essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
abf0922 | Dear Senator,
I would love it if the electoral college was gone because it really is crazy if people are thinking their voting for someone when they really aren't like the presidents. We actually help pick our state senators because when we vote for presidents we are actually voting for the canidates electors. Some states have a winner takes all system, and what that system does is awards all electors to the winning presidential canidate. But Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of proportional representation. after the prsidential election, our governor prepares a certificate of asertainment, l isting all of the canidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors.
Under the electoral college system, we do not vote for presidents, but for the slate of electors who then elect the president. We should consider ourselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century, the system allows for much worst. Consider that state legislaturwes are responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people.
Back in 1960, segregationist in Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors with new electors with new electors who would oppose for John F. Kennedy. In the same vein, "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's canidate and cast deciding vote for whomever they plaese. | 2 |
ac0b9fe | Electoral college should go away. electoral college is unfair. each party picks a slate of electors,although it only takes trust to pick that elector it is unfair because it is what the people want. there are 4 reaons why electoral college shouldnt be used today. one may be that votes arent from people and votes are only elected by the electors,and the polular vote most likley always win. which means that people vote for the elector and the highest votes from one state to the elector,the president now has that state and now has votes from it. this is why ecltoral college shouldnt be used today. it is unfair that we cant vote for our own president and the electors get to choose.
one reason why electoral college is bad for the people is because of the thing called disastor factor. this is a bad affect to the voting. this happen in 1960 and was with John F. kennedy. what happen was the state legislatures are technically responsible for the electors and that the electors could always tell the people what they want. this was a key factorbut,what to fiasco did he helped changed everything. and here to today we still use electoral college. although we still use fiasco method it is getting better but still is a disastor and i think we should just make something that the people want. this woild be better and maybe an easier way to choose a president.
another unfair subject that electoral college does for voting is the prospect of tie ,this is a method in which only states with a certain amount of people allowed to vite. this is an unfair method because, for example hawaii has only a little amount of people and cant vote. also many other states cannot vote because of there population. this is very unfair and should be stopped. every state should be able vote. and again there is only one vote for each state and this method should be voted by state but by people to get a better examnation of what people want. since each state only cast one vote it is the senates job to pretty much vote for the elector. we should let the people vote the people vote themsleves so there is a more accurate vote,than just a single vote for the whole state.
another reason why the electoral college is unfair is because of the winner takes it all method in each state. this is a very unfair method because i do agree that every state should be able to vote. it doesnt matter if the state only has a population of twenty. every state should be able to vote for preseident, esspecially if you are old enough to vote. it is only fair. there are states such as rhode island and south carolina that are too small and other 25 of the largest media markets didnt get to vote. this is unfair . the system should start letting at least every state vote.
these are reasons why electoral college shouldnt be used today,this is a very unfair way of voting. forget the electoral college method and just start letting the people vote. yes it might hard to keep track but this way, if you let the people vote they will know what the people want and it would be much more accurate than saying one vote for each state . they should really take time thinking of ways to make this better and fair. because electoral college isnt fair at all. they should abolish electoral college from the united states. go back to directed elections. bob dole was someone who said that they shouldnt allow this, and i certainly agree that electoral college shouldnt be allowed. | 3 |
ac0ce23 | The challenging of exploring Venus. The idea of studying Venus is the dangers and worthy of it. It says that Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun.
Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atomspheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Astronomers are Fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system.
Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. Also Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges.
Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. By the way NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions.
Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of immagination and innovation.
So my conclusion to this essay would have to be that the Author was trying to say that Venus is beautiful despite the dangers of it like exploring getting to know it
also Venus is sometimes called the "Evening Star." I mean Venus is interesting people want to know more about the planet you could learn something new in life. They are wanting to send humans to Venus study the planet so yes it is worthy studying Venus despite the dangers of it. | 2 |
ac0d6e4 | In the United States, people are very busy. With school, work, and extracirricular activities in the mix of "everything else," Americans rely on an efficient and preferably fast mode of transportation, and typically, their first resort is car. However, while cars are extremely convinient, they are also very dangerous to the enviroment. Car usage should be limited because there are many advantages, including less smog, less traffic, healthier people, and reduced air pollution.
To start off, when car usage is limited, smog and air pollution are drastically limited too. According to the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars," cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in the United States. This is a major problem in many different parts of the world, yet people still continue to always resort to cars, though they have many other options. Transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind powerplants, and the pollutution that comes from it is most detrimental to the enviroment and ourselves. If we limit car usage, we will drastically reduce air pollution.
Furthermore, when car use is limited, it is better for humans. When people do not drive cars, they will sometimes walk, skate, or bike to where they need to be. This is exercise, so it is better for you than just sitting in a car. When people use other methods of transportation like walking, biking, or skating, they do not have to worry about being stuck in traffic for hours. Limiting car usage also saves money. When you do not drive as much, you do not have to pay as much for gas, or paying for parking. These are huge advantages.
In conclusion, there are many different benefits and reasons that we should limit car usage. We can walk, bike, skate, or even take a bus or carpool with other people. It will reduce air pollution, make people healthier, save money, and people can feel good knowing they are doing something good for the enviroment and themselves. | 4 |
ac0daff | I believe driverless cars are coming, because of Technology, safety and the world's view on this kind of thing.
The technology we have today is the technology we need for driverless cars. Granted the cost of the technology is not affordable for everyday buys. "The smart road systems work well" said by google employers. They believe the upgrade need for the driverless car brings them a step closer to actually putting it on the market. Apparently , the cars needs new starters for it.
Google used the toyota Primus radar sensor, a GPS reciever and an inertial motion sensor to upgrade the starter. They use the combination of all these different materials
to impersonate a human driving the car.
The safety of the car is a big factor leading into the future. The google car has went more than half a million miles without a crash. I do not know too many people who drive now that have went that long without being in some kind of car crash. The safety is also more effecient because it alerts the driver to when they need to take over. The motion sensor
makes sure the driver hands never leave the wheel. These features are game changers to how people drive from here forward.
I believe the world will accept the change to driverless cars . I think the cars would hit the market and sell a trendmendous amount as soon as they release. The technology to these cars are nothing new like the sensors or the radios . They are just used in a different way than before to increase a car technology and safety of others. The cars would say some energy from the engine through the sensors.
My conclusion to the topic of driverless cars is they will eventually happen. the reasons I believe this are technology, safety and the world adapting to change. | 3 |
ac16db3 | The article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D' Alto is quite an interesting article. As it talks about how technology can detect one's true emotions. At the first glance, this article looked redicilous to me, How can a machine show one's true emotions but as I read more and more the disgust started becoming interest. And, now I am just fasinated by thid article.
In paragraph 1, the author states "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry". Which shows how much technology has grown, now the technology can even tell us how and how much of a specific thing we are feeling. Quite amazing, is it not? One can't specifically say that the machine is 100 percent correct but in future maybe the technology goes even beyond this.
When reading this article, one may have had a few question about all this calculating emotions but in paragraph 2 many of the question that comes to ones mind are stated "Hold on! Can we actually 'calculate' emotions---like math homework? And how can a computer recognize the subtle fcial movements we humans use to express how we feel". After stating these questions the author gave us their answers and not just left us curious. Recognizing one's feelings correctly is quite hard for even an human eye since someone may be trying to hide their true emotions, it's not as impossible as it sounds now due to the technology which is a good thing about the improvement in it.
In the article the authior states a couple benefits of having technology that can detect your actually feelings, one of them is in paragraph 6 " 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr. huang predicts. 'Then it could modify lesson, like an effective human instructor" This one particular benefit of having something that can calculate your expressions, quite got to me. It can help so many students and teachers as it can lesson the burden on teacher to go to the specific person and help them understand and the student also would not have to wait for a turn.
So for all the reasons that I have listen above and explained I would like the reader to understand the benefits of having such technology. | 3 |
ac199a9 | Computers shouldnt have to tell our emotions. Humans should interact face to face and ask how the person is. Eventually computers will be doing the talking for us. The computer could be useful on historic paintings. With all this technology mankind is going to end up being antisocial and hide behind screens.
If people were to use this on a daily basis to see how your friend is feeling, it would take the sypathy out of asking how someone is."Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication." Dr. Huang follows up that statement by saying "So computers need to uderstand that, too." Why have a computer learn these human traits when people can just interact face to face.
People make their own decsions and learn from what they did right or wrong. The computers dont need to tell people to put a happy face on or show epathy. If you are not able toread someones feelings or someone cant read yours then just ask. Asking someone shows that you are concerned and care about how they are doing.
This technology could benefit voters or the Goverment. The computer can tell if a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful. The Court house can use it on witneses and the defendant. It can be used in school classrooms but the kids will have to get used to it.
This technology isnt made for everyday life, it should be used occasionally. There is no need for the use of these machines in classrooms. Kids are learning fine with out them. People should stick to iteracting and asking how someone is feeling. | 3 |
ac1cb0c | Driverless cars in the future would be fantastic. I believe they will help alot of people out. Companies are even making computer-driven cars all ready. This cars would probably sell very fast and easy. They will make a big inpact on humans in the future. Anyway why would anyone want a driverless car?
There's many different reason why humans would want this car
I think they would want a driverless car because you wouldn't have to drive your self. Especially if your tired and been busy all day. There would be great equitment in the car for them to use when in the car. The sensors will help them out too. The driverless car will also have a video camera,a GPS recevier and an inertial motion sensor. People would love all that stuff in their car. This driverless car would change driving for ever.
That why i'm agreeing with driverless cars. This would be a perfect invention in the future. Everyone would love this care very much. I just think it would help out a lot of people who's busy and works alot. This would change how car aceidents happen and more. This is why i thing anyone would want a driverless car. | 2 |
ac2295e | Google's driverless cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. With something this innovative and exciting there are going to be people who question the safety. There are always going to be those people who try to find every thing that can go wrong, it may seem unfair but it is necessary for our safety. Driverless cars are the future.
Safety? Everyone wants to know how safe they are and how reliable they are. Many people have developed semi-driverless cars. In fact Google "has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditons since 2009". The key words are "specific conditions". No one has developed a car that is fully driverless. That may be a good thing. Cars are machines, machines malfunction.
Google has modified a Toyota Prius to be semi-driverless equipped with "position-estimating 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 sensor". It seems very prepared for whatever could happen.
The cars that have been developed still need a driver. What's the point of having a driverless car, when you still need a driver? Some people who don't fully trust the concept, like me, need some control. That's why some manufacturers are "bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays" to alert the driver when he/she needs to take over. Many manufacturers have developed an alert system, GM "has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object". Some others include a simple announcement and flashing lights.
The law has also made it hard to develope these driverless cars. What would happen if someone was to wreck in a driverless car? Would it be the driver's fault or the car's? No one has worked out the details yet. Most states don't even let you test driverless cars. The "traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driverin control at all times". Once they prove that the cars are more "reliably safe" the other states will join in testing driverless cars.
It won't happen for awhile but driverless cars are our future. They have developed the necessary things to keep us safe and keep the car aware. There are still some kinks to work out, like the law. But many car manufacturers like Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan have planned to release semi or fully driverless cars in the future. | 4 |
ac23966 | Dear Rick Scott,
Controversial. This is the word that can describe the Electoral College in recent elections. The Electoral College is composed of 538 votes, a presidential candidate must acquire 270 to win the election. States with large populations get more electoral votes so say, Rhode Island. California gets 55 votes while the puny Rhode Island gets a whopping 3 votes. The Electoral College has been debated since the 2000 election, where Al Gore lost even though he got more popularity votes. Many folks believe the Electoral College should be abolished. I believe that the Electoral College should be kept in the presidential elections, because it shows a clear winner, it ensures it is, "Everyone's President", educated voters count in the swing states and it avoids Run-Off Elections.
Without the Electoral College, some elections may be hard to decide a true winner. No matter the situation, the Electoral College will determine a winner, if the popular vote and electoral vote become tied, (which is highly unlikely,) the vote will be taken to the senate. Each senator counts as one vote, so no longer do bi states matter. Also, the Electoral College ensures the presidential candidates have trans-regional appeal. It makes the votes count, the president chose is surely, "Everyone's President," rather than a favorite in just northeastern states. Furthermore, swing states are tremendously important to the outcome of the election. States such as Florida, New York, Texas and California have dozens of votes combined, winning all four of those states pretty much means presidency. The swing states not only have more electoral votes because of population, but because of their voters. On average, there are more educated voters in the swing states, they actually stay up to date, watch the news and know the means of each candidate. The Electoral College also avoids the disaster of which no cadidate receives a majority of the votes cast. A good example of this is when Clinton had only 43% of the popular votes won, yet he got a whopping 370 electoral votes, which made him president. The pressure of having a run-off election is nearly vanished by the Electoral College. Although others say that the Electoral College should be abolished, because in that system, voters vote a slate of electors, not the president. Well tough , the Electoral College ensures a winner, and that is all that matters.
The Electoral College should, for sure, be kept in the Presidential Election system. It consists of 538 total votes, and 270 votes have to go to a candidate to pick a winner. Although the votes may tie up, which is nearly impossible, the Electoral College ensures another method to decide the presidency. The Electoral College produces a sure winner, "Everyone's President," is elected, educated voters are in the swing states and it avoids the disaster of a Run-Off Election.
From,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
ac28a4b | Driverless cars? Am i for or against them?. I believe that driverless cars could be fun for some. especially those who are lazy and dont like the complications that occur on the road. So, therefore they'd like someone to take over the wheel for them so that they don't have to deal with the complications of driving the a road that is just confusing and disorganized. Sure, why wouldnt you want a driverless car. But, a driverless car can take som eof the fun out of actually driving for future drivers.
First I am completely against the future of driverless cars because i would like enjoy the fun of driving with my hands. What i mean by that is that i would like to enojoy the feel of turning the wheel at the time i want and also putting my feet onthe breaks as i please instead of using voice comand and telling my car when to stop. To me the idea of driverless cars would seem just a little boring as explained in paragraph 8 when the authors claimed that " Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for thir turn to drive?".
Second i am also against the future of drieverless cars becausehow would it have an affect on our lives in the future? How would it show off mankind? not just as a very smart species but a species that is very selfish and has took what was once given to them and changed it into something that has have basically been tooken for granted. I enjoy the cars we have today but what's gonna come next after "driverless cars" ?. Are there going to be floating T.v's?
Lastly i am against the futre age of driverless cars because it just cost to much. Some people who have a complete low income can't afford that much money on a car that is worth ober 500,000 dollars. Some of the fellow americans today are considered to still be "paying" off there car debt from when they first got the car. Therefore i wouldnt exspect driverless cars to be so big in the future depending on price.
Driverless cars? Am i for for against them? I have explained in the following essay that i am against driverless cars because of the price, enjoyment that it can infict, and the way it has changed the minds of civilians today. I gave three reasons why i am against them and gave details to back up my reasoning. | 4 |
ac2cc41 | Unidentified Object
Scientific observations at NASA leads us to belive that the theory of an alien face on mars is fake. The idea that the object is anything more than a natural mesa on the planet is not backed up by proven facts.
Theories of the mesa on mars actually being some sort of alien face or object have no proof. NASA has refrenses from our own planet to compare the object to, and high-resolution camers to photograph the object. While skeptics on the other hand, have nothing more than thier own personal beliefs. Unfortuianly the rest of NASA and other people in general belive otherwise.
After researching the landform it saows resemblence of a mesa. The "face" actually had the researchers think of formations in the American West that would become a type of dome shape that would form from lava. That theory has a decent amount of real life facts compared to the alien theory. So far that is the best theory NASA has on what the object is.
In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" whilst reading throught the fifth paragraph, they quote that defenders of NASA's budget wish there was an ancient civilation on Mars. This made me wonder why they would think that. It's because it would be more than just a landform like a mesa. They would have more to look into than just a face looking terrain. But being scientists they realized it was not as much as they'd hoped for. Therefore having no reason to lie about the mesa.
However putting myself in the shoes of a person who wouldn't know about all these facts or opinions, I could see why these beliefs are taken seriously. But that's why we have researchers like NASA. To look into theories with more knowledge behind them and see how they turn out afterwords.
After all the pictures, refrenses, and comparisons, the face of Mars should be known as a mesa, and not an alien artifact. However there are always more people that will belive it is alien. But that's just a theory. | 4 |
ac39bfd | Dear state senator,
I believe that we should keep the Electoral College. It's a part of history and has worked for many years. There maybe people that think the Electoral College should be taken out and be replaced, but I strongly disagree.
The Electoral College was founded by our founding fathers, and it's in the Constitution. This system has worked for years and it still works to this day. When the people vote they are voting for a slate of electors, and those electors are trusted people. If you don't like the system than you don't have to vote, but you want to vote top help your electors when.
Changing the election by popular vote for the presendent won't change anything. People will find mistakes in that and want a different way to elect people. It's best to leave the system alone before everything goes havoc. The Electoral College is a way for people to vote for who they wan't without others knowing. Keeping the Electoral College may make some people mad, but it's something we are all used to. It would take years for us to perfect everythimg for a new voting system.
That's why I think we should Keep the Electoral College. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Sincerely,
A concerened citizen. | 2 |
ac3fbb4 | Self-Driving Cars?
Are self-driving cars actually smarter than we think? Many car companies have started to invest their time and money into creating a car that is driverless 100% in the future. Driverless cars are not reliable because it takes a lot of money to make these driverless cars, safety is a big concern with these cars, and if the car can't drive on its own then the human must take over the wheel when there are complications.
Car companies such as Mercedes, Audi, Tesla and Nissan have all started to work on driverless cars. These cars are very expensive to make and test out. Sebastian Thrun, the founder of the Google Car project said " Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost teo hundred million dollars. It wasn't something you could buy at Radio Shack." Sensors are the main idea and concept of the driverless cars but they cost millions of dollars. What happens if the sensors are not reliable?
Safety is the number one priority of anyone that is in the car. The driving laws are very concerned with this and need gurantees on the driverless cars that are coming in the future. In paragraph 9 it says that " Presently traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all time. Manufacturers believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars are proved more reliable. But the question we must ask is" If the technology fails and someone is injured, then who will be at fault?" It could go in many different ways and many conflicts can arise. There are postive aspects to driverless cars. One is that automakers are still trying to improve all the qualities on the cars. In paragraph 10 it says," Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. They are saying that they will not release the cars until they are reliable and ready to go. The cars are improving as the days pass by. More and more laws will changed due to these cars which will be for our safety.
The biggest concern is why can't we fully rely on these cars yet. They are not reliable right now is because when there are complication or certain situations that can occur on the road then the human must take over the driving until it is safe again. "Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents". Google still has many issues with their driveless cars that must must improve and work on futher.
Now we know that these driverless cars are coming for sure. Many car companies are making the time and effort to make these cars successful. We know some of the problems they are facing. But we now know that they are not going to be releasing these cars now but in the future when they are ready to be safe, consistant, and reliable. | 4 |
ac3fdcc | Yes it is valuable. Why? It is because you can use it to see if the student is really paying attention or not. You can also tell if the student is bored or depressed so the you can do something about that. like it was said in the article about Making Mona Lisa Smile. This technology can tell you wether the person is happy or not. just by seeing the face that the kid or anyone is making which this will come in handy for others in the future to know. And all they have to do is use this technolghy to see wether you are really liking something or wether you are really hating something. not only that it also see that if you are making more than one expression in your image.
In conclusion, i say that this techology is nit just good in all schools around the world but good to use in everyones daily lifes and can be used to help people in hospitals and all over the world, it can be used to stop crin=mes and used to see wether someone is lieing or not. or to even indicate what the person is probably thinking or planning to do. | 2 |
ac4848b | The challenge of pursuiting and exploring Venus presents dangers lets start off by saying. Sulfruic acid in Venus's atmosphere tempetures are average of 800 degrees fahrenheit atomspheric pressure is 90 time greater than what we have on our own planet. Conditions are exterme to encounter what we have on our Earth this enviorment would crush even a submarine accustomed to dividing to the deepest parts of our ocean and would liquifey many metals. Beyond huge pressure the plant weather is beyond, erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes and frequently lightning strikes. To probes seeking land itsurface is much more dangerous for the a worthy pursuit depite the other dangers going on there on venus. Although Venusa had large oceans and could have upported various of forms of life. Venous also has some feature that are dangerous to those on earth. this is a crucial condisdersation.
Although scientist have created a " float fray" that is a blimp-like figure that can hover over 30 or so miles above Venusian's landscape the storms are still likely to hit. It is not a easy condition to send humans and have them survive. This hovering expirence is less effective more importantly, researchers cannot take samples of rocks, gas, or anything else, from that distance. Despite their risks or maybe even challenges having to face. Venus has lasted for three weeks in such conditions.
In conclusion, makinig more mechanical parts be made resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces could still be even better. But also there is always a risk to something. Striving to meet the challenges presented by Venus had value all because humans have a curiosity that will likely be gaining on the planet itself, our challenges should not be limited by dangers and doubts. We should be on the very edge and have imagination and creativity. These are the dangers of the study that Venus presents and a worthy pursuit depite danger it is a risky attempt for NASA and scientist. | 2 |
ac4a293 | Dear Florida Senator,
I think we should change our voting system to a popular vote instead of an electoral college. I think this should change because the electoral college has many flaws in it with the way it is done. The popular vote is much more reasonable and practical.
One of the main reasons that I believe we should switch is because of the "Disaster Factor". I think that this really stood out to me when reasearching. According to source two,"The American people should consider themsleves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse." The author is one-hundred percent correct. The state legeslatures are responsible for picking electors, and the electors can ALWAYS deny the will of the people. This would not happen with popular vote because the people's opinion translates directly to who they want as president.
Another reason why the popular vote is the better way to go is because you will never get a tie. With the electoral votes, a tie is possible becuase there is an even number of electoral votes across the United States. Also, not one citizen of the Unoted States wants a draw because then the House of Representatives would have power and state delegations would vote for the president. The houses decision will almost certainly not reflect the real coice of he people.
My last reason why I believe that the electoral college is unfair to voters is because the swing state votes. If its a tight race all the way to the end and theres only a few states that need to make a final decision, sometimes a small state ultimatly changes the end result of the precidency. With the popular vote, this would never happen. The electoral college basically says that some states are more important then others by giving them more say in who is president. Popular vote counts every single person as one.
So after reading my letter I hope you have come come to the conclusion that popular vote is by far better. Electoral College is just old school, not fair, and can cause stupid issues that can easily be avoided with Popular vote. Popular vote will never tie, let others choose who is president besides the people, and would never let a swing state change the destiny of the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Timothy Eustace | 4 |
ac4f2e1 | The story of Making Mona Lisa Smile is about a Prof named Thomas Huang making a computer that can tell your emotions and the way you are feeling that day. You might not be the mood for anything and the computer can tell when your bored or not feeling anything it will modify the way it work so you will be in a better mood i think its great. Beacuse kids might not fall asleep in class as much if thcomputer sees it and will fix it and it will help whats wrong with people. Part of me say its a bad idea becuase most people dont like talking about their emotions so that will make things worse if a computer does it and feel their emotions . Its pretty cool through how it can read your face and all 44 major muscles on your face. I would say no to it becuase i myself and like telling my emotions about things and dont a computer telling me about them | 2 |
ac51bff | What would life without cars be like? Cities throughout the world are practicing this idea, and seem to be doing fine without thier cars.
Cars are a great way of traveling from place to place. They are fast and time efficent but cars aren't the best for the environment, they cause polution,bad air,smog and global warming. The city of Paris has a partial driving ban becuase of the rise in smog they are experiencing. The ban was succeful in reducing the amount of smog and also alowed the puplic to use public trasportation free of charge. Now if more places started doing this air polution would decrease and we would have cleaner air to breath in and less health problems from smog.
In the city of Bogota, Colombia the residents have a car fee day each year. On this day Colombians hike, ride thier bikes, skate, or take buses and taxies to work. Doing this yearly activity has lowered traffic jams which allowed workers to get to work on time while they took buses or taxies. Not only were traffic jams reduced but people get to exercise and commute with others while the walk or ride thier bikes to thier disired distination. Limiting car use is not only good for lowering air polution and geting exercise, it's also good for bussines.
Vauban, Germany has been practicing this idea as well. They have a no car policy, if residents wish to have a car they have to buy a parking space from a parking lot. Having a parking lot allows kids to play outdoors without the worry of having to deal with cars. As people walk to places they want to be at, they may find stores where they can do some shoping. Store owners are now placing thier businesses along walk ways to atract customers as they walk by. Not only are businesses blooming so are parks and sport centers. The city Bogota have been building parks and sports centers as people are beginig to exercise more and are going outdoors.
Limiting car use can be great for the environment and for people. Cars have been in our lifes for long time now, but it doesn't hurt to walk from place to place or to enjoy a bike ride to work. | 3 |
ac53aed | Driverless cars, once thought to be only a far off and unattainable concept, are now a realistic possibilty in our near future. Already, manufacturers have developed working prototypes of driverless cars. With the possibility of them being an interactive part of our future, the topic as a whole begs discussion. Are they safe? How do they work? Will they ever be completely driverless? These are all valid questions, deserving of valid answers. While work is still being done on these cars, they are a safe, and should continue to be developed.
Driverless cars could bring an entirely new face to public transportation. The future of these cars hold not only the possibility of completely autonomous vehicles, but also ones that are more energy efficient. If the whole of a cities transportation system would go driverless, the system itself would be much more efficient. Unlike a cab driven by a human, driverless cabs do not have to stop for lunch breaks or other trivial and very human matters. The text states, "Google cofounder Sergey Brin...envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system. The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." This quote from a leader in the field of driverless cars shows that driverless cars offer a real possibilty for a much more efficient and flexible transportation system.
Real possibilities stand in the horizion for driverless automobiles. As of right now, cars are not completely driverless, as the text states, "Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues." However, given the amount of progress the company has made since they began testing independently driving cars in 2009, it can be assumed that they will make more progress, and eventually develop a car that can drive completely independent. There is a real future in the field of driverless cars, and the only way to find out what it holds is to continue its development.
The development of driverless cars will also be beneficial to more than just the industry of driverless cars itself. The technology used in the cars can be applied to more than just the cars. The text states, "There was no way, before 2000, to make something interesting. The sensors weren't there, the computers weren't there, and the mapping wasn't there. Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars. It wasn't something you could buy at Radio Shack." All the forms of technology listed above are found in driverless cars, but they are also found in many other different areas of science and life itself. The technology that became available was not limited to a single use. No technology is. Science is an inclusive, interactive, and widespread concept. No single concept in science is used in only one design. For example, Velcro, developed for use on space suits, is now something used daily by ordinary citizens to keep our bags shut or our shoes tied. As new technology is introduced in the field of driverless cars, it will expand to horizions beyong just the cars themselves.
As much as the development of driverless cars could aid our society, some people still have concerns about them. The biggest concept that concerns citizens is their safety. Many people believe that a truly driverless car is dangerous, and could go rogue, malfunctioning and causing a wreck. However, even though people might not believe these cars are safe, they are. The text states, "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel...Manufacturers are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road." Cars may one day be 100% driverless, but right now they are not. A human is always in the front seat, ready to take control, and that means these cars are still as safe as a normal car.
Driverless cars, while they may only sound like a concept from a science fiction book, are a real possibility, and can affect our near future. Their development is crucial. They could bring about more flexible transportation systems and new technology, and the progress made so far offers substantial proof that this isn't a worthless subject. They are a very real and immenent possiblity in our future, and they should be taken advantage of. If development of these cars continues, then development of our future as a society continues. | 6 |
ac53b48 | The Author supposrts the idea of Venus being worthy of exploring dispite the challanges by stating in Paragraph 8 "Striving to meet the challanges presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likey lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors". This leads me to belive that if us as humans dont proceed to learn more about this planet we are not going to gain any knowladge and we will never know about the new dicovories we could have made. The Author also continues on about how Venus was belived to be filled with oceans and supported various forms of life and is reffered to as the Earths "twin". So this leads me to think that there is more out there than dangerous carbon dioxide blankets, clouds of corrosive acid and above boiling point tempatures. There possibley couldve been life.
This makes me agree with the Author's statemet even dispite the dangers Venus has. With it being so close to Earth and once possibly having living life forms on it. It makes me belive that we should be leanring more about it and building machines to study the materials of this planet. Us Humans make discoveries everyday and we build extrordinary things that you would only see in movies. I definitly think that one day we could build a machine to substand the harsh tempatures and dangerous chemicals Venus has. WIth listening to the Author points i belive that this could open new doors for us and maybe even one day visit the planet. In Paragraph 6 the author states that " Many reaserchers are working on innovations that woud allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaninfuly to our knowladge of Venus"
This shows me that NASA and other astrologers have already began to try making machines to one day travel to Venus.
Soon one day we will have discoverd the planet of Venus and have learned many new things. This could possibly lead to new discoveries about tecnology and maybe even one day about human life. But we have to use our natural human instict of wanting to know more to find these amazing things. Thats why I agree with the authors statment that we should continue studying Venus despite the dangers it presents. | 4 |
ac606b5 | In this essay I will either be arguing whether the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable or if its not valuable. I personally think that the "Facial Action Coding System"
would be benifical for the teachers and other students in the room.
In paragraph one it states that "Mona Lisa is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." the Facial Action Coding System figured out these percentages from the Mona Lisa painting. Computers do know your emotions while looking at ads just like it says in paragraph 6, "If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar d might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." I think that if a computer can detect what your emotions are that it could possibly be doing bigger things. If you know what your students emotions were you could either change what you are teaching to make it better, or to keep doing what you are doing if their emotion is mostly happy.
This is my essay on if the use of using the Facial Action Coding System would be valuable in a classrom. | 2 |
ac611e6 | The new technology it was created by, what does it do,is it a good thing. The software is the latest innovation fro professer. Thomas Huang,of the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science at the Universiy of illinos,working in collaboation with Professer Nicu. Sebe of the University. Dr. Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better way for human and coumputers to communicate.
The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face;all 44 major muscles in the the model must move like humans muscels. Movement of one or more muscles is called an "action unit." Then Dr. Huang relies on the work of pyschologists such as Dr. Paul Eckman,creator of FACS.
They want to use this technology to help in a classroom to see when a kid is confused or boerd to help them to plan lesson that the kids will learn from. Eckman has claaified six basic emotions happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness and then associated each with characteristic movements of facial muscles
I think we should use the new technology in classroom because I think I will become dectration to kids because they will want to play with it to see her they feel. This type of technology should be use for treapist to help read patient when they are talk about their life so the treapist know how they felt about that part in there life. | 1 |
ac63e57 | I will have to say no because you can't use technology to see someone emotional. what if you try to see if someone is happy but it come up with an erorr on your computer. like ib the text said that some comupter can't do it. so i say why can't some comupter can do it.
so what i think is that technology can't tell show how we feel. how we feel can't be calculat by technology. in some people may say that it is not right to think that technology can so how we feel. sometime technology can like stop working what are we going to do now that it's not working know more. what i think is that this is not smart todo because what if technology chage what they are feeling like lying to them like that are really happy but it change to say that they are sad but they are not.
so tell me this what do you think we should do keep on leting technology teel us how we feel or go deep down in your heart in tell yourself how you really feel. but i don't thing that the people that say yes we should let technolgy tell us what we should feel. they are never goingto give up on leting technology tell them how they are going to feel. | 2 |
ac66230 | You should really join the Seagoing Cowboys because they have lots of fun even though it might seem scary to be on a boat with horses then yes but it is actually pretty safe. Luke may have broke a few ribs and other stuff but he had fun and if you live on a farm then you would be good for it because you have to clean out stalls and feed them and put out bals of hay for them to munch on. You could be on the next boat to be a Seagoing Cowboy of Cowgirl. You may have to do night patroll but it don't matter as long as youhave fun. Maybe even bring a friend so you don't feel so lonely if you don't know anyone.
If you don't like boats then don't do it if you like boats and horses then your the one to apply and we will send you a ticket to get on the boat and be on your way. If you want to see the world or some parts of it then sign up and come join us because we go everywhere you can imagine like China, New Zealand, and Crete. These are just a few of the places that we go to so the horses can get where they need to be. We will go way across the world just to deliver horses.
Luke had no friends when he came other than the friend that asked him to go with him to be a Seagoing Cowboy. Luke made many new friends on the boat. He made 9 (nine) trips all together from that whole career that he had with that job. He had fun and learned new things about boats and horses.
He thought it was going to be a chance of a life time but he changed his mind it being completely amazing better than what he thought it would be for someone like him. His journeys were amazing and he loved it and his family was very proud of him and his friend. He said he is grateful for the opportunity. He also said it made him more aware of people of other countries and there needs. The awareness stayed with him and it lead his family to host many of international students and exchange visiters and students for many years.
This is Lukes story and this is why you should join. | 3 |
ac698da | Dear Senator,
I favor keeping the Electoral College in the arguement. One of the reasons I feel that way is that it is harder for someone who is runnig for president to win. To win they would need to win over the votes of most of the small states. Or win over the votes over some of the small states and some of the big states. So it would need someone who is smart or at least somewhat smart.
Another one of my reasons for going on this side of the arguement is not only do they have to win over the electoral votes they have to win over the poularity votes. The next reason I have is the Electoral College requires the people running for president they have appeal to all regions and not just the west because they were born there or something like that.
Now there are a few bad things about the Electoral College. Like one is the fact that a tie is posible.
Another is that it's out dated. Lastly each party picks a slate of electors to vote for the party's nominee and it's posible that trust can be betrayed, but that's rare. That is what I think about the Electoral College. | 2 |
ac6a5bf | Is the landform on Mars created by aliens or just a natural landform. In the article '' Unmasking the Face on Mars'', it talks about this landform on Mars. Some conspiracy theorists say that the landform was created by aliens. NASA says that they wish that there was an ancient civilization on Mars. In my opinion, the face on Mars is just a natural landform because it is not seen as much often, it is proven not to be created by aliens, and the landforms are common around Mars.
First, the landform can not be seen as often. In paragraph 9, it says that mission control scanned the planet and they rarely pass over it. Mission control also took pictures of it. They took pictures to have a better look at the landform. In April 8, 2001 Mission control used Mars Global Surveyor to take more photos on maximum resolution because it can hardly by seen. So that is why the landform can be seen less than usual.
Secondly, the landform is proven not to be created by aliens. In paragraph 6 and 7, it says that on the scientists' research they found that the landform is not created by aliens. It is not created by aliens because the landforms are common in that area. Also that when they tried to find the answer, they used photos they took with maxium resolution on it. So that is how the landform is proven not to be created by aliens.
Thirdly, the landforms are common on Mars. In paragraph 12, It says that the picture of the landform is common. It also said that the landform is like the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. In the text is says,''that's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa is the same height as the face on Mars. So that is why the landforms on Mars are common, not created by aliens.
In conclusion, the face on Mars is just a natural landform. There are many reasons or details that says that it is a landform. Some reasons or details are that the landform is common on Mars and that it proven not to be created by aliens. The reasons for this is the formation of rocks. So that is my opinion on why the face is just a natural landform. | 3 |
ac6cc38 | The Face on Mars was not created by aliens, it is only a natural landform on Mars. It is a natural landform on Mars similar to a mesa or butte. The landform only resembles a face and was not made by aliens. Scientists have examined pictures of it and concluded it has no alien decent. The Face is a landform and was not made by aliens.
The first reason the Face is a landform is that the Face is similar to an Earthern landform like a mesa or butte. "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," says Garvin. NASA beleives this is a rock formation and not anything else. "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." The Mars Face is similar to Earthern landforms, thats why it can't be an alien produced object.
In 1976 the camera photos weren't as good as they are now. The photo in 1976 isn't as reliable as the 2001 photo taken. In paragraph 7 it said, "revealing a... natural landform." There was no alien monument after all." This shows that this newer photo from 1998 shows more evidence than the 1976 photo. More data can be gathered from newer photos to show that the Face is a landform.
If the Face was an alien monument, then NASA would tell people of the information to get an exploration going. They would have sent out another mission to investigate the Face. It said, "We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it." This shows that NASA was as anxious as the people to try and discover new foreign life. This is why NASA would have investigated if the Face on Mars was an alien monument But it is a landform.
Some people might say that NASA is still lying about the Martian Face being alien related. Conspiracy theorists would say things like the Face is pure evidence of alien life. In paragraph 5 it said, "the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars." The conspiracy theorists who say this are wrong because NASA has proven that it is a landform. This is why those conspiracy theorists are wrong.
The Face on Mars is a landform. It is not alien related in any way. The scientists at NASA have proven it. NASA would not lie, they need money to fund anything so they would have to tell people. This is why The Mars Face is not alien related and is a landform. | 4 |
ac6cc44 | I think they should use the The Facial Action Coding System in class rooms.It is something that could be a fun activaty that the class could do together and at the same time.It could be useful, the teacher could also use it to see if the students.Have any
problems by looking if the Facial Action Coding System picks up to much of negative emotions.
That way if the student is have problems and does not want to say anything.The teacher can find out that way.Then talk to the students that might have any problems so they can help them get the help they need.There are to many cases where students have problems at home or at school then dont say anything.
In some cases it becomes to much for them and they do horrible things.Like go to school with a gun to harm people.If the Facial Action Coding System picks up on those emotions maybe they can get the help they need.So that it does not get to that point and a tragity could be avoided. | 3 |
ac6cc81 | There are some advantages of limiting car usage. For exampple, it can cause a lot of pollution, traffic jams in small cities, and thr greenhouse gas emissions.
First of all, the advantages of limiting car usage is pollution. The passage states that "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Meaning that, Paris had to ban driving because there was so much polution going on. Pollution is one of the biggest problems in the United States today. And most of the people argue about it when it's actually them causing all of it.
In addition, the reason why they limit car usage is because in some small countries like, Colombia can cause a lot of traffic jams. The passage states that, "Bogota, Colombia-In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams." also, in the passage it discussed that, "The turnout was large, despite gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota. Meaning that cars were causing all of the rain showers and that is why Colombia banned cars for one day only to decrease the traffic jam and to do somthing about the rain showers that is happening daily.
Lastly, one of the advantages of limiting car usage is because of the greenhouse gas emissions. The passage states that, "President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week." Meaning that when a lot of people are using gas. | 3 |
ac71146 | In Germany, residetns have given up on cars. Vauban's streets are completely "car-free", except the main throughfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, and a few streets on one edge are only two places to park.
70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and the 57 percent sold a car to move there. Some say they feel happier now than before when they had a car. Automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs, where middle-class families from Chicago to Shanghai tend to make their homes. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced drastically. Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the U.S.
In the new approach to make cities denser, and better for walking stores are being placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway. In teh U.S., the Enviornmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legistors are starting to act, if cautiously. In previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other tansport.
After days of near record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined, according to Reuters, an international news agency headquartered in London; 27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday.
President Obama's goal to curb the U.S.'s greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week. Recent astudies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. Pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety. | 1 |
ac7467b | Dear senator, I believe that we should change the electoral college to popular vote. The reason why I believe this is because it's much more simplier and has less problems.
To start off with, its more simplier than the Electoral College. The reason why it simplier is because its much fast and easy than the electoral college. For example,"Who picks the electors in the first place? It depends on the state. Sometimes state conventions, somethimes the state party's central committee, somethimes the presidential candidates themselves. Can voters control whom thier electors vote for? Not always. Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candiddate? Sometimes". This quote just shows how confusing the electoral college is. Another example,"It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. This quote explains that the electoral college is outdated and should be changed.
To contiune, using the popular vote has less problems than the electoral college. For example "The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. 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 that state legislatures are technically resposible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. This quote explains that the electoral college will always cause a problem with voting the president you want. Another example "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality elections are spurious at best". This quote explans that we should abolish the electoral college and it also points out the flaws of it.
To end this off, I still believe that we should get rid of the electoral college. Wheather it's because it has several problems with it or because the popular vote is much more simplier. This is why senator i think we should get rid of the electoral college. | 3 |
ac756fd | Hello,I am Luke Bomberger and here to convince to be a part of the Seagiong Cowboys program. When I was a part of this program I really liked it I did a lot of fun things like baseball,volleyball,table-tennis. fencing,boxing,reading,and whittling of when we had extra time,but there were down-sides to being overseas like I did not get see my family much or friends.
I really liked when I got to help people in need. It gave me a sense of awareness and a purpose I even got to host a number a international students and exchanged visitors(hopefully one of will be able to do this one day like me).
If you like traveling you will really like this
I crossed the Atlantic Ocean sixteen times and the Pacific Ocean twice to help hurt in World War two. There also a lot of amazing places like an excavated castle in Crete and Panama Canal on my way to China.
It is also a long voyge to get from place to place it took me a month to get to China and two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States,but my task kept me busy like feeding the animals and cleaning there cages.
I really liked being a Seagoing Cowboy. It was always a really fun every day there was always something new to help people with. I hope you will join the program and if you do good luck by the way you will do great. | 3 |
ac76dc6 | Dear, Mr. Senator
The Electoral College is a process not a place. There's nothing wrong wit people voting for the president . Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO, in their time , agreed on? Abolishing the electoral college. Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for the slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.
Who picks the electors? It depends on the state. Sometimes state conventions, sometimes the state party's central comittee, sometimes the presidentail canidates themselves. Voters can't controls whom their electors vote for. Well not always .Voters sometimes get very confused about the votes in vote for the wrong canidate.
The best arguement against the electoral college is called Disater Factor. The Americans should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election in a century. Back in 1960, segregations in Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratics with new electors that would oppose John F. Kennedy.
The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruled by declaring the canidates who recieve the most votes. A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible, it happened in 2000, but it's less likely than a dispute over popular vote.
The Electoral College requires a presidential Canidate to have trans-regional appeal. No other region ( South, Northwest, etc.) has enough electoral votes to elect a president. The winner takes all method of awarding electoral votes. The electoral College avoids the problems of elections in which no canidate recieves a majority of the votes cast. For an example, nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes. | 1 |
ac845ca | The author suggest that studying Venus is a worth pursuit despite the danger it presents because of many reasons. Venus is often referred to Earth's "twin". "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in term of density and size" as its listed in the article in paragraph 2. Venus has a nickname, its usually called the "Evening Star", it the brightest point of light in the night sky so thats why it has a nickname the "Evening Star" In the solar system that we have right now, Venus is the second planet from our sun. 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets Venus.
Dispite the dangers it presents the author still suggest that we should study Venus. There's some negatives and positives about studying Venus. For example, some negatives are that Venus has a "surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valley's, mountains, and craters", as listed in the article in paragraph 4. Scientist think of them as challenges, as said in paragraph 6. Venus would be a challenge for scientist, it say's on paragraph 2, " since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." menaing this could be a problem they are trying to find out on how to handle.
Other necgative things that would accour is that the ttemperatures would be toasty. It would be like around 170 degrees Fahrenheit. Not easy conditions, but at a stage where humans can survive. As listed on paragraph 5, it say's " Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels." On paragraph 3, it say's " On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our planet." They are far more extreme than Earth's. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even tho Murcury is closer to the sun. 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.
Positive things that scientist have discovered that they can do is that Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. As well that the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Scientist have found a way to hover from a spaceship safely far above the planet. It can only "provide limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard form of photography and videography ineffective", as said in paragraph 6. "Researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enought to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus", as listed in paragraph 6.
NASA is working on different ways to approach Venus. They are working on a old technology thing called "Mechanical Computers". They are devices that were first envisioned in the 1800s, and played a important role in the 1940s during the World War II. I Personally think that NASA would work on approaching Venus. Like it said in the article, "No spaceship has landed in Venus in decades", so Imagine a spaceship landing in Venus again. What NASA is doing is good, that they are finding different ways to approach, as well as things that will help it get their, like for example, the old mechanical computers that was used during World War II. NASA sould countine to do research so that a spaceship may return to Venus. | 4 |
ac84bac | The face on mars is really just a butte; that is just a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa. NASA has even proved that with the first pucture. But people still didnt beleave them.
Science can prove this by taking pictures every few years to see the diffrance. In the oragnle photo in 1976 it does look like a face but, that was from 1976. Then in 1998 they took a other photo and it dosnt look like a face at all but, people still didnt beleave them so in 2001 they took one more picture, and it revealed it is just a mesa in the martian area of Cydonia. In Cydonia there are many mesas and buttes.
So that proves that the martian face is really a mesa. But you will still come up with awsers for the missing fetures like a ¨cloud¨ in the way, so the camraes couldnt get a good image. So like I said before NASA sent a other probe to get a good image and it was in 2001, and it pleased the publuc. | 2 |
ac8c2d6 | "A classroom computer could recongnize when a student is becoming confused or bored," said Dr. Huang and also predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This would be ground breaking if children, high schoolers, and even audlts coould use this techonology. It would change how everyone on this plant learns everything.
This is very vauble because the computer will be able to tell if you are happy, sad, confused, angry and other emothions. The computer could change its lesson around you and not what it is just programed to do like computers right now. Everyone human on this earth learns differently. Some students are more visual than others and some get distracted more. This program would help everyone equaily. Everyone on this planet learns differently and that is why this program would be so helpful to our education and future on earth.
This product would be so valuable to our society today. We need something like this for our education. Everyone would be able to learn how they want to learn and everyone would be given a fare and even learning expericne. | 3 |
ac8e39c | Driving a car that can control itself is pretty amazing. It might have it's difficulties, but you have to admit it's amazing! People would only have to drive like 30% of the time depending on the traffic. It'll tell you when its time to take over too so you'll have to be alert at anytime. Everything isn't going to be perfect. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" are about cars that drives by themselves which is spectular because it's car that can drive for people.
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" can possibly change the world. The driverless cars helps people save money on gas. People always complain about how gas is so high. If people get the driverless car, they save twice as much money. If the person who buys the car end up having kids, they can save the money they've been wasting on gas and can finally spend it on their children. They'll also have enough money for a family trip! Another example, the driverless cars went more than half a million miles without a crash. That's amazing considered it's drving by itself. There would be times where the person might have to control the car like when its to much traffic on the highway or driving in and out of the driveway. Other than that problem, it can drive on its own without any help and not get in any accidents. Last example, the car will alert the person when it needs the person to drive by many different ways. First way it'll alert the person by, the driver's seat that vibrates when the car is in danger of backing into an object. The other way, the flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up display. The Manufacturers are thinking about using camers to watch that the drivers are paying attention to the road at all times.
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" may have its flaws, but every single thing has their flaws. It may need you to take over at times, but thats all. The car helps people save money on gas and it's also keelping people safe while they're relaxing in the vehicle. Hope people wouid consider buying the driverless cars. Driverless cars are going to change the world! | 3 |
ac8e95d | Venus needs to be study, because we may need it later. Venus is the most like Earth in the solar system. Some of it's difference are pretty bad, but it's closest and maybe best opition for planetary vist. It's known about some of Venus diffculties, but if there is even a chance we could survive on Venus, shouldn't we try? One of the good things about Venus is that it's same size as Earth. If not the unbearable heat and carbon dioxide blankets we all would be able to be a on Venus. Another thing is that density matches ours, so we could stand on it. And then is basely our neighbor planet so we wouldn't have to travel that far to get there. But now you have to know the bad things about Venus. Firstly the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's, so we wouldn't be able to walk on there. In fact the would crush us completely. Then there's no water on Venus so we have to brings our own. Finally it's just too hot, with temperture of 800 degrees. So w/ all that in mind, Venus has it's ups and downs, but it's still worth studying to see if we can make it better. | 2 |
ac8fa95 | This goes out to the senator of florida. I think we need to chang to voteing way. We need to change it from the Electoral college to the most popular vote for the president of th Unitd States of America. Because whats the point of all of our parents and alot of other adults of voting if we can't even get what we want but no it's all up to the electors and congress, ect. like for real what is the point in voting if it isn't a fair shot.
Now that I've read it we don't even vote for the prsident we vote for the slate of electorswho in turn elect the president. Whom are the electors? They can be anyone not holding public office. Who picks the electors in the first place? It depnds on the state sometimes state conventions sometimes the stateparty's centeral committee sometimes the presidential candidates themselves. Can voters control whom their electors vote for ? Not always. Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong canidate? Sometimes.
At the most basic level the electoral college is unfair to voters. And dont likethat because the what the heck is happening if were not acktually voting for the president and just the electors. Like for real then whats the point of voting if were not getting what we want. When the goverment is all about giveing the people what they want. Like why can't they just let the people vote for the people the want to vote for like for real. This sucks that we can't get wht we deserve. | 2 |
ac90f1b | The Seagoing Cowboys was part of a program called the UNRRA that helped rebuild cities after World War 11. The Cowboys transported animals such as, horses, young cows, and mules overseas to the ruined cities. You should become a Seagoing Cowboy.
Luke became a Seagoing Coyboy after his high school graduation. The reason he joined was because his freind Don invited him to go with him on a cattle boat to Europe. Luke didn't disagree because he knew it would be a opportunity of a lifetime.
If you were to join the Seagoing Cowboys you would be a part of a very important program. 44 nations united to help the contries in ruins after World War 11. The Seagoing Cowboys shipped the animals to help the countries regain their food supplies, animals and other things that the countries needed.
Being one of the Cowboys didn't mean it was all work and no play. During the trips across the oceans you can see China, Greece, and other contries you've probaly never seen before. After a hard days work of cleannig stalls and feeding animals you could play baseball and volleyball in the holds where the animals were kept. Games like fencing, boxing, and table-tennis also kept the Cowboys ocupied.
There are dangers that come with this important job. Luke was a watchman on his second trip. His job was to check on the animals every hour. After he made his report to the captian he slipped on a ladder, slick with rain, and started to fall twards the Atlantic. A piece of metal stopped his fall but he couldn't work because he cracked a few ribs.
You should become a Seagoing Cowboy. It includes great sights, fun, and hard work. If you become a part of the Seagoing Cowboys you are a part of a great program that saves lives. The job is full of suprises and danger, but it is all worth it because you are helping others. | 3 |
ac919b8 | People use them to commute around various locations and it releases harmful emmissions. The object that is being reffered to is a car, a car is beneficial but people should limit car usage because it cuts down on pollution of the atmosphere and it is not as bad as it seems to not use a car all the time, and limiting usage of cars is starting to trend.
Cars release green house gas emissions that affect the ozone layer of the atmosphere. that is a main cause as to why people shoul limit car usage. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog...[the smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world." as explained in the article
Paris bans driving due to smog . This shows that smog is caused a good amount by cars and has affected major cities around the world. it also showed that when less usage of cars happened there was a 60 percent decrease in congestion which is a big percentile. in paragraph 5 of the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars.
it is explaining that automobiles are a big part of the suburbs and is a affect on the efforts to try in cut down on green house emissions of cars. its states in the article by Elisabeth Rosenthal, that "passanger cars are responsible for 12 percemt of green house emissions in Europe.... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States. Some may argue that the percent of green house emissions produced by cars is not high, but in reality it is and the numbers keep rising. If people limit the use of automobiles the numbers can be cut down and reduce pollution in areas that have heavy amounts of smog, smog affects the health of people and is toxic. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." as atated in the article
Paris bans driving due to smog this shows that driving is a major contributor to smog and can be reduced by people limiting the usage of cars.
limiting car usage is not so bad and can even promote a happier lifestyle as shown in the articles about limiting driving. "when i had a car i was always tense. i'm much happier this way,'' said a media tyrainer and a mother of two whos statement is said in the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars.
This shows even when the people of the community of Vauban, Germany, experince a fortuitous life style. '' Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a move,ent called "smart planning" as stated in the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars.
this shows that limiting car usage is a "trend" and it leads to a positive outcome that affects generations to come. People around the world are also taking up the movement of limiting car usage, in Bogotoa, Columbia a buisness man named Carlos Arturo said ''it's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." as referred to in the article
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota thsi shows that not only the advantages of limiting car usage is decrease in air pollution but can also benifiet the individual. 'If the pattern persists-and many sociologists believe it will-it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviroment." as explained in the article
The End Of Car Culture.
this is relatin to the pattern of how in America the buying of cars is going down since 2005. which as result of that ocurring has benifited or will benifiet the enviroment. This shows how more and more peole are traveling less by car.
The advantages of limiting car use far outway the disadvantages of not using a car. this means that people are duing more to commute less by car and more by eco friendly transportation like bikes. The limiting of car usage not only impact people now but will do so in the future of the world and if not changed will result in the mass pollution of the globe. | 4 |
ac94c8d | Venus, a very powerful, interesting, planet that needs to be explored more indepth to ease our minds, to let the curiosity subdue. Venus is absolutely a planet that deserves a our attention. Why does it deserve our attention though; is it worth our time and money? If it was not worth all these risks, why would it be a topic of matter?
In the passage it states," Venus, sometimes called the "Evening Star," is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot." Many wondering minds think about all the possibilities of what could be on Venus and if it could be similar to Earth. Venus is our neighbor, or as paragraph 2 states," Earth's twin." "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." If you had a brother or sister that close to you yet so far away wouldn't you want to find out about them?
Venus should be worth the exploration because there are so many possibilies of what could be on Venus. The passage states," Venus still has some features that are analogous to those close to Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sedient and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." As crazy as it sounds, there is a chance that the sediments from Venus, and other objects like rocks, are here on Earth too. I believe that we have scientists already working on the break down of what is in these objects and how they got here.
NASA workers have come up with the idea to send a hovering ship into orbit above Venus. Though the conditions are hard to work with, NASA has the capability to think of a way to let us receive information, pictures, and other objects from Venus. Towards the end of paragraph 5 it says, " Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans."
NASA should first send a demo rover out to Venus,before you send our people out. We have already discovered the conditions, like the air, and surface, of Venus. See if there is another object of surprise that could pop out of no where. Make sure everyone is geared up and ready to go before sending our people out. Once we have determined all the conditions and maybe an element of surprise, send a highly trained, willing, person out there. Not on a long 36 day mission but just a simple few days to see what evidence and new opportunities that could arise on Venus.
The danger side is very important to look at as well before sending our people out there. Like the passage says, " A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." This is one for the few risky obsticles NASA and its workers would have to overcome. Another example is, the temperature difference between the two planets. In paragraph 3 it states," These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals."
Though there would be many obsticles we would have to overcome to get to Venus, I believe if the United States could come together, we can go to Venus! Looking at all the great outcomes that going to Venus could give us I think it truly would be worth our time, money, and attention. All for the amazing possibilies we can uncover though this fantastic project. Despite the rough patches here and there, going to Venus would be such a win for America! The author suggests going to Venus is a " worthy persuit despite the dangers it presents," and his detailed evidence proves his suggestion. | 4 |
ac95919 | The use of technology to read emotional expressions of students in the classroom is valuable. This information could help in many situations. This information could let the teacher know when a student doesn't feel good or is feeling angry or sad and maybe better teach the student or get the student emotional help. This could let the Teacher know when the student is happy and help the teacher ways to keep the student happy and working hard. This information could help stop many bad situations caused by emotional distress in the classroom.
Facial Action Coding System is ver valuable in the classroom. This software could help you know when a student is angry or sad. This information could help a teacher find new ways to better teach a student. With just the slightest knowledge of how a student feels in a classroom could help a teacher find ways to cheer up the student and find ways of teaching that better fit the student. Facial Action Coding System would effectivey open up ways of better understanding the student. The author says "using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movement" which could be a helpful way of determining students needs in the classroom.
Facial Action Coding System's way of understanding each students emotions can help with teachers keeping students on track and working hard. The software could help the teacher recognize when the student is happy. This information of the students happiness could indeed help the teacher come up with more ways of effectively motivating the student and getting them to work even harder. This software would better help the students and teachers to effectively make sure everyone is successful in the classroom.
The Facial Action Coding Software could help stop situations in the classroom. This software could easily tell the treacher when a student is feeling extra sad or angrier than usual. This information could help the teacher get the student emotional help such as a therapist, counselor, or medical help. For example, in the cases of school shootings, 90% of the time the reason these incidents happen is because in the classrooms people don't recognize how a student is feeling and that student doesn't get help. With this software it keeps people aware of others' emotions in the classroom. This could make it easier to get the student help and ultiately stop the possible outcome. In situations where fights break out, it is often because the teacher doesn't recognize a students anger and can't effectively calm the students down in time and prevent the fight. With the Facial Action Coding System a teacher would be able to see when a student is angry or a bad situation is about to happen and the teacher could quickly make sure the situation is avoided.
Facial Action Coding System would be very valuable in detecting students emotions in the classroom. The software could helpe boost the students learning experience and help boost the students performance. The software could also help the teacher recognize students emotions and help find better ways to teach the students. This software could even be the one thing that prevents a major tragedy from going down. The Facial Action Coding System would be greatly useful and effective within the classroom. | 4 |
ac972d8 | The author did a great job supporting his/her previous statements. The author used many examples and real facts to back up the explanation of why we should keep studying and trying to get to Venus. Venus is a complicated planet, with many features that are not imaginable. Although we haven't made many big discoveries about Venus itself, we will still continue to learn, look at, and love everything about it.
The author stated that Venus is extremely dangerous do to the crazy temperatures, radioactivity, and absurdly high atmospheric pressures. "On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 3). This quote represents everything previously stated. It speaks of the high temperatures and the atmospheric pressure on Venus' surface and atmosphere. "Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun"(The Challenge of Exploring Venus).
This quote shows another fact that'll help back up other statements. It talks about how Venus actually has the hottest surface in our solar system.
In concluson, Venus should continue to be studied and should be understood by everyone. After reading this passage, it's hard not to see the beauty of life. After years and years of studying and learning, maybe one day we'll make a ground-breaking discovery about Venus, and we'll be able to inhabit the planet somehow, along with having a better understanding of our solar system. | 2 |
aca3239 | We humans have been trying to discover aliens for more than a million years. Why have we not found them yet? We have been up in space multiple times and we have had yet another more multipe times sent space robots that went into orbital. So ask your self this question why have we not found aliens yet?
I think due to evidence that it is a natural landform. I think it is a natural landform because in paragraph one it states that "...when it spotted the shadowly likeness of a human face." When I read this I then concluded that it only really looked like a human because of the shadows that make up the "eyes, nose and mouth" in which makes this rock figure looking as if it has a face. I do think that is a natural rock landform because God created the earth so that only people would live on earth. Also God never created aliens as it states in the begining of Genisis in the bible. Another example of why that the "face" on Mars is a natural landform is because it states in the text on paragraph seven that "There was no alien monument after all." This is poroving that even scienctists have conculuded that there was no landform on mars. Then on April 8, 2001 the space station found to "face landform". Though due to the pixalation i think that it did not look like a face anymore. The scientists should have put each photo in the same pixilation because it would have been an accurate demonstration over the years and how this rock landform has formed.
Based on the evidence from the article and my past knowleadge I have conculded that this rock landform is in fact a natural landform that aliens have not created/ made this face looking landform. So what do you think? | 3 |
aca684e | The technology to read emotions should not be used in classrooms. The reson I say it shouldnt be used is because in the passage it describes how if your lips tighten up it shows anger, but what if you smile with your lips closed as you are smiling your lips are getting tighter but you are happy and not angry so the emotion reader would be wrong. Anouther reson why the emotion reader shouldnt be in a classroom is because what if you came into school realy sad because someone had just passed away or something you wouldnt want the teacher coming up to you
trying to put this computer in your face trying to tell if your sad or not then you would be mad. I dont feel like people should know the way im feeling by having a computer tell me if someone wants to know the way i am feeling they can look at my face ans see they dont have to have a computer to tell them how im feeling. that is why the emotion readers should not be in a classroom. | 2 |
aca775b | Driverless Cars Are Coming
As technology evolves, there are better things that come into this world. Not only are the positive effects from a great technology, but there is also negative effects. Some technologies have more negative consequences than positive. One example of this includes driverless cars. Although they have not officially come out yet, they are still working on it. Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Though it might be a great technology for the future, it might not be the best technology to release just yet. Having a driverless car has way to many negative effects. These negative effects include: it could cause an accident and no one is responsible, a person can not enjoy driving, and if we have driverless cars there will have to be new laws that have to be put on the cars that could take a long time and most people do not like waiting.
A new technology always has consequences. One consequence of having a driverless car is that when an accident happens no one is to blame for the accident. In the world there is always someone to blame. That is just how the world works. One day a driverless car hits someone with an actual driver. The world will still have regular cars because not all people can afford such a luxory as a driverless car. Who is the actual driver suppose to talk to if he or she gets hit? There might be no one in the car and what happens from there? If these cars get released, the owner should always be in the car just in case this situation happens. One might say that it is a driverless car for a reason. Where is the car suppose to go if no one is in it? The car has no where to be unless there is someone going to another place. This is just one negative effect of driverless cars.
Some people really enjoy driving their car. The new car smell and the feel of how the car moves against the pavement. The thrill of the speed and adrenaline that the car has. No one can enjoy these feelings if no one is driving the car. Driverless cars might have electronic intelligence, but they do not have any feelings toward what is actually going on. If the world switches over to driverless cars how is anyone suppose to enjoy racing? Racing might be boring to some, but it is not boring to others. Racing is one of the true American sports. People who drive cars for a living really enjoy driving. That is why they have the job. If driverless cars come out on the market, it will put millions of people out of a job and then they can not provide for their family. Having a car that people can drive is very important and if a company takes the joy of having a car and a job away from people, that will be wrong.
One more consequence of having this new technology will be new laws. Everything great always has to have laws and consequences. Just like anything else in the world, there will be restrictions. One important thing about passing a law is that it takes a long time to get it into actual power. Time is what no one has. Having patience is good, but in a society where everything is moving 100 miles per hour, this law will take to much time to get into action. These driverless cars will need to have many laws. These laws will have to state who is responsible for a crash the owner or the company, where these cars can be and not be, and who can actually be behing the wheel of the driverless cars. New technology can be good, but in this case having a driverless car is obviously not the best idea that America has ever had.
In conclusion, having a driverless car has way to many negative effects and consequences. From this article we know that if we take away the joys of driving, people will be upset and maybe they will be without a job. We also know that if there accident no one will be responsible and that is not human nature. The world just not work in this manner. Also, new laws will have to be put in place to keep the world safe and are own precious lives. Laws take a long time to pass and patience is not one of the best qualities that everyone might or might not have. To have the power to put in a technology so great in society is awesome, but knowing that people could lose their lives and the enjoyment of having is car is not something society needs. | 5 |
acaec30 | New cars that drive on their own, sounds fun right? Well think again. Diverless cars should not be used thoughout the world. Diverless cars are not counted as driverless because people will still have to take control of them while in traffic zones, and during other occasions. Not everyone will be able to afford one of these driverless cars so people who usually ride in taxes or buses will no longer have that option. Also, cameras were thought of to be put in these cars to watch divers to make sure people are paying attention even though they are not driving to insure their safety if the driver has to take control, but that is invasion of privacy.
Why would you go out to buy a car that is "driverless" when you need to still have to drive it at any given time, and still have to watch the road? That defeats the whole purpose of having a car that drives on it's own. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" It says "All are designed to notify the driver when the road requires human skills, such as navagating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires".
If driverless cars become the new car than many people who take the bus, and ride taxis will be unable to have rides to their locations anymore. Especially if all other types of cars are got rid of. A lot of low income families rely on a taxi, train, bus, or even a subway as a cheaper way to get around because they cannot afford a car. That means they would be walking while higher class people are riding in a driverless car. The argument for supporters of driverless cars was "The cars would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." Still it does not change the matter that people would still have to walk to get to where they need to go if they cannot afford a driverless car.
Some people believe that diverless cars will be a good thing because it is a peak of our technology, they also think that the driverless cars will be able to help people stay focused on the road just as the article says "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." But that statement is not exactly true. If a person is put in a car that drives on it's own they are going to get more distracted and choose to be on their phones rather than paying attention to their surroundings because a driverless car is made to, drive on it's own.
That is why driverless cars should not be made, or even thought to be created. In reality, they are a distraction, they do not fufill their purpose, and they would end up costing way more than they are worth. | 4 |
acb0383 | Driverless cars are soon to be the future of the world.
People in this world have different views on the driverless cars.
Some people think it is a great idea for there to be driverless cars and other people do not think so.
The writer of this essay does not agree with driverless cars.
The driverless car seems to be a great new invention of the modern time.
It appears to the writer of this essay that it is a wrong move for this generation. The move to driverless cars seems to be the wrong idea.
The driverless car is not the best option for a mode of transportation.
Yes people are getting lazy and do not want to drive themselves, however, the car can only "handle driving functions at speed up to 25 mph[.]"
The driverless car seems pointless.
If people want a driverless car, then people need to think of ways to get around by not driving themselves.
Who wants a driverless car that still has to have a driver.
It is meaningless to have one then.
The only reason people would get one of these new cars is because of the new "entertainment and information systems" in the cars.
The driverless cars are not allowed to even be tested is most states.
In the states of California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia, they have allowed limited use of these new cars.
It seems pointless to only have these in ceartin places if they are not even going to be driven that much.
Even with the few states allowing them, it would be hard for people to even get one with the new laws for driving them.
With the new cars come new features of steering, sensors, and handiling. However is something goes wrong with the car and it causes and accident, who is to blame?
Will it be the owning company of the car, the driver, or some outside force of some kind?
This would cause a heated battle in a court room.
It should seem pretty simple.
Should company owners risk thousands of lives to make thousands of dollars, of should they not make the cars at all and carry on with the cars the people already have.
In conclusion, the use of driverless cars seems pointless.
The driverless car should not be produced because of the point of having a "driverless car" that still needs a driver. They should be taken out of production and testing to help possibly save the lives of thousands. | 3 |
acb6361 | The advantages of limiting car usages can be more fresh air, reduce smog, and might be a relief not using the car all the time. Cars have been the most reliable resource in transportation allowing people to go where they need to but it seems like its going down. More people buy less cars and travel without polluting a lot. Many countries took the initiative to have car free days and see how life is like.
Vauban, Germany is an example of a car free society gaining more and more residents. Limiting our car usages is more efficient then using them everyday. Try taking the bus or ride a bike and see how much better it is then being cramped in a car. 70 percent of Vauban's residents don't own cars and 57 percent sold theirs to live in Vauban. Hiking and other alternaives for travel are growing while cars are reducing. Sometimes people can't afford cars or rent one for usage.
Many countries are trying to reduce the usage of cars to clear pollution and allow more ways to travel. Beijing, China is the most polluted city in the world from all the cars and factories they have there. Paris even realized they needed to cut back on car usages and banned odd and even license plate cars usages knowing the smog and pollution was rivaling China. In a week the smog cleared enough for cars to be used again. Cars have a huge impact on civilization.
Bogota, Colombia's Car-free day is a big success. It was a great way to take away stress and lower pollution. Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city along with replacing uneven sidewalks with new smooth ones. The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. Thats how the constructions of 118 miles of bicycle paths are made. The most of any Latin American city.
The United States is in love with cars but it seems like less and less people want to buy one. Given by the technology we have now not that many people travel to see a friend or family member. | 3 |
acb9243 | I think that the new software, the Facial Action Coding System, is actually amazing and wierd at the same time. It can be interesting towards some people and not to other because it can make people feel uncomfortable.
Read peoples emotions without the persons consent might make them feel quite vulnerable or uncomfortable. Dr, Eckman has only classified six basic emotions. Happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness were the six emotions. I think that are more than just six basic emotions that need to be taken into consideration. I do agree when Dr. Haung said, "Even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression." Caculating the extent of someones real emotion or expression is very difficult for trained professionals to actually get how a person might be feeling, so how can a computer know? I think just by measuring the persons muscles on their face it can just be a fake smile just looking like a real smile. Using this technology in different locations and settings could be very helpful. If the prodect accuratly can measure exactly how a person might be feeling. They could use it in law inforcment to caculate sadness, happiness, being suprised, or being nervous. When the article says, "While looking in the mirror," it made me imagian myself looking in the mirror and trying the steps. Reading through paragraph nine and seeing, ("Putting on a happy face" actually work!) I completely agree with that statment because acting like you are hapy can actually help you be happy. I know that from personal experience. When I look at other people and see they are sad, I get sad or if I look at people that are excited i get excited.
This new technology can be very effective if it can actually tell the emotions of a person, not just the expression. This invention can help a lot of people understand one another. Understanding one another and ones emotions can lead to more peace in the world. | 3 |
acbaf3c | I think that the creation of cars that can drive themselves can have a mainly negative impact on the world for a couple of reason one is it would make many people jobless, if the car malfunctions a passenger can suffer a crash that is fatal, and if we needed a emergency ride how fast would it be able to make it thier to pick us up. these are all main concerns of any human being so do you think making these cars is a good idea?
First, if the creation of these cars were to actually succeed in making the new public transport system then it would put many taxi drivers, bus driver, and trolly drivers jobless. If all of the taxi drivers and etc. drivers were to get fired then they wouldnt be able to pay bills making them most likely homeless wich would be putting more weight on an already existing problem. Just for these cars being made it already makes a major problem even larger wich would degress america even farther than it was before. so thats my first reason that i think counting the progress of these cars would be a bad idea.
Second, what if there was a malfunction? would we still be safe? these are the questions that should be asked, If there was a malfunction in one of these cars would we be safe most likely not because there is no driver to take over if this happens and its because its a driverless car. Accidents if there was a accident would the car company be held accountable or the passenger. There is already so many car related deaths just think how many these cars would add on to that. thats my second reason that these cars will be a bad idea to keep manufacturing.
Lastly, In the article it says that we would no longer need to buy cars because the driverless car will be a public transportation well, what if there was an emergency and someone would need to be rushed to the hospital how fast could it come pick you up and get there. Not only that but if a another person was throwing up or bleeding in the car how many people would still wanna use it. Diseases would be another problem it would cause more spread if somone were sick and in a car and then another person had gotten into that car later then they have a possibility of getting sick too. thats my third and last reason that making these cars are a bad idea.
In conclusion though many people think this would be a step up for america or even humanity it wouldnt be mainly because for every problem it fixes it causes two more. Those are my three reasons making tons of people jobless, accidents may increase, and emergency plus diseases. | 4 |
acbe7d6 | I cant imagine a life or a point in time where in the future people could be driving driverless cars. Can you? I thinks its okay if some people who need help driving uses them or might own one, but for everyone? Not exactly how I see the world becoming better for everyone because of that. The world evolves in many ways with transportation already now in numerous ways. The bike lanes are everywhere, people run, walk, or jog places, theres Uber thats now pretty big. But why a driverless car? So now people can become so lazy they barley have to drive? From the age where your remembering to be in a car you cant wait to be the next person to be able to drive thats somehing I & many others agree shouldnt be taken away.
A driverless car seems very possible within the next few years but I dont see any reasoning behind the fact that we dont need it. Maybe for older folks who have trouble or someone having so much money for one they just get one for the fact that they want to say that they have it. Also technicaly it's not even a "driverless" car. You still have to be awake, aware, & control it through tough spots like a car crash, & road work.
If your in a age where your getting a permit or you already have one dont you think when you was younger, before all that, that you couldnt wait to get your car & licaens. You would think of driving somewhere with someone if you prefer that out to eat or to a store littlle things that make you feel like you accomplished something. You'd miss it right? So why have a company tell you dont have that excitment for being a legal driver & showing you can do things, & share thier dream of just being able to sit in the car for however long with who ever your with just to sit there?
Evolution is a big thing to be apart of in this generation but its really simple to do if you have that idea. If its big enough to turn people's heads to whatever your idea may be then you have this platform of doing so. Changing the way people now get around is a big industry. There's always compatition & there is always going to be better. Wouldnt you rather have to drive to all the places you go yourself or would you just sit in the car doing nothing waiting for your turn to drive? I would love to be able to drive now & I will be able to soon. Nothing is better than the feeling of doing it yourslef.
So dont waste thousands of dollars of your hard earn money on something you can just do yourself. There's no reason in investing in that. They're simplilar solutions to this problem than you think. So think back now can you imagine just being lazy sitting in your car waiting for your turn. I know i cant & I know I definetly wont be. | 3 |
acc0f5b | The challenge of exploring venus is so one knows what is there. Pluse no one knows anything about it soneone would have to go. Then agian it would take forver to get there and there whould be no air maybe bc its in space.
See no ones ever visited venus be it is far away and no one has done reserch on it to see if theres liveing things on there or not so someoe whould have to do that. Then someone would have to go up there maybe put a drone or rover on it drive it around and see. Then someone would have to go back up there and get the rover then look at the video to see if anythings there. Then we would have to see if theres air on this planet so maybe one day humans can live on a differnt planet.
That is why we don'go to venus yet because then we would have to built better rockets. Then we would have to get astronut food and make sure they have air helment just in case. Maybe some jet packs just in case. they get stuck and cant find a way back. | 1 |
acc0f9d | In the article the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represents. Studying Venus is a difficult challenge that NASA is trying to achieve. NASA is trying to create an aircraft that will last long in venus's environment conditions. They have a aircraft that is made out of silicon carbide that will last about 3 weeks.
NASA
and other scientist believe that venus was once like earth, they believed that there was once water and living oganisms. Due to the planet being so close to the sun, and the sun being as hot as it is the temperature of the planet is average 800 degrees fahrenheit. The planet now has a rocky sediment, valleys, mountians, and craters.
Also from the planet being so hot the aircrafts that had been made for venus wouldn't last very long. The atmospheric pressure is 90 time greater than what we experence on our own planet. The aircraft must be strong enought to support itself and not be crushed. "even a submariene accustomed to diving in the deepest parts of our oceans would be crushed and would liquefy many metals.
Not only is venus very hot and has a greater atmospheric pressure, the weather and natural diasters are dangerous. Venus often has "erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on it's surface."
Going to venus would be a very diffuicult for scientist to achieve. The aircraft that they built would only last about 3 weeks. The temperature on the planet is average 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atomic pressure is 90 times greater than is is on earth. The Weather on venus is also very dangerous. | 3 |
acc1e20 | The conditions on venus aren't pretty. The tempertures get up to 800 degress fahrenheit. Humans can barely deal when it's a 100 degrees in Arizona. The carobon dioxide is so strong that we could survive it more than 10 minutes. Venus's surface tempertures are too hot to even walk on. Venus even has very dangerous weather like erruptng volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to proes seekng to land on it's surface.
Where could we go if earth was to blow up? Mars. Venus or Mercury, We don't have a for sure answer to that. Exploring Venus isn't a bad idea but very risky. We could see what Venus has that could benefit ot affect Earth. Considering Earth is the closet planet to Earth. NASA could potentially send robots in the spacecraft to see what information they can give.
No ones life should have to be put on the line to explore a diffrent planet. I personally think its a great idea. As said in the passage "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." | 2 |
acc3c33 | In my opinion, driverless cars would be a great addition to the road. Driverless cars allow drivers to be more safe and alert on the road, they don't require as much fuel, and would overall help prevent accidents!
I think every driver wants to be safe and alert on the road. Now, with the driverless car, you are able to be even more safe and alert! The driverless car would be equipped with laser beams that will constantly update a 3-D model of the car's surroundings. The car would basically be another set of eyes on the road to help keep you or other people in the car safe!
Everyday people are driving, whether it's 5 minutes away or 2 hours away. They need their car to be fueled up so it can take them where they need to go. Depending on where you are going and how much time it will take, you might need to fuel up a couple times. With the driverless car, it takes half the fuel it normally would take in a regular car! This allows you to spend less money and less time fueling up!
Allowing the use of driverless cars would help decrease the amount of accidents on the road. As drivers, we sometimes get distracted, but with the driverless car it could help you keep your eyes on the road. It would have sensors on the steering wheel to keep you alert and focused on the road. The driverless car's main job is to watch the road and keep you safe!
Overall, I think the driverless car would be wanted and even needed on the road. It helps you stay alert and safe, it would require half the fuel a normal car would need, and it would keep you focused on the road at all times! | 3 |
acc5ef8 | I beileve the author supports this acticle very well humans could survive on Venus. It would take time and work but I beileve it could happen. Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, occasionally the closest in distance too. Earth, Venus and Mars, our other planetary neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds.
These diffrences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. The Harsh tempatures and low air pressure the raidation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions but survivable for humans.
NASA is working on other approches to studying Venus. For example, some simplifed electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted weeks in such condtions.
Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On planet's surface tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.
Venus has the hottest surface tempature of any planet in our solar system, though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking land on it's surface. If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface? Astronmers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of a rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains and craters.
In conclusion I believe humans could live on Venus unless It orbits too close to the sun it could get to hot. Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dnagers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. Would you want to live on Venus with the high tempatures and low air pressure? | 2 |
acc6d52 | Seagoing Cowboys
Imagine being on a boat, on your way to help people and animals. Well, you can take that opportunity right now! Sign up to become a segoing cowboy. This will give you the opportunity to help animals, go sight seeing, and travel.
Firstly, becoming a seagoing cowboy helps animals. You can feed horses,cows,and mules. You also help these animals cross oceans to get to other countries. This helps me infer that people that like animals will also like this program.
Secondly, there is sight seeing. I took a gondola ride in Italy. I also saw the panama canal and Acropolis in Greece while doing the program. From this I can infer that people would like this part of the trip.
Lastly,you get to travel places. Some of these places include China, Greece, Italy, and much more. Also, you get to travel on big boats. This helps me infer that people that like adventures would have a good time doing this program.
Overall,you should become a seegoing cowboy because you get to help animals, go sight seeing, and travel. This is a great opportunity for everyone. Sign up to become a seegoing cowboy today! | 2 |
acc9711 | Transportation takes up most of our time. Many of us sit in the cars waiting to get to a place without realizing that we actually spend more time in our car. Transportation is the second leading cause for the emissions in the United States. Car-Free cities are starting to trend in Europe. In the car-free cities you no longer have to worry about where to park. We need to lower the amount of emissions we produce on a daily bases, for America most of our emissions are from gas while in Paris the emissions come from diesel.
Paris has been really polluted, there is much smog that they had decided to ban driving, whoever drove recieved a fine on that day. Paris would take turns on the license plate number to determine if you could drive that day or not. A car-free day in Bogota, Colombia had many people walking, hiking and taking the bus. The streets were free or almost free from traffic jam,violaters who did not participate were fined.
Obama has recently announced that he would like for America to lower the emissions we produce. Statistics show that less people are purchasing cars also there are less people getting their drivers license. In Vauban, Germany they do not just go a day without cars, it is a suburb where street parking are forbidden, it is an expermental site where people are to be without cars. People from there are much happier they no longer have to worry about traffic or congestion they just walk, ride a bike or bus. 70% of Vauban families do not own a car. Cars can cause us to be stressed and it even harms the enviroment.
The advantages would be we'd be more calm and relaxed people rather then trying to hurry and speed in a car. We would also have much clean air. The money that the city gets from the violators would be used to make the community a much better and clean place. Although it is limited it does not mean you cannot use your car, but you may want to live in another area if you keep getting fined. Many people if they choose to walk or ride a bike will become more fit and healthy. Maybe we should consider it even if its just for a day it makes all the difference. | 2 |
acc9a14 | Dear state senator i am in favor of the
Electoral College .The
Electoral Collage the process,not a place Founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between elections of the president by a vote in congress and election of the president by the popular vote of qualified citizens.
Electoral Collage consis of the selection of the electors where they vote for president and vice presidence,and the counting of the electoral votes by the congress. The
Electoral Collage consis of the 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to select the president. Under the 23rd Amendment of the constitution, the district of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the
Electoral Collage .Each canidate running for president in our state has his or her own group of electors. The electors are chosen by the canidates political party,but states laws vary on how the electors are selected and what their responsibilities are.
President election is held every few hours on tuesday after the first monday in november. You help choose our states electors when you vote for president because when you vote for president because when you vote canidate you are actually voting for your canidates electors. After the presidential election your governor prepares a certificate of ascertainment listing all the candidates who ran for presidenty in your stare along with the names of their respective electors. The certificate of ascertainment declares who the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent. Your state certificates of ascertainments are sent to the congress and the national archives as part of the official recors of the president election.
Why people think the
Electoral collage is wrong? Because over 60% percent of the voter would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now. This year the voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidency. Whats the bad thing about the
Electoral collage is that voters vote not for the president, but for a slate electors,who in turn elect the president. Peaple dissagre with the
Electoral collage do to the fact is is unfair to voters. Because of the winner take-all system in each state,canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning. Those are mostly the main reason why the people do not want the
Ellectoal collage to continue they want to be the one who choose who is winning.
I agree with the
Electoral collage and think it should continue with it. I think the president and the congress ahould continue to decide who is the winner they got more expirience and know who will be the best person to continue with it and win the
Electoral collage . | 1 |
acd3a8d | Limiting car usage is great way to start helping out our planet in many ways. It's called "smart planning" that is a movement to separate suburban life from auto use in Europe. In many countries, cars are creating one major problem in our environment, which is air pollution.
The main cause why we should abstain ourselves from car usage is to reduce air pollution. Paris is one of the most European capitals that has the most smog in the city. Due to the excess of air polluted, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear out the city. If we take efforts forward, greenhouse gas emisssions can decrease.
The advantages we take of limiting car usage is less congestion on the streets, ride our bikes or go walking which is very healthy too."It's a good opportunity to take away stress" (source number 3). In Bogota, Columbia there's a program in which a day where people hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work to limit traffic jams, others who violate to complete this will be fined $25. Since a lot of people were participating, other cities were enthusiastic about this event and joined. It's time to take act and make a change for our environment. | 3 |
acd5ada | Is getting emotional facial recognization the best way to go with technology? Computers are getting smarter and it doesn't sound like it will be slowing down any time soon. When scientests and computer programers combine it can be a beautiful thing. Scientests are developing better ways for humans and computers to comunicate. With new encoding and development of software scientests have now created a way for a computer to tell how someone is feeling by using their facial muscles. The new programing will be a positive thing, muscles in the face just act naturally, the encoding is complex, and the new technology could be coming to local classrooms.
The Scientests have a whole process. The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D model of the face and has all 44 major muscles that must move like human muscles (D'Alto 3). All of the muscle units that work together as one is called an "action unit." Since all facial emotions are universal the technology could go worldwide once improved. The software could also identify mixed emotions. The technology reads how major muscles move and show emotion. With each emotion that is showed they compare it to a neutral face. Every day humans do the same thing. Humans read the face of other humans to try and tell how they are feeling. If they are sad or happy. There are six major emotions within the technology right now, there maybe more encoded at a later date.
With the new technology comes new computers. A home PC could not take the proper encoding right now. The scientests are working on something much better to try and get the home PC's to where they can encode them. The scientests new computer software stores similar anatomical information as an electric code (D'Alto 5). Although the home PC couldn't handle the encoding, they can give simple encoding to your home PC. The encdoing that can be given is simple instructions for differnent emotions. The simple encoding would not be able to read mixed emotions.
The emotional facial reading could be coming to a local schools. The new technology would be able to tell if a student was bored, or if they got confused. Then the computer could modify the lesson for the student to help them learn better. The technology could act like an effective human instructor. Must human communication is nonverbal. Emotional communication is also nonverbal. The studesnts could improve with one on one lesson plans. The studensts could also work at their own pace and have their own personal plans.
All the technology needs to understand how to read and comunicate with a human through facial features. The anatomy of a human is complex and hard to understand and encode into computers. The new programing will be a positive thing, muscles in the face just act naturally, the encoding is complex, and the new technology could be coming to local classrooms. Scientests are hard at work trying to make the new technology common and natural for everyone to use. | 3 |
acd81a8 | Dear, state sentor
Getting rid of the electoral college would be a bad idea because of the ease it puts on voting and it makes the candidates work harder to becaome president.
When a person runs for president they are trying to take on the hardest job possible, running a country. When they are on their campaign they visit states individual amd they spen alot of time on swing states or the big states such as California, Florida, and Texas. without the electoral college it kinda defeates the purpose for them spending as much time as they do in those states because yes they have a large amount of people but so does every other state, the only large difference now is the amount of electoral votes each one gets. where as with the electoral college they spend more individualized time with each state to try to sway the majority to get all the electoral votes since they cant split them between the candidates. it all comes down to who the smarter candidate is and how they spend time and what they are trying to achive. overall the way it is now makes them wotk harder to win the election. with voting no one likes a tie and without the electoral college that can happen.
In 2000 gore and bush had a fiasco with voting in the presidental election and it was the first time since 1888. Gore who had more popular votes than bush only lost because Bush had the most electoral votes. If it was only up to popular votes than it can easily come down to a tie, what then? recount after recount, or simple debate (but who decides that?). In some cases without the electoral college it could actully make the process because yes they dont have to spend much time campaigning in certain states they get to visit smaller states that tend to get neglected during the campaigns so everyone is more of an informed voter when it comes time to vote. lets say bob and sally campaing against each other and with out the electoral college they can go ariund to smaller states and the big ones and when the voting results are in yes they can be closer or larger apart you also see how america feels whenit comes to politics, yes you can see it with the electoral college but it is a smaller amount of votes so it will always be close but seeing how america feels isnt as easy.
When it comes down to voting the Electoral College is an over all easier way to vote and makes the candidates work harder to win an already hard election to run the country. | 3 |
acda8eb | In the year of 1976 NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft found a face looking figure staring back at the cameras. A lot of people have conspiracy theories that the aliens caused this. Though, anyone with a decent amount of knowledge in astronomy and even geology, will know that this is simply a mesa of some sort.
With a lot of people and few scientists still believing that the Face was some type of alien creration or artifact, it became a priority for NASA when the MSG arrived to Mars. The MGS was ready to fly over Cydonia to have a better look and get a better picture of the Face. As they were flying over the Face, Michael Malin and his MOC team took a picture ten times sharper than the previous pictures taken by the Viking 1 spacecraft. The pictures were released and all the people eager to see the pictures and everyone from NASA saw that it was nothing but a natural landform.
Though, people and few scientists weren't ready to give up on their opinion. When they looked at the pictures they claimed that the time the picture was taken was a cloudy time. They believed that the clouds affected the quality of the picture. They also said that maybe the alien markings were hidden by the haze.
So NASA reacted to these skeptical claims. On April 8, 2001, On a clear day with no clouds, the MGS was ready for a second investigation of the Face. The MGS rolled 25 degrees to the center of the Face. The picture was amazing using the camera's maximum resolution. The pixels from the image from 2001 spans 1.56, while the viking's best photo had 43 meters per pixel. The picture was so amazing that if there was some objects like landed plains or small shacks you could see what they were.
The Face was an amazing discovery, though some people got carried away thinking it was created by aliens. Though those conspiracy theories were invalid, it doesn't take away the merit from NASA findind this amazing landform on mars and taking high quality pictures. You never know, people might even be able to experience the Face from an even closer look! | 4 |
acdebde | Twenty five years ago something happened on Mars. In 1976 we discovered that there was a unusual face on the planet of Mars. The landform was located 41 degrees north martian latitude.
The face on Mars is a landform because there was no alien monument. And also scientists believed that the face was an alien artifact. I know this because in the article it states, "The caption noted a huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." This shows that there is no alien activity on Mars and that there's just shadows that forms the human shaped head.
Twenty five years ago NASA found a human shaped head on the planet of Mars. People believed that alien activity caused the head but what really was was shadows that formed the head. Then in 1998, and 2001 NASA and scientists upgraded to a new high resolution image to figure out it wasn't formed by aliens. | 2 |
acdf709 | Dear senator
I think you should keep the electoral colleges. The elctoral colleges are not a vote for presidency but its the vote for slate of electors who in turn elect the president. This is a great way to find a good president because if the people voted they might not know much about the president that they are voting for but if the slate of electers are the ones who pick the president they might know what the man running for president is not telling us. If their is a tie in the electoral votes than the election would be thrown to the house of representatives, where state deligates vote on the president. The electoral college should stay.
The electoral colleges has been an american tradition for hundred of years why would you end such a long and strong condition. The only bad thing about the electoral colleges in my opinion is that it is unfair to voters because of the winner take all system in each state. ( According to the article the electoral college: why even the best laid defenses of the system are wrong) "during the 200 campaign, seventeen states didnt see the candidates at all, including road island and south carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didnt get to see a single campaign ad." Bobe dole thinks they should abolish the electoral college he thinks its unfair, outdated, and irrational.
It is the electers who vote for presiden not the people it is possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the nations popular vote. It happened in 200 when gore had more popular votes than bush but bush had more electoral votes and bush still won the race and became president. You should keep the electoral college throughout history it has helped us in many ways. Lots of people say you should abolish it but give it a few more years and see what happens. The electoral college also stops run off electios this means no candidate recieves a majority of the vote cast. If their is a run off election the people might think the election was rigged or unfair. So please leave the electoral college alone it benefits us in a lot of ways.
from: PROPER_NAME | 2 |
ace2bd7 | Venus is one of the most unknown planets to exist to hot to land on to dense and to challenging to land rovers on heres my evidence. Also explaining
why this planet is so mysterious.
Venus is an extremely dangerous planet to study but well worth it because, little is known about it. "No spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours", this states sits near impossible to even send rovers so gathering data is truely not possible. Risking things to learn more and more about this planet everday is being done. Even hovering the planet is not enough to gather the most information needed. "More importantly, researchers cannot take the samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance Even if pictures are taken the lights cant pass through the dense clouds and atmosphere "Most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere", Also hurting chances of getting any look at the actual floor/ground of the planet.
This statement is facts each detail well explained in conclusion Venus will take a very long time to learn more if ever its beautiful and a neighbor planet but will always be unhabitable. Our travels beyond earth should not be limited by the dangers. | 2 |
ace59f1 | In Paragrph 1 sentence 1 it says that somrtimes Pluto is called "Evening star. However its nickname is misleading since Venus is actually a planet. In our solar system Venus is the second planet from our sun. While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth , it has provide a very challenging place to examine more closely .
In paragrph 2 Venus is somrtimes often referred to as Earth's "Twin" Venus is the closet planet to Earth In terms of density and size and occasionally the closest in distance too. Earth Venus, and Mars, are other planetary neighbor.
A thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbron dioxide blankets Venus. The clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venu's atmosphere. On the planets surface, tempertures can average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit , and the atmospheric preesure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anthing humans encounter on Earth such an eviorment would crush even a submarine accustomsed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans .
The Nationnal Aeronautics and space Administartion (NASA) has one particuar compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus.
NASA is working on othe approaches that Pluto might be a planet or a star. In the 1800s
NASA was still studyimg in the 1940s during World War 2. The tought of compuetrs exisiting in those days ,but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electrions at all.
NASA is striving to meet the challege presneted by Venus has value , not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itslef ,but also because human curiosty will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors .
Pluto is a planet according to NASA. Since Pluto is a planet Pluto is dangerous because Pluto can cause problems to the atmosphere and it can cause harm to our sister planet and it can cause the sun to give Earth more sun and really hot heat and we would have to turn the ac on high.
Pluto can be very tough to study as well because pluto can be a planet one momemt and a star the next and NASA somrtimes give us the wrong information sometime. Earth has a lot of preesure ,heat and other forcers that Earth is responbile for and Earth cant do Everthing by itself beacause Earth needs backup from other planets. NASA also that cell phone and tablet acid or heat capable can burn a tin from only on the planet Mars and Pluto because its so hot in those 2 planets. | 2 |
ace9d62 | The reason Luke joined the Seagoing Cowboys was so he could help rebuild people's home so they wpouldnt have to move to different countries. The purpose of the Seagoing Cowboys was to bring livestock and food for the livestock so they could live and eat so they wouldn't to stay without shelter.
food so they brought and the reason luke knew how to do all that hard work was because he helped out a bunch on his aunt's farm with cattle and horses and on Lukes second trip he was a watchman at night so no one would steal i would think.
Then later on that night he ended up breaking some ribs because he crashed into the metal strip on the side of the ship so he wouldnt fall in the ocean. Whenever he got free time with the other cowboys the played baseball and volleyball then they'd go back to work . and then he figured out what being a Seagoing Cowboy mean't to secure people's needs and and helps citizens. | 2 |
acecdfa | " Can you imagine a time in te future when no one buys cars because no one needs them anymore?" From the passage that i've read they've predicted that driverless cars will first be issued around 2020 thats just 4 years away! I believe driverless cars could severely lower the percentage of an accident happening. The odds of a teenager crashing with driverless cars could go down nearly an astonishing 68%. The police force would have to watch out for distracted drivers that are on there cellular devices or even doing there make-up in the car. Would you like to see driverless cars in the future.
There are a handful of companies developing prototypes and concept cars, such as Toyota, BMW, Google, GM, Tesla and even apple has attempted at it before, but havent had as much success compared to the brands listed before apple. GM has had Computer driven cars since the 1950's. In 1950 GM created a concept car that could run on a special test track. Of course that didnt suceed due to the expenses the government would have to pay for new roads with sensors and electrical cables which was way too expensive to be practical.
In 2013, BMW created a development called "traffic Jam Assistant." The car could handle driving functions of speeds up to 25 MPH. I would love to drive everyday, but i do understand when parents say it's boring after so many years you just have to change up stuff such as a new car. Why would anyone want a driverless car? It would be interesting to show off your driverless new car, but in the end everyone would get bored just sitting in the drivers seat while the car takes you wherever you want to go. Even if a driverless car was created certain states wouldn't let you drive it on their roads. In states such as California, Nevada, and even Florida doesnt allow people to test a computer driven car without a human driver at the wheel. Would you want a driverless car to take you everywhere?
Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Back in the 1950's none of this was possible without costing millions of dollars just for a simple car now that we have all the sensors the prices of that manufacturing rates will go down if we ever continue are dream of creating a driverless car. in the 1980's, automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of the antilock brakes. Antilock brakes have helped prevent millions of accidents in our world today that could have led to thousands of deaths. So do you believe we should keep on striving for driverless cars. | 3 |
acf38f8 | Many people are not using vehicles anymore. It could be more alternatives for transportation are showing up, to lower air pollution rates, the goverment might be forcing citizens not to use their vehicles, the enviroment they live in, or simply citizens have no interest in driving. There are many reasons to not driving, but maybe there are advantages to limiting car usage.
Some cities have been built where streets, driveways and garages for home are forbidden, such as, Vauban, Germany. These suburban communities have used every other way of transpotation except cars, taxis, buses, and some even trains; they pretty much use anything that doesn't have an engine. Many citizen like not have to drive everywhere. In Source 1, paragraph 3, ""When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two." Many of the citizen that live in Vauban give the same answer or just want something different in their lives. In France, the govermnent enforced a partial driving ban to clear smog in the city get rid of traffic. In Source 2, paragraph 5, "Congestion has down 60% in the capital of France, after five days of intensifying smog." The lower rates of traffic congestion helped a significant amount of French citizens to get to where they were going faster and less accident on the road.
Other countries have created a somewhat holiday called car-free day where millions of people hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work during that day. The only vehicles on the road were buses and taxis. In Source 3, paragraph 7, "These people are generating a revolutionary changeand this crossing the borders." The citizens doing this are very open to this change and enthusiastic about it. It also helped cities renovate and rebuild themselves. In Source 3, parargraph 9, "Parks and sports centers have throughout the city; uneven and pitted sidewalks have been replaced by brad, smooth sidewalks." These change that this holiday has influenced helped the cities to become a safe place.
In conclusion, the limits of car usage has helped bring great beneficial change to many countries of the world. It has provided us with altenate ways of travel, health habits, the reduction of air pollution and a great way to interact with others. | 3 |
acf3b94 | Driving cars can be a tiresome chore. In "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents driveless cars. Although there is not an official driveless car, there is progess towards making one. He displays both the advantages and disadvantages of driveless cars, but the advantages out-weigh the disadvantages.
The advantage of driveless cars is people no longer have to drive. Without people in control, there could be less accidents, leading to safer roads. When driving, some people lose focus, become distracted, or even text and drive. With driveless cars, the computer in the car would control the car. Unlike humans, the computer in the car would not have these issues. According to the article, Google has studied cars that could drive independently. These cars drove more than half a million miles and they did not crash! The odds of accidents happening when driving half a million miles is high, so although these cars were not fully, driveless, imagine how safe a truly driveless car will be. In addition, newer technology is coming into place to make driveless cars safer than human drivers. Several parts of the car are being enhanced. For example, sensors have been altered and advanced greatly within ten years.. Sensors were used in 1980 as antilock brakes, but in ten years, these senors had become more advanced. They were able to sense and respond to danger on the road. With the information from sensors, the car will be able to apply brakes when needed. According to the article, this allows "far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." This shows that the driveless car will be safer than a human driving. Driveless cars will be able to handle more and more tasks on their own with this new technology. With the progress being made with driveless cars, these driveless cars will be safer than cars driven by people today.
In conclusion, driveless cars will truly benefit the world. Although, it make take time to fully build and design a driveless car, it will be worth it. Driveless cars will be ensure the safety of driving. It will be a much safer option than human drivers. | 4 |
acf9971 | I don't think driverless cars should happen. I could see that having a lot of problems with driverless cars. I can only see it being good for two reasons.
I can see a lot of people not listenig to the rules like keeping your eyes on the road. I can see more people looking away and going on phones. With cars now, people look and text on their phones, which they should't be,but I can see more people looking on their phones with driverless car. The driverless car can have many problems with it not working corretly. And if the car does fail their are gonna be many problems to figure out who's fault it is. In the article it says, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacture?" The only thing I can see it good for would be for drunk drivers, it would still be illegal but it would be safer.
I think it would be better to have drivers driving the car then to have driverless cars. It would be safer to have a driver driving the car. Their wouldn't be new laws. Not as many cases of who's fault it is. | 3 |
acfb858 | People actually thought that the face on the planet was a sign that there was still life on that planet or an alien monument , and that the NASA was trying to hide the photos alot of people couldn't wait to see the photo of the face .
In NASA we thought that it was created by an alien , because thats what people thought , they thought it was bona fide evidence of life on mars because why would an face just appear out of nowhere it had to be an reason for it . so people thought that it was somebody on that planet or an alien . But people never really thought that it can just be and nartual landform we know that sounds weird because , out of all things why would an face just appear so that had people thinking of weird or different ways it formed or got there .
In all reality that it was just an natural landform some people didn't thought we were lying and just trying to hide how it really got there . Defenders of the NASA budget wished that there was an ancient civililzation on mars so we could really know how it got there . But nobody knew so we had to do more resreach , just to find ou that the face was not an alien or a signal to something like life still on the planet it was just a natrually landform but not everyone was satisfied becasue that was a weird landform . they said that the alien markings were hidden by haze .
When they took a picture with the special camera that shows every little detail .
The picture actually shows is the martian equivalent of a butte or mesa , they said thats a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on mars .
The NASA and all the other groups thought that it was an alien mounument or a sign of life on that planet they never really thought of a natrually land form because it was weird that a face had came out of nowhere on a planet , they had took alot of pictures people thought that nasa was hiding the pictures . they did alot of research just to find out that the face was a natrually land form we already knew , they didnt cause they thought it was weird that a face just pops out of nowhere so everybody thought it was something different but in reality it was just a natrually landform that everybody thought it was something different . | 3 |
acfd6bb | I really have to explain this again? This is probably the fifth time. Whatever, here goes. First of all, the fact that this 'face' looks like a face is just a coincidence. If there truly is or was life of Mars, why would this massive rock be a sign of it? The earlies picture of the face is an extremely low quality and blurry image taken by a really old camera. Even in the picture from 1976, to me it just looks like a rock, which it is. Newer photos show the intricate cracks and molding on the landmass, there's even 3D models showing what it really is. There is absolutely no way this is something created by a living being. Just look at the size of it! Well, I guess you can't tell how big it is from the photos, but it's miles long. There is nothing that could exist with enough power to make something this huge, yet leave nothing behind to show us proof of foreign lifeforms. So many consistencies in this evidence has to convince anyone skeptical that the Face is just a rock. Got it? I hope you learned something today. | 3 |
acffb3c | I feel as if the making and implementaion of driverless cars will benefit our society greatly. I do not drive personnaly but as someone who ha been picked up,an dropped off endless amount of times i have seen my fair share of the roads. Upon these roads bad drivers and good drivers exist; and they are all humans controling the cars. As humans we are not perfect at all and we have our flaws. An example of one of many flaws is our inability to truly multitask. Texting and driving is something many of us believe we can do but it is the samething that kills numerous amounts of people a year: shown from multiple statistics.
In my opinion computers are more reliable unlike people. when they are bugged and have malfunctions yes its irratating and complex to fix them, but when there up and running there is no stoping the leaps and bounds they go through just to produce information efforetlesly. yes there will be those who belive that there is too much of risk of putting your lives in the hands of technology but on an everyday basis we do without realizing it. when you think about it everyday you wake due to the sound of your alarm, everyday you wake up to check your phone to stay updated with worldy and local topics, we also check our phones for time. what im trying to state is we wake up because of technology and we go to bed because of technology so why not get to your chosen destination by upgraded technology.
One of reason I feel so strongly about the idea of having driverless cars is due to the idea of them using half the fuel of todays taxis. this could be so helpful in two ways; one way is it could help everyone finacialy. with the price of fuel always fluxating from high to low, those that do use the driverless taxis would in theory pay less then what they would do now. Also another great reason for driverless cars is there would hopefully be a lesser carborn footprint then what we have been producing. Our abuse of releasing too much co2 has led unpredictable climate change which is having long lasting effects in parts of the united states let alone the globe. | 4 |
acffe17 | SO YOU WANT TO BE A SEAGOING COWBOY
If you're reading this article, I'm guessing you want to be a Seagoing Cowboy. It's an interesting job. It doesn't require any special skills or years and years of experience. You just have to know how to take good care of animals and not get seasick easily. It's not that hard. Read on; I'll show you why.
There are a lot of great reasons to join the program. Here are some. When I was a Seagoing Cowboy,(Yes, I was!) along with helping other countries get back on their feet, I got to see awe-inspiring things, such as the Acropolis in Greece and the Panama Canal on my way to China. Taking care of the animals wasn't that hard. Sure you had to clean the poop-ridden stalls and carry up heavy bags of oats, but the animals made great company. On rides back home, you could relax and play games with the rest of the crew.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy could be dangerous, too. Once, after making my hourly report to the captain, I fell down a slippery ladder and almost went overboard and died! Luckily I got away with only a broken rib and more caution. People in the countries we aided could've been hostile. Seas could've been violent. Storms could've broken our ship to bite-size pieces. Fortunately, none of that happened;most of my trips were safe ones
When I was a Seagoing Cowboy, it opened up the world to me. I saw that the world wasn't all sunshine and rainbows, like the little me thought. The world was full of unfairness and was my job, everybody's job, to help stop it. I stepped up to do my part by joining the Seagoing Cowboys. Do your part. Join the Seagoing Cowboys program today. Make the world a better place, one cow at a time. | 3 |
acffe7b | "Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents".
Because even though not one spaceship has touched down on venus in more than three decades.
we can change that and learn more about its effects other than its simlarties.
Because even though its good to know that its very alike to earth.
or that some of its things are.
We can be learning and opening up more to what should be done or what could be done to be successful.
And actully be able to land there.
And explore it like for example we can learn of the kind of meteral that wont be much effected by it.
Or that dosent get effected by it and so on advance.
And it will open up more doors and possibly arppounties for others who may be intrested or know a little about it.
The author does very well supporting this idea.
Because he knows its dangerouse and that its not going to be very easy.
And that he has to continue learning more and more.
And make time for it .
He also does very well discribeing the planet venus not just by its looks.
but by its tempatures and its potentail.
and its closure to things around it .
I see why the author supports that idea.
and his not wrong for standing for what he thinks should happen or should be done.
Its not only good for him but for everyone else here alive.
If we can find a way to get there.
And get there without a problem we can almost do anything.
because if we could do it with that place.
We can do it anywhere else.
Mabe not the sun or very dangerouse planets that are unsafe.
but we can get into the ones that dont have anything that will melt us and stuff.
but it will open up ideas possiblely even life.
All of "paragraph 8:" explains that we as humans should go above our standards and grow together.
not to benefit apon another planet.
But it will beneft on stronger things like meterials.
and more people motivated to go after there dreeams.
Because nothing is imposibble.
And lastly that we all play a part in bettering.
and makeing our place and each place a better place for each.
And one of us.
And for those in the next generations. | 3 |
ad0262a | Driverless cars are coming. Driverless cars would be a great thing to do because there would be way less crashes. Sensors can stop the car when in danger. The sensors can also reduce the amount of power from the engine. Position estimating sensor on left rear wheel stops the car when backing up almost into asomething you cant see. Another thing that the sensors could do is make sure the driver has hands on the wheel.
The good in these driverless cars is that there would be less lives at risk. There would definatley be less crashes in the united states. Another thing driverless cars can do is save lives on the road and off the road as a pedestrian. The last thing that driverless cars are good is when your in bad traffic the car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but the sensors make sure hands are on the wheel.
The bad in the driverless cars is that the driver dont want to wait fot their turn to drive. Dr. Werner Huber said that we have to interpret the driving in a new way. In some states they wont allow to test these smart cars except, california, nevada, florida, and district of columbia they have led the country in allowing limited use of semi-autonomonous cars. If something bad happens like the cars technology fails the manufacturer is the blame for it all. | 2 |
ad04e66 | F.A.C.S this is a shorted word for Facial Action Coding System this system can use a camera or webcam and look at a person and tell how they are feeling just by the expression on there face it takes there face and compares it to a neuteral face. This technology would be great in a classroom enviorment because students can get off track or get bored very easily. Students arent very intrested in math or english they can get frustrated by doing the work. F.A.C.S could help with online learning very much by looking and rendering what expressions are happening and if they are happy and it doesn't seem like they are having trouble then it wouldn't change anything. If they have a bored or confused or even angry face then it would try and help that person by maybe changing lessons or even trying to teach it in a easier way.
In the article in paragraph six Dr. Huang says "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" this means that the computer could take that emotion and flip it around by changing somthing. Most teachers are good at spotting a child who doesn't understand or who is bored but sometimes they dont pay attention and don't see they have gone off but a computer could alaways tell if they are not getting it or are bored. A computer that could tell the way you feel from just looking at you would help alot of students it is sometimes hard to tell the way we are feeling especially when you try and hide it but the computer software would pick it up. Dr. Huang also stated "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication", "So computers need to understand that, too"
Thus this technology would be a great and huge advancement because it could help out so many people maybe a student is sad and the computer picks up on it and it tells the teacher and that student could talk to someone or it could pick up on fear and tell someone about that and then they talk about that. this technology could teach the computers how to deal with so many things which is why it would be useful in the classroom. | 3 |
ad06321 | My position on driverless cars is that they shouldn't exist. I think this because technology can have so many issues and it could cause so many accidents. Even though technology gets better and better every year they always have problems and people are always having to fix it.
In paragraph nine the passage states that the law is trying to make things safe and the safest way to things like this is that a human is alert at all times, taking charge of the road. That already tells you we shouldn't have these type of cars because with something not going right or working with the google in the car, you never know what can happen. Sensors don't always see everything or feel everything so it could always lose its signal or something. Lastly what if one day the google isn't connecting again, and the antilock brakes aren't working. You aren't paying attention and boom you run into something and for all we know you could lose your life.
The point that i'm trying to get across here is that making these google cars is very pointless. If you want things to be safer and better, than they shouldn't be created. Sure humans driving isn't the safest, but the way i look at it verse google cars humans make it safer. | 2 |
ad068cd | Driverless cars aren't always so great
My position in driverless cars is that I'm opposing them.
Even though Google cofounder Sergey Brin can, I'm not ready to put my life nor my family's life on the line even after years and years of people testing them and making the driverless cars 100% safe.
Electronics always mess up somewhere down the road, even 100% safe, so why trust a driverless car when it could mess up and put your whole family's life on the line.
In the text it say's that "Driver's need to stay alerted at all times" but why if this car is 100% safe, aren't we aloud to sit and talk to are family while we are on the move.
The text also stats that "If there is a wreck who's going to be the blame, the owner of the driverless car or the manufacturer" so why buy it if you might be the one to blame and not the manufacturer who made this 100% safe driverless car.
My points go to prove why I'm sticking to a car I can personally drive and not a car that's still not 100% safe on the road yet.
So I ask you, would you like to move on with the rest of the world and put your life and other people's lives at risk every day with a driverless car or a car that you can drive and help keep others safe.
Stay safe and go against the flow sometimes, could be for the best. | 3 |
ad07e4b | The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. It, when originally pictured, may have looked like some sort of face or alien artifact, but with new high-resolution imaging and 3D altimetry, we can see that this "Face" is just a mesa. This type of mesa is commonly found in the region of Mars where the Face is located, called Cydonia. These mesas are also commonly found here on Earth, in the American Southwest. The fact that these types of landforms are commonplace means that the Face is nothing special.
One piece of evidence that supports my claim is the new photos. Back in 1976, when the Face was first pictured, the pixel size on photos of Mars was 43 meters per pixel! That makes for a very blurry picture with not many details. When the Face was photographed in 1998, and again in 2001, the pixel size was much smaller, at 1.56 meters per pixel. This means that objects on the Martian surface bigger than 5 meters would be picked up in detail by the photo. This proves that the new picture shows it all: a common, everyday mesa.
A second piece of evidence that supports my claim is that NASA would not try to hide alien artifacts in their pictures from the public. This is because if NASA found life on Mars through one of their studies, they would become very popular for the fact and would draw a lot of attention. They may have even won a Nobel Prize, so NASA would definitely not hide it. Conspiracy theorists who claim the Face is alien would be completely wrong because of this fact. NASA isn't hiding anything. The Face on Mars is just a mesa.
A third piece of evidence that supports my claim is that NASA was excited about displaying this photo and wanted to learn more just like the public. They wouldn't have given all this trouble to the Face just to lie about it to the general citizens. NASA was probably disappointed when they found out that the Face was a mesa, but they had to tell the truth. Mesas are common around Cydonia, and also common on Earth, so there is no reason for NASA to lie.
In conclusion, the Face on Mars is a completely false object. This "Face" is just a common mesa, found all the time where the Face is and on Earth. NASA did not lie about the Face because they had no reason to. The new, high-resolution imaging says it all. The Face on Mars is a mesa. No doubt about it. Case closed. | 4 |
ad0a779 | I beleive that the development of self driving cars would better our future. The introduction of self driving cars is a positive because they give the driver more freedom to do other productive things, they still give the driver some control over the car incase bad condition come up, and they use many different sensors to ensure the passengers safety.
Self driving cars give people the freedom to do more productive things instead of driving. This is helpful because people could get more work done in the car. Which in some cases people can commute many hours, giving them valuable time to work. A concern with this could be distracting the driver from being alert incase the car needs assistance. Although as stated in the article "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up display. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over". This means that drivers could use the systems already put in the cars that are regulated by the car itself so that if there is an emergency, the car can shut down the devices.
The cars are smart enough to know when they should let the passeneger take over. This is important because it shows you that the cars still give you control in certain situations, and they only drive in conditions that would otherwise be easy. Stated in the article, it says "In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant". Th car can handle driving functions at speeds of up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel. In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless". This means that if the car starts to lose control or go into bad conditions, the passenger can take over.
The cars that are modified to be self driven are highly equipped with technology to help the car. Stated in the article "Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating 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 reciever, and a inertial motion sensor... The most important bit of technology in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the cars surroundings" These sensors all make the car have the important information to make decisions just like a human would when behind the wheel.
I think that self driving cars would be a positive because they give the driver free time to be productive, they still give the driver control in certain situations, and they use many sensors to ensure the safety of the passengers. | 3 |
ad0c87b | Who would you believe, a couple of conspiracy theorists without proven research or scientist with proven research? In 1976, Viking 1 was circling mars and took a picture which seemed to look like a human face. Later, research proved that it was just a landform equivalen to a butte or mesa. People still believed it was an alien creation. I believe the landform on Mars was not an alien creation because: if it was an alien creation NASA would benefit from it, Mars Global Surveyor snapped a photo proving a landform, and in 2001 another photo was taken clearly showing a mesa or butte.
First, if the landform was an alien creation NASA would have benefited from it. In paragraph five, the author stated, " Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." The author is telling us that NASA wouldn't hide that a civilization created the landform because they would get a better financial stand. The author stated in paragraph five as well, " Some people think the Face is a 'bona fide' evidence of life on Mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists." This theory is clearly proven to be wrong.
Secondly, in 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia and capture a photo of the Face which was a landform. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped the photo that was ten times sharper than the Viking photos. In paragraph 7, the author stated, " Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image fist appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." This on photo proved that not only was it not an alien monument, but that it was a natural landform.
Finally, in 2001, another photo was taken by Mars Global Surveyor to capture a second look of the Face. In paragraph ten, the author states, " ' Malvin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution.' Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." The camera in 2001 was clearly better than the camera in 1976 than the one the Viking had. Also, the digital image taken in 2001 was made 3 times bigger than the pixel size, showing that it was a landform that was a butte or mesa.
In conclusion, I believe that the landform on Mars in not an alien creation because: NASA would have benefited if it was an alien creation, the Mars Global Surveyor snapped a photo in 1998 showing it was only a landform, and in 2001 the Mars Global Surveyor also snapped a more precise photo clearly showing it was a landform equivalent to a mesa or butte. All this proves that conspiracy theorist were wrong all along about aliens creating the land form. Who do you believe, a couple of conspiracy theorists without prove or scientists with facts and prove? | 4 |
ad0e063 | Holy Avacadoes! A new computer software has just come out, and it is designed to insure that this software can recognize our emotions, feelings, and best of all... FACIAL EXPRESSIONS! You may think this is a good idea, or maybe even a bad idea. Never the less this was not intended to be a quote "AS SEEN ON TV" commercial promoting a computer software for $19.99. It may be a good piece of technology, and a smart way to see things from another perspective. While many may argue that using technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom, is valuable. This may be the best idea I have ever heard of, espcially in an age where people are using facial recongnition to recognize who is coming in and out of the schools, and people can track others medical histories, and so on, and so forth. Classrooms should be more reliable when it comes down to facial recogntion, and cyberbulling.
One example on how classrooms should be using facial recognition especially with students, can be shown on paragraph #7 whenever the author mentions that home computers can't always rely on facial recongiton, but that school computers can and should. "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile. But we can write down some simple instructions that "encode" different emotions." As this paragraph is shown to readers, the author is trying to mention a point that home computers can be slow, and may not recognize faces easily, and that right there can lead to stalkers, and hacking occuring as well. Not only that but school computers can get hacked too, but with facial recogonition, they can stop that from happening.
Another example on how classrooms should use facial expressions especially with students is displayed fully in paragraph #5 when the author states that quote the "calculation" to recognize faces is so complex now that you can recognize everyone's face on a computer no matter if you mention there name. "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look at her face." This shows us the readers that we can identify peoples faces, on either a computer, or in person. It can be very useful for counslers because they can identify who this person, or people are walking into there offices.
Finally, the last example on how classrooms should use computer facial recognition especially with students, can be traced to paragraph #9 they claim that quote "(Putting on a happy face" actually works!) this shows us the readers that whenever the computers try to recognize your face, they can also see how you were feeling, whether it was happy, sad, or even emotion. And pictures can be a good recource to identify a cas, or in the case a student.
In conclusion these examples I showed were good whenever it came down to finding out what students are in where, but it can help not only in a classroom, but aslo in the world of law enforcement, and our phones. But if you use it incorrectly, you may have serious trouble in your hands. | 4 |
ad0e889 | Luke said he had only worked two jobs before in his life and they were at a gocery store and a bank. He never knew he would get a chance for a job like this. It states that Luke knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. He might have never got to do it agin. It also states that the cattle boat is an ubelievable opportunity for a small town boy. He couldn't say no.
Luke caring for the animals has kept him busy. He has to feed them and give them water two times a day. The animals food has to be kept in the bottom of the ship. Luke had to make sure the stalls are clean. Luke had to work hard for this job.
Luke had to do alot of work but he also had fun. It had opened up a world for Luke. He states that he is gratefull for the opportunity. It states that the cowboys played baseball, vollyball, table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and some other games over time. Luke has learned alot of this job and hopfully keep learning of this job. You can have an important job and a fun job all at the same time. | 1 |
ad10d41 | In vauban,germany car usage is not very popular in fact 70 percent of vaubans familes do not own cars and 57 percent sold there car to move to the area. Heidrun Walter says when she had a car she was always tense and that she feels so much better and relaxed this way. The way people in vauban chose there lifestyle is starting to rub off on places like europe and the united states. they call it smart planning. Vauban lifestlye may br the most advanced experiment in low car suburban life but its basic percepts are being adopted around the world in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation. David goldberg an official of transpotation for america says how much you drive is important whether you have a hybrid. In the united states the environmental protection agency is promoting a car reduced community.
In paris they ban car driving because of the smog , on monday motorist were ordredto leave their cars at home or suffer a 22 euro fine which is 31 dollars. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had their car impounded for their reaction to the fine. cingestion was sown a 60 percent in the capital of france after five days of intensiying smog. Diesel fuel was blamed since france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline diesel makes up to 67 percent of vehicles in france. Paris has more smog than other european capitals delivery companies complained of lost revenue while exceptions were made for plug-in cars , hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers and public transport was free from friday to monday.
in bogota colombia a program thats set to spread to other countries million of colombians hiked,biked,skated or took buses to work during a car free day it was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permited for the day the goal was to reduce smog all violaters faced 25 dollar fines the turn out was great. Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two seat bicyle with his wife. For the first time two other colombian cities joined the event. the day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in bogota in the mid 1990's. the change is big parks ans sports centers also bloomed throughout the city uneven pittd sidewalks have replaced by broad smooth sidewalks rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic. | 1 |
ad11bff | In the future, driveless cars can become something big that can benefit or cause problems. Cars in my opinion should be driven by people and not driven by a car. It would be better because people wouldn't have to be depending on the car. Plus, everyone takes a drivers test before getting a official license. Would people still need one to drive a car that already drives itself?
Cars either way have to be driven. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." This quote in the draft explains well on how a car still can't compete with actual human help to drive. It can also tell how driving a car still requires someone. Especially when they go through construction work or other accidents on the road.
The safety is also important. "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." This is an example of how people need alert drivers and not some random car driving itself. They need someone to be in control of a car and watching the road.
It will cause many problems. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault—the driver or the manufacturer?" This statement is true. Who will be responsible? It would probably be the drivers and the cars fault, but would someone actually be blamed if the car was driving? They would have to think of laws that would have to protect the people in the accident and who aren't.
All of this with the car that drives itself is just to much for people. People can't be depending on technology even more, but in their skills. They need to know that they can drive and prevent things from happening and not having to depend on a car to do the work for them. Where will they be in the future, if people do sale these cars and put them in the streets? | 4 |
ad14587 | Overtime technology has been growing more and more , affecting all of us in both good and bad ways. Many have abrupted our minds and cause issues because some appliances arent necessary or they are not ment for some particular people.
In the story "Driverless Cars Are Coming", it tells us important information that new made auto cars are useful for us and what bad effects might come amoung us. I believe that this story is a negative impact because, when making new things such as "technology", it may or may not be dangerous. Things arent usually what they seem according to everybody. You might see it as a whole life changer but what some people question is, " Is this necessary for me?" or " Is this safe for me and my family?".
The cars we use now, are somewhat we call it "perfect" and if we use higher standard advancements of our cars, would we really rely on it? What are we capable of when using a driveless car? To me, a driveless car compares to sitting. Sitting is just another way of being lazy just like using a driveless car when you dont need to do anything but just sit there and enjoy the road.
Whats so great about driving a driveless car anyways ? Sitting there and watching the roads are no fun. How would people who like the speed and heart-pacing condtion when racing feel about this ? It would be a boring ride for me because you are not doing anything but just sit there. Yeah, there would be chances for you to be on your phone, or eating your meal rith there, or sleeping. But do we rely on such advance technology so much that we depend on it and avoid the dangerous cause?
Do we think that our children and family's are safe in a vechile that doesnt need you to drive and only drives by itself are safe enough ? Do you think this new car would be capable of rainy conditions and and snow conditions ? Yes, in the story it tells us that there would be objects just like in an ordinary car would have for you to use be in there just in case of emergencies, but why get an advance car when there are some similar alliance between the both of them? Why waist money on something that is the same? Think of how it would be with you just sitting there instaed of enjoying the road. | 3 |
ad14bcb | The face is just a rock formation that looks like a face due to the shadows which gives it eyes, nose and a mouth. the formation is normal and it is located in cydonia and it reminds alot of people of a mesa.
Many conspiracy theorists say that this is something thaat nasa should not have put out for all to see. they say that in the picture that was sent out was too foggy and that it was hiding things in the fog.
When this face first appeared on there monitors, they were surprised, but allitle bit after that they decided that it was just another mesa, which was common in the place that they found it at, which would be in Cydonia. they said that it just had unusual shadows that gave it the looks of a persons face.
They knew that it was just a martian mese, so they decided to let everyone else see this amazng picture, hoping that they could gather the attention of the public. it did do that which was great but then they wanted to know more. so then when NASA launched another mission for mars they decided to take another picture of the face, which this time it was alot clearer for the people to see that it was just another martian mesa.
People still weren't happy with those pictures, the people didn't know how hard it is to get it in the right place for another picture, but NASA was willing to get another picture for the people to finally prove that it wasn't an alien artifact. they took the picture with the camera's maximum resolution, so that the people could see everything in the picture clearly. although some people might not be satisfied, many people are. | 3 |
ad15b8d | Studying Venus is a worthy pursit despite the dangers it presents. Facing a lot of challenging things could be a difficult tasks to complete. In this situation, I think studying Venus is worth our time because NASA and others are trying to land on the surface or at least stay longer at the atmosphere to explore the planet; they can't just give up on what they already did, so there's no moving back or quitting the experiments for researching Venus.
Exploring Venus could be a very difficult tasks because many scientists figures that Venus has a harsh climate and is 90 times hotter than our planet surface. It is also the hottest surface temperature of any planets in our solar system, even though Mercury is the closest to the sun. This evidences might prove that it is impossible to reach Venus's surface, but in this modern date; I think we can accomplish something or a plan to reach Venus's surface much quicker than previous years, because more people are getting smarter these days. In the Venus atmosphere, it contains an highly corrosive acid called Sulfuric acid, it is a type of acid that reacts with other chemicals such as Sodium. We need a ship that prevents the acid from getting inside so that it won't destroy the plane or ship.
We could make a jet that by passes everything, such as storms like lightning tornadoes, and more. In paragraph 5, it talks about how it would be helpful if we were to make a jet that by passes or avoid any dangerous conditions on the surface of Venus. The temperature would be still overheated around 170 degrees Fahrenheit; but the air pressure would be close to the sea level on Earth. There would be enough solar power and the radiation would not exceed Earth's level, It is not an easy conditions, but it is possible for a human to survive. It's possible to send a human to Venus, but I don't think he/she will make it back unharmed: because the temperature is so high in Venus.
In paragaph 4, it discusses about the environment in Venus having rocky sediment just like our planet Earth. Not that it's impossible to live in Venus right? I think it could be possible to live in Venus; after many centuries or decades, the planet could possibly decrease or cool down the temperature in the surface and could reduce acid in the atmosphere if we figure out how to destroy the acid or reduce the reactants. If Venus have landscapes like mountains, craters, valleys, and etc. Why not try to test observations or even explore? It is not easy to figure out or solve the problem, it will takes years, or it might not be even possible to test prototypes to land on Venus. We need a prototype ship that avoids any destruction that is doing to the jet. If we accomplish one, then maybe one day; we can explore and learn more about Venus.
These are the evidences and supporting details to why I think Venus is worthy our time even though it's dangerous. | 4 |
ad20e23 | Are you interested in taking care of animals? Do you like going on boats out in the sea? If both of your answers are yes then you should be a seagoing cowboy. A seagoing cowboy is a person who goes onto a boat and takes care of the animals on the boat.
I think that you should particapate in the Seagoing Cowboys Program because you could explore all of the oceans. Also you could see Europe and many other countries. You could help all of the people that need food supplies, animals, and more. To support this in the text it says "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,"
Also I think that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys Program beause it was an oppurtinity to have fun on board. I know this because in the text it says "Luke also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed.
To conclude, I think that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because you get the oppurtunity to explore all kinds of countries. Also I think that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys Prgram because you got to have fun on board playing all kinds of different games to past the time. | 2 |
ad2182f | The author presents a strong argument suggesting a worthy pursuit to study Venus depsite dangerous endeavors, however, his statments regauarding un-reliability on current technology, the necessary actions to conduct research, and numerous failed attempts to reach Venus greatly outweigh the good outcomes of this mission. Venus is considered the planet that is most similar to Earth. The passage explained that scientist speculate if there was once life on Venus considering it incredible geographical and size similarities to earth. Although further research could test their theories, Venus has very extreme weather conditions harmul to man and other objects. A closer look and gathering of evidence is expected to make this mission a success. However, modern day technology is barely able to keep up efficiently by just the use of humans. These issues are far too risky to consider pursuing.
Venus has features such as mountains, craters, and even valleys that are also seen on Earth. According to the article, its atmosphere is 97% carbon dioxide with temperatures averging 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth with can crush nearly anything that tries to reach its surface and even liquefy metals. The second paragraph discussed how spacecrafts in the past barely lasted a few hours and since there hasn't been a spacecraft sent there in more than three decades. This evidence shows that despite the success of reaching Venus, we are not even close to even slowly progressing and fixing smaller issues with spacecrafts traveling there and back to Earth. By not providing evidence of some sort of pregression or steps closer to considering sending humans to Venus, the author weakens his arguments over the better outcomes of conducting research.
Conducting research requires numerous forms of evidence, samples, test, etc. In paragraph 5, the author makes suggestions of creating a spacecraft to sustain temperatures of at least 170 degrees Fahrenheit and levitating thirty-plus miles over the surface to observe the planet. Although this may be the most safest and efficient approach, he even stated that it would require getting "up close and personal" to collect samples. The whole idea is to reach Venus and collect data to compare to Earth and Venus' previous history. Without being able to collect samples, the author weakens his argument to study Venus despite the dangers it presents.
Lastly, modern day technology is known for its speed and cinvenience to access information. In paragraph 7, the author discussed how electronics we simplified to last at least three weeks in simulating conditions to Venus. He explained, "modern computers...tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physicakl conditions." He supported this claim by informing readers that older technology, mechanical computers, have been re-evaluated and seem to have better calculations but involve levers and such. This weakens his argument because it would mean that this mission wouldn'tt be helpful if the right technology can't be utilized to help calculate and evalutate information.
All in all, the author makes very good claims as to why NASA should continue to pursue further research on Venus. It would help determine if there was previous life, if it once operated as successful as earth, and if Earth could potentially be headed in the same direction. However, the extreme weather conditions, actions necessary for research, and un-cooperative technology make this pursuit seem far less worth it considering how danger it is for humans and even the spacecrafts sent to examine the planet. Ultimately, the project can be deemed as impossible if facts given in the article remain the same. | 5 |
ad2558e | I think that the use of the technolohy should not be used because then parent would be complaining how it is not fair for a teacher or students to know her sons/daughters expression. Also I personally think that we shouldn't allow them because then teachers would always be focused on the kids that aren't as happy and are confused on the work or lesson they are learning. I also think that it would also be a good idea for the whole school because if a student is to shy to speak up and they dont know how to do something then the teacher can talk to him/her after class. I think that using this technology will be to much too and the school will have to use millions of dollars just to buy some for a whole class. I know this becuase the author says "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode mocode Mona Lisa's smile. Then they show us how we can do it at home and how we can make use smile or happy. In the artical is states "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them. ("Putting on a happy face" actually works" So at the end of the day I personally don't think we schools should have this type of technogoly and be more focused on other technologys like finger print sign in or school resources. | 2 |
ad267b2 | I think that this image of this face is very neat. Although I think that the face is real, but I dont think that the aliens did it though. I think that it was just nature made. Just like how if we are outside sometimes in the woods or just out in the yard you see like a heart shape or any shape on and object. You think its really neat and all but it doesnt go through your head that a strange living person made it. I know that it is on a diferant planet, and that we are looking for life some where else, but personaly I do not think that it is made by aliens.
Just because they think that there is some other life out there doesnt mean that that life made this. If there was other life out there they would have been able to see the life moving around. Like us in the city or something we have monuments and statutes and they are all in or very close to the city. We dont just build somethng and have it we out where no one will go. There all in the city. So dont you think that the aliens would be out around admireing it, and looking at it.
This is what I think. | 2 |
ad28a5d | With the technology that we are capable of using to create a spaceship to have astronomers study Venus from a distance and gather information is a massive jump leading to a future where more than likely NASA could get a better understanding on our sister planet.
With deeper knowledge of a planet so similar to earth, it could really boost us and lead to bigger andvancements such as creating rovers or spaceships that can sustain Venus' enviorment for more than just a couple of weeks. With an ability to have rovers or spaceships that can sustain the enviorment, NASA can get a better understanding and get more evidance so that deeper, and more complex studies on Venus can be taken part in. With an advancement in technology in spacecrafts, scientists can achieve better understanding of the planet and its atmospere, Scientist can get more complex answers and evidance on the age of the planet, and its atmospheric pressure. Due to so little data or lack of technology to get more advanced studies of the planet, it has been difficult to get more answers than what we already have.
In conclusion, although the trips to study gather information on our sister planet, Venus, more information and evidance on the planet could let sicentists find a find a way to maybe inhabit Venus or if not, just get deeper knowledge on it. | 2 |
ad28e86 | Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite its danger of making it a challenge because there are great qualites about this planet that makes it different . One way Venus is analogous to earth is because it has a rocky surface,valleys,and mountains. A interesting fact about Venus that the passage states is that "its one of the brightest points of light in the night sky." Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density of size and occasionally in distance too. The article states that " A ship hovering over venus can allow very limited insight on ground conditions because of certain forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere." but when scientists figure out a way to create a machine that will work in those conditions it willl be worth the wait.
Venus is reffered to as earths twin. A big differnce between earth and Venus is that Venus is over 800 degrees and no one would last in that condtion of heat. Venus has the hottest surface even though mercury is closer to earth. There are many more things scientists can find out,if they keep studying Venus even though it is a challenge because of the high temperature. In conclusion even though Venus is a challenge to study it is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because of howmany differences it has from earth. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.