the cars use half as much fuel, then our natural resources would be preserved and the cost of driving a car would be lessened.
Also, Driverless cars are safe.
The biggest problem with driverless cars is that it is difficult to enable them to manuever around unexpected problems like car accidents or construction areas.
However, driverless cars are now able to notify the driver when he or she needs to take over the controls in trecherous situations. This ability to notify the driver when needed will make driverless cars much safer.
If the car is unable to manuever through a situation safely, it will force the driver to take over.
This nullifys the arguement that driverless cars are not safe because it proves that driverless cars notify the driver at any unsafe moment and enable the driver to take over the controls of the car.
Otherwize, the driverless car can handle the terrain on its own.
Finally, driverless cars would increase the quality of life for the driver.
In tedious situations like a traffic jam, driving is boring and energy wasting.
However, driverless cars can take away the exhausting driving experience and allow the driver to relax.
For example, "Traffic Jam Assistant" will be very helpful to anyone in a traffic jam because it would take away the boredom of driving in a traffic jam.
Traffic Jam Assistant enables the car to handle driving functions up to 25 miles per hour.
This would be very helpful in a long and tedious traffic jam because one does not drive over 25 miles per hour in a traffic jam.
Also, if taxis could be driverless cars, the quality of life for the average citizen would increase.
Taxis would cost less money, they would be open more often, and they could take passengers to farther destinations.
This would dramatically increase the quality of life for all people and it would make owning a car almost antiquated.
this would provide much finacianal saving for the average person and it would provide a great deal of convinience for the average person as well.
In conclusion,
Driverless cars would be extremely beneficial.
They would increase efficiency, increase safety, and improve the quality of life for all people.
Driverless cars would drastically change the way people live.
If cars could drive themslelves, the quality of life would be incredibly increased for all people and the world would not be the same. | 5 |
a8193a3 | Imagine the World with driverless cars. Is creating driverless cars too expensive? How many mph will the driverless car be able to go? If technology fails and causes an accident, who will be responsable? The driver or the manufacture? Making driverless cars is not a good idea for the future.
Are driverless cars too expensive? Driverless cars would be too expensive to keep developing. Driverless cars would need a lot of technology for the roads and the car, and to create every piece of technology for each car would be expensive. In paragrah 3 the article stated "These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but the required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." If driverless cars worked well on smart-roads, will they work the same way on regular roads?
If the car is driverless, how many miles mer hour will the car be able to go? The auther states in paragrah 7 "Ther car can handle driving functions at speeds up tp 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." Will only going 25 mph slow up traffic? Slowing up traffic will interrupt the drivers daily life. The driver will have to begin leaving the house early so they will not get caught in traffic an so, they can make it on time, considering the car will only be going 25 miles mph. If the driver has to keep their hands on the wheel, is that really a driverless car?
Will making driverless cars change traffic laws? "Traffic laws are written with the assumtion that the only safer cars has a human driver in control at all times." If manufacturs create driverless, who is driving? The person behind the wheel or the car? If a persom gets into an accident no one will know who to blame, new laws will have to be created.
Making driverless cars are not a good idea because it is too expensive, cars can only go 25 mph, and if techonlogy was to fail and cause an acciednt, no one will know who to blame. | 3 |
a81b2e1 | Senator of Florida, im writing you today to address the issue about keeping the Electoral College or changing it to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. Let's start off, by pointing out that the Electoral College is an antique, and we should upgrade, also there could be many issues when using that method and many not wanted decisions can become official. Let me guide you through this important topic, and help you make this fair for everyone.
Like i pointed out before, the Electoral College is very old, Richard A. Posner stated " The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism" back then everyone was okay with not having a say on who runs our country, but now and days people want to be part of it and want to help decide and know that there opinion matters. With the Electoral College, the people don't make that decision, they choose electors to choose the president. It is not democratic and is also not fair or equal because only certain people are being heard. Our choice as a whole should matter more then the electors. (Richard A.Posner) " In 2000, when Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes." this is called the disaster factor and was the biggest election crisis in a century stated Bradford Plumer. Let's take a moment and let this sink in.
not only is this unfair but so many things can go wrong it. For example, the electors can always defy the will of people. Plumer also stated " back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kenennedy.( so that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy.) .... "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please..." As you can see, nothing is forcing the electors to vote for their party's candidate, this method is putting the decision and our future in their hands.
there is no other way around the fact that the Electoral College has to go, is unfair to the presidents and us, the people. everyone should be heard and not have to depend on anyones decision. I hope with this letter the debating stops and your not on the fence about what method should stick and your certain about why elections by popular vote should be our way of picking our presidents.
sinceresly, kim | 4 |
a81b2f2 | As a NASA scientist I know more about how the Face is not made from aliens. First off how would aliens create the face because they probably never seen a human. We never seen any evidence that supports that aliens are real. So how would aliens create the face if we don't have any evidence that they are real?
The face is made from rocks. Rocks like from Mars. The face is just a natural landform nothing else. Since the Face is made from Rocks and is on Mars it is called a mesa. Its basically a huge rock formation eveyone would say, even I would say it. There might have been an ancient civillization there, but we are still finding out new stuff everyday.
Yes the face has been a pop icon. It has appeared in many books, magazines even radio talk shows. Some people even think that it is possible that there is somehow life there on Mars.
You shouldn't believe that aliens really did make the face. We don't have any proof that aliens are even real. So we can't say that aliens made the face. Since there are humans are Earth then there could probably once have been humans on Mars, but we have no clue at all. So far its just a natural landform since we have no proof its made from humans or even possible aliens. | 3 |
a81bb80 | Limiting car usage can seem like a far fetched idea, but in reality, it helps us more than hurts us. Limiting the usage of cars helps reduce pollution, reduce smog, and reduce the amount of obese people in the world. By doing so, it's not a bad idea to limit car usage.
Pollution, the cause of the ice caps melting, is an ongoing battle that we seem to be losing. As it states in Source One, "Passenger cars are responsible for twleve percent of the green house gas emissions in Europe and up to fifty percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States". If the cities in the United States had these limitations then our percentage woul rapidly decline. In Europe, they have already taken notice of their percentages of pollution and have started to have experimental towns in which there are car limitations put in place. In the town of Vauban, as written in Source One, "There are only two places to park, the large garages at the edge of the development, where a car owner buys a space for fory thousand dollars,along with a home". This is a good way to get rid of all the pollution, by having no where to park and if they want to park, they will have to pay for their space. It also states "As a result, seventy percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and fifty-seven percent sold a car to move there". The people that live there most of them are carless so they don't spend their money on a parking spot, meanwhile some people sold their cars to either to avoid paying for a spot, or to join in the experiment of limiting the usage of cars.
Smog, is a citafect of to much pollution in one area. Smog has gotten so bad that Paris, accordinto Souce Two, enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air. The ban was partial as in the article it says " on Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a twenty-two euro fine (thirty-one dollars) and the next day it would apply to the odd numbered license plates". This caused almost four thousand drivers to be fined and twenty-seven cars were impounded, acoording to the article. Smog is a problem that can be fixed just like how Paris got rid of their smog by car usage limits.
Car limitations don't just help the enviroment they can help us as well. Humans have become very obese in the last fifty years then they have been in any other time period. You can blame the fast food, but you can eat fastfood and stay healthy. Car limitations make you walk or ride a bike which can get you healthier. I'm not saying go out and be Usain Bolt or Lance Armstong but it can help people to be healthier at the same time as being helpful to the enviroment.
Car usage limitations are a great idea, although most people wouldn't enjoy it. It helps reduce pollution which is the biggest threat globaly. It helps dissolve smog from highly car populated areas. The limits can even help humans by having them ride bikes or walk. The thought of limitations are not accepted by most people but if this is what we must do to keep the earth healthy then we have to do it. | 4 |
a81dab5 | The use of this technology in the classroom would be valuable. It would help keep students happy. Teachers would know if students are enjoying their lesson or if they should change it up so students are happier with it. Students will be more engaged in classes. I will being by talking about student emotions.
Firstly in school students emotions are always changing. The article said," A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." In a school classroom students are always going from happy to sad to bored. So if a computer can detect when that is happening and can tell the teacher to fix it then students would be happier. The article also said,"Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective humand instructor." If the lesson is changed until a student is happy with it they will undersatnd the subject more and get better grades. It could also be useful to teachers.
Another way this could be helpful in classes is by helping teachers. If a teacher is informed that some students aren't happy with the way the teacher is teaching they could change the way they teach. A good teacher would be able to use the data the computer sends them by giving those students who aren't focused as much in class more attention. Teachers could also use it to help them make better lessons that all the students in their classrooms will enjoy. The article says,"They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one." So if this technology can detect fake smiles teachers will know students are really happy and can fix their lessons to make students happy. I will now go to my final reason why this technology would be useful in a classroom.
A final way this would be useful is by getting students more active in the classroom and want to participate more. If a student is enjoying a subject they will want to answer questions in class because they know the answers and are confident about their answers. If teachers were using lessons students enjoyed and wanted to listen to they will become more confident in that subject and want to be active in classroom talks. Students being more involved would make school less boring and make the atmosphere less stressful. Students wouldn't be scared to go to school because they don't know if they will understand the material. They wouldn't be worried because this technology will tell their teachers they are confused and their teachers could help them.
In conclusion this technology would be useful in the classroom for a couple of reasons. This technology would help keep students happy, let teachers know if they need to change their lesson, and get students more involved in the classroom and more confident in their schoolwork. | 5 |
a81eb53 | If you think about it, going on a ship could be dangerous. You could end up risking your life. Do you know how many ship wrecks there have been. That could be bad when you only graduating in high school. You still have, 70 more years of your life to explore, discover, try, and build.
And maybe he could do it but sleeping on a boat? Won't that be uncofortable. I've never slept on a boat but going through all the waves, the boat moving side to side, the sound of waves hitting the boat. You wouldn't get some good sleep.
Some people get sick on the boats. And you have to go through that every single day. The article said it took about two weeks to get across the pacific ocean from the eastern coast of the united states and a month to get to China. That's like sitting in vomet for a month.
What would you have to eat every day. You can't keep food on a boat for a month. The boat would only be filled with food. Unless your going to have the same thing every day. That would be boring. I wouldn't do that!
There had to be a rainy day or even a storm at one point in that month. What would you do all day? You have no internet, you can't really play unless your playing cards. If its raining then it's going to be very slippery. So you would have to stay in place for a while. And when the rain stops, you still need to be cautios that you don't slip
It says in this article that, Luke had to serve the night watching for animals. Will you get any sleep? Will you fall asleep on the job. What i'm trying to say is you need sleep. I couldn't stay up all night and then stay up all day. I would have to take a nap.
Now the reasons I would join the ship. It says that Luke had fun on the boat, the cowboys played volleyball games. They also had table tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling,and games also helped pass the time.
If I had the choice to become a Seagoing Cowboy, I wouldn't go. I would miss all my friends and family. And yes you would have a lot of fun but, you couldn't see your friends. You couldn't see the people you wanted to see. And i'm happy where I live and where I go to school. I never want to leave. But for Luke it was something I guess he wanated to do. He said, he knew its was a opportunity of a life time. Luke cound not say no. | 2 |
a826aa8 | If we were to limit our usage of our motor vehile's we'd salvage & try to repair our earth's polution problem. If we could switch over from using cars to bikes or any way of transportation not run on gas or anything that cause's damage to our O-zone , then i believe people would become healthier & more fit from the exercise of getting from one destination to another. Using motor vehicles is a lazy way of getting from place to place. but if we can comit to not using them or even just some days you dont drive then I believe we could help today's obieceity atleast a little bit.
If we could even limit driving in the big rural city's where everything is closer than in urban areas. I understand using motor vehicles to get from one far destination to another but their & back every single day is just destroying our earth. Polution is another effect driving does to the earth. In the German suburbs they have given up cars , people could learn some things about them. Their putting in effort to help save our earth from polution & other harmful things that come from driving so much for decades & decades.
I would love to live in a healthy & clean environment if we could work together to stop polution & damage to our O-zone perminantly. I love my life & would not want to end it any time soon. We were given life to enjoy ourselfs & be happy. Not to destroy oursleves along with it. Driving only causes polution & damage their are people that live in such poluted area's they cant leave their house because its bad that theyll get extremely sick. if we could chane that not only our world would be better but civilation as well. | 2 |
a8294d1 | its it just erosion in the planit there might of ben a metior strike in those places and it just looks like it is a face or it might of ben wator from millions of years a go that eroded the face of the planit and made it look like it had a face but i think it was water or a meator stirike on the planit and not alieans if it was alieans they would not be sending people to that planit beacause they would kill them oand why would alieans want a place that has no water and noother living things on the planit its is a daed planit there is nothing on it be sides dirt wand gasses and maybe just maybe some plants or trees baried in the dirt of the planit and alieans would of made a bass on the planit and we have found nothing of that sorts and they would of never told uss a bout that planit in the first place if there was alieans | 1 |
a82b5ef | The Electoral College should be not be abolished and the government should not change to election by popular vote for the President of the United States. The Electoral College requires the presidential candidate to have a trans-regional appeal, it produces a clear winner and avoids run-off elections, and the Electoral College allows people in swing states to be more thoughtful and choose wisely because the popular vote could be in their hands.
In paragraph nineteen of the article
In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President , it states, "The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal. No region (South, Northeast, etc.) has enough electoral votes to elect a president." This means that the favorite candidate of a particular region has no reason to campaign too much in those states because that candidate doesn't gain many more votes. Any candidate with only regional appeal is unlikely to be successful because the people of the other region feel that their interests will be overlooked by the president.
The Electoral College decreases the amount of pressure of a run-off election. In paragraph twenty-two of the article
In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President, it states, "The Electoral College avoids the problemm of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast." So if both presidential candidates receive an equal percent of of popular votes, the Electoral College's number of votes could be the "game changer." The number of votes in the Electoral College produces a clear winner. If there wasn't an Electoral College, then there would have to be a recount of votes and one vote could change the entire election. This could cause chaos in swing states because of the one vote of someone that might not even care who wins the election.
Based on many elections, the Electoral College creates more thoughtful voters in swing states. Those people know that the power of turning an election around is in their hands, so they must use that knowledge wisely, not recklessly. People in non-swing states will vote on a candidate that their peers like or that they heard is "the best" even though it may actually be a choice reconsidered two years into the winning candidates presidency. In paragraph twenty of the article
In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President , it states, "Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign, to really listen to the competeing candidates, knowing that they are going to decide the election." The most careful voters should be the ones to decide because they are the ones receiving the most attention by candidates trying to persuade them to vote for them.
Overall, the Electoral College should not be abolished and the government should not change to election by popular vote for the President of the United States. The Electoral College doesn't allow a presidential candidate to have a single regional appeal, it produces a clear and fair winner and avoids run-off elections, and the Electoral College creates more thoughtful and careful voters, because when you actually think choices through in life, it could make a tremendous impact on yourself everyone around you. | 5 |
a82cc2a | There is no doubt that our future that beholds us is headed into big changes with technology. We have already morphed into a society where technology is such a big hand on how we live now. Driverless cars are coming and they are coming for the better.
Driverless cars could help us in many aspects. Some being as simple as less crashes and others being as big as how to prevent those crashes. Under specific conditions, Google has had cars that could drive independently since 2009. Although not being truly driverless, their cars have driven more then half a million miles without a crash. Googles modified car uses lots of position-estimating sensors that can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine. This would allow far better control than a human driver could manage alone.
In conclusion, i am in support for driverless cars. Not only do they have a bright spot for the future but even at this point in time they could help us change the world for the better. | 2 |
a82d3dc | Are you for driverless cars? Did you think they are safe? Would you fell safe in a driverless car?
I am not for driverless because at any given time they could just shut down. Yes they may shutdown with a human controling them but you would have more control of the car. Wrecks can easliy happen with you not having control as much as if you were controling it.
In paragraph 7, it states "none of the cars are completly driverless".
In the text it states that "the car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sures the driver keeps hands on the stiring wheel." You still would have to pay attention and use human skills to drive the car. So is the car really worth spending a lot of money for?
For the people who is for driverless cars, would you feel safe in one knowing at anytime the driverless mode could overload causing wrecks leading to injuries, severe injuries, or maybe even death? Although it is a possibility that wrecks could happen to a human controled car but you have more control. Would you really want to spend a lot of money on a car that is not even completly driverless? | 2 |
a82d5e7 | About twenty five years ago, the Face was first discovered by Viking 2 while it was circling Mars taking pictures. NASA got the pictures and released them days after the mysterious rock was found. The Face settles in the region of Cydonia on Mars.
People think that the Face is created by aliens because the rock formation looked like an Egyptian Pharaoh; however, it is not. Arguements about the Face have been going on since the first picture was released. I'm here to tell you that the Face is 100% a natural landform.
When people argue about the miraculous rock formation, they say that there was or is life on Mars and that the aliens built the Face because it appears to have a mouth, nose, and eyes.
Some questions we get a lot are "How did it get there?", "Why does it have a human face?", and "How did it naturally get prominent face features of a human?" We do not 100% know how the Face got its human feature, but through all of the tests we have done on Mars, there are no aliens found and that the Face is just a fantasic natural made wonder of space.
When I get more informtion about the Face, I will certainally let you know! | 2 |
a82dbe9 | Driverless cars are the future for the world. There is a need for driverless cars that is slowly being filled by prominent car manufacturers. Although the government makes assumptions that there is no safe car without a human driver, the steps being taken towards a future with driverless cars are showing a different alternative to human drivers.
Many of these driverless cars still require a form of human drivers to guide vehicles through special situations such as road blocks or work zones however, there are now many driverless vehicles that can transport a passenger without any problems. As these vehicles become more popular, affordable, and practical in everyday life it will cause a change in the driver laws for human controlled and driverless cars. With projected release dates for these modern vehicles approaching so fast it is now time for us to begin thinking about the future. Driverless cars are the future.
There is a future for driverless cars and that future is now. Driverless cars have the ability to change lives positively and remove many of the dangerous actions we face now in driving. There will be no more fear of texting and driving or an adult not being able to focus on the road while checking their child. No more fear of drunk drivers or operators under the influence. Driverless cars are more important to the safety of our country than many realize.
So let's begin to take the initiative to bring driverless cars to the forefront of technology and make these technologies accessible to the public. There is a great need for these products that must be filled as soon as possible. Driverless cars are the future and that future is now the present. | 3 |
a82df4d | Cars in this century are being band for multiple reasons. To most people, cars are a hastle and a pain to deal with. Advantages to limiting car usage are the less parking areas and more community buildings, the reduction of smog/polution, and more exercise for Americans. Most cars are getting better with the limitation on gas and more on battery, but we should still limit cars in general.
If you walk along the streets in New York, you will see that along every sidewalk there is a parking strip and around every corner there is a parking lot. What if those parking spots were gone? We could have larger and more store then we have now, plus we could have larger sidewalks to bike and walk on. In Vauban, Germany, generally street parking, driveways, and home garages are forbidden. The house owners are allowed to own cars, but transportation is limited due to the limited parking areas. Suburban inhabitants mainly use a source of public transportaion because of how cheap and easy it is.
Smog is a fume that comes from cars and lingers around that area. It makes the whole area fill up with gas that it looks like a huge fog bank. China is the worst contributor to smog due to all its factories which make cars. Paris is trying to limit the amount of smog in their area so they restricted the use of cars for five days. After the five days, Paris cleared up and the people there were able to see a lot clearer.
America is known to be a fat country. All the people in American sit around and eat everything, are really lazy, and rely to much on machines. If we cut down on machines, including cars, a whole lot of Americans would lose a lot of weight. Larger sidewalks would help a whole lot for bikes. Bikes would give you exercise and help you be self relient instead on relying on the car. A professor at The University of Michigan has a son who lives is San Fransisco, who he says has a car but never uses it. He always uses the public transportation, and why's that? More than likely it is becuase in San Fransisco the traffic changes rapidly and you don't know if you will hit bad traffic. Also, San Fransisco is a beautiful place to be, and he may want to enjoy the view in that area.
Cars have taken over the United States in many ways that we know about but don't care or don't do anything about it.. America and everwhere else could have a lot more stores and get more exercise if parking lots, parking spots along the sidewalk, and some cars are gone. Smog is not a good gas to have lingering around where a whole bunch of people are walking and living. Cars are great, no question, we can live a healthier life if we didnt have them. | 4 |
a82e4d8 | In the article ¨Making Mona Lisa Smile,¨ the author tells us that with technology that we have today they can see her have a full smile. The way she looks tell people that she not to comforable about something. With the special work of Computers they can change they ways she feels and look. The three reasons about how to ¨Make Mona Lisa Smile¨ is facial expressions, emotions and 3-D computers.
What so wonder well know about Mona Lisa is her face. That is, hiding how she feels by putting on a fake smile. She shows tons of facial expressions to show people how she feels. Most of it is happines by 83 percent, 9 percent disgusted,6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry. Seeing the different characteristics that she has of facial muscle. While often shows vary of expressions that preforms a persons feelings. The reason Leonardo da Vinci´s painted Mona Lisa,he had studied human anatomy and convey speficc emotions.
Seeing that their are six basic emotions like happines, surprised, anger, disgust, fear and sadness. Using those to associated every characteristic of the facial muscles and using them on Mona Lisa. With new software it can recongize Mona Lisa emotions. Which can actually calculate emotions of others.
An by now, knowing that we have new techonlogy like 3-D printers they can give Mona Lisa emotions.
The computer can construt a 3-D modle with all 44 muscles that must be moved like human muscles. The creator of FACS (Facial Action Coding System) is by Dr. Paul Eckman. Which Computers can give the a certain look or emotion. The software stores similar anatomical information called electronic code. But only speacil computers can make people have emotions and faical features, not our normal PC at home.
The way people express their feelings and emotions, can show everyone how you feel about certain things. People who will try to hid their emotions are very fond of themselves for not expressing it. | 1 |
a82eb41 | While humanity is doing just fine with how we use cars now,driverless cars are apart of our not too distant future. Personally,I'm neutral in this argument but if this new way of using our vehicles advances our humanity I'm all for it. People these days are reckless when it comes to driving and so maybe a car that does the driving will in a way stop all the accidents and reckless driving. Driverless cars could reduce hit and runs but drivers are still needed in certain situations. What's the point of driverless cars if there's still a need for a driver.
Driverless cars would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer better transportation than a bus. These cars could possibly change the world and advance technology. These driverless cars are helpful but need a lot of sensors,a GPS receiver,and laser beams to form a constant update of the 3-D model of the car's surroundings. Sensors are needed for these unique cars because they advance the car to mimic the skill of humans at the wheel and respond to the danger or something out of control. These sensors give the car info or a warning to cause the car to apply brakes and reduce power from the engine. The sensors give the special car better responses and more control than a human driver could manage alone.
These advanced cars are amazing but are exspensive and a bit of a risk. None of the cars are completely driverless. These cars can steer,accelerate,and brake,but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills. So like navigating through work zones or around accidents. The driver must stay alert and ready to take over when the time comes. This is what I mean when I say what's the point of driverless cars if we're still basically driving the car. I do like how Gm has developed the driver's seat to vibrate when the car is in danger of backing into an object because of my personal experience with backing my first car into a fire hydrent.
To conclude,Manufacturers are considering adding cameras to most of the cars so the drivers are remaining focused ont eh road. While the driver watches the road,the car watches the driver. Humanity needs to experience new things and give this new way of driving a try. Driving laws focus more on safety. Traffic laws state that the only safe car there is has a human driver in control at all times. These driverless cars need to be proven safe and reliable. Humanity needs to consider that if an accident occurs who is at fault the driver or the manufacturer of the technology. The future is looking very bright,the best has yet to come. Humanity is growing and advancing more and more everyday. | 3 |
a82fa5f | Can this new technology called Facial Action Coding System or FACS help? Yes, it can help because it can identify a human's emotions. Some don't understand it but it actually could help. the way it can help is by helping our kids when they are in school.
Hold on, how can this help our kids while there at school? It is able to help them because it can tell how someone is feeling while they are learning. "A classrom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts." "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."(Dr. Huang) In other words it can make something they don't understand easier, but without feeling dumb in front of there peers by asking the teacher if they can explain it in a easier way in class.
To sum this up, the way it can help is by helping our kids in school. It can detect how they are feeling while they are doing there work. It also can make it easier for them to do there school work if they don't want to ask the teacher how to do or so they can understand it better. | 2 |
a830f55 | Dear Senator,
I know that you have many issues to think about and havee a lot of decisions to make, but I think it the subject of the Electoral College is a very improtant subject for you to ponder. The Electoral College needs to be changed, we need to vote for the presidency with the popular vote. I believe that the Electoral college needs to be taken away because it's not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College, the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate, and it is a very confusing process for people to understand.
First, the Electoral College should be changed because it is not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College. The people ar evoting for the president, but not really. They are actually voting for a slate of electors, who then choose what canidate there electoral votes should go to. The whole point of a democracy is to let the people of the country have a say in who is in charge, but with the Electoral College this is not happening. The people are saying who they want for president but if the slate of electors does not agree, then the votes go the other way. This was expressed in "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" by Bradford Plummer. In the passage he says, "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for aslate of elctors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for insatnce, and wanted to vote for John Kerrry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry. On the off chance that those electors won the statewide election, they would go to Congress and Kerry would get 34 electoral votes."
In addition, the Electoral College should be abolished because the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate. The Legislature is technically responsible for picking electors and theycould very well pick electors that are all against a certain candidate. Everyone says the system is so strong but is it really? The fact that a group of people opposing one candidate could be the electors for that state and could totally changed the votes doesn't make the system look so strong. Plummer adressed this situation in his passage, he stated, "Back in 1960, segregationista in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors wiht new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (so that the popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy)."
Finally, the Electoral college system needs to be taken away because it is very confusing. The whole system is just a jumble of different things. There are so many different steps and processes that tend to confuse the voters. When the voters get confused they often end up voting for the wrong candidate or making a mistake. If the voting system was just, the voters voted for who they pleased, then the votes were counted, then all the votes from states are added together, and then whoever had the most votes won, the whole thing would just be much easier. I belive that when the situation is as impportant as voting for our president, it should be as easy and flawless as possible. For example, when I was in seventh grade, I learned about the Electoral College in civics class. learing about the Electoral College was one of the hardest and most complicated thing I learned that year. How are people supossed to vote, if they have no idea how the system works?
In conclusion, I believe that the electoral college needs to be abolished because it's not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College, the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate, and it is a very confusing process for people to understand.
Thank you foy your time,
PROPER_NAME | 5 |
a83390c | Do you ever wonder why Earth is polluted? Well Earth is polluted because the amount of car ussage their is in Earth. If we can lower the percentage of people using cars we can stop air pollution. One reason for not using cars is that you can save money by not buying gas. Another reason is that you can walk and it is a great way to exercise. Last but not least is you can stop air pollution.
If we can lower the percentage of people using cars we can stop air pollution. One reason is you can save money by not buying gas. What I mean by this is that gas now a days are pricy. So when your not using your car you save money. Also gas is what causes air pollution. Gas stays in the air and kills our environment like our oxygen and trees etc .
If we can lower the percentage of people using cars we can stop air pollution. One reason is that you can and it is a great way to exercise. What i mean by this is that some people are lazy to exercise so people just sit down. But with out their car they'll have to walk to their destination. Also when you walk alot you loose caleries and you start getting muscles on your legs.
If we can lower the percentage of people using cars we can stop air pollution. One reason is you can stop air pollution. What I mean by this is that the gas that we put in our cars goes out in the air. With air pollution it can make us loose our oxygen. Also it destroys our trees that we need for oxygen. That is why we need to the percentage of car usage.
In conclusion, if we can lower the percentage of people using cars then we can stop air pollution. One reason for not using cars is that you can save money by not buying gas. Another reason is that you can walk and its a great way to exercise. Last but not least is you can stop air pollution. | 3 |
a83b54b | My reasons to join the Seagoing Cowboys are listed below. You should join and meet new people you never knew about. It would be a great story to tell kids. You would feel good about helping people and be happy that when they have children it was because you had saved the parents of the kids.
You should join the Seagoing Cowboys because it is an oppurtunity of a lifetime and can change many peoples mind. You will get to see things you never get to see. Everyone can be able to help people in trouble and meet other people different from you.
If you join the Seagoing Cowboys you will know new things and learn new skills. You can also teach them your language and learn theirs. You will also be able to do things that you never done before.
When you join and go on trips, you can do cool things to use as a conversation starter. You can also learn stories and legends from around the world and tell it to your hometown. You can make people envious and make them wanna go the trip as well. You can also speak of things you never thought of doing and did it.
So in the end, you have learned about why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys from Luke's side. I talked about how it is an oppurtunity of a lifetime,how you can learn new things,and how you can talk about your amazing trip and incounter with people. This would be an amazing oppurtunity. Saving people like that with no pay is good thing to do. | 2 |
a83ba4f | Technology able to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because we could detect different type of moods even by making faces that wouldn't necessarily indicate a certain mood just by looking at their face. This sort of technology can benefit in more way's as well such as helping video game designers make their graphics more realistic and having characters resemble actual and more expressive moods.
Reading students emotional expressions can determine how they could possibly feel and perhaps help them out if they're feeling low or having a bad day. A simple computer program could tell if a student is in need of help by determining if the student is in a state of confusion or stress. Then if the student is confused or in need of help then the lesson could be modified and altered to be made more understandable for the student. The student could also be helped by a digital instructor that would trigger when the student is confused. Technology like this could give students better understanding of whatever is being taught knowing there are students that are too shy or scared to ask questions it could finally help them learn without having any fear of raising their hand and causing attention.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System can really benefit students all around the world who would use it and prepare and give students more understanding in our future causing it to be brighter and more vivid ,therefore, the Facial Action Coding System is a valuable piece of technological advancment that could impact our future in a positive manner. | 3 |
a840d69 | Driverless cars do seem like something nice to have, but I don't think they are a good idea. I am against them because technology can always go wrong somehow, people don't actually need them, and if there's nothing wrong with cars right now then we shouldn't have to change them.
First of all, technology can always go wrong. Nothing in the world is perfect. There are always going to be mistakes. Technology can go wrong somehow and cause even more problems. Driverless cars are being invented so that driving will be easier and safer. Even though that's the idea, they might just end up causing more problems. For example, what if the car glitches and doesn't notify the driver that they need to be driving the car? This can cause a crash.
Second, people doesn't really need driverless cars. They will just be a luxury item that would be nice to have. Cars are meant to help people get around places faster. It is a humans responsibility to be alert and cautious when driving. We can't always count on others to be cautious when driving a regular car, so we won't be able to trust that they will be paying attending in a driverless car.
Lastly, if there's nothing wrong, why change it? There isn't anything wrong with the way cars work. If there isn't anything wrong with them, then why are people trying to change them? For example, if you have a certain way you study and it helps you to do good on tests, are you going to study a different way? Probably not. This is because there is already a way that is effective for you.
Overall, I don't like the idea of driverless cars. I don't like them because something could go wrong, people should be more responsible, and there's nothing wrong with cars so we shouldent be trying to change them. This is why I am against driverless cars. | 3 |
a8444c3 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author explained many reasons why studying Venus would be helpful and advantageous to us as humans and scientists. Especially since Venus is the planet most like Earth, this would benefit Earth's knowledge at how we could study and explore Venus and grasp the research it would reveal. In Paragraph 8, the aouthor wrote, "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value..." This quote means that Venus is valuable, yet challenges face the journey.
In Paragrpah 4, the author compared how Venus was like Earth a long time ago. The author described how Venus seemed to possess analogous features to our planet, like valley, mountains, and craters, except the long time frames to Venus are a crucial consideration. " The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable...," though in Paragraph 5 the authour explained how NASA had a possible solution for the problem of traveling safely and Venus's hostile conditions.
NASA introduced an idea of a blimp-like vehicle hovering over Venus; the vehicle would remain floating above Venus's surface to remain away from the storms. Even though Venus has unavoidable dangers, for exmaple, the erupting volcanoes and powerful earthquakes explained in Paragraph 3, we will come prepared for the challenge.
Paragraph 7 states that NASA is working on different approaches as to how to study Venus so far off the ground. Safe in the hovercraft and away from the high pressure and heat and sporadic lightning strikes, scientists discoverd there was no possible way to collect the samples of rock, gas, or any component of Venus without getting out. The scientists sought to conduct a mission to bust the bubble of safety dispute the risks. Simplified electronics made of silicon carbide were tested to have withstood the chaotic surface of Venus for up to three weeks. Mechanical computers would also serve an important role now, just like in the 1940s, by making calculations with gears and levers that do not require electronics at all.
Overall, the point made across by the author of this passage was that even though studying Venus will definitely bring problems and challenges, there are loopholes and many ways to solve the solutions. Science is worth the risks, especially since it is for our planet and can better our understanding, so finding ways around the problem, and even facing them head on are our only solutions better comprehend Venus, and other planets in our solar system as well. | 4 |
a84d1dc | The author states that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The first reason that supports this idea is by stating that Venus has caught the attention of astronomers because it was once a planet like earth. Second, another reason that supports this idea is NASA wants to have a better insight of the ground conditions of Venus and studying them better. The third reason is NASA has been trying to invent a way for humans or technology to survivethe conditions in Venus and studying Venus more without risking anyones life.
The first reason that supports the idea that studying Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers it presents is the author states that Venus has caught the attention of many astronomers because long ago Venus was a planet like earh. Venus "was covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth" stating that Venus was a planet that had lots of different forms of life and that astronomers are amazed and are wanting to discover more about Venus." Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel," this quote states that Venus is the planet that can be the nearest to us and that it would benefit NASA a lot because although this planet is pretty dangerous to be in it would help NASA learn and discover things about Venus and how to be there without risking their lifes.
The second reason that supports this idea is NASA wants to have a better insight on ground conditions and studying them better. " More imporantly, reseachers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from distance. Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to undersatnd Venus..." this quote states that NASA has realized that they can't get simples of any kind of living life in Venus that could help invent a way to be there without risking anyones life therefore they haven't invented the technology to do that but they are working on it althought they know there are risks. "Many researchers are working on innovations that could allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus" the quote here states again that researchers are working on finding technolgy that will allow their machines to last longer in Venus so that they can see and study for themselves Venus but are they are also cautions that sending those machines could maybe not work.
The thrid reason that supports this idea is NASA is taking different approaches to studying and learning aboust Venus. " Some simplifed electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested ina chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions,"
the quote here states that NASA is coming up with new inventions to study Venus without taking the risk of going actually there. Its also states that they had invented a kind of electronic that will last there up to three weeks in Venus. "Another project is loking back to an old technology called mechanical computers," the quotes states that NASA is looking back to technology that was used during world war 2 could be useful for studying Venus.
In concludsion the author supports the idea that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers real well by giving examples. Even though there are many risks into going to Venus there is many reasons why to take those risks. Astronmers could study more about Venus and its similarites to earth. It would help NASA discover new forms of life. It would benefit NASA by studying more about the ground conditions in Venus. It would help NASA work on taking different approaches to studying Venus. Instead of just sending a person to Venus and risking their life NASA will have technology that will be able to resist the conditions of Venus and be better prepared. | 4 |
a84d37f | In the exepet to support his clam the author explains all the problems and things wrong with exploring Venus then goes into explaning ways that'll help fix those problembs. But his plain back fired because it just doesn't at all seem like it'll ever happen any time soon.
In paragragh three it is explaining why it's so dangeros to go. it is 97% CO2 in the air, the tempertatur is over 800 degres Fahrenheit, the air has asid in it, and the presher would crush a sumberen which is made for high persesher. All of paragragh three just doesn' help his case at all.
In paraghrah four the author then goes intpo how its better to move ingto Venus rather then to mars bc of time it takes to get to mars. Well if Venus is so dangarus then why even think about ging there. Nasa already has been on Mars abd its the safest to go on. The author should have explainded more reasons as to why its better to go to Venus then mars.
However the author did explain ways as to deal with those problems that Venus prsents to us. on of whitch is how if the drones fly higher then the presher is lower as well as the temp. Buthe then goes into how the drown still can't take video or pictures of the planit becouse the desity of the ari is so bad below its unfotoghraghiball. which defets the point of adding that in if its usles. its just nonsene thats not needed to help his claim.
Thought that part was unneeded in paraghragh seven it talks about an idea of a new drown that'll be able to stand three weeks on the grown on Venus. That there is good evidenst to support his claim.
To conclud the author may have given all the eviens he could but most of it was not good evidents to support his claim of going to Venus even thought the dangarus. | 3 |
a850453 | Dear Senator,
I feel like we should keep the Electoral College because, "A disput over the outcome of a electoral college vote is possible but, it is less likely than a dispute over the popular vote". This means that that people would argue over the electoral college vote and who they voted for but but people most likely would not argue over the popular vote. They have done this before in 2012's election prosses with Obama and Romney. The second reason is that everyone will have to put ads up because not just one region of votes will make them president they are going to need to advertise everywhere.
The third reason is that "the winner-take-all method of awarding Electoral votes induces the canidates". This means to me that the method helps the canidates so they can win easily. The fourth and final reason is that the big staes get more votes because they have more people in there country so the automatically get more attention from the president. It is also easier for them to get what they want meaning they can reallly like choose any president they want and its a high percenatge that they will get that president.
Those are only some of the reasons that i think we should keep the Electoral College. To me I feel it would be easier to just do this other than count all the votes frome every single voter. Besides what other brillant plan can you come up with that is easier than this? | 3 |
a851540 | The Electoral College should be abolished. It is "unfair, outdated, and irrational". It just makes so much more sense to go with the popular vote from everyone. Even Bob Dole agreed to this and said "Abolish the Electoral College!" Most people just despise it anyways, let's just get rid of it already.
Let's face it, if you have a vote, it would go to the slate of electors who in turn, vote for the president. The worst thing about it is that sometimes they can't even control their own vote. What use is that? It doesn't make sense if they can't even control something that they have such as a vote. Also some voters get confused and don't know what to vote for though. Instead, they can vote for the wrong candidate. This is why we should get rid of the Electoral College. It's just so unfair to other voters that they can't have their way because the others get confused. This can let to political disasters and events that will make people riot over a mistake that they made. They need to learn that the Electoral College needs to go.
First off, the founding fathers established the Electoral College in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. It was was founded all the way back then, it must surley be outdated and we should really try to go by our modern intelligent ways now. They believed the "winner takes all" system that just doesn't make sense anymore if you can just vote on your own and when the President wins, it will just be the popular vote from overall everyone.
Secondly, the people in Congress are well educated indeed, but do we really need their seperate votes? Can we just skip that? We are already getting the "popular vote of qualified citizens" (which is good). All these electors are just so unneccesary when it comes down to it. I understand only a few people still want the Elelctoral College in place, but in all honesty, it is only what they have been taught and they think it is the right thing. There are "538" electors in the Electoral College and they need a mojority of "270" electoral votes. This seems far too complicated just for voting on a President. All we need is the popular vote. There has even been a case in the 2000's that is called "Disaster Factor". Americans are even lucky that this event isn't the most that can potentially happen with the Electoral College in place. We should avoid this political disaster at all costs!
In the end, we should all finally understand that the Electoral College is outdated, unfair, and irrational. It was made long, long ago and we have a better way to vote other than dealing with the mess of electors getting confused and the people in Congress dealing with it all together. Just go by the popular vote from the people and we would be good to go. Better modern than old fashioned, right? | 4 |
a853f66 | As the world begins to grow and expand, many people have found that living without cars can be more beneficial. Cities and suburbs around the world, have found that reducing car usage has a grest number of advantages. This is reducing pollution, and is reducing stress. The world is shifting into a new way of life, not involving cars.
Cars release a large amout of greenhouse gases into the atmospere every single day, and this is harming the environment. Experts explain that, "efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes" (Rosenthal), have been taking place in suburban communities in Germany. This has resulted with a, "12% of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50% in car-intensive areas in the United States" (Rosenthal). Also, Paris has seen near-record amounts of pollution and smog in the city, so the global city has limited motorists' driving on two days of the week, Monday and Tuesday. The climate in Paris, "[causes] the warm layer of air to trap car emissions" (Duffer), thoughout the atmospere in the city, but the limitation on motorists at the beginning of the week has allowed the smog to clear up.
Helping the environment is not the only benefit of reducing car usage, yet it can also relieve stress in your eveeryday life. There is no need to stress out over traffic, finding somewhere to park, or even paying the expences that come with owning a car. In Germany, most residents don't own cars, and Heidrun Walter explained that she is, "much happier this way" (Rosenthal), because she doesnt have to worry about traffic. She has enjoyed a healthier life style that is stress free, by walking or biking to the places she needs to be. In Colombia, there is a day that citizens will not use cars, once a year. Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza agrees that, "it's a good opportunity to take away stress" (Selsky). There is no need to worry about rush hour, or other traffic.
Others don't see the advantages of reducing car usage. Delivery companies complain about the loss in revenue, yet they aren't thinking about the benefits. They can save their employees from stressing out, or even help the environment. Reducing car usage would be a huge cultural shift, that has many advantages. | 3 |
a8543d2 | Self driving cars was once thought of as nearly impossible, so was smart watches, virtual gaming, etc. The idea of cars that limit the drivers responsibilty of controlling the wheel is very interesting and fascinating because not only can it be a fun way to drive it could potientally, if done right, be a lot safer for the roads we drive on today.
There is no doubt that this tactic would make driving more excitng but there are questions to have to be answered and tooken care of in order for this idea to be as succesful as it can. Some of these questions include, "How much would these cars cost not only to sell but to be produced?" or "How will the cars function in diffrent types of weather?" things in which we as consumers need to know upon purchasing. The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming." also introduces the idea that many potential lawsuits could happen if the driver gets into an accident by saying "...new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the
case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" (9). So laws will have to be found and companies may have to pay more money to produce but in the near future we should see driverless cars and be used to seeing them like smartphones or smartwatches.
After all, the advancement of technology has given us a lot of things in the past that are used in peoples every day lives today, so maybe Driverless cars are the next big thing? Only time and the continued advancement of technology can tell but we have to start now to make what seems impossible a reality in the near future. | 3 |
a85b3a1 | Before reading this passage, I had no idea of anything being trully driverless. I couldn't imagine a world with driverless cars, but i guess it's going to happen sooner or later. I think that it is a big step in the industrial world, but I don't think it's practicle for day to day life because it is dangerous, it will cost a great amount of money from who know's where if the government funds it, and it will cause a lot of problems between the manufacturer and the costomer.
My first reasoning for this project to be dangerous is because no one knows how long the computer inside can stand doing all these things for the human driver. The driver might not know what's really going on with the car or how to use it. Something may happen between the computer in the car and the driver wanting to drive it. The driver may be incapable to drive a such advanced car and might not know what to do in a dangerous situation that might occur. Thousands of bad things can happen with this new invention. The computer may go dead and the driver or passenger may get hurt badly, and this goes for my third point.
The cost of these new cars has to be very expensive. If this does take off and is a very popular thing, the more of these cars that are made, the more money will have to be used to make them. If the government goes for them and tries to fund and support them, then the citizens of this country may have to pay a great amount of tax dollors to support the making of all of these expensive cars. If people are not happy about this happening, and it does, and their money is going to that cause, then more problems will arise from that. I think that would be last thing that anyone would want to happen. If we do have to start paying tax money towards that and they fail, a big outcome from that might happen, and even more money could be lost in result.
My third and final point is that it could cause great problems between the consumer and the manufacturer. If something were to happen while the driverless car was in control and the driver wasn't really involved and that person got hurt, someone will be to blame. It was either the customer's fault for not paying attention and taking over, or it was the machines fault for messing up in the first place. The whole point of these cars is to make the roads a safer place by making the driving perfect, so there shouldn't be any doubt in anyones mind that these automated cars would let the customer down. This arguement could go on forever if this really happened. It could very well happen, and it could be a very scary outcome.
The things that are happening in this time with inventions and upgrades are un thinkable. No one from three decades ago would imagine a world like this so advanced in the technology we all have, and to think that there would be a driverless car on top of that. In the end, it's just an opinion on whether this will fit now, or if it's just a mess up waiting to happen. Soon enough, these cars will end up coming, and whether you like them or not, you'll still be amazed by what people are doing today. | 5 |
a8621aa | In Nick D'Alto's article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile," he talks about a new technology called the Facial Coding System that enables computers to identify all kinds of human's emotions. This could be a very valuable tool for classrooms, but it also sounds scary that computers are consuming more and more of students' time. In some ways the technology to read a student's emotion can be very helpful, but there are also many cons to the technology, which should make so it should not be used outside of the classroom.
The Facial Acting Coding System is and will be helpful in the future to students' learning. While a student is using the computer it can tell if they are learning and concentrating or bored and tired. Also, if a student seems intrigued by a certain assingment or video, the computer can see that and produce more that are like it. Lastly, if a student is struggling, but he does not want to admit it the computer can see that and communicate with the teacher of the classroom.
Even though the computer is helpful, there are many possible problems. First of all, just like the article said, humans can already tell when other humans are happy, surprised, angry, discusted, scared, or sad. If we can already read human's emotions why do we need a computer to look at one another to read their emotions? Just by simply looking at a friend we can tell if they are having a good day or if they are struggling. We have lived without this technology for many years so why do we need it now? It seems like humans are only wasting their time trying to create new technology like this for example.
Students and their parents alike should fear these computers. If parents want time with their kids, and if they want to help with their kids emotions these computers will ruin the parent's chances. The Facial Action Coding System is helpful now, but in the future it may take away from family time, and the students might go to their computers for help instead of their parents. This system could create a disaster in the world if people do not go about it the right way. Finally, with these computers humans would not be able to hide any of their emotions. Some emotions are meant to be inside and stay that way. Not everyone needs to know all your deep dark secrets. Especially a computer system does not need to know your secrets.
The Facial Action Coding System could be used in many different ways. If the technology is not used right then the world could be changed for the worse, although if it is used only in the classroom (the right way) then it could be very helpful to students who struggle. Overall there are pros of the system, but we need to be cautious with the new technology and make sure that it is used in only beneficial ways. | 4 |
a86412f | Venus, Earth's "twin", has very harsh conditions. Unlike Earth, Venus is the hottest planet in our solor system. It has a very thick atmosphere, and the clouds are composed of highly corrosive sulferic acid. The aurthor of this article believes we should send mechanical mechines to explore this planet for all of its benefits, despite the dangers.
My first point, according to the article, is that Venus is the closest planet to the Earth in terms of density and size. Geographically, it has valleys, mountians, and craters. The author also suggests that long ago, Venus might have had oceans and that Venus could support life. This is why some researchers see value in the exloration. But, it provides the question: will exploring Venus be beneficial? The aurthor thinks that yes, this is a good opportunity.
My next point is that the author also states that we have already had missions there. If Earth poured money into going there at all, more than once, we must have seen some value in the mission because of its potential data and learning opportunities. The crafts may have only lated for days, but we still were able to learn. If we we not going to gain anything from the missons, we would not have wasted time and money to get there, multiple times.
Lastly, NASA has proposed a way to avoid the dangers. The facts about Venus are scary to some, but what if we could safely send a probe or spacecraft to Venus? According to the article, it would have to travel 30 miles above the landscape. Doing so would prevent the corrosion, it would have pleanty solor power, and the machine would not overheat as easily. "Striving to meet the challange presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endevors."
This challange may help us, the Earth, learn more ablout habitable planets and how to care for our own planet.
As our technology grows, so does our possibility to go to Venus. It does not take a computer, it takes human curiosity. The aurthor of this article supports the possibility of going to Venus. Its informational possibilites, and its challanges are all positive things about the mission. The challanges are what pushes us, as humans further than we have gone before. Learning about Venus could help researchers, and the people of the Earth. | 4 |
a8675e4 | Technology has done amazing things. It has even changed the way society goes about their dails lives. For example scientists today are trying new and creative methos to get children and/or kids invovled with what they're learning in the classroom. They are even going as far as making it to where computers can read your emotions. This is a good way to teach students based on the fact that some students may not be good with asking the treachers questions, or they may not be good with speaking out if they don't understand the lesson. This way they won't have to, and the computers be a tool to help them stay intrested in the lesson and also move foward to the next.
Now some people may be thinking that this won't work, and that how not everyone shows there emotions the same, and yes even though that is correct the scientisit made sure to have a variety of emotions. Even including the mixed ones, such as the painting of the Mona Lisa. "Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements-in a real face of in the painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions (as in da Vinci's masterpiece.)."
The fact that da Vinci studied human anatomy makes it easier for the scientists such as Dr. Huang to collect data, and/or use the emotions they have based on the painting this man painted. "His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code." This is also a good way to talk about the fact that people can even most of the time read emotions based on what you're friend is doing, or the face that they're making.
Not only are all of these emotions universal but these emotions were also tested by the way the face muscles in humans bodies change when a different emotions occurrs. "Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis ocuil pars palpabraeus make crow's-feet arounf your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic majoe and different muscle, the risorius. To an expert, faces dont lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politican or celebirty isn't being truthful."
Using computers to help us teach students is a goos idea. People frown apon technology a lot but in some cases, such as this one, people are only trying to make the lives of the future society become easier then it is, and/or better then it would've been without technology. This will later help us improve as a society and become better with all the things we do in our daily lives. | 4 |
a87243c | Ugh! Politics are so boring why must we study or do them. But then again there is an upside to it. We get to choose who the president is and how he is going to run the country. Also if we Electoral College vote it would be harder for us to vote.
To begin with, If we changed it it would be harder for us to vote because it is a process made by our founding fathers and it is established in the constitution. It is a compromise between the election of the president and the vote of the citizens and a vote of Congress. The Electoral College process is long it consists of many sections like the electors, meeting the electors so they can vote for the President and the Vice President, and counting the votes everyone thata voted. The Electoral College comsist of 538 vots but thwey only need 270 votes in order to elect a President. With that amount of votes they can become presidents. | 1 |
a875a8e | Dear state senator,
I believe that the Electoral College should be changed to election by popular vote. The reason I say his is because we, the people, should be able to decide who we want as our president. In "source 2", line 10, it states that "Under the elecoral system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the presedent". While it's true that the slate of electors should also be involved in the process of voting, i believe that our vote should count more than the electoral vote, because we are the ones who will be affected the most depending on which presiden is chosen, for that reason, it should be us, the voters, who have the most power over who is elected as our president.
In addition, according to "source 2", "The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is equired to elect the President". In my opininon, this is not fair to us, the voters, because a whole naion should hav more power over who gets chosen as a president than 538 electors. I agree with what "source 2", "line 13" sates wich is the following, "At the most basic level, the elecoral colleg is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates dont spent tome in states hey don have a chance of winning, focusin only on the tigh races in the "swing" states". I agree with this part of the text because, the electoral college is in fact being unfair to the voters.
Another reason why the the Electoral College should be "
Ablolished
" is because of the "disaster factor", as it says in "source 2", "The American people should conside themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest elction crisis in a cenury; the system allows fo much worse". This was a problem because "faithless" electors refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast | 3 |
a875d6a | Dear, senator the Electorial College should be riden of. The people do not have much of a vote. We actaully vote for our candidates electors, the defenses of the system is wrong, and the winner-take all system is unfair. The people should make their own decisions and not be fooled about it.
We are told our vote counts. We have been fooled. We do not vote for the president directly. We vote for the state of electors who elect the president. These electors are our candidates electors. The electors could turn the other way and vote for the other candidate. It almost happened in 1960. The Office of the Federal Register states that the Louisiana legislature almost used new electors for the Demeocratic electors who would have opposed John F. Kennedy. He would have not had a popular vote. So, ask yourself, who do we really vote for?
The defenses of sytems is a joke. The most popular vote of a candidate should be who wins. The Office of the Federal Register described a situation in 2000 Al gore won the popular vote, but lost the presidency. It is a shame that this can happen. Now, ask youself, why can we not have the say on who is president?
Candidates do not spend any time in states they think will not win due to the winner-take-all system. Their main focus are on the "swing" states. As if we do not matter. The Office of the Federal Register says in the year 2000 campaign seventeen of the states did not see the candidates, and twenty-five of the largest media markets did not see a campaign add at all. Again, think about it and ask yourself, do we really matter?
It is not fair that we are underminded and fooled. we should have a say and not the electors. The people should have the power. The electorial College is outdated and should be riden of. It is our time. | 3 |
a880da5 | One major cause of global warning and greenhouse gases hurting our Earth and it's atmosphere is the excessive use of cars worldwide. Ever since they were invented, humans have naturally been attracted, but the attraction is turning dangerous. The amount of pollution these cars give off its sickening, and it's hurting us and nature. The amount of pollution was so deadly in Paris that they had to create and no-car day. Paris is so full of smog that people literally can not see. Everyone should cut back on the driving, it's becoming an epidemic. The upcoming generation of our children and our children's children needs to know the importance of conservation and helping the Earth, not destroying it.
Furthermore, less use of cars will actually lower the risk of death for pedestrians and drivers. thousands of deaths a year are from motor vehicle accidents. Not using cars as much or in general will lower the rate dramatically, obviously. The streets will be safer and more enjoyable for you and your children and your children's children. | 2 |
a8828c7 | Dear Senator,
An Electoral College is a vote to elect the President/Vice President. Only votes that count are the ones done electoraly by Congress. Out of the 538 votes that are going to be done, you need 270 or more to win. Thats extremely disrespectful to the people of the Unites States. Don't they have a say in wether to elect the President or not? Thats why you should banned Electoral College votes and approve it by popular votes because it is your people's (persons living in america) lives you are affecting.
When it is time to elect a new president, citizens want to know thier votes help elect the President of thier choice. In fact it just went to help thier candidate mabey support the Presidents election. Plethora of Catholics voted for Romney to win because Obama supported abortion. We never know if the all the citizens vote could have made romney win because it just goes to help the candidate help the person running for president win. If Romney won 1,000 lives a day could be saved. Obama helped with some problems to though, he made Obama Care, that gave people insurence for less money. Him helping the less furtienate is great. In, addition, making popular votes can help your citizens feel better. You are helping them by choosing wich president will help them and thier family have a better life. The citizens know what they need, they know if Obama is going to help them or not. They know who to vote for because they are providing what they need to live good life. If more citizens vote ofr one president then another, gues what? You just helped more then half of the us a citizens because they knew wich president helped them more. The trouble is out here and you can only fix it with us.
In conclusion, citizens should have the choice of the President because they know what they need and what presidnet will provide it. The citizens have a choice to elect the President. No one knows the real problems but the people and with thier votes you can help them individually. | 2 |
a884517 | Many people think that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. It really isn't considering the fact that aliens do not exist.
The Face was actually found by NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft, while it was circling the planet. It was on the red palnet caled Cydonia. Now at first all they saw was just a shadowy shape. It took about 25 years as you can see in the pictures, that they ould process out of how the shadowy figure actually looked. The scientists figured that it was just another Martian mesa 25 years ago."The autthors reasoned that it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars, when they unveiled the image for all to see."
The face has starred in alot of films, and alll sorts of types of media.
"The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude. M ost people aven some scientists from NASA wanted there to be an alien life form of some sort. There was no alien monument after all and after all skeptics say that perhaps alien markings were hidden by haze. Neverthless, The rock formation on the planet, was a natural landform. This proves that aliens are not real and that the rock was naturally transformed. | 2 |
a885751 | The Face is actually a natural landform. It's a huge rock formation which is also common in the American West. It's proven by Micheal Malin and his Mars Orbit Camera because it's ten time sharper than the orginal. All this mostly proves that it's not an alien monument.
When NASA reveal the image for everyone to see, the authors thought it's a good way to engage attention on Mars. According to the text, it stated, " huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadoes giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." This caption have brought attraction on Mars and books, magazines, radio talk shows, and Hollywood film has starred.
Most of the people thought of an alien comparacy but when Malin and his MOC team snapped a better view of it, it proves it wasn't an alien monument. According to the text, it stated, " And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a oicture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos.
If it's not an alien monument, what is it? Garvin said it was a landform which reminds him of mostly Middle Butte. According to the text it stated," What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West."
The picture is a landform after all. Most might be disappointed that it's not an alien monument. It's also been proven by the pictures over the year they had taken of which mostly is not an alien monument. Again, it's a picture of a butte or mesa, which are common around the American West. | 3 |
a885b01 | Dear Florida State Senator,
The Electoral College is an unamerican, and unfair voting process. In America we believe in the people living in our country having the right to vote for their leaders, but what if they're not directly voting themselves? The electoral college is an inacurrate way of determining the leaders of our country compared to the other actually accurate way of voting, a direct vote election. The method of The Electoral College cannot always be controlled by the voters from their state, and is unfair to states with lower populations whereas the population of that state might not understand what exactly they're voting for. This doesn't seem exactly the way things are supposed to be in our nation since "...over 60 perecnt of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now."(source 2), does it?
Though it is highly unlikely that a choosen elector from a state would not vote towards the chosen side their state decided and voted upon, they still have the opportunity to. This opporitunity is unfair to the voters of the state as they are not directly voting for the president, such as how things are in a direct vote. A direct vote allows the candidate to be choosen and voted for directly by voters knowladgebly voting, then the highest popularity perecentage from votes are then to have the candidate be elected, not by a group of people that have a chance to be bias from the voters in their state. This problem can occur by things such as state legislatures picking electors that may not vote in favor of the states population's choice, but their and state legislatures choice. Even though "...almost all states award electoral votes on a winner take all basis,.."(source 3) not all states electors must do so. They can and have the chance to choose whoever they want as the power to pick is in their hands, and out of ours.
In smaller states such as Hawaii and Alaska they are only given a total of 3-4 electoral college votes as their population is not as large as somewhere such as California, New York or Florida. This does not only matter due to the low number of votes awarded, but it also effects how much they may know about the candidates running for the position. A lot of candidates only choose to go to "swing" states (California, New York, etc.) in order to recieve more votes in the electoral college. "...candidates don't spend time in states they have no chance of winning,.."(source 2) this causes a lot of people in areas not visited to be unknowledgable about eligible candidates in the voting process, and what they could be voting for. These "swing" states help candidates reach their goal of the winning 270 majority votes out of the 538 possible. 538 may seem like a large number but compared to the population of the United States its not really all that large of a group of people. The population of our nation and the votes of our voters is much more larger then the decisions of 538 electors.
Now hopefully it is clearer to see the many problems of the current electoral college system, as it is unfair and irrational. Our nation's voters are the ones who should be voting in a direct vote in picking the president compared to the electoral college. As the method of the electoral college cannot always be controlled by the voters from their state, and is unfair to states with lower populations whereas the population of that state might not understand what exactly they're voting for. These are only a couple of the large problems caused by the electoral college. As far as these problems I believe as Bob Dole said: Abolish the electoral college!
Sincerely,
Anonymous Student | 5 |
a8895c0 | I think the face on mars is just a face of landform because, how would aliens make a face on a planet? A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see, then NASA captioned it "huge rock formation" they didn't say nothing about aliens and probably didn't even think about aliens. After 18 years they finally stopped researching about the face on mars. I think that is was just there as a land formation because, I don't think any person or alien could make a face on a planet. After the years went on you could see the face even more, but the only reason why NASA couldn't see it clear is because in 1976 the aliens markings were hidden by haze, which says exactly in the text, "Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." NASA says "We just don't pass over the Face very often."
A lot of the scientists think that it's a alien artifact, which then later on, the scientists figure it was just another Martian mesa. But this face was a little different then the other ones by, unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. In the text it says, "which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." If NASA says the Face On Mars was really big, then how many years do you think it took to make the face if it was a alien artifact? But then again it says in the text "There was no alien after all." This discovery took NASA 25 years to figure what it really was, and everybody has been talking about it for 25 years, because, this is like a one time thing, you would never see a face on a planet!!
There's been to much information that it wasn't aliens, and it says in the text that "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform." So again there clearifying and making sure that everyone don't freak out and just make sure it's a natural landform. | 3 |
a889edc | I agree driverless cares should be used because it is useful and can be stress free. The driverless cars can reduce fast speed racers and crinimals that drive away. The driverless car can do many thing to help the environment.The car would stop crime, follow the speed limit and can reduce stress. The car can do many things but those were the main ones.
The driverless cars can stop crime becuase when you look at the news there are people driving away in high speed races and crashing evrywhere. If we had driverless cars this would'nt happen at all. The car would only go at a specific rate of speed and this way this can reduce car crashes. People tend to drive fats where they arn't suppose to and later on get killed in a car crash.This car there isn't a way you can get in a crash.
The car itself can follow the speed limit. Some people ignore the speed limit and it can cause major injuries. The driver would always want to speed up and not pay attention but the car it will react faster and go slower. In the text it says, "That only the driver can have control at all times. As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars". Driverless cars can be tested but it would be difficult becuase you need to put all the road rules in the cars system. This can helop and cause some issues.
The driverless cars can reduce stress to the driver on the wheel. If an important call happens adn thier in the highway she cant answer it becuase she would get it into a crash. If she had the driverless caar the car can go on autopilot and drive itself so she can answer the phone. If the driver has somehting wrong with him while he's driving the car,the car will drive itself by just a pushing button. In the text it says," New laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured who is at fualt the driver or the manufacturer". People would think anything will go wrong but no one will now until we try it.
Driverless cars can really be benificial in people's lives. They can be trust worthy and reliable. It can stop fast speed cars, follow the law more often and reduce stress on the driver. The driverless car can be the next big thing if it works. Most likely it would work becuase of the technology we have today. People sometimes dont wanna drive and this can help with that. Let just for say the people int hecar were drunk.The car would drive them home no one would go to jail. | 4 |
a88a91c | Dear Senate,
It's offical, The Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. It's really hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: "Abolish the Electoral College."
The Electoral College is a non-democraic method of selectiong a president that will be by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. According the the "In Defense of the Electoral College" article," the Elecoral College method is not democraic in a modern sense.....it is the electors who elect the president not the people." So bascially we are voting for the electors and we keep our finger crossed that they vote for the president we want. It is unpractical that the people vote for the president they would like to govern their counrty and then the opposite party wins. According to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly ater Al Gore, thanks to the quirks of the Electoral College, won the popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct elecion to the kind we have now. The last election was yet another close one thanks to the Electoral College, which the popular vote winner lost the presidency. After all of this the Electoral College still has its defenders...
At the most basic level, the Electoral College is unfair to voters, because of the winner-take-all system in each state. Candidates that don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad.(Source 2)
The Elector Voters in toss up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign- to really listen to the competing candidates knowing that they are going to decide the election. But other types of voters just like the "play around" according to article two.
The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose by virtue of the mal-apporionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution but is this system really the most logical one to use?(Source 3). True this system has worked for many years but it is time for a change. People are starting to think it is unfair and really poinless to even vote when the president they want will possibly not win anyway.
The single best argument against the Electoral College is what we might call the disater factor.( Source 1) The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse. Consider the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. (Source 2) Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. So that popular vote would not have gone to Kennedy. (Source 3) In the same vein, "faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please.
Under the Electoral College system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. There are some reasons for retaining the Electoral College but it still lacks democratic pediree. And the people should have the right to vote on the president they think is the best for
OUR
country. After all its,"We the people" not," We the electors".
Sincerley,
Highschool Student | 4 |
a892408 | Have you ever thought about life without cars? In VAUBAN, Germany the people have given up their cars and there streets are car free. In Paris, they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. In BOGOTA, Columbia millions of Columbians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work during car free day. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act, If cautiously.
In VAUBAN, Germany 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter. As you walk Verdant streets where you can here the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drowning out the occasional distant of motors.
In Paris, diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe. On Monday motorists with even numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 31 dollar fine. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined.
In BOGOTA, Columbia there goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Violators faced a 25 dollar fine. Being car free is a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution. Parks and sport centers blooming, no traffic just people and there everyday life.
The United States is the birthplace of the Model T,the home of Detroit, the place where Wilson Pickett immortilized "Mustang Sally." Presidents Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States green house gas emission is slowly working. The number of miles driven per person is nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995. New York's new bike sharing program and its skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorities, as do a proliferation of car sharing programs across the nation.
In conclusion, life without cars keeps life fresh. Cars are destroying the earth from smog. We will be much happier people with out cars. Having to see all the children and all the wonderful people actually having a good time with there families. Cars are every where but if we can reduce the amount of cars being driven maybe we can save the earth from air pollution. | 2 |
a8a2337 | Are aliens real or just a myth? Aliens have supposedly done many things on the planets. The question is, did the aliens create The Face on Mars? Or is The Face just a natural landform on Mars? There are many theories on which one is true.
The Face on Mars is just a natural landform on Mars. There is a theory that has been going around for centuries, that aliens created The Face. Many people will believe whatever they hear on T.V. or anything that draws the media attention. People forget that they need facts and or evidence proving something. Otherwise it will only ever be consindered a theory.
Mars happens to be like Earth in many ways. There was once water on the red planet. That has facts to back it up. Mars is believed to have once held life, it may or may not be true. NASA is still working on whether or not Mars had life there once. Yet, since Mars is our sister planet, also may have common characteristics. As in there natural landmarks. But, if there is actual proof on aliens, maybe they did make The Face. | 2 |
a8a3a35 | If we start having driverless cars, then there are many pros and cons.
Driving cars that we currently have already have many positive and negatives.
In my opinion, driverless cars seem easier to work with almost like they would be safer because of all the improvements that a regular car doesn't have.
As the article mentions, the driverless cars would "need a whole lot of sensors, on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver and an inertial motion senser.
That being stated the driverless cars have a lot more look out than regular cars do.
Because, the driverless cars have more lookout than regular cars do, they would be more aware of what was going on, where the car was, how close it was to an object and better your safety.
Many cars that aren't driverless have a back sensor for when they are backing up, and will beep if the car gets to close to an object and that alone helps people out a lot so driverless cars that have sensors all around could help people out a ton by making them more aware of their surroundings.
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" states that they would "have a better response than a human driver can do alone."
The car would have a better responce because "furhter improvements in sensors and compter hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more driving tasks on their own."
By the article saying that, driverlss cars would be a huge help out to many people.
You wouldn't have to worry about getting lost or not knowing where to go because the car would know for you.
Also, with driverless cars they allow breaks to stop when needed so if you were in a sitution where you needed to use the breaks you for sure would be able too.
All of the "driverless" cars now arent fully driverless.
"They can steer, accelerate and break themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents."
That being said, the driverless cars that we have now are already smart enough to do their own thing but yet warning us when it comes down to needing human attention.
In driverless cars "the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over whenever required... the car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over by vibrating the seat, flashing lights on the windshield, and other heads up display."
There are many ways to get ahold of a driveer if needed to with th cars already, so hen they remake them into newer and greater cars... the cars should almost be smarter than us.
Would you rather have a car that drives itself?
Or would you want to have all control?
There are many important reasons you could mention for either side, but driverless cars sound a lot more interesting and safe to me.
Either way the car gives alerts when needed, has sensors to monitor angles around it and has better response and conrol than humans. | 4 |
a8a46d4 | In my perspective, I beleive that when viewing someone's facial, or human emotions it should be visual. I do not agree with the form of technology. By viewing someon's emotions it forms a sense of character which is good with person to person to person with associating with one another. According to the article, it talks about how the process with technology starts at a 3-D computer of the face which is then known to have 44 muscles which then shows the movement of the face to detect the human's emotions. The article continally explains that the facial expressions are what are known to detect the emotions through technology. This ll today is showing you what all a computer can actually do. According to the article they agree on using the technology from what the computer can actually do. In my perspective I think my opinion is the opposite. Your emotions should be detected by another human;s point of view, not by technology. | 2 |
a8a8f9e | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author believes that studying the planet Venus would be a rewarding endeavor. The author presents his claim and supports it very well through the knowledge he already has about the planet, the knowledge that the exploration of Venus might uncover, and persuasion through relating to his readers. This allows for the author to very clearly and precisely get his point across to those who might read the article. It also creates a strong way for the author to connect to his readers.
When the author uses the knowledge that he already has about Venus, he is trying to convey that what information we have on Venus is already important. In Paragraph 4, the author presents the idea that Venus "may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". When the author introduces this concept, he also describes the surface of Venus to be "rocky" and "includes similar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters,". Becuase the author presents the idea that Venus might have been like Earth and then goes on to describe this, he strongly supports his claim of how rewarding studying Venus could be. He is also trying to spark an interest in his readers regarding the study of Venus.
In Paragraph 6, the author suggests that researchers need to get closer to the ground.
When he says "researchers cannot take samples...from a distance", he is urging scientists to find ways to get closer to Venus's surface. To support this he also presents that scientists "cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else" without getting closer. He uses the curiousity of man to lure them into what he wants them to. This proves to be strong support for his main claim. This also leads right into the persuasion aspect of his support.
The author uses persuasion throughout the article, but in Paragraph 8 it is used excessively. Near the end of the paragraph, he introduces the idea that "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts...". When he uses "should not" in that sentence, he is adding a strong opinion to his conclusion. In doing so, his opinion also contributes to the persuasion factor. This allows for him to call out to the reader individually and emotionally affect them. Using persuasion made way for the author to support his claim very well and influence the reader to think the same way as him.
Overall, the author has a very well thought-out way of supporting his claim that studying Venus would be a worthy persuit, despite the dangers. The author hits the brick wall head on by first presenting the knowledge he already has. This allows for the readers to have a little bit of foreground to play on. Then, he introduces the knowledge that could be gained by studying the planet, giving the readers a clear-cut example of how studying Venus might present important information. Finally, he includes persuasion, making it possible to influence the readers one by one. In conclusion, the author supports the claim, studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers it presents, very well. | 5 |
a8b26b9 | The author thinks that studying Venus is worthy idea because the challege by Venus has value, explaining how challenge is the weather in Venus, and Venus is the closest planet to Earth.
First reason, the challenge by Venus has value. On paragharp 8 it state, "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." This means that humans are interesting to know more about the value that has Venus. Also humans are planing to go to Venus.
Second reason, how challenge is the weather in Venus. On paraghrap 5 it state, " At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that sea level on Earth." This means that is doesn't metter how many miles they are from the surface, the temperature will be higher. Also the pressure of the air would be close.
Last reason, Venis is closest to Earth. On paraghrap 2 it state,"Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in the distance too. Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planery neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds." This means that no one other planet is more closest to the Earth.
In conclusion, studying Venus result a good idea because when someone read "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" they can know about other planet. This article explain how is the life or would be the life in Venus, with the temperature, and the air pressure. This article makes the people imaginete how is Venus. | 3 |
a8b30ba | Dear Senator,
I would like to take this time into explaining why having the Electoral College is not a good idea in determining who would become our president. Why should anyone be voting if in the article it states
"
It's offical: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational."
If the Electoral College is irrational and outdated, then why do we keep using? Popular voting can be a better idea then using the Eleortial College, with the popluar voting we can the president that makes the United
States a better place to be living in. For the past century there has been war and terroist in the U.S, and the cause to all the violence is because when Senators are suppose to represent our state they say what in their favor. IF we focus on what the people want we will have a better chance of stopping all the battle. People that are serving the armed forces can come home to their children and family, the local news will not talk abou the next war and the disagreement that this country has aganist another.
If we begin to use popluar vote we can begin to have more and more people voting. Many citzens do not vote because they think that their votes do not count or aren't counted. With popular vote they can be sure that they will be counted and that the votes are for the people not for the Senator. As we get older, this country will not ben the same as before or how it was in the 1800's, we are goinmg to start changing the things that we think are best for this country, we do not want to start the same wars we did centuries ago. Improving it would mean to take risk and if we have to change Electoral College to popular vote, then so be it and let's change it.
I suggest for now on instead of using Electoral College we start using popular votings. If there is ever a case where the votes come out teied then we instead on using Electoral College, this would of be if there were to ever be a tired in the voting session. If this country is all in choices of the people and for the people why can we start to use popular vote instead. | 2 |
a8b6334 | Advancments in technology is the future for the 21st Century. Technology is being improved everyday wether it be with phones, cars, or house systems. The development of driverless cars is inevitable, and it's a big step towards greater technology then what is already there.
The making of driverless cars is already in production because it's a way for technological companies like Google to improve their technology. To discontinue the making of these cars would be to hinder the improvement of technology. There have been no reports of accidents to show that driverless cars are a danger to drivers, passengers, or pedestrians. The use of driverless cars does come with some risk factors because these cars aren't completely driverless, but they are being improved upon with test drives.
There will be some controversy of the dangers of alert drivers when using driverless cars. To conteract these risks the cars come with built in alert systems such as vibrations of the driver seat, or flashing lights on the windshield to inform the driver when the car needs human assistance for the road ahead. Of course it's not the best safety precautions, but with continued use of driverless cars the technology can be improved upon.
The most benefit of the development of driverless cars would be the money gained. With car manufacturers like Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Tesla, and Nissan interested in the production of driverless cars, these cars would make high profits in sales. New technology comes out everyday, and the appealing aspect to buyers is that they need to keep updated on what's new. The selling of driverless cars, new inovative technology, would appeal to buyers because it would be considered different and new.
The continued development of driverless cars would have to have new regulation laws put into place for use on open roads and clarity on who would be held responsibe in the case of an accident, but they're appealing for profit and advancement in technology. These cars would boost the technological and economical world. It would be a waste to stop the production of cars that haven't even been given the chance to really be used on open roads, especially if they have no reports of accidents or death.
Driverless cars aren't a serious danger risk, and with continued production the problems ahead would be solved. The production of these cars is helping the advancement of technology and can bring in high profits. The dangers that the driverless cars could present would be improved apon with the continued use of these cars. | 4 |
a8b8909 | The Electoral College has many amazing things people like about using it .When it comes to voting not many people do .Thats why in the Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress. There are about 538 electors, now that's alot of people if you ask me. Only 270 of the electoral votes is required to elect the President which is an okay amount of votes for the President election.
On the other hand, under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who inturn elect the president. The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themeselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century, but the system allows much worse. People are more worried about having a tie in the electoral vote. The election would be thrown in the House of Representatives, where state delegation vote on the President, also the senate would choose the Vice President.
Not everyone thinks the same tho about electoral College because some people dont like it because some states have more representatives,but yet again what if it was your state that have the most representatives like Califorina with 55 of them wouldnt you want a huge avantage like that? I know I would. | 1 |
a8bcbe0 | The value of not using this technology is great, because its just more reasonable to know your own moods ftom your expressions instead of a computer. I say this because it's more natural to use your own mind instead of having to with a computer. This is my opinion of this article, because it makes you have to use your mind instead of having a computer to use it for you.
Students should use their minds when it comes to this, because you will be able to tell other people moods and yours also. In the text it states," The facial expression for each emotion are universal." What this means is that the facial expressions we use are used all over the world. So why not learn them your self instead of having a computer to do it for you. When you travel there will be facial expressions every where so it's best if you learn them on your own so you will understand what there moods are.
When you can tell people's mood from their facial expression and you address it to the person they might think your smart. In the text it states," Moving your facial muscles not only express emotions, but also may even help produce them." This is also another good reason to read facial expressions, because it benefits you in a mentally way by reading people's body language. Another way it can benefit you is because it shows your actaully paying attention to the person's emotions.
When you use an computer to read people emotions just imagine doing it non verbally and using your mind to read it. In the text it states," In fact, we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day." For an example if your friend is looking down or happy you will most likely be able to tell from their facial expressions. I say this because us as humans we use facial expressions everyday so why not be able to read them.
As you read this passage this can be a life lesson, because it's used in everyday life. As we get older and years pass we will always use facial expression so it's best to learn them instead of a computer doing it for you. This is my opinion of this article, because it makes you have to use your mind instead of having a computer to use it for you. | 3 |
a8bd45e | In the articla "Making Mona Lisa Smile" they talk about how scientist came up with a technology that can read how people are feeling and what there emotions are. On this new technolgy I personaly both agree and disagree with whether the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable.
I agree with this technology only because of how they are planning on using this for students. They are planning on making a computer that knows when you're happy or sad. They said that this computer would be like if the computer knew you're emotions on each ad. For example if there was an ad that appeared on you're screen that you didn't like then the next ad would be on a whole different topic. But if an ad that you did like came up on you're screen then the computer will know wheather to have a similar ad appear next. They are also saying that this technology on a computer could know when a student is confused or bored, then it could modify the lessons, like a human instructor. The part where I don't agree with this new technology is where the technology its self would let other people know exactly what you are thinking and how you are feeling. I feel like this would interfear with others privacy. For example, if some one was really happy because something good was going to happen to them or to someone else then if others knew they where so happy for this then they would most likely be asking them and that person might want to keep it as a secret. This also goes for if someone is not feeling good or is really just sad about something but didn't want to talk about it because it was vary personal to them then if others where to use this technology on them then that would interfear with that persons privacy.
On this article "Makeing Mona Lisa Smile" I have discribed some of the reasons on why I both agree and disagree with having this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. Just because of the fact that there are both positive and negative effects on this statement as I have described. | 3 |
a8c0065 | Ok so in this article about selfdriving cars it talks about how there are cars out in the world that can do a lot of things without the need of a person to help out the car. To me i dont like this idea for many resons, the law, how it senses the world around you and because of other personl reasons
The worries me a lot on this topic because say something goes wrong who is to blame for what happens, the driver or the car but sinces there thiers nothing that we can to do the cars to punish them then we have no one to punish and that means that justices has not been suver to anyone and thats not right. Now say that their was a drunk driver or a guy that hit a kid with his car whats to stop them from saying my sorry i wasnt driving the car was we wont be able to tell if they are telling the truth or if they are lieing
I dont like the whole thing with the sensors sensing the world around use cause imagin haveing a bind person drive a random car around thats not safe and its the same problem with the sensors because with out those sensors the car is bilnd and it could easly hit someone or run into a gas station. Now we already have sensors on our cars to tell us when we are to close to any object but the problem with those is that they easly brake and mess up just by taking the car to the car wash so how sure can we be that thiese sensors on the selfdriving cars wont brake to the car wash a rianstorm or any other clemint change.
Lastly i wouldnt want one of theses cars because i just donlt like haveing a car that i dont get to drive in the article it talked about how people would start to get mad waiting for their turn to drive well what if the car never lets you drive then what? another reason is beacuseim more of an old school car guy i like the oldder cars and thats what ill always like.So theses are all the reasons why i am agenst selfdriving cars. | 3 |
a8c10ca | Driverless cars are a great investment and idea for our country to encourage. Not only do the cut down on fuel usage, but also reduce the number of accidents. The futuristic automobiles could revolutionize the country. Drivereless cars are a fantastic idea, and could create several benifits for the country.
Driverless cars have the potentiol to drastically reduce fuel usage. In the opening paragraph of the article, the author states, "the cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis." Less fuel used for automobiles would empower the United States to spend less money on oil and natural gas imports. Additionally, less fuel polution released by cars would help make the enviroment a safer place for current and future generations.
In the article, the author talks about the use of GPS and sensors used in the cars. Relying on computers to transport us is a much safer alternative compared to the current option. The driverless cars, that are largely computer powered, leave very little room for human error, which would drastically reduce the number of automobile accidents.
Oppontens of driverless cars may argue that these cars are not safe in the event of unforseen circumstances, such as accidents or road problems. However, driverless cars, as stated in the article, "are designed to to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill." Thus, in an emergancy situation, the driver can take over the car can advance past the situation and continue to move along without any issue.
In conclusion, driverless cars could be the best thing to happen to automobiles since automobiles were invented. They could reduce the amount of pollution, and save the United States millions on oil imports. Furthermore, self driving cars can make the roads a safer place to be. Although it may seem scary to some, and there may be a few bumps along the road, driverless cars could make the world a better place to be. | 4 |
a8c1526 | My name is Rachel. Today I will be talking about the "Face on Mars." Some people like to say that there are aliens living on mars. They say that the aleins are who made the face. To that I have alot to say.
My first thought is that the face is human like and aliens have never been near humans to know what we look like. Another thing, i work for NASA and if we wanted to we could say that there was a form of alien life. We would make alot more money that way. So this is why I think that there s not alien life form.
So here are some of the basic reasons people should not believe in alien life form. I have been working for many years trying to prove this to people. some people just refuse to believe that there are no aliens. There is no possible way to be aliens and thats a fact.So thank you for your time and i will be happy to inform you more if needed. | 1 |
a8cc71f | It sounds insane to even suggest whether or not to impliment a new system of computers taht can identify the emotions of students in a classroom. However, this is not because of the idea of the software but the absurtidy of truly modifying the education system around each individual student at once. It is beyond beneficial to students to impliment this system, it is revolutionary. It may be the first time in all of history that education is able to acomidate every student in the class room and ensure their success. The Facial Action Coding System should be implimented into classrooms to read teh emotional expressions of students in order to ensure their greatest success and the furthur success of the school.
These computers do so much more than read what is on a students face. They are able to determine emotions that maybe the student is not aware of or denies. This can determine what the student really loves and are interested in. This could eliminate unwanted or unessisary classes that prove no benefit to the students future based on their interests. To be able to change the curriculum around every student is to maintain a steady growth of every person into what they truly want and deserve to me. If science is a field of much interest, it would be easily determined by small changes in facial movements. This could allow for students to identify fields to pursue, making it easier and more enjoyable in the classroom. To continue down a path of true passion is more beneficial to everyone in the situation. D'Alto refers to a simular idea, saying that "if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow" (D'Alto 6). Like advertisement, students would be able to follow a steady stream of interest, insuring the best and more satisifying education possible. By being able to elimnate certain subjects or topic that peak no interest, students would find themselves more involved and more passionate about the subject rather than simply turning away from all subjects due to the poor outcome or little interest in one. It is astounding that lack in interest in one subject can turn a student away from school. The Facial Action Coding System would not only help students with their interests, but keep them from turning their backs on school completely.
Although the students are mainly in charge of their education, teaching style is also a large portion of how a student learns or does not. If a student is bored, confused, or uninterested, it could be how they are being taught. How one person learns is not universal. However, "the facial expressions for each emotion are universal" (D'Alto 4). If students were able to be placed with teachers who would acomodate them the best based on learning styles in cohesion with teaching styles based on the science behind their facial expressions, grades would be higher and students will have a higher sucess rate. It is not fair to blame a teacher for a students inablity to learn in their environment, however it is the responsiblity of the school to place a student in their space to learn. By being able to determine how a student reacts to certain moments in a class or activities, schools would be able to change their curriculum and place students with teachers who would most benefit. This technology would produce better outcomes for schools, creating a new system of aulmni that are more likely to succeed in their field and therefore more thankful and loving towards their previous school. To blame the student or the teacher for the lack of communication is unfair since "most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication" (D'Alto 6). To give students and teachers the opportunity to truly open up new possiblities of communication through technology is revolutionary because of the better relationships that would form if all involved are on the same page.
Many may argue that this technology takes away the part of humanity that is working with others who disagree. However, if humanity was able to perfect a system so that everyone was happier, would anyone truly disagree? Once out of school, if students were able to immediatly pursue a career in their interest and work with people who share this, they are again being placed in an environment best suited for them. This technology could not only eliminate unessisary classes or subjects but stress. If everyone was in pursuit of their passions, living their best lives, would anyone feel the need to aggresively brual or disaggree? This technology may not completely eradicate disaggrences, but it may eliminate unessisary arguments or issues. The Facial Action Coding System enables students to live and learn to their full potential while also benefitting teachers and schools. By enabling students to take charge of their education, success rates will reach unthinkable numbers. | 6 |
a8cf68c | We were up is space circling Mars snapping pictures and trying to find a landing spot for our sister ship Viking 2. Then we had noctice that in one of he pictures there was likeness of a human face. The head of the face was two miles from end to end. So we decide to send the picture back to NASA to see what they had to say about it. There replies where so shocking to us we could not belive it they that the face had been created by aliens.
Our first reponse to them was that it was simply not possible because aliens do not exist. Even if they did we did not think that it was going to be possible for them to do something like this.
Our second reason we do not think it was aliens was because they would not have the brians to do this. They would not be able to calculate the right measurments and angles also. Plus we dont think they would be able to survive on Mars because of the conditions that are there. These aliens would just have to be out right smart to do something like this. This is just one of those things that seem impossible for an alien to do.
The third and final reason is the point we are trying to get across to you guys and that is that we think is just a natural land form that formed while the planet was being created. If we are being logical here we know that the pyrimads were created by humans them selves but do really think an alien could have done this? We do not think so because they are just not as smart and and not as equpit as a human is. We think that it was a land form God decided to give the planet.
To wrap up everything about this mysterious face maybe it was created by aliens but we may never know because this face is on a planet where a human would not be able to live and survive to witness the aliens build it. The only people that might have got a chance to witness it is atrounauts that would have been up in space at the time. We personally think that it is safe to say that God decided to give mars this mysterious land form and not aliens. | 2 |
a8d1c30 | I personsonally think it would benefit everyone if we abolish electrical colledge. We should change the election to most popular voted. This would be easier and also fair. The election should only determine who is going to be our president not the electors. This way it just creates a bid mess for them to deal with anyway.
For example "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now"."This year voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidency". The votes should be direct to dtermine who will be president of our country.
"The electral colledge consists of 538 electors". Thats alot of electors. Why not just make it more simple and try to avoid voting the electors and lets try to just vote directly for the president.
In conclusion I would have to agree that we should abolish Electral colledge. We should just get right to the point. Lets just and only just vote for who should be president. Don't waste your time trying to vote for the electors, make it easy for yourself. "Each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors". Why so complicated? | 2 |
a8d233c | The NASA solution on the conditions of Venus would allow scientists to follow above the fray. Venus is the second planet of the earth. Sometimes it called "Evening star."
More importantly, resarchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from the distance.
In the 1800s they played an important role in the 1940s during the World War II. They thought computers existing in those day may sound shock an d that they are not require electronis at all. More delicate of the physical conditions of phone.
The atmosphere almost 97percent of carbon dioxide. They experience atomsphere pressure of 90 times greater. The average of the temperature over 800 degress.The author support ideas of Venus's reputation is a challenging planet to human to study. Astronmers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once most like earth planet oin our system.Venus is actually a planet.
The challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because on the planet itslef will also curiosity of human will likely lead use into many equallly intimidating endeavors. Earth and beyond should not be limited by any dangers and doubts but sholud expanded of vey edges imagination and innovation. Not easy, but survivable humans. | 1 |
a8d35fd | After reading the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" i have came to the conclusion that i am against these vehicals. They're not the safest vehicles, could be really exspensive, and can cause issues with the law.
Vehicals that dive on there own can be very dangerous. Think about all the programming and manufacturing that would be in these cars, what if something goes wrong on the interstate? I know that the article says , "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills" what if the driver cannot regain control of the vehicale when they need too? Major accidents can happen and can cause fatal injuries or death. There's already many wrong things that happen on the roads everyday , with people in control of their lives. So are you really going to let little computer chips control it for you?
Another thing wrong with these cars is the price tag! These cars could cost up too a fortune. Have you ever seen the ones in movies? Normal mininmun wage people could never afford these vehicals. Car companies would raise be required too raise the prices on their cars because of all the extra electronices they would have to be put in these cars , so they can make the as safe as possible. Sooner or later all of the vehials could cost over $50,000 and a lot of people have trouble making that much money over a span of 2-4 years.
The biggest reason i am against these cars is because the issue they can cause with the law. I know everybody has heard of a DUI , driving under the influence, charge. You get these if you are caught driving with a alcohol level over the state law , what happens if someone is completely drunk but the car is driving itsself? Does this give people the right to be intoxicated on the rodes because if somethig happens and the driver has to take control of the wheel they could kill somebody or theirselve. I feel like people would abuse these vehicals and do everything in them that they couldn't do in a normal car because at the end of the day they aren't driving. So this really goes back too the point that these vehicals aren't safe.
I hope after this artical people and car manufacturing companies would go back and rethink this idea. I hope they realize that these vehicals aren't the safest, can be really expensive, and will cause problems with the law. | 4 |
a8d5765 | Based off the article
"Unmasking the Face on Mars"
there's alot of confusion or argument over the face being an alien artifact or landform. The face on mars is indeed a landform.
First, NASA, who discovered the landform, releaed the picture with the caption "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head. The authors thought it was an great way to bring attention to mars. Therfore contributing to the cofusion of the landform. Then, Micheal Malin and his team captured a photograph of the landform ten times better than the original authoers. ThIs photo revealed proof the face was a landform. Not everyone was saticfied so he set out for another photo. Finally, in 2001, Malin captured a photo using maximum resolution and each pixel neing 1.56 meters making the image three times bigger. The photo shows what looks to be a natural landform. this landform would be compared to Earths and Snake River Plain of Idaho.
In finding out the face was a landform , some conspiracy therist still believe the face is alien artifact. Onthe other hand defenders wish there was acually ancient alien civilization on Mars. | 2 |
a8d7467 | I am totally against driverless cars. There are so many reasons why. I think they could be extremely dangerous if something with the computer driven cars fails and stops working and why on earth would you not want to drive a car! It's really not that difficult at all. Have we really become this lazy that we dont even want to operate a vehicle anymore. Computers always crash and fail, so what is going to happen if the computer driven cars stop working. There could be a huge wreck or accident.
When we drive we are relaxed, calm and focused. We are paying attention and seeing everything around us. There is a less amount of chance of us wrecking than a computer. I also like the idea of having my own car. I would not want to call a driverless cab to take us wherever I desire. I would not want to have to wait for the cab to get to my house instead of just stepping into my garage and getting into my car.
In my opinion driverless cars are irrelivant. Teens would much rather feel important and useful driving their own car. That is one of the tings us teens, I think cant wait for. It's The moment you get your liscence and learn to drive and become great at it and have the freedom to drive youreself to wherever it is you want to go without haveing to depend on your parents to take you somewhere or pick you up. Parents would also feel safer on driving themselves and their children places. I would not trust nor let no computer take my child nowhere.
We can't let technology take over our future and our lives. I think it is time we put an end to this and start using our hands more often and we also need to stop depending so much on technology. One very important way we all learn repsoniblities starts by driving. We do not depend on anyone for a ride and we feel responisble. I think responisblity is one of the main things we all need to have, so please do not get yourself a driverless car if you want to be the responsible person you can be without relying on technology. | 3 |
a8da8f4 | Alot of people may think that aliens created the Face on Mars but i don't think it was. I think that it is just a natural landform made by a storm or a meteor. Photographing the rock formation was a huge priority for NASA. Some scientists say that aliens didn't make it because they don't exist. They decided that it was another Martian mesa which were common around Cydonia.
A few days after, NASA unveiled the image for all people to see. When they released the photo, the caption was "huge rock formation." Some of the scientists say that the rock formation looks like a face. They said "formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." An author later decided that the Face would be a great way to get the public's attention and attract them to Mars.
After the Face was released to the public, it became a pop icon around the world. the Face appeared in Hollywood film, books, magazines, radio talk shows, and even haunted grocery store checkout lines. In the passage it says, "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars." This is evidence that NASA wanted to hide from the public. Some say that the defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars.
On April 8, 2001, the Mars Global Surveyor got close enough for a second look. Garvin says, "we had to roll the spaccraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field view." He also said, "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." In 2001 each pixel spans 1.56 meters. compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
Even though the scientists did not find out if it was alien who made the rocck formation or not, they tried very hard to try and find out. People are saying that the formation looks like the Martian form of butte or mesa. Other people ae saying they look like other landforms around the world. Some scientists might think that aliens formed the Face becuase of what it looks like. Other scientists might think it is a natural formation. Both answers could be correct, but they still don't know. | 3 |
a8dcdb4 | Our home called Earth will not last forever. In thousands of years to come we will need a new home if we want humans to survive. The author in the passage, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" has given us a possibility of a new home.
Venus is known to be Earth's twin. Earth and Venus has similarities but also differences. Scientist and inventors can help make us adapt to Venus's enviroment. Venus has many harsh living enviroments like average temperatures being over eight hundard degrees fahrenheit, atmospheric pressure is ninty times greater than Earth, hottest surface temperature, and even intense weather. None of these dangers can stop us entirely. Venus may have some harsh conditions but us humans can survive if we put effort into it. The author has provided information about how we can adapt to Venus's lifestyle. He has done research about past inventions from world war II that could help us with inventions that could survive the intense heat and also many other ideas.
Not only do scientists believe this could happen but even NASA. NASA has came up with a solution to be able to create hostile conditions, so us humans can survive on the hot surfaces on Venus. If scientist and NASA continue to do their job and commit to Venus then humans will never have to be scared of us humans loosing our home. It may not be our generations but many generations to come will thank these people who have put thier time, effort, and brains to help make Venus our second home.
Dedication and Imagination can lead us to the Evening Star.
All we need is to be brave and try new things. The author has shown us a new way to live and proved to the readers we can make it happen. I'll be hoping to see you on the spaceship to Venus, our new home. | 3 |
a8dfab2 | Have you ever looked at a freind and have no clue what he or she is feeling? well with the new invention the FACS (Facial Action Coding System) could tell what your freind is feeling just by reading their face.
I think the technology of having a divice that could read a human emotions is a impressive and could be valuable.
One reason why I think the FACS is a good thing is because it would be great for the cosulasr at the school that could help ceritain kids out if they are feeling low, depressed, sad and any other negitive feelings. a sentence from paragraph 3 says "Eckman has classified six basic emotions happiness, surprise, anger, digust, fear , and sadness and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscels."
Another reason why i think FACS is a good thing for studenst in the class room is it could read the studnce and if the student is having trouble or confused , the FACS could see it and make the assiment less difficult for the student wich would help alot, I thought this because in the text it says , " A classroom computer could reconize when a student is becoming confusd or bored, Dr. Hang predicts. " then it could modifiy the lesson, like an effective human instructor" this shows that it could be useful for students .
Thses are some reason of why i belive that the FACS is a good thing for students at school . | 3 |
a8e1e0f | No, that is not a face in the picture from the Viking 1 from 1976,rather, like the scientists at NASA say, it is a natural landform.Yes, I know it looks like a face but in reality,
it's not.Technically, you really can't say it is from an alien life form because scientists and astronauts haven't found evidence of life on Mars yet.Conspiracy theorists say NASA is trying to hide the truth from us when actually they want you to know the truth.Otherwise, if they didn't want you to know the truth they wouldn't have put the picture out in the first place.There are a lot of statistics and facts that obviously point to the truth and I'm going to explain all of them to you.First,the other and newer pictures, the obvius comparison to landforms on Earth, and why your brain thinks it sees a face.
First of all, it's obvoiusly not a face because the newer pictures ,that were taken of the same thing show a different thing.You might wonder, how can it show a different thing but still be the same thing?Well, the newest picture,from 2001, was taken with a much better camera.So, the picture is clearer and so is the fact that this is a natural landform.Finally, the pictures are the most important clue that the face is a natural landform.That is how the pictures tell that the face is a landform.
Secondly, if you compare landforms on Earth to the face pictures you'll get similar pictures.For example, if you take a picture of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho from above and compare it to the 2001 picture they'll look identical.That is according to cheif scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program.He stated that, the face reminds him the most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.Finally, when and if you get the chance you should compare the face to other landforms on Earth.That is how comparing landforms on Earth,to the face can provide evidence to you that the face is a natural landform.
Lastly, your brain somewhat tricks you into seeing a face,but don't worry because it's natural.When you look at the first picture, you're most likely going to see a face, even I see a face.So, we kind of get excited about discovering another life form, and we start to jump to conclusions.Don't think there is something wrong with that because there is not, as long as you have evidence to support it,but in this case,you don't.Furthermore, the reason are brain 'tricks' us into seeing a face is in our DNA.For example,from when you were born everytime you looked in the mirror or looked at somebody else, you saw a face.The reason why you always see a face is because our brain has been ''hard-wired'' to recognize a face.That is how our brains trick us into seeing a face.
To conclude, those are all the clues/reasons why your brain sees and thinks the first picture is a face when it's actually a natural landform called a mesa.To recap, the comparison of the first picture to the 2001 picture can show that it's a mesa. Next, the comparison of landforms on Earth to the face can show you it's a mesa.Those are clues that can prove to you that the face is a mesa. So basically, all you have to do is compare different things to the face.Finally, the reason why your brain tricks you into seeing a face instead of a mesa is because everybody's brain has been 'hard-wired' to recognize a face.So that is why when you look at the first picture you see a face instead of what it really is, a mesa.Finally, sometimes all you have to do to find the truth is dig and look deeper and you'll discover the truth.That is why I say the face in the first picture is actually, indeed a mesa. | 4 |
a8e26b6 | Driverless cars are the wave of the future. Some people may be skeptical of this futuristic idea, and it may seem abstract to some minds, but we need to put away our fears of change and embrace the innovation and technology that is continuing to drive us through the 21st century. We will be seeing driverless cars in the very near future and it's important to hop on the bandwagon in order to help progress our generation. The devlopment of driverless cars is important for the convenience of everyday life, progession of technology, and increased safety while driving.
Driverless cars will bring so much ease and convenience. No longer will we have to worry about finishing work and having to eat a quick breakfast while driving, or having to manage children in a car while simultaneously paying attention to the road. "Further improvements in sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their own." The advantage of not having to constantly be paying attention to the road could significantly help the driver by allowing them to focus more on what's going on in the car, and less on what's going on around it. While some people may be less afraid of their own car driving than potential mishaps of cars around them, smarter cars also have functions that "quickly get the driver's attention whenever a problem occurs." This would allow people to go about their business, but help us to be aware of what's going on around us when it's necessary, overall making driving more efficient and convenient.
Another positive aspect of autonomous cars is the overall progression of technology. "In the 1980's, automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock brakes" and not too long before that cars themselves were developed. With the current rate of innovation and invention and cars being able to "steer, accelerate, and brake themselves" already, there's no doubt that eventually we will have cars able to drive 100 percent by themselves. These types of groundbreaking ideas coming to reality, pave the way for other such inventions and tehcnology to surface. There is no reason to stop the development of driverless cars because it would only be slowing the development of the human race.
Humans are an easily distractable species and the emergence of smarter cars would not only be more convenient and groundbreaking, but also ensure more safety of drivers while on the road. Sensors are what make driverless cars able to drive on their own, and they "allow far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." This is a huge advantage to our safety because a quick glance away from the road could mean missing something fatal and sensors are able to alert you the second something goes awry. This is done by use of "heads-up displays" and "such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over-something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone." Cell phones and more importantly texting while driving is one of the main causes of deaths while driving and to allow people to be occupied while driving could mean the difference between life and death. The displays shown when something is wrong on the road also ensure nothing is being missed by the eyes of a driver. All in all safety of passengers is the largest issue car manufacturers deal with when designing a car, whether people drive it or it's driving itself, and the responsibilty that these driverless cars are able to take on is monumental, and we should continue to let it grow to further ensure the safety of people everwhere.
As I see it, the positives of the devlopment of driverless cars much outweigh the negatives. They bring convenience, technology, and safety into a world that thrives on all of those things. We don't want to sit back and stop history from happening, but be the ones who help to drive it forward. Driverless cars are the thing of the future and embracing their devlopment will only better our lives. | 5 |
a8eb3f5 | Dr. Huang stated that his computer can identify a persons feeling just by scaning them. By the way it look the computer can verify a person experssions by the way that they look even thou some poeple in this world can understand expressions but techology is change and now it can nearly tell human emotion. But yet the differences here are that the computer can see emotions or no emotions at all.
Well the step to take in order to see if a person is showing emotions it would muscular action units. For the instruction 1&2 will determin that techology can tell which from which like a smile canbe tested by a computer or a real person. A machine can tell the difference.
We need to look at the prons and cons cause a person can tell if a person is showing any emotion is how they are useing their mouth's muscular actions such as smiling or frowning. Telling a force one a real smile can be que trickey but a computer can tell the differences. | 1 |
a8eb961 | When it comes to driverless cars there are many good points and bad points. For example when a driver is running late for work and dosen't have time to get dressed, his car could take over and give them the time that they needs to do so. Also if a driver is incapable of driving the car can do so untill the time where the driver can take over. There also a few draw backs from the driverless cars. first is the fact that computers break and in this case could lead to serious injury if not death.
Also at this point the cars themselves are not completely driverless, they still require some human interaction in cases like parking, accedents, and construction. Then there is the fact that with less skill needed to be had in driving it could lead to less responseable drivers. Also if a driver is texting while driving the driver wouldn't be able to see the notification that they need to take over. Next is the fact that when a driver and or the car injures someone else whos fault is it the driver or the people who made it. That of whitch could lead to some problems later down the line. Finnaly the problem with upgrades and updates how do they plan to send out the updated requirements for road safty.
there are some facts that are still good for the driverless cars. First is the fact that all drivers get distracted at times and, with the driverless cars this could lead to geting rid of most of those human errors. Next is the fact that this could lead to more reliable public transportation. Allowing more stops to be made at the same time but, at different locations. Also alot of the safty features allow for better friver safty withthe anti-lock breaks and the motion sencers that pick up alot of what humans can't find for themselves.
That is the pros and the cons of driverless cars. First is the fact that less skill is needed to drive and could to less responsable drivers. Then was the fact that computers break and glitch. After that was the safty features that come with the driverless cars to keep the drivers safe. Finially was the safty of drivers when they get distracted. | 3 |
a8ed947 | Dear State Senator, most people in this country may argue that th Electoral College is well layed out system in which according to source #3: In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing a president "The winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes induces candidates to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states", which means presidents are always looking for support from small states, which is based on population, to be voted for because in the big states little to no votes are accepted by the Electoral College. I disagree, I believe that this method is wrong and unfair for the peope so I argue against it.
To begin with, according to source #2: The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races on the "swing" states", this means that in some states one candidate might have a better chance of winning than the other candidate and even though a candidate is at disadvantage because the other takes all the votes because of the electoral college that candidate might win and the people of that state will not even know who is this winning candidate until they see him on tv as an actual prsident, which probably means that the winning candidate won't help that state because he does not know well enough about it. Additionally, acording to source #3 "The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have transregional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. So a solid regional favorite, such as Romney ws in the South, has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states, for he gains no electoral votes by increasing his plularity in states that he knows he will win", this means that in order to win the presidency a candidate must get to know other regions but because in this case Mitt Romney vs. Barrack Obama, Obama was the regional favorite for the North Romney was at a disadvantage, which is what the Electoral College ultimately wants.
To conclude with, I think that the method of using the Electoral College to elect presidents is wrong and unfair. Furthermore, according to source #2 "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdate, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality" this means that the electoral college is just not fit for the modern democrat world of today and mostly people argue against it. | 4 |
a8eef6d | My fellow citizens of America, we are in a crisis where pollution is at an all time high. We need to find a way to limit the amount of pollution given into our atmosphere. And I have found that solution. If we can reduce the usage of automobiles and form car-free communities pollution rates will drop to rock bottom in a matter of time. Germany and France are leading the way to limiting the usage of cars.
In Germany the town of Vauban street parking, driveways, and garages are strictly forbidden in the experimental district. You may own a car but you have to park it in a large parking garages and pay 40,000 for a space. In result to this change 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold their car to move there. Due to these actions the United States Enviormental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities. These are facts that we are taking a step forward in reducing the usage cars in everday life
Paris is very well known for the smog because of its consistant use of automobiles,therefore they have banned the usage of auto mobiles to clear the air of the smog | 2 |
a8f9c65 | Dear Mr./Mrs. Senator,
In light of previous research I've done on the Electoral College, I would like the opportunity to voice my opinion on how the voting system should work in this country. Based off of the information acquired and with the best interest of the country at heart, I believe that the system should be changed to the election by popular vote for the president of the United States.
First and foremost, when voters vote, they aren't really voting for their candidate, but a slate of electors, which in turn elect the president. Don't you think that this method is a little impersonal? As well as the matter of possibly having one's chosen candidate not win the presidency-even when they've won the popular vote- as a result of losing the electoral vote. According to 'The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong', the best argument against the electoral college is what we call the disaster factor. The system allows room for crisis; technically state legislatures are responsible for picking electors, who could always defy the will of the people. An example, would be in 1960, when segregationists almost succeeded in replacing electors of the Democratic party with new ones who opppesed John F. Kennedy; as well as the case of some faithless electors refusing to vote for their party's candidate and pick whomever they like.
Another valid reason as to why the system of voting must be changed to popular vote is due to the unfair winner-takes-all way the electoral college works. In most cases, candidates do not see all states as important, only those they think they have a shot in winning over. A way to look at this, according to 'In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep out desspised method of choosing the President', is that a regional favorite, such as Mitt Romney in the South during the 2012 voting, has no incentive to campaign in states outside of the region because he gains no electoral votes. However, this is also a disadvantage, for he cannot expand his popularity to other regions of the country. If he does so with the new popular vote system, winning the presidency will be guaranteed. Neglecting voters that are potential supporters of one's campaign is, in my opinion, the worst way to go about winning.
In summation, the Electoral College should be replaced with a popular voting system. I assure you that even though this system might have worked in the past, but in the ever changing world of politics, some things have to be done away with, and the Electoral College is one of them; with holes in the way the system works and outcomes that could possibly do more harm than good leave the Electoral College with nothing more to offer the future of this country. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
A skeptical citizen | 4 |
a901570 | Biking for a Change by PROPER_NAME
Cities have come to the realization of how much pollution is being released into our air by motor vehicles. Many cities and countries are taking part in this attempt to clear the air, such as: Germany, Paris, Columbia, and the United States. Smog is hanging over many cities in a dull cloud, blocking the citizens' lungs from receiving clean air but cities are starting to come to an understanding of how dirty our world is becoming.
In a small town with the population of 5,500, Vauban, Germany, the streets are completely "car-free", which does not include public transportation and certain roads meant for driving. If one wishes to own a car, they must purchase a car space with their home, costing a whopping $40,000.(source:1;paragraph:2) This automatically discourages home-owners to purchase a car because of the steep price. The attempt to rid the air of pollution is gradually becoming more and more successful. 70 percent of Vauban families do not own any motor vehicles, and 57 percent sold their cars to move to the small town. The United States Environmental Protection Agency approves of this movement and is promoting car reduced communities. Although this is occurs in the suburbs, it is hoped to spread into the cities as well. (source:1;paragraph:9)
Paris came to the smart decision of a driving ban once their air was replaced with a filthy smog. All motorists that owned license plates with even-numbers were required to leave their cars at home for the day, or they would be fined. The same rule would apply to any motorists with odd-numbered plates the next day. Evidently, it did not seem as if the people cared about the wellness of their planet, since 4,000 drivers were fined in a single day. 27 people were so furious with this law, their reactions cause them all to have their cars impounded.(source:2;paragraph:10-12) The pollution was catastrophic enough to have Paris challenging China for the record of the most polluted city in the world. After one day of a car-less city, the smog cleared enough to revoke the ban for odd-numbered plates the next day.
In an attempt for world-wide change, Bogota, Columbia creates a "Day Without Cars" in the capital city holding 7 million inhabitants. Many citizens partook in this act. They hoped to promote alternative transportation such as buses, biking, skating, hiking and walking to reduce pollution and have fresh air to breathe. Any violators were to be fined a fee of $25. (source:3;paragraph:20-21) This campaign began in the 1990s and has resulted in the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, which is the highest amount of alternative transportation in any Latin American city, according to the city mayor. (source:3;paragraph:27) Bogota has seemed to make the highest impact of cleaning out air pollution, and resulted in a more positive effect on every person's life.
The motivation of people trying to clean up the human act of pollution and waste is abundant and consistent throughout the entire world. We are changing the daily enjoyment of our lives, animals lives, and the cleaness of the earth one step at a time. A study last year showed that driving by young adults decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009, which is a huge accomplishment on our part, compared to the earth's well being in the past 15 years. (source:4;paragraph:41) If we remain focused on the wellness of our planet and ourselves, the world can be a better place. | 4 |
a909770 | Electoral Voters
Citizens of the U.S. have been voting for their presidents ever since George Washington was elected. They vote because they want their voices and opinions to be heard. So they can provide ways to make their lives better. But the truth of the matter is, we don't make the decisions. The Electoral College does. They should change the election to go by popular vote of the United States. Reason being is because what's the point of voting if they won't listen and they only hand pick a few people out of the millions of others. But keeping the College would make it easier to have votes counted.
Initially, the point of voting is to be heard and to have things your way for once, but if it's falling on deaf ears, then why bother? For example, in 'The Indefensible Electoral College' writer Bradford Plumer states that, "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a state of electors, who in turn elect the president." Okay lets say someone wanted to vote for the Republican, and they vote for one of the electors who pledge themselves to the Republican. We can't rely on a person's word. What if they change their mind and vote for the other? How can natural citizens know to put their faith into a random stanger. Clearly, the voter does not get a say in the matter.
Furthermore, the millions of people who vote are reduced to a small amout of people. "The Electoral College consists of five hundred thirty eight electors," and "Two hundred seventy is needed to decide who's president." - The Office of the Federal Register. So states like New York and Nebraska only have three to six people voting since they are small. While on the other hand, California, Texas, and Florida have about thirty to sixty. And with the civilians living there, it's still not enough. Honestly, it wouldn't even matter if they voted.
On the other hand, the smaller amount of people, the quicker the U.S can get a president. In paragraph 4 of 'In defense of the electoral college' it's replied that, "A tie is possible... but it is highly unlikely." The presidential vote in 2012 may have not been a landslide ,but at least it wasn't a tie. The small amount made it a lot easier to count the votes. And the majority of voters still got who they wanted ,so it wasn't all terrible. The electoral college hasn't all been bad.
The Electoral College has more cons than it has pros. A citizen's voice must be heard and that won't happen if only few people are heard. But votes can be counted faster if there's only a tiny amount. | 4 |
a90cacb | The Seagoing Cowboys program is a program that sends diffrent cowboys overseas to help out many countries that are trying to recover from war or just do not have the essientials they need.
According to the story in paragraph 2 some cowboys were sent in 1945,after World War ll to Europe to help these countries recover their food supplies,animals,and many other things.44 nations jonied together to form UNRRA and hired in "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses,young cows,and mules that were shipped overseas. The passage also states in paragragh 5 that besides helping people,you get the side benefit of sight seeing. For example Luke was able to explore Europe and China,Luke also toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China. In paragraph 7 Luke had an accident. During the accident Luke cracked his ribs,he could not work for a couple of days. In paragragh 8 Luke found ways to pass time while his ribs were still injured.
Luke says in paragragh 9 that he was so grateful for the oppurtunity to be a Seagoing Cowboy. He says it made him more aware of people of other countries and their needs. If you decide to to join the Seagoing Cowboys program it will sure be a great expirence for you. | 1 |
a90f403 | The topic on driverless cares in growing bigger and bigger. Some people like it and some people do not. I like it for certain reasons which include; a possible saftey advantage, healthier for the environment itself, as well as giving drivers breaks when they feel tired but not want to stop to rest or switch drivers. I also do not like the idea of driverless cars because it takes a good time for people who really like to get behind the wheel. It also may serve as a safety hazard if some people choose driverless and some other people choose to drive themselves. Machine and Man do not interact too well at this point of technology even after all the advancements.
I do not know if i like this idea or if i don't. I have mixed emotions. I can not drive yet in my life so this topic may or may not serve to be politically correct. I do like the sound of all the cars that can drive itself. Technology is a huge factor in everyones life right now. It is cool, faster, and does hard work for you. Just imagine the possibilities with cars driving themselves. It would become a big hit to society and sooner or later will not be a question on which is better. It will naturally adaft to our lifestyle. It will indeed help us in making error-less moves on the road to maximize safety. It would also minimize the amount of time to get somewhere. Coming from me as well as many more impacient people, the faster we get there, the better. I would like to take rests without having to stop if the technology gets there. It also serves a great advantage in prtecting the environment with conserving fuel and not giving out those harmful gases like the story explained, and who doesn't like the sound of that? The whole environmental conservation has been up and coming but has been corupted into thinking it isn't our fault as our race, politics have big reason to believe we need to be greener to our planet, and as a matter of fact, the people listen to them. I would on the other hand have to remain always focused incase of an emergency or an accident though, and that is why i do not think it is the best idea in the world.
Like I said in the begining, Man and Machine do not coexist to the best of what is thought. What if there are flaws of these cars and if there are, it could mean so far up to death to people. This whole idea of these cars is based on a what if in my opinion. What if it works without fail? It would in fact be genius, but if it doesn't however, It could be concerning to everyone in our community. I can not drive so i do not know the feeling of getting behind the wheel of a car and driving it around. I do know people who love it, and is kind of their get a way. If this new technology becomes a reality, their passion could become depressed in a way they can not get it back.
To me, this is a what if topic and is taking a huge risk. There would be lots of laws made to protect society made and for what? This is talking about an experiment. It has its advantages along with its disadvantages just like everyother product or new technological design. It is in our natural being to take risks and to be out there. To me, I do not like the idea of the smart car, America in itself can not take on the finances to keep up with reconstruction of road in order for these cars just to run and work. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.