essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
b808907 | I think that the use of the new technology to read the emotional expressions of people is not valuable. If people want to tell you how they feel, then they probably will. I do not think you should "invade" their privacy, feelings, and emotions. People have their own feelings and they have them because they are THEIRS. If they wanted to share their feelings then they would. But a lot of people want to keep their feelings to themselves.
Humans every day kind of do the same thing as this new technology does. The article states " In fact, we as humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day." Which is true, because if say we see a friend who is upset about something, and they are not really crying or anything, but you can just tell by their face that they are upset; then that's using a "humanized version" of the new technology. That is almost the same thing as the new technology, except with the new technology it literally SCANS your face and has access to your personal emotions. It invades your private mind.
Another reason that supports my opinion is that the student's peers could find out the results from a person's scan and tell everybody when most people want to keep their feelings/emotions to themselves. This is not a good idea, it is sharing to all kinds of other people how someone feels and that is not okay. You have to let people have their own thoughts. When they did the scan on da Vinci's Mona Lisa painting, that is fine because it's just a painting. The painting is not a living thing with feelings.
I think that if someone wants to use the new technology to scan historic pictures or historic things then that is okay. I think it's important to understand our past. If finding out what someone from the past was feeling helps us understand history then yeah sure! Why not do it. It's not going to hurt anybody or anything like if you were to use the technology on something living.
In conclusion, I believe that we should not use the new technology on anything that is living and has feelings. But I think that it is okay to use it on historic things (like da Vinci's Mona Lisa painting) so we can really truly understand the word's past. It is important for people to have their own feelings, emotions, and thoughts. It is also okay for people to share their feelings. But they should not always have to share them. I feel like in a way, this new technology is "forcing" people to share their emotions, feelings, etc. | 3 |
b80959a | Why should you join the Seagoing Cowboys program? Well, there are many reasons. Firstly, you have many chances of adventure. Who knows what could happen, but it could be worth the risk. Another reason you should consider being apart of the great program is the exprience. This could be a once in a lifetime offer that may never apear again. Furthermore, the learning oppurtunities are endless, and maybe even fun.
The places you could go. It almost seems like a dream when thinking about the many chances and oppurtunities that may stand with an open door. You could meet some great, new people. See some great new places. Luke stated from the passage ,"Besides helping people, I has the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special." You have the life-changing chance to not only help the needy, but to see things some don't have the chance to. Not only see, but exprience.
Expriencing new things can be terryifying, but can be something incredible as well. You can visit museums, ride bikes through the city, dine at the fanciest restaraunts with some new-found friends. Not only can you do all of those things, you can become close with the animals and other workers while on the journey. You may be busy throughout, but think of the job you are doing for so many in need, It's all worth the work. Expriencing is also learning.
Learning new things is like having money in your pocket. You may need all that you learn one day, and you need to be prepared for whatever life throws at you. One of the many things for you to learn while being a Seagoing Cowboy is how to care for animals. Animals have needs like humans. They need food, water and sometimes shelter to survive life's harsh ways. Another thing you may need to learn is how to communicate in other languages, or maybe how to speak in that language. You may also need to learn how to cook different foods, or how to live in harsher conditions like some do in other countries. The possibilities are endless whe it comes to learning new things, sometimes they are as simple as doing the dishes. But we can agree that there is more fun things to do rather than doing the dishes.
Stated in paragraph 8, "Luke also found time to have fun on board, esprecially on return trips after the animals have been unloaded. The cowboys played baseball and vollyeball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading and games also helped pass the time." Finding ways to entertain yourself doesn't seem to be hard when you have many crew members who would eargerly accecpt the oppurtunity to play a good game of catch.
In conclusion, being a Seagoing Cowboy seems to be a great oppurtunity for many to exprience. The many fun activites, the great cultures, the amazing people, and new things to learn should be enough to convince someone to become a Seagoing Cowboy and do some outstanding things for those in need. | 4 |
b80fb5a | I believe there should not be driverless cars. I think it should not because the driver would not be in full controll of the car, a mistake can happen where the driverless car could mess up and something happen.
As of now in our world people have full controll of ther cars and can manuver within their cars. With driverless cars they say a humans would still need to pay attention because of traffic situations, accidents, and more. If that's the case than their might as well not be any driverless cars because the driver technicallly still needs to be alert. However if their is to be driverless cars than the driverless car should be able to do everything it self; like get though traffic jams, drive into drive ways, and back up, but all by it's self. That would be a driverless car. If a driverless car can't do that than they should just stick to manual cars for humans can do everything.
Mistakes are common. One little thing could be missing in anything and a mistake can occur. For driverless cars to happen that involves a lot of work with machinery, and electricity. If a driverless car is in a situation and something happens where the wrong wire or anything is missing it could all go bad there. Humans basically have full controll over the regular car such as steering, braking, and if anything goes wrong it will likely be the human who does the mistake.
Driverless cars sond cool, but to be safer i think the human should be in full controll of the vehicle to stay safe on the road. Driverless cars should not be on the roads for the future, because the human will not have full controll. | 3 |
b8103da | Dear Florida State Senator,
Every 4 years, many people vote for a president they think will lead the United States to greatness; some, however, don't know that they are voting for the Electoral College to vote on their choise. This act of using the Electoral College is, by definition, not democratic. Didn't our founding fathers create this country promising democracy and people representation? They did, and that is why the Electoral College must crumble. Florida State Senator, we need to change how our country votes on its leader; we need to use popular vote for the president of the United States because this method is more democratic, the people representing the Electoral College are flawed humans, and the nature of this type of election forces some states to be ignored. Florida State Senator, you must take action against the flawed Electoral College!
Because of the function of the Electoral College, the people aren't truly represented for. According to Source 2, the voters--the ones supposedly voting for our new president--vote for a group of electors instead. Due to the power of the Electoral Colleg, electors can vote for any candidate. This process we have every 4 years is truly un-democratic. For example, during the 2000 election, Al Gore was the candidate with the most popular votes--this meant that the majority of the citizens of the U.S. wants him to be president. However, Al Gore lost since the majority of electors from the Electoral College voted him. Lastly, in the case of a time, the lection will truly be un-democratic; the House of Representatives will have to choose the new president. The people may allow continued usage of the imperfect Electoral College, but there is still one major problem: the Electoral College is made up of flawed, easily manipulated humans.
According to Source 1, the electors are made up of people chosen by the candidate's political party. Immediately, these electors can easily decide on the candidate to vote on; it's just the matter of the amount of electors each candidate has. Also, the electors are human beings, and everyone knows that humans are flawed creatures. According to Source 2, electors have been replaced to be against the opposing candidate or wait until the last minute to vote. Although, according to Source 3, the electors are chosen and are given trust, others can still influence them. Candidates or even political parties can influence the electors to vote for their chosen person. Lastly, Florida State Senator, the nature of the Electoral College forces some states to be ignored.
Florida State Senator, as you may know, the candidate for presidency usually go to the "swing" states to win "the people's" vote. People, however, from the non-swing states are generally ignored. During the 2000 election, 17 states weren't even able to see a candidate they are voting for the title of president. Although it is understandable that candidates go to the "swing" and populous states, there is no excuse for ignoring thousands of people from the small states. The president of the United States is the president for an entire country, not just a region of it. Voters from the non-swing states will still want to see the candidate to decide on who to vote for, even though they aren't voting for the actual candidate. The Electoral College is imperfect and un-democratic!
In conclusion, the Electoral College and its electors must be disbanded so that popular vote will be used in determining the new president of the United States. According to both Source 2 and 3, the process of voting a group of people to vote for you is un-democratic. Electors, the people making up th Electoral College, can be manipulated and coerced into voting a specific candidate. Lastly, non-swing states will be ignored; this will anger and frustrate them since not one candidate tried to persuade them. Florida State Senator, you must, in the best of your ability and then some, try to topple down the un-democratic roots of the Electoral College. The people, the ones who must truly decide on the president, will be immensely greatful towards you; in a 2000 poll, 60% of the voters even stated that they want a popular-vote type of election. Florida State Senator, I implore to you, abolish the Electoral College in the same manner as with slavery. Many people will thank you! | 6 |
b81213d | The challenge of Exploring Venus has been in minds for decades because it is the closes to earth which is why they call it earths twin. Venus aslo has the same density and size in comparison to Earth which in terms occasionally the closets in distance too. "Venus itself is right around the corner in space terms humans have sent numerous spaccraft to land on this cloud draped word". No human has never been to Venus in for good reason, which might be the issue that explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more then three decades. The thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Whats more challenging is the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's amtosphere. Venus's planet surface temperature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospher's pressure is 90 times than what people experience on Earth. The conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth, environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of the oceans and also liquefy many metals. Take note that Venus is has one of the most hottest surface temerature in the entire solar system, though Mercury is the closests planet to the sun. But if Venus is so inhospitable, then why are scientists even discussing to move further visit to its surface. That is because Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it most likely have been the most Earth like planet in the solar system. Venus has probably been the most largely coverd with oceans and possibly could have supported lots of various life forms, just like planet Earth. Venus has a surface of rocky sediment and includes simular features such as mountains, valleys and craters. Venus can also sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, giving the long time frames of space travel. The value of returning to Venus seems "indisputable, but what are the options for making a mission both safe and scientifically productive. (NASA) The Aeronautics and Space Administration has one compelling idea for sending humans to Venus. NASA's possible solution to the rough conditions on the surface of planet Venus, could initually allow scientists to float above the fray. Put it like this, a huge blimp like vehicle hovering over 30 or so miles above the Venusian landscape. Just like jetplanes traveling at higher altitudes to fly over many storms, just like a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the bad ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. Many researchers are working hard on innovations that would allow our advance machines to last a long enough to contribute to our knowledge of Venus. NASA is also working on other approaches to studying Venus. Example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbon have been tested in a chamber which simulate the chaos of Venus surface and have lasted for less then three weeks in such condition. | 1 |
b815e6f | I do believe that the use of technology, such as the one talked about in "Making Mona Lisa Smile", by Nick D'Alto, should be used in a classsroom to read the emotional expressions of students. I believe this because why not advance in our technology in school if we already are advancing in our technology outside of school.
In paragragh six D'Alto greatly explained how it would be if we actually had a computer sitting in front of us, reading our facial expressions. " 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored '," Dr. Huang predicts. " 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.' " (paragragh six, D'Alto) I agree with this quote because students now in todays age are already growing up in a society where technology around us is starting to become advanced. For example, cars used to have to be conducted by someone steering the wheel a foot on the peddle's, although now cars are able to drive themselves by just being charged. The quote explained that just by a student making a face expresson showing that we are bored, then the computer could change into a more fun and effetive lesson, to get students interested. Of course there is always that question, "What would the need of teachers be ?" I believe that teachers could still teach and assign homework, but this will highly beneifit them also because preparing a lesson on a computer that reads our expressions would not be hard at all. This would actually make school fun for students.
In paragragh six it also explained how our commercials and ads would run. "Imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad. For example, if you smile when a Web as appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different," (paragragh six, D'Alto). I like this qoute because it makes you think, not only does this have to be with ads and or commercials, but this could follow with tests in school. I recently took a big test for the semester in my sophomore year, in one of my classes, and the test was challenging. I found myself on one excerpt that was given to me dozing off alittle because how boring it was. Eventually finishing that excerpt i was not confident in my answers. Later on in the test I was soon given another excerpt but it was actually one that was interesting with alittle mystery and drama. Finishing that I was confident in my answers and I was told that I received a good score on that part of the test.
From the excerpts examples and from my example, I strongly believe that technology that can read students emotional expressions, should be used in the classroom for students. We should give students confidence on passing tests and assignments. Not just because we want to and there's no reason behind it, but
because if tehnology can advance in the outside world then why can it not advance here in school ? | 4 |
b815ec0 | The reason I think that people should become a part of the seagoing cowboys program is because it helps people. It helps people by helping them get there food recovered . The story shows this on (pagaph 2) it says "to help these contries recover their food supplies". Also the (UNRRA) helps people get their animals. Another way the (UNRRA) help people is by also helping people be more aprecaitive what they have. The story shows this on (paragaph 9 ) it says " It made me more aware of people of other contries and thier needs."
Also I people should join seagoing cowboys because it is not just helpin people. On (paragraph 5 ) it says "I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and china." Also on (pagraph 5) it says that
"But seeing acropolis in Greece was special ." On (paragraph 5) it also says
" so was taking a gondola ride in Venice." One mor eway that the (UNRRA) is not just help people is "Luke also toured an excavated casle in crete(Paragraph5).
The seagoing cowboys also is not just working all the time. On (pagraph 8) it The cowboys played base ball. " Also they cowboys also played "volleyball game in the emty holes" (paragraph 8. ) Cowboy also played table tennis and fencing . one more thing that te cowboys did for fun was read ,whitttling and played games. That is whi I thinks that people should join The seagoing cowboys. The seagoing cowboy can also be a life time expeirence On (paragrph 1) it says "He knew it was an opportuity of a lifetime. | 3 |
b8179cf | The universe is a weird place. It is filled with places no one fully understands. Exploring those places that people do not fully understand is important. The author support the idea of studying Venus well.
The author gives good reasons by talking about what we could gain. In the text the author writes, "not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors". This sentence from the article helps support the claim by telling us we would gain insight in the planet. The sentence also helps support the claim by telling us the exploration of Veus would also make us more curious about space which will help with exploring other planets.
The author gives us information that we have already learned about Venus. In the text the author writes, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth". This sentence from the article helps support the claim by telling us information to help support why we should explore. The sentence also helps support the claim by telling that the planet could have been like earth a long time ago which shows it might be habitable if we can learn to control the dangers.
The positives outweigh the negatives. In the the text the author writes, "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface". This sentence helps support the claim by saying if Venus is so bad why are we trying to find ways to explore it. The sentence also helps support the claim by showing that there is a reason to explore Venus.
The idea of studying Venus was well supported by the author. Exploring those places that people do not fully understand is important. It is filled with places no one fully understands. The universe is a weird place. | 4 |
b81815a | When looking at the Face over the years, you can clearly tell that it's a landform. From 1976 to 2001 the Face has lost almost all features to make it look like a face. For example, in 1976 you could clearly see a nose and eyes. By 1998 you could hardly make out the form of the nose and there was a crack where a mouth would have been bplaced. Finally, by 2001 you could hardly see any of its features. In the following paragraphs I will discuss detalis and characteristics into further detail.
When I took a first looked at the Face, in the photo from 1976, I saw a clear face with a nose, eyes, and the feature of a pharoh.
By 1998 I could no longer see the eyes and nose look caved in. I did however see the form of a mouth that I didn't see before. A martian couldn't make a face out of the ground because nobody knows for sure that they're real. No one has ever seen a martian so how do we know that they're even there? Land however could completely make this. If you look at Earth and the mountains that have been formed, not by man but by the land, you know that there's no way martian's could've built this.
Also, nobody has proof that this isn't just shadows reflecting onto the ground. There might not even be a landform there but the shadows are forming an allusion that makes it look like a land mass. In paragraph 9, Garvin says, "We don't just pass over the Face very often." When Garvin says this, it makes me believe more that it's just a shadow because they don't see it very often. The sun might have to be placed just right to cast the shadows onto that specific spot. Lastly, how would martians know what an ancient pharoh looked like?
Now I'm going to sides with the martian's. If martians were in fact a real living thing, why couldn't they build something to look like a face? I'm sure that they would have hands, fingers, feet, and toes just like humans. If this Face was martian made, maybe they were trying to send a signal to someone like, "Hey, we really are here and we need your help!" They could've known that there were space rovers going around their planet from somewhere else. There's no telling who built the Face.
There's no telling how the Face got there or why. The most realistic and logical explanation is that the land formed it. There are many conspiraces out there as to how and why the Face is on Mars. I choose to believe that they had a "Mars Quake" and the face just appeared. But in reality nobody knows how it was formed. | 3 |
b81f18a | As a scientist at NASA I strongly believe that the "The Face on Mars" is simply a martian from of a mesa, which is commonly found on Cydonia. According to the text "There was no alien monument after all." This was of course after the Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) flew over Cydonia and captured a higher resolution image of "The Face." In the world of today, you can never prove anything to be real without people spreading rumors.
Some conspiracy theorists like to think that there actually is life on Mars, and that's fine, but their reasoning is not credible and make believe. In the story it states "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists." This reasoning behind believeing that there is life on Mars is unfactual and merely people's opinion. But as soon as my co-workers and I heard that people thought the Face was real, we took matters into our own hands and managed to take a couple of other photographs of the landform. Under a closer inspection in 2001 we were able to see that the mysterious Face was a "Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa" as stated in the text. No ancient alien civilization, just a common landform.
In conclusion, my team here at NASA and I have proven that the pop icon "Mars martian face" is actually a natrual landform that can be found just about anywhere. There was no need for all the chaos and random conspiracy theories, all it need was a little bit of science and hard work. | 3 |
b821bd2 | To whome it may concern,
From my knowledge based on the sources i've been given on the Electorial College, I strongly beleive it should be abolished. To me it seems senseless to be voting for a slate of electors rather than a president. Also, anyone not in office can be an elector so that means they may not be the best person to be representing your vote. The electors may only vote for who they want rather than go with the vote of the people which is why I beleive the president should be elected by popular vote. This would also mean there would never be a tie. In the event of a tie the House of Representatives would take the vote. So the representative of Wyoming representing 500,000 voters would have the same power of as the representative of California, representing 35 million voters. it should be quite clear why popular vote would make more sense. We have outgrown the electorial college as a nation.
Thank you for your time,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
b8299a4 | Natural Landform
Have u every looked up at the clouds and seen all type of figures, shapes and probly even a face? There are many of theories of aliens making
landforms on but, there is still no sign of life on the Red Plant. The Red Planet
has a history of 22 years of faces poping up on mars and so far, we have known about every one that has came up. Belivers has always
talked and angerd the govnerment on letting sectrits out on life on other planets so.... why would the NASA release four pictures of the faces, you be the judge. A theory is like a gess no better yet it is a accurate gess that is basicly right on the trail of being right or true. Most people don't even try to even atempt to belive a conclusion if it has a theory on the title.
Scientists all over the world have came up with many ways to prove that there
is no life to proving there is a posibility that a such thing is posible and can accure with proff. The way that scientist can have acurate hypothisises is by flying and scanning the planet with thermale or cooling system that scientist have masterd today. A theory is something that can be true or false by using high studies of reserch but, in most cases there are more likely syfy stories but with real acuranceses in every day life. NASA has released four pictures of the faces so in conclusion NASA has even better proven their self and company to have nothing to hide. NASA no better to let out information that will cause a war or upwarw in todays society.
NASA knows what will happen if serious information about anything war or life related in general gets out to the public or world cause they seen it all and heard it all from day one. I do belive that there is life out there but no where near earth because of the robots, camera, and drowns we have today, we would have been seen something by know. The teloscope that NASA have in there labes to day can see all the way into another dimision to see more planet but can't see millions of miles way. | 1 |
b82b067 | Although self-driving cars are quite an interesting topic, they can be quite dangerous. Throughout the modern age cars have been a major form of transportation and have been constantly modified to match our ever growing needs. But this type of modification can prove to test the limits of safety these machines can offer.
Safety is the key aspect in designing machines for transportation. Be it thicker frames to stronger more durable material. But with giving these machines nearly total control can leave quite the room for worry of failure. The article even says itself that the machines would have quite the trouble traversing "...through workzones and around accidents." That flaw was able to be botched up with the feature to notify the user that human skills are required.
Even if the safety is solved with notifications such as "flashing lights on the windshield" or "seats that vibrate" The cost to build/purchase such technology is still quite absurd. The technology that goes into the ones we have today, namely Google's cars, they would require a multitude of sensors from "positioning-estimating" to a "rotating sensor on the roof" and Google has went to the extremes as to add a "LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings." So the price continues to rapidly climb as the other devices come into light.
If the the already mentioned safety features weren't bad enough the psychological ones it would create make it even worse than the price. as the article states "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" And that is entirely true because you would have to be constantly alert in case the car comes across trouble and needs your assistance. They plan to battle this with "in-car entertainment" but it would still be quite bothersome to be constantly vigilant for imminent danger. And yes the laws would adapt but it is currently, and logically should remain, that a "safe car has a human driver in control at all times."
With the issues in safety, price, and psychological area's of this proposal it will clearly take more than a few half-baked solutions to fix these bothersome quirks. It is clearly too much of a hill to climb for our current technology and budget to attempt until a later date. But the proposal is still a daring and appealing one on the surface and should be kept close for the time that we are feasibly able to carry it out. | 4 |
b82bf26 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I persoanlly am agianst the development of these cars. There's no need for them, they can be dangerous, and who is to blame for an accident the car or the driver?
First off I believe theres no need for driverless cars, for we have cars now that can do the same things while in control. We have sensors and back up camras on cars now. These have worked perfectly fine. Have we really become that lazy that we cant drive our own cars? I feel there is no need for them. Just another piece of technology to waste money on.
Another reason I believe we should not have drivesless cars is that they can be dangerous. With all of the technology something can easily mess up. You can lose controll of the car. Its just to much built into one car. There will need to be new laws and most likely other things will need to be placed.
Lastly "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault.. the driver or the manufacturer? The driver can say its the cars fault but what if it was actully the driver. How are you to know? What if you lost a loved one because of this car. Sure you would sue the manufacturer but money will not bring that loved one back.
These are the reasons i believe having driverless cars is a terrible idea. There simply no need for them. They can be dangerous to have and handle. Who would be to blame if there was to be an accident. Think about this before creating these new tehcnologys. | 3 |
b82eed9 | You should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. It helps make countries that are in ruins recover their food supplies, animals, and more. You can use this program as something less extreme than war for your service. The trips are fun expieriences.
When you are on the trips, you have plenty of time for sightseeing. You benefit a lot from being a Seagoing Cowboy. If you get bored, you wont. Taking care of the animals will keep you busy.
The animals had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. Sometimes it can be a dangeous job though. But, it is mostly fun. After the animals were unloaded, everyone played games like baseball and such.
The games also help pass time. Being a Seagoing Cowboy is much more than an adventure. It opened up the world to me. It will make you more aware of other people's needs.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy is a great opportunity. And, I hope you take it. | 2 |
b82f899 | Dear Senator,
The electoral college is a process that the founding fathers extablished as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and popular vote of the people. This process involves selecting the electors, meeting with the electors, and counting the votes by congress. There are 538 electors total in the Electoral College. The presidential election happens every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. After the election the governor makes a "Certificate of Ascertainment" which has all the names of the candidates who ran for President. I believe we should keep the Electoral College because there is a certainty of outcome, it helps avoid run-off elections, and the electoral college helps balance out the smaller and bigger states with more people that vote.
The outcome of an Electoral College has a possibility of creating a dispute like in 2000, but this dispute is less likely to happen over a dispute over the popoular vote. This is because the winning candidates share of the Electoral College is greater than his share of the popular vote. Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote in comparison to the 51.3 percent of popular votes for him and Mitt Romney. Trans-regional appeal is required in the Electoral College. If we got rid of the Electoral College then there would be a greater possibility of dispute.
Furthermore, Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes while winning a majority in the Electoral College. This proves that the Electoral college avoids the problems of elections in which neither candidate receives a majority of the votes. When no candidate wins a majority the pressure complicates the presidential election process. The Electoral College minimized this pressure be invariably producing a clear winner every time. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President.
In addition, a large state gets more attention from candidates than a small sate in a campaign. As an example in 2012 Obama, got 29 electoral votes. In Wyoming the winner only had 2 electoral votes in the same marin as Obama. The Electoral College provides some kind of restoration for the weight in the political balance that large states lose by mal-apportionment of the Senate. Voters in toss-up states are more likely to read into and pay more attention to a campaign because they know they are going to decide the election. It is most likely that these people are going to the the most thoughtful voters.
To conclude, there are many reasons to keep the Electoral College. This process has made the winner of the election much clearer to decide. There are a lot of pros and cons to the Electoral College but the list of cons is way shorter than the list of all the pros to the Electoral College. We should keep the Electoral College because it creates a certainty of outcome, diminishes run-off elections, and creates a balance for the bigger states. The Electoral College has created a positive impact for our presidential election.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
b8330aa | The new hit "the face," has made its way through tv, and articles all across the world. This phenonim is about a small land form on the suface of Mars that takes the look of a face. There a million hypothesis of what it could be, but we have found what it really is. With research we found a logical reson to how we are correct. Some think its from aliens, and some think its just a natural land form but what is it?
Incase you have not heard the "face" has been spotted on Mars, a small landform with some facial features that make it look like one. But a face from an allien, that sounds, and is unlogical. We have done so much reasarch towards this landform. Shadows give it the look of a face, and thats why we can only see it sometimes. In fact mission controllers even said you had to capture it at the correct lighting. But, if it were a real face, you could see it anytime.
In fact we have logical evedience, there are gigantic storms which would have wiped all the alliens out. They would be burried way benith the suface, becuase when Mars has a storm its vicious, and moves dust, dirt, and sediment all over. If there even was alliens they would be covered in hunderds of pounds of dust.
Yet I can see the opposing side saying that since the dust moves around so much how come the bodies couldnt be revealed? This is hundreds of pounds of dust ontop of them. Even though the dust moves so much, there a 1 and a million chnace of it moving above 400 pounds of dust.
In conclusion, this phenomim gives NASA the attention it wants, but its not true. While some might think there was alliens were on Mars, its illogical for their heads to just appear. Even though the opposers think its possible, they are dead and cannot move. Therefore the face is just a landform with shadows that make it look like a face. It it were a face we could see it anytime, but there was lots of research needed to conclude this. Therefore sayin its just a landform. | 3 |
b835460 | There's a new software, the Facial Action Coding System, and has promising applications for a variety of industries. It can be able to detect exactly how other people are feeling, even when they try to hide their emotions. I think the use of this technology that reads the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because it can help teachers know how students are really feeling, not by how they pretend to feel. Students can fake emotions by fake smiling when they're down or students can look sad, but be alright and just not be smiling.
The text states "the process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face, with all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Dr Huang relies on the work of psychologists, such as Dr. Paul Eckman, creator of the Facial Action Coding System. Eckman has classified six basic emotions, happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. They are associated with characteristic movements of the facial muscles." So the system has most of the emotions that are used in the everday life. When your muscles move it helps determine your emotion a little better. Some examples, are your frontalis pars lateralis muscle raises your eyebrows when you're surprised and your orbicularis oris tightens your lips to show anger.
Secondly, the facial expressions for each emotion are broad and you can see mixed emotions. In the text it said "There's universal emotions even though individuals often show varying degrees of expressions
(like not smiling as broadly). Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movement-in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighing the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions. Each expression is compared against a neutral face. " When a person is sad and mad, the video imagery can help figure that out. You may not know why they're mad and sad, but you know how they are feeling and something is going on. Then, maybe a teacher can help the student let their emotions out and open to them on why they're feeling different emotions and what's going to cause them to be the way they are.
In addition, in the text it talked about how humans can calculate other people's expression everyday like being able to tell how a friend is feeling by just looking at their face, but we could have some trouble if their face is worry and other people think they're just tired. In the text, it stated :Dr Huang ovserves that artists such as da Vinci studied human anatomy to help them paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotions. His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code. Perhaps Dr Huang's emotion algorithms are a different sort of "Da Vinci Code". So even back then artists could draw people with perfect muscles showing their true emotions like da Vinci with Mona Lisa. The Mona Lisa demonstration is intended to bring a smile to your face to show how much the computer can do. It truly is amazing because technology is so advanced, but this technology you could really get a good use out of it for students in their classrooms, mostly for kids who are quiet and just keep to themselves. The text also stated, "for example if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different. A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr Huang predicts. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." It's very helpful for when it shows a student is puzzled on a certain material that is being taught and it can notify the teacher. If the student was shy to ask questions in front of everyone or if they were embarassed to say anything, the teacher woud know and would be able to help the student individually.
Furthermore, the article talked about how moving your muscles helps express your emotions, which is how the Coding system is able to catch onto how you're feeling and if you're hiding your emotions. Examples from the text are, there is an indicator that indicated the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. "In the real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at your cheek bones) lift the corners of your mouth. Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius. To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful. According to the Facial Feeback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only exresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." When faking smiling people can detect it by the way your mouth looks. It's better to just show your true emotions because there may be many people who can tell your true emotions and when you have the technology in classrooms, teachers will be able to tell your mood.
In conclusion, I think the use of the technology that reads the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valueable. There are many reasons on how it helps and how it works which are several stated above. It's truly amazing techonology and is very advanced and can detect every little thing, like when faking an emotion or having multiple emotions. This will help teachers in their classrooms when a student is confused. Students won't be able to fake their emotions and someone can help when there is sadness that is detected. | 5 |
b83cb77 | How I feel about this driverless car situation is it's pointless and dumb. Just lets continue driving how we are and don't change anything. I mean if technology do change anything it just should be what type of cars it is. Driverless cars seems cool but its just to much.
Me as a person I dont care to much about what type of car I have or what it look like. The only thing about my car that I would be worried about is how it's working and how much gas I got in it. Stuff like this is very pointless to me.
But ok, let's say they do change the cars to driverless. Yes I would still drive I mean it's not that bad. If they do so, I would defintely suggest they make the roads smarter. In the passge it says the roads work good suprisingly but it's expensive. Hey, if they're tripping off that they shouldn't have change it. I even saw that coming.
The idea is cool, but me I would rather stay with the reuglar cars and regular driving. Im not to much in cars no way. But coming with this you have to be pretty smart and know how to handle all the stuff that's coming with it. Im pretty sure most people a like this idea though. | 2 |
b83f457 | There are pleny of advantages fellow citizens get for having limited car usage. Fewer people are getting there license and using cars each year anyways.
in addition, it is true that people without cars would have to go through the rain or the cold weather every time the weather looks ominous and people would have to worry about getting to school or work on time. But, Limiting or taking away cars would clear the air of smog and less people would have stress.
First, by limiting car usage you can reduce smog. "After says of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city"(Duffer, "Paris bans driving due to smog"). If all cars or vehicles were to stop being used the air would clear easily and we can all live in clear air. "The smog cleard enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday"(Duffer, "Paris bans driving due to smog"). If they made like a schedule for which days cars will be banned and what days aren't, then the air we breathe will be better than ever and everyone will still be able to use there cars how they feel like.
Last, People will become less stressful when not using a car to get to places. "It's a good opportuntiy to take away stress and lower air pollution, "said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle wiht his wife"(Selsky, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota"). Without cars theres people walking along the side walks talking, people not having to worry about saftey on the road as much, people riding bicycles and skateboarding, and just a great way to excerise just by walking outside. "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating,' said bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus"(Selsky, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota"). The fact that people dont care about the rain makes me think that people are enjoying this car-free day and there's no reason to stop it.
In conclusion, A few days or even weeks without cars is a great idea for reducing stress and air pollution. There are even more reasons why we should have a car-free day like time conservation, emission lowerage, safety improvement, and resource conservation. | 4 |
b841181 | Driverless cars, are they all they are made out to be? I think not. The reason being is because it still needs a driver. It watches the driver instead of the road. And you have to be alert at all times.
This "driverless car" should not be called a driverless car. This car still needs a driver. Say your close to a wreck, the "driverless car" will alert you saying it needs you to drive around the wreck. do you really want a non driverless driverless car? I know iI do not.
This car also watches the driver. If it is watching the driver how is it watching the road? It cant do both at once. This is absurd. This car is just not as good as they made it out to be, in my opinion.
According to paragraph eight you have to be alert at all times. Since this car still needs a driver this car can alert you that you need to take the wheel at any given time. Therefore, if you buy this car be very alert.
In conclusion, I would not buy this driverless car for myself because A. it still needs a driver. B. it watches the driver instead of the road. And C. you have to be alert at all times. | 2 |
b849cb9 | Limiting car usage has so many benifits not only for the earth but for us to. Getting rid of cars would make everyone in shape beacuse we would be walking every where. It would also lower car accident rates and the amount of pollution we breath in. If some of the worlds most polluted places like beijing and china stopped using car's their amount of smog would decrease greatly. France forbided cars due to the increase of smog and after five days without them the smog had cleared and France was back to normal. Bogota has a day without cars each year and all the people love it they say its a good way to lower stress and pollution. Recent studies show americans are buying fewer car's, driving less and getting fewer licenses each year. Part of the explination is some american's can't afford cars and some don't even have job's. Scientist belive if america keeps this pattern their pollution rates would drop greatly due to cars being americas second biggest polluter. | 2 |
b849d52 | Dear Senator of my State,
Being a citizen of the state of Florida, I dearly wish for the Electoral College voting to no longer continue.
In my state of opinion, we should change the election of voting to the most popular vote for the President of the
United States. I have thought through for awhile that the Electoral College is rather dumb. But of course
I cant just say that and think you will get rid of it, i have to have my reasons of why i think this and share them with you.
First off, when we want citizens to vote, such as my self, we want all of thier votes to count for something.
Not just some little game for you senators to play with. All of our voting need to be included by what we voted in the first place and what we want, thats the whole point of voting. For example, we dont always control whom our electors vote for, that's unfair. Or even worse, we get confused about the electors and sometimes vote for the wrong candidate. Citizens that are voting for a candidate should never be confused on who they vote for. So if i was a State Senator i would stop the Electoral College for good.
There are many reasons for retaining the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree. I would state them all but unfortunatly i am running out of time. Just know that i think that the Electoral College is unhealthy and is wrong for our society and it is completly an anachronism. Its NOT hard to say but Bob Dole was right, " Abolish the electoral college! " . | 2 |
b84aaeb | The author does not back their idea that studying Venus is worthy of pursuit. The author only has 3 paragraphs that supports their idea out of 8. The problem the author has is that there is not enough reason to go to venus besides curiosity.
The main things fighting against the authors point are how unhospitable it is on the surface of Venus and that the only reason we would go there is to say that we did go to the planets suface.
The second paragraph states "each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The vary next paragraph then states "a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." This very same paragraph also says that the temperature on the planet is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience onour own planet." The only thing that backs the author up is the three ideas they said could work in paragraphs 5, 7, and 8. The author states the reason for use to go to Venus is curiosity, but fails to tell us what the cost or the reward to fuel the want to go to Venus
The author does not give enough information to support their idea that studying Venus is rewarding enough with the many reasons the point to us using to much effort and resorces to get a good payout. The author does not give any facts that support their idea. That is why the author`s idea is not fesiblely supported by their effort to prove itself. | 3 |
b858c9d | i think this should be a thing because it would help people work when on a computer. it would help people becasue it would make them more enjoyable for the person that is working. it would help because if th user is not satisified by the way a lession is performing the computer would know that an change the application to make it more interesting to the spicific user. also it would be diffrent for everybody and everyone has a diffrent way of learning certain things. doing this would make studfence preform better because th appilication that they are using conforms to them specifically. the only bad thing about this is that some people would say that it is invading peoples thoughts and that it should not be able to know everything down to emotions in a person. the othe rthing wrong with this is that we dont have the capeability to have that in the common computers that we have today , simply because they would have to be way bigger just to have the space to hold all the facial recognition codes for every emotion. those are the reasons i think that facial recognition in a school computer would be helpful. | 2 |
b85b50c | using this technology to read the emotions of students in a class room is valuable because you can tell a lot if a student is confused or even to angry or to sad to learn. plus you can tell if the teacher is doing her job right or if the student feels confortable in the class room you can also learn if the student feels bullied or not safe in the class room. We could also tell if the student is acutally happy in the class because of the facial action coding system that even allows you to figure out if the student has a genuine or false smile stated in paragraph 8 of the text. This technology could help students to learn better, students that come from other country's and dont know how to speak for thereself or are just to shy to speak out. At last is the communication that the teacher and student can have through this device would be better since the device can read emotions the teacher can learn from all of her students on how they like to learn and how they dont like to learn. | 2 |
b861ada | If you were going cross country on interstates the whole time, why not let your car do the driving for you? Driverless car are great when you do not have city traffic, but it also could be dangerous when something fails in the car. The Google car has driven more than half a million miles without crashing, but it is also not completely driverless. Dirverless cars are the future; this is what the future needs.
Many say that driverless technology is not safe. Some also think that becuse they technology is likely to fail, whoes faut will it be if someone is injured. Many states have limited use of semi-autonomous car. In 2013, BMW develpoed "Traffic Jam Assistance." The car can handle speeds up to 25 mph, but it make the driver hold the wheel. The steer, accelerate, and brake do it themselves, but working through accidents and work zones require human skill. None of the car that are built today have complete driverless technology. Tesla has projeted torelease a 2016 car that is capable of being on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Which means, we are that much closer to developing a full time automatic cars.
Would the drive or the manufacture get blamed if the technology in the car fails? Even if new laws are passed it still woud not resovle the issues with the driverlss cars. Many car that are on the driverless systems, are not really driver less because thay still will need the human skill to guild it around work zones and accidents. Driverless cars are the future of technology. | 2 |
b863a21 | Dear, Florida State Senator
Right now there are many disputes and arguments over wether or not to keep the electoral college. Personally where I stand, I think that the electoral college should have less power, but not be totally rid. Reason for my opinion is that alot of times the electoral college has too much say, and we the people dont have enough say. For example, Barack Obama recieved 61.7% of the electoral vote compered to 51.3% of the popular vote. The electoral college had the most say and impact upon the outcome of the election. Most of the time electoral college makes mistakes on who they pick.
Everything they say is based of an intellectuall standpoint. The pick shouldnt be based off of all intellectuall. That doesnt mean the electoral college is bad, if it werent for them I think we the people are too stupid to make the decisons just ourselves. we need intellectual. Most voters dont even know much about who they pick. We shouldnt be trusted with all of the say in the election. Thats why we need electoral college to balance it out and make it right in the end. Alls im saying is dont give them all the say in who wins the election just lower it a bit to be 50-50.
Sincerely,
We the people ;) | 2 |
b875b20 | In the article it says that technology can now read the expression of a person using a software called " the Facial Action Coding System". I think this would be valuable in a classroom because it can read when a student is bored or confused and when it reads that the computer would modify the lesson like a human teacher would. The FACS would also help understand how the student is feeling in the classroom. It could aslo help in many ways by understanding how the students feel about like a lesson that is given or feel throughout the whole classroom time. There is pros and cons to this, the pros are that the computer would be able to a students feelings. Facs would also be able to help out the student if the student is confused during the lesson and would be able to modify it for them. The cons is that the Facs software might also not work at time by reading thier correct emotions. | 2 |
b87929d | The Electoral College has been a part of America since the beginning, but is it fair? Our country is a Democracy, which means " For the People" or " By the People". The Electoral College is not By the People. Yes, it has historcal value, but it no longer is what a Democracy is because of population changes and states being added to the country.
To begin with, Source 2 states " The Electoral College is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state." There is a popularity vote and then the Electoral College vote, most citizens think that the popularity vote will win because that candidate is the person that the people chose. That is not the case. It just depends on basically how big your state is and how popular a candidate is in that state. The population is the biggest factor that the candidates think about because if they win that state they are closer to winning the election. There are people who want to abolish the Electoral College including past presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. It really just isn't fair to the people that who they vote for and who wins the popular vote may not have a chance to win because he/she did not get the Electoral College votes.
In addition, Source 3 states " The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense...it is the electors who vote for a president, no the people." When you vote in your state you are actually voting for an elector and not the presidential candidate. In 2000 the popular vote was higher for Al Gore than it was for George Bush, but Bush won the presidential election because he had a higher number of electors in the electoral college. In a real democracy Gore would have won because of the fact he was more popular. The people want to vote directly for the candidate they want not for some person that has been trusted to vote for a party's nominee.
Finally, The Electoral College is kind of fair in a way because it is based off population in each state. There is also an equal number of electors. Source 1 states " The founding fathers established it (the electoral college) in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by popular vote of qualified citizens." I understand that it is a law set by the men who created our country and it worked back then. It just isn't working in present day.
In conclusion, The Electoral College was created by the founding fathers back when the U.S. was small and didn't have a huge population like we do today. It worked back then, but now there are 50 states and millions of people. They want to be heard. The popular vote would make more sense than having states with huge populations deciding the fate of the election, when it should by popularity of the candidate. We need to restore our democracy and have the election be By the People. | 5 |
b87a989 | As seen in the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," people are always looking for ways to make life easier,or lazier,as I see it. We are perfectly functioning human beings,and we shouldn't use A.I. or advanced computers in order to do something as simple as driving a car. What would happen if we resorted to using computers in everything we use today?
There would be no need for "Alertness" when a computer is doing it for you,or for you to watch the road. The human mind needs stimulation in order to grow,and by having a machine do everything for us we are denying it that function. If you really don't want to drive,then take a bus or a Taxi. I can understand having technology to make driving safer but to drive the car itself for you? That's going too far. At that point we might as well have a computer walk for us then,and eat for us,breathe for us. The human body has survived without advanced computers and such for so many years,so why should we change?
So please,don't support the idea of having a car drive itself. It's just one step closer to turning our race into bigger couch potatoes than we already are. If you don't feel like driving then call your friend or take a bus,or even walk/bike to your destination. Both are safer and help you build up your body instead of dulling it down by having a computer do the work for you. | 3 |
b87afab | Driverless cars are fuel and it more active than a bus. An article entitled, " Driverless Care Are Coming" discusses how the author present both positive and negative aspects of driverless care. In the article, Google cars are not correctly driverless. Some people are argument for or against the development of thses cars.
The positive about the driverless cars are that it's become smarter. According to the article," Antilock brakes and driver assistance still seem a long way from the dream of calling a driverless cab to take us wherever we desire, but Sebastian Thrun, founder of the Google Car projec, believes that the technology has finally begun to cath up to the dream." A BMW project manager driver stated that, they hope to bring enterainment and important informaton system. They hope that driverless car can be entertainment and safety.
The negative aspects of driverless cars is that it would make people boring. It would not be entertainment to wait for people turn to drive. According to the article,"Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotationf sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirroir, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor." Some people argue that, the most important part of technology system is the spining sensor that on the roof. Some said that, sensor are not new to them because it respong to the hazard of control.
The argument for the development of these cars are that some states are allow to used half stonomous cars. So the manudacturers thought that more state would allow limited use of the half autonomous cars. It continuing saying that, if the technology didn't work and someone is hurt they can't blame the river or the manifacture. So, new laws will be need if the traffic laws change to cover an accident in the future.
The automakers are working on the project for the a car driving that can drive themselves around 2020. People are hoping to see this new driverless cars in the future. People believe that driverless cars world change the world. | 2 |
b87b1d8 | The idea or ideas of a driverless car system do not seem all that smart. With a driverless program there is a lot of high maintance that comes along with building these cars.
Even though the idea of new technology is great you also have to think about the counter acts of these machines also. With all the new improvements to technology you would think that having a driveless care would be the ideal future. In return you have to think about how much it cost, safety percussions,liability and more.
In most states it is illegal to test drive auto-produced cars on mainroads leading to other citizens. Of all states that do not have a illegal ban on testing these cars are still trying to figure out if they will be safe enough. mean while they are testing these cars on open roads whicch could cause multiply accidents on the way. There are many ways to test the saftey of these cars. Some of which are sensors. The car could have every sensor possible,but since it is a computer made engine things could still go wrong in the processing. The car could mouthfunction while the person is driving and an acciedent could happen because the software didnt meet up to code.
Not only is there safety risk with having a auto-driving car think of the cost. Radars alone are over two hundred million dollars. Thats just for one car so for manufactures to have to make multiply cars at that price would be outrages. The manufactores also would have to pay for all of the other driving made things. Sensors,radars, engines, safety equipment and more cost over the normal amount if it were just manual cars.
90% of the car would rely on the computer programing and 10% would actually really on the human. That 10% can be a tricky thing because if something were to go wrong in the programing the driver would have no control or be aware of what is happening
or how to control the car is it stops working.
Another downside of having a computer programed car to rely on is the upgrading. Most new equipment that would be provided for the car would be high end. The programing would have to be updated regularly in order for the car to manufacture right. Most people wouldnt have the time nor money for the constant upgrading. As the years go on people would learn less and less how to drive so if the computer programing would happen to stop working then the driver would be completely lost and would have no idea how to control the car. This can cause many dangerous situtations. The car and possibly people could wind up damaged from the messed up manufactruing.
In the end even though cars that would drive themselves would be a cool thing it is also very dangerous. It is okay to have all the high end equipment for cars,but they should be driven by humans not computers. It wil be a lot more safer for everyone involved. | 4 |
b882670 | Technology that reads students' emotional expressions should absolutely be used. This technology would make it possible for a computer to know how a student is feeling during an assignment, which could help with advances in later work.
Confusion, boredom, anger, whatever a student is feeling during an assignment a computer can pick that up. In paragragh six,Dr. Haug states,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This could change lots of things. If a computer notices a student getting bored from an assignment, perhaps they can make the next assignment more interesting. When a student is bored during an assignment, they tend to not be completely focus or to not do the work. With this technology computers could prevent students from getting bored during assignments, which could result in more students doing their work. This technology could also help students when they are confused or don't understand something in the lesson, by modifying the lesson, which could be needed for many students.
In the article aslo states, "If you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown,the next ad will be different." This could change alot for students that have any type of social media. Social media could become much more popular using this type of technology. Students will see things they like, thus pleasing them. Then, they will begin to like social media even more and maybe even encourage others to join.
This new technology could change alot for students and even students with life on social media. Students would do much better in school if this technology were to be used in schools. Assignments turned in on time would become more effecient, students would pay attention to their work instead of dozing off, and students would not be as confused and have more help with their assignments. While students will also grow to love social media much more, resulting in more money for the distributers of social media. This technology could be a win for students and social media. | 3 |
b888c7c | I think everyone should join the Seagoing Cowboy program because it allows you to experience adventure and visit many unique places. In the story is says that his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Eurpoe on a cattle boat and it also says it changed his life.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy will allow you to to experience adventure. And when you experience something for the first time it can be scary and it can be really fun. Also you can visit unique places that some people will never get to go to. And when you go to those places you can tell really good storys. I remember when my family went to Flordia for the first time together and when I got back I had a lot to write about.
By doing something new it could change your future and you might realize you like doing this in sted of doing what you had planed. But you have to want to try something new and you have to give it a chance. When you try something for the first time it might not always work out but most of the time when you keep trying and not give up it will end up going really well and you could learn to like it.
But if you look at it at a diffrent way going into the sea is dangerous and you would have to be really careful. And if you where in a storm you would have to be careful not to tip the boat and you have to remember there would be cattle on the boat. Also you would have to be careful around the animals so they wont bite or try to kick you.
However it can change your life by seeing new things. And you would get to see unique places that a lot of people can't go. You will get to experience adventure and be able to tell great storys about where you where and what you did there. So therefore i think everybody should try something new and be a Seagoing Cowboy. | 4 |
b889521 | Did you know that automobile accidents are one of the most preventable causes of death per year? With thousands of people dying for small mistakes, there is need for some change. Surely there is a way to make the roads a safer and more secure environment. Google's driverless cars have driven half a million miles without any individual crashes. I believe driverless cars are the safest path for our future on the roads.
Unmanned automobiles have been on their way for a while. These developing autonomous vehicles are using some of the most advanced technologies to keep us away from harm. "In the 1980s automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock wheels." (Driverless Cars Are Coming) The necessary sensors have been in devolopment for over thirty years with improvements along the way such as preventing skids or rollovers. These sensors make the cars easier to operate. Google's modified Toyota Prius has a plethra of new sensors attached to it. Of those, it contains a position-estimating sensor, four radar sensors, a video camera, a GPS reciever, an inertial motion sensor, and a spinning sensor on the roof of the car to make a 3-D models of environments surrounding the car. With all of the upgrades made to this machine, it is a much safer vehicle than it was before and it exerts its dominance in having an untarnished history on the road.
The cars may be able to drive themselves but humans can still take control when necessary. If there is ever an environment where the car cannot navigate properly, like an accident or a work zone, the car will require the human driver to take over rather than taking its regular plotted course. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills". (Driverless Cars Are Coming) The notifications for the driver to take control are maximizing the safety of the driver and passengers. Unexpected changes in the path the car has been traveling may require human assistance which shows the driver can still be in control.
In conclusion, I believe autonomous cars are the most secure way to travel the roads. They show superior technology and represent our capabilities to the make the roads a safer place. Driverless cars are the way of future transport safety. | 4 |
b88c3b5 | Have you ever wanted to see other things in space like our "sister plant" Venus? In this article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author was supportinhg his ideas of why we should go and explore Venus our "sister plant." The author explaied why he thought exploring Venus was a good idea and why we should keep looking into it. In this article the author does support his ideas in exploring Venus. Scientists are finding new ways to vist and test Venus surface, scientist are talking about what Venus has to offer, and Venus is so much like Earth.
First, Scientists are trying to find new ways of testing and even visting Venus. There have been a couple of approaches on studying Venus. NASA has been working on this "simplified electronics" that are made up of "silicon carbide." NASA even tested it in a "chamber simulating the chaod of Venus's surface" (the challenge of exploring venus 7). The simplified electrons had lasted up to three weeks in the simulation.
Secondly, Venus is just like Earth. A very long time ago venuse was covered largely with oceans and some scientist think that Venus was able to support diffrent various of life forms, and still today Venus has some features that are "analogous" to those on earth.
In concluison Venuse needs to be explored becasue it has some of the charticsts that Earth has and it will help us expand more and have us venture out further more in or solar sytem and more. | 2 |
b88f0c4 | These four essays all show that car culture is decreasing in the developed world, North America and South America.
These four essays show the willingness of the people to help the enviroment and reduce car usage. In essay 1 "I'm much happier this way" said a member of the community. She speaks for many who have moved to this area to live where cars are very uncommon. In essay 3 "It's a good oppritunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" said a buisness man of columbia. Most of the members of the capital seem to be in favor of the car-free day, the support for a day similar to this in other countries is rising to. The main problem for getting rid of private vehicals is that many cities cannot accomplish this kind of transportation. There are many small towns in America that do not have the ability to walk or bike across the long distances from the home to the downtown area. America depends on agriculture exports, so if we all convert to city life America wont have many exports left.
The essays also show that going car-free is important in reducing greenhouse gas levels. In passage 1 "Up to 50% in gas emmisions." This means that 50% of our pollution to air is caused by our transportation. In passage 2 "Last week Paris ha 147 micrograms of paticulate matter per cubic meter." Paris at this time had record amounts of pollution in the air. This pollution is mostly due to transportation.
In conclusion the people of the world want to decrease pollution and it is nessasary to do this. | 2 |
b89cdae | The Earth and Venus have somewhat in common which is allowing NASA want to do what they are trying to study for. Venus is the closest planet to the sun. Which will bring some problems to the project. But it won't stop NASA from trying to do what they are soon going to acconplish.
The author did a good job explaining and supporting his idea. Venus is alot like the Earth and it can also have some living things. "Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans."
Their is a possiblitity that Venus will have some living things. And to find out about all this it takes risk. And thats what NASA is trying to do but carfully and slowly.
To conclude the autor did a good job explaining his point and also supporting his idea. Sooner or later NASA or someone else will go to Venus. And the truth will be told. | 2 |
b8a4245 | Self driving cars should be encouraged. this coulld be the future of all transportation. Where would this country be without taking risks in new technology. Worst case scenario, if the cars do turn out to be more dangerous than the normal cars, all you have to do is wait for them to improve the model. And when it comes to the laws being written, just make the people sign a contract at the dealership that says the company takes no resposibility over injury.
The first reason i think this should happen is because it could be the future of all transportation, imagine all of the people that would be able to go places because now they dont have to drive.Take drunk drivers for example. in todays society people who arwe drunk arent allow to drive, but if the car drove its self, they would be able to get home safely.People with impare dvision or other sorts of disabilities could also get around without have to depend on someone else.
The second reason as to why i think self driving cars should be produced is because being scared of what ifs isnt going to help this country evolve technology wise. If we wouldnt have taken a risk we wouldnt even have cars. and if we did create something dangerous , all we did was give it to the military.
The third and final reason i think self driving cars should exist is that virtually and problem you can think of can be fixed over time. If the car goes too fast or too slow or has problems turning, all you would have to do is "update it". If certain new laws have to be made, fine. If people cant decide who to blame for a accident, make the buyer sign a contract that says the company isnt responsible for an damages to vehicles or people.
In conclusion, ithink that seld driving cars should exist because they are the future of transportation, we need to take risks to advance, and all of the problems would be easily solvable. | 3 |
b8a49b0 | Some people believed that the "Face on Mars" was an alien monument, and still do. This was a conspiracy theory that had been proven wrong many times by us scientists at NASA. When we first discovered this face, there was a degree of surprise among the mission controllers. But they soon figured it was another Martian mesa, which is common around Cydonia. Only this one had different shadows that gave the appearance of an Egyption Pharaoh, which caused the theories of it being an extra terrestrial monument.
When we had unveiled the photograph of the rock formation out into the public, it had been captioned that it was a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." This had been done to attract attention, and it did. People began to think the Face was evidence of life on Mars that NASA would rather hide. But, our NASA budgeters wish there was life on Mars because it would benefit our investigations and bring in more money. NASA would have abosolutely no reason to hide this information from the public.
Yet, theorists are unconvinced. On April 5, 1998, we sent the Mars Global Surveyor to fly over Cydonia and to take photographs that were ten times sharper than the original photos. We first uploaded these images onto a JPL website, explaining that the Face was a natural landform and that it was not a monument built by aliens.
People were still not satisfied with our information at this point. Our mission controllers prepared to inspect the Face again. This time, our controllers used a camera that spanned 1.56 meters on the maximum resolution, which captured a breath-taking image. This image shows that the Face is an equivalent of a butte or mesa. This is a common landform on Earth, and proves that the Face on Mars is just an oddly shaped area of land.
I do understand why people may have thought that this landform was evidence of life on Mars, but us workers at NASA gave real evidence that it wasn't. Our mission controllers had taken three different images showing more and more proof that it was just another landform. The mission controllers had used cameras with extreme resolution that had the ability to see airplanes or pyramids if there were any. But there wasn't, and there still isn't.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that there is no life on Mars because there is no actual evidence proving my belief wrong. To all those who still believe the Face on Mars was a monument built by aliens, I truly hope you will read this and realize that theories are theories until proven true. | 5 |
b8a868d | For years, people have been telling others that the natural landform on Mars is actually a face created by aliens. I as a scientist believe that it is also a landform coinencidently in the shape of a face. There are multiple reasons why I and many other scientists feel this way.
We have tried multiple times to photograph this landform and have succeeded. It appears to majority of us, that it is not more than a natural landform. We have took many precautions into making sure that it isn't an alien artifact. For example, it's like the man on the moon. It just happened to be there naturally and created itself over time. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but that doesn't make it a fact.
In conclusion to this theory, it is not more than just a theory. We are not hiding anything from the world. Something like this I'm sure we'd be more than happy to share with the rest of the world in our amzing findings. We could be wrong, that is so. But, we're pretty positive it's just a landmass. | 2 |
b8b179c | There has been a large argument about the "Face on Mars". This "Face on Mars" is located in a region called Cydonia, where martian mesas are commmon. It has gain a lot of attention from conspiracy theorist that belive there is life on Mars, and they belive an alien life form has created the face. While scientist are positive, that this is a natural landform like you see on Earth. However, conspiracy theorists ignore what the scientists say.
If aliens had created a monument that looked like humans, how would they know what we look like in the first place? We have not seen or proven that there is life on Mars, and if they knew what we looked like, wouldn't we know what they look like? Many conpsiracy theriosts argue that NASA wants to keep aliens a secret, but NASA would love to find an ancient civilization on Mars. If they could find an ancient civilization that could be a break through in science and biology.
When they took another picture in April 1998, the picture was taken with clouds in the sky, making it impossible to see the small things. The theriosts argue that they couldn't see anything, so on April 8, 2001 they took another picture. It was a cloudless day in the Cydonia region. They took aother picture of the phenomeun in full resolution, and that picture proves that the face is just a mesa or butte. The landform was even common in the United States.
Many conspiracy theorists was wishing for this to be a momunment from an anicent civilization, but the facts are agaist it. In the high resolution picture you can see the crevices in the land that make up the lanform. With the ditches and holes in the land, it causes shadows that reemble the eyes, nose, and mouth of a human. NASA would be happy to find an ancient civilization on Mars, but they look to the information first. | 3 |
b8b47de | Dear Mr. Senator,
Our foundig fathers established the Electoral College in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. Voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who turn to elect the president. The Electoral College regarded as people that seem to belong to the past and not in the present. The Electoral College is unfair to voters. Candidates don't spend time in the states they know they have no chance of winning.
I believe that if anyone should have a good argument for putting the fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters, they have yet to make it in this world.
The most worrying is the result of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives. We as Americans have the right to vote and yet the Electoral College still has its defenders. Voters expect another close election, in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidency.
The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. A larger state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign that a small state does. Just because most other things are equal they favor larger states. The Electoral College's method of selecting the president turns off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state.
60% of Americans agree that the Electoral College should be abolished. The Electoral college is unfair, outdated, cruel, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. Bob Dole was right when he said "Abolish the Electoral College."
Sincerely,
John Smith | 3 |
b8b5abe | Driverless cars often seem like an abstract achievement that man has made that allows for drivers to be reckless and lazy. Many people believe that when a crisis may occur, people will be too lazy to take control of the situation and avoid tragedy, resulting in injury or even death. Or, they can even argue that driverless cars may seem like the world will begin to rely on technology. But, this is not the case. Driverless cars will hold a positive effect on the upcoming future because the cars could make up a very flexible bus or taxi system, only use half of the fuel that is used today, and allow far better response and control than a human driver.
If in the future there are driverless and self-managing bus systems, there will be much less need or demand for every person to have their own car and this could save many families a lot of money. Buying cars can be a very tough ordeal for families that have a hard time affording the lives that they live, and by creating a standard bus system, there will be less of a hassle for these families. Also, if the bus and taxi systems are standardized, the busses will all come and depart on a schedule, causing the busses to be more on time and more efficient than having humans drive.
Secondly, if there were a large increase in the stadard bus and taxi systems, the usage of gas and oil will drop substantially. Again, this wold help to eliminate one of the pesky bills many families have to pay for but through standard bus and taxi systems, paying for fuel will no longer be a hassle. Also, it is common knowledge that oil and gas are not reusable or nonrenewable resources so by cutting back on the amounts of these resources that are used, there will be a much more stable supply of these resources. Additionally, burning oil and gas has been causing terrible problems for global warming and climate change so by reducing the amounts of these resources used, the climbing rates of global warming will begin to decrease and this problem will then be a thing of the past.
Lastly, due to all of the technology and research put in to these cars to make them as smart as they truly are, these cars are more able or better suited for life on the road compared to a normal person. In order to make the cars able to drive by themselves (with the slight help of a person) they needed sensors that could determine where it was safe to go and when there was danger ahead. As stated in the passage, "Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers". When faced with a dangerous situation, these cars have the ability to quickly fix itself and avert from any danger or hazard there was. Because the driverless cars are adapted with this information, it is said that, "The information from sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone". In a time of a crisis or need for diversion, driverless cars are much more suited to take on the situation than cars driven by humans. Driverless cars have features that regular cars cannot manage such as the ability to brake each wheel indiviually. No human could ever be so perfectly ready or able to take on a dangerous situation that they could control each wheel. So, by having technology drive the cars instead of humans, it is considerably safer for the passenegers in the vehicle.
In conclusion, not only is it more intersting to say that there is a car that can self-drive itself, these cars are safer, more efficient, and are more able to create a system similar to taxes or busses. It helps the environment, it helps the needing families, and it helps in the case of a dangerous situation. | 5 |
b8bff70 | Driverless cars. Look at that word. Does that sound right to you? I wouldn't say so. Sounds just a bit scary if I would say so myself. I dont know, maybe i just dont understand how you could have the audacity to let no one drive a car. That just sounds so wrong. I understand its monitored but its still a huge risk.
It says the car is actually being controlled but not by any sort of human. So who takes blame for a wreck. The non driver. Its just dangerous. What happens when it has a glitch and hits someone or something? WHat if measurements are off? Or there was a mistake and the wasn't completely finished? So many different problems could come from 'Driverless Cars.' There is still a human in the drivers seat but what if the humans to late to react? Or there is nothing the human can do?
Another problem would be laws. So many would have to be changed. From street signs, speed limits, to railroads or streetlights. Or consquences of car crashs, or wrecks. If the car is doing something wrong and gets stopped by a cop, is the cop going to talk to the car and ask it for its license and regestration? Its just a silly idea and i cannot believe its probably actually going to happen. The world is losing it.
I strongly disagree with the idea of a car being driven with out.. being driven. Im sure there are pros to this idea but in my eyes the cons out weigh pros by a ton. Its just dangerous. | 3 |
b8c1a5f | Imagine a classroom specifically tailored to each individual student and their emotion. The students there enjoy coming to school. If they are bored, the lesson changes to regain their interest. If they are confused, the lesson uses a different method of explaining to help them better understand what is being taught. The article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile" describes a new emotion-recognition software that could do just that. The use of technology to read emotion is valuable and should be used classrooms.
The technology that is used currently in schools could be bettered using this new software. Throughout the United States, many schools are looking for solutions to better their classrooms. Emotion-recognition could be the answer. Most schools already have devices in place such as lap-tops, iPads, and classroom computers. With technology already in schools, why not strive to make it better? The only step that would need to be taken is putting these softwares in place.
Students could have more enjoyment and better understanding in schools with emotion detecting softwares. Those who find it hard to pay attention could recieve lessons that are constantly changing. Students that are having a difficult time with a particular portion or subject could recieve help. Even those who are commonly bored in school could be given more challanging lessons to keep their interest up, simply through emotion-recognition.
With happier kids and more personalized instruction, student's success in school could increase. If children had a more positive experience in school, they could enjoy learning more. If students enjoyed learning more, they might have more motivation to do well in school. Also, each individual student would be given instruction tailored to them, so no student would be left behind or have less oportunity to succeed than others.
Overall, the use of emotion detecting technology is valuable and should be used in classrooms. Technology is already being used in schools, so all that would have to be done is putting the new software in place. Increases in student enjoyment while at school could greatly effect the levels of student success, leading to a smarter generation of motivated and positive individuals. If a change that is not difficult to make, could have such a great impact, why is it not in place already? | 4 |
b8c4484 | To whom it may concern, I have recently been enlightened on what Electoral College is all about. According to "What Is the Electoral college?" Electoral college is a compromise between election of the president by a vote in congress and the election of the president by a popular vote of qualified citizens. It consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress. As quoted also from "What Is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register.
First of all, the Electoral College should be kept because no, one region has the ability to elect a president. A certain region can gather all it's people to favorite one of the candidates, but it still won't be enough to reach a biased conclusion in the final election. The candidates also cannot count on one of their favorite states or rven regions for them to win because, with only regional or state appeal, it will become unlikely for them to be a successful president.
In addition, having The Electoral College will ensure that the larger states can't overrule the smaller state based on population. It balances the weight of more populated states to smaller populated states. This is good because now, the smaller populated states will feel that they actually have power in the Election process instead of feeling left out due to a larger population. This is also significant because now the candidates won't aim their campaigning only towards the higher populated states. They will go all around the country trying to emphasize their importance in winning the campaign.
In conclusion, the obvious solution here is to keep using the Electoral College process. It not only ensures that one state or region does not have enough votes alone to sway the election, it allows the smaller populated states to have just as big of a say in the election as the larger states. The procedure of using The Electoral college has been around for quite a while now and it's clear why. It is the most beneficial way of ensuring that the right candidate will get into office, based off of the right terms. | 4 |
b8c4981 | The cities of Vauban, Germany; Paris, France; and Bogota, Colombia all have something in common. They have all taken measures to use cars minimally for at least a small period of time. The results of car use are pollution and accidents among other large scale issues. The cities previously mentioned, however, have taken active roles in preventing these issues. It is no guess as to why the pollution is created; "...transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions..." states Elisabeth Rosenthal of the
New York Times . A seemingly simple, but effective, idea could prevent the pollution caused by cars - limiting car usage. Cars have been a major cause of stress with people who always rush to arrive at their destinations, and social interaction (in person) has significantly shot onto the negative end of the spectrum because of the invention of cars. By limiting car usage, the overly tense and smogged communities alike would benefit.
A frustrated, tense driver is not an uncommon occurrence. The term "road rage" was not spontaneously thought of. The purpose of cars is to transport someone or something from destination "A" to destination "B" in a short amount of time. This makes the very nature of cars one of urgency and with urgency comes stress. Stressed drivers have been the cause of many a car accident. All it takes is someone who is almost late for a meeting to speed too quickly for an accident to occur. Cutting down on car usage would exponentially decrease the number of car accidents, and it is likely to increase the overall happiness of a community that harbors less cars on their streets. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," states Heidrun Walter of Vauban, Germany. The community of Vauban has given up their cars. In fact, there are only two places to park there; the parking garage requires a $40,000 fee to reserve a space, and it is rare to find a private garage for a home. Vauban is an example of what is likely the beginning of more communities based on minimal car use. "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change," states David Goldberg, official of Transportation of America. "In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting 'car reduced' communities..." (Elisabeth Rosenthal) Communities are realizing the benefits of reduced usage.
An astounding statistic: "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." (Elisabeth Rosenthal) Pollution is the main concern for the generation of fossil fuel consumers. It is not unknown that cars cause pollution because of the diesel and gasoline that fuels the car. The pollution cars bring will not cease to multiply until cars are used less, and hybrid cars are not necessarily the answer because there has always been controversy on whether people will actually buy them with time. Cities who ban car usage see significant changes in the quality of their atmosphere and an example of this is Paris. Paris, the travel destination of both adventurers and lovers, experiences some of the worst pollution - even when compared to Beijing, China. "Congestion (car traffic) 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," stated Robert Duffer of the
Chicago Tribune . Paris benefited from the bans and reduced the amount of smog in the city. Paris took action on their car usage issue and it would be beneficial for other places to follow suit as pollution is an increasinly major environmental issue and health hazard.
Not only would pollution be shifting downward, but city projects would improve with the limited use of automobiles. Cars promote the improvement of highways and roads. This creates a situation in which the city funds the roads, but fails to focus on other important city structures such as sidewalks and local stores. Roads are constantly run down and massive amounts of tax money go into repairing them, but limiting car usage would prevent road damage and change the city's view on other structures. Bogota, Columbia has a "Day without Cars" to "...promote alternative transportation and reduce smog," states Andrew Selsky of
Seattle Times . With just one day reserved for not using cars, "...uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks;...; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." (Andrew Selsky) Reducing car use enhances the experience of those who normally don't use cars because of improved bike paths, sidewalks, and is the foundation for a more lively city community.
Luckily, the United States seems to already be on the path to lowering numbers of cars used. "...Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by," states Elisabeth Rosenthal from
"
The End of Car Culture
"
. America is one of the biggest mascots of the car industry; they have always been on top of advertisement and 'showing off cars' with companies such as Ford and Mercedes. The decline of car usage is beneficial in America for the environment as emissions will be lowered, but the car companies would need to find a different tactic to generate or maintain money flow. The resulting effect is that not only would limiting car usage aid the environment, decrease stress levels, and promote structural integrity of a city, but it would be the dawn of a new cultural age based on a community that has a better transportation system to "...conserve resources, lower emissions, and improve safety," as proposed by Bill Ford of Ford Motor Company. Limiting car usage will usher in a healthier age for the younger generations. | 5 |
b8cc468 | Should driverless cars be legalized throughout the United States? I argue that they shouldn't. First of all, driving is an important skill to have and without that skill, an individual becomes less independent. Secondly, if we, as a country, relied on driverless cars to transport us places, we would rely on other technology to help us live too, thus losing more independence. Lastly, if driverless cars were to malfunction, then humans wouldn't have the option to drive a real car around. These are just three reasons I believe driverless cars shouldn't become a part of our society. Firstly I will explain, in more detail, my first reason; driving is an important skill to have and without that skill, an individual becomes less independent.
My first reason for why driverless cars shouldn't become part of our society is that driving is an important skill to have and without that skill, an individual becomes less independent. There are many skills to have in life: dealing with money, performing your job to the best of your ability, and striking up a conversation with somebody. Among those skills is driving. When a person drives themself somewhere, they are showing that they are independent. If driverless cars were to be set into motion in our society, then how would our country look? How would a father supporting a family look if he went from driving himself to having a car drive for him?
My second reason that driverless cars don't belong in our society is that if we, as a country, relied on driverless cars to transport us places, we would rely on other technology to help us live too, thus losing more independence. Americans already rely on technology to help us with our everyday lives. We rely on phones, computers, and even televisions to entertain us. If the skill of driving were taken away from people altogether, then we would most likely turn to other technology to help us, like hoveround chairs so we don't have to walk, or completely turn to computers and forget writing altogether. My third reason that driverless cars shouldn't be replacing cars in America is that if driverless cars were to malfunction, then humans wouldn't have the option to drive a real car around.
In the future, if driverless cars were to start malfunctioning, after forty to fifty years after they had succeeded gasoline cars, then there would only be a minority of people that would know how to drive and the majority of the country would have to learn how to drive again. That is, if the government would agree to build gasoline cars again.
The proposed question was: "Should driverless cars replace gasoline cars?" I argue that driverless cars should not replace gasoline cars. My first reason is that driving is an important skill to have and without that skill, an individual becomes less independent. My second reason is that if we, as a country, relied on driverless cars to transport us places, we would rely on other technology to help us live too, thus losing more independence. My last reason is that if driverless cars were to malfunction, then humans wouldn't have the option to drive a real car around. | 3 |
b8d9df2 | Too many children, parents, and friends are lost each year from vehicle related deaths. Drunk driving is among the top leading causes of car accidents. Phones and technology play a big part in distracting the driver creating opportunities for a crash to occur. If driverless cars are put into use, the amount of wrecks caused by drivers fault will decraese greatly
Alcohol can cause an impaired driver to get behind the wheel and drive to the next location they have in mind. It is too often that drunk drivers crash into innocent people in another car creating death among the innocent. With google cars, the impaired car owners can sit back and leave the driving up to technology. The sensors and cameras installed about the car create a much better chance in preventing an accident instead of relying on an impaired driver's vision. In some sections of roads, the driver will have to take the wheel, but as technology advances, there will no longer be a need for human control of vehicles.
Getting a phonecall or text while driving discovers the oppotunity of distraction which leads to car accidents. The sensored braking system installed within Google cars will do a great job in decreasing the number of pedestrian and animal related deaths due to distraction of the driver. You can almost always find animals lying alongside the roads due to the driver's inability to brake or swerve fast enough. Google cars cameras will see the animals long before the driver can which prevents the loos of an animal and the destruction of a vehicle.
Google cars may have difficulties and faults but over time they will advance and problems will be solved. Preventing drunk driving or technology related deaths will cause friends, family, and children to stay within the lives of their loved ones longer. This decrease in worry will also create more opputunities to focus on other top people relating deaths and their preventions. | 3 |
b8e1a6c | I do not belive that the electoral college should be kept as our country's voting system. The electoral college is unfair to the people, outdated and is no longer a rational method to choose our president.
The first reason That I believe the electoral college should be abolished is because we do not get to directly vote for the president ourselves. The people currently vote not for the president himself, but for a state of electors who will vote for you. The voters can not always control who our electors vote for, so in some cases, our votes may not even be contributing to the election at all. There could even be a possibilty of the candidate winning only by the majority of electoral votes. The popular vote could be completely disreguarded.
Furthermore, I do not believe that the electoral college should be our voting system because of swing states. Most of the time, candidates will spend a large portion of their time in states that will have the best effect on their outcome. Others are disreguarded and will most likely be less motivated to vote.
Finally, the electoral college should be aboliashed because of the discouaragement of minority voters. If a republican were to live in a mainly democratic state, he or she may be not be motivated to go and vote because they would feel as if thier vote does not count.
To conclude, I beleive that the elctoral college is outdated and irrational and it should be no longer used as a method of choosing the leader of our contry. | 3 |
b8ee42c | Driverless cars sounds like a good idea, but if you really think about it, is it really? A car that can drive itself could come with many other problems. Personaly I don't think its that good of an idea. In the following paragraphs I will be explaining why I am not for driverless cars.
Basically driverless cars are controlled automatically by like a computer. Think about all the times you've had an issue with things messing up with your computer or cellphone. If smartphones have technical problems some times, what makes you think a smartcar won't? Imagine driving on a busy street or a highway and something going wrong with the car and you not being able to control it. Someone could end up seriously hurt, or dead.
In the article it says how the car would still need the drivers assistance in situations such as navigating through work zones or around accidents. I feel like because this car is designed to steer, accelerate, and brake for themselves the driver would be less aware while on the road and if for any reason needed to take charge of the wheel they wouldn't do it fast enough because they are not being as focused on the road as they would be with a normal car you drive yourself.
Also, if these cars were to start being more used there would have to be more laws made in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. They would have to see who would be held responsible, the driver or the manufacturer and that just makes everything more difficult. There would have to be a lot of work put into these cars being able to be used.
I don't think technology is advanced enough for a driverless car to be completely safe. Cars controlled by a person aren't even completely safe, a car controlled by a computer definitely isn't. The technology could fail and people could end up severly hurt. There could be many problems for the drivers and manufactures of these cars. Maybe one day in the future there could be driverless cars but I don't think right now is the time. | 3 |
b8f26c1 | The Automobile Industry has done nothing but grow since World War II. The Car has begun to implement itself into our culture, becoming a part of sporting events, TV shows, and even video games. Recently, however, the automobile industry has been experiencing a shift in interest. Countries around the world are implementing "Car Free Days," or even car-free cities into their laws and cultures. The new laws and ideas are seen by some as irrelevant, or pointless, and some have even resisted these laws. While car lovers and enthusiasts may not enjoy the laws very much, when implemented on their daily lives, studies have shown that the new ideas are extremely important, maybe even revolutionary.
The car free environment begins in the German suburbia, where residents of a large community called Vauban live their daily lives Car-Free. Vauban is free of street parking and driveways, and full of cyclists, skateboarders, roller bladers, and any other emmision free means of transportation you can imagine. Because of this, nearly 3 out of 4 families in Vauban do not own cars. "When I had a car, I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, mother of 2 and resident of Vauban, Germany, mentioned in source 1. Car owners in Vauban park the vehicles in garages at the edge of town, to make commutes to nearby developments. Car free cities like Vauban are believed to be the next step to a greener, better world.
More efforts like Vauban are being made in large cities like Paris, France and Bogota, Columbia. According to source 2, Paris recently enforced a law to reduce emmisions, where even number plated cars may drive on Monday, and odd number plated cars my drive on Tuesday, and so on. The laws soon proved ineffective after a short time, for Paris to recind them. Paris, being one of the most polluted European cities, will certainly be making more efforts against pollution. An improvement campaign in Bogota, Columbia calls for one whole day without cars, according to source 3. Citizens are urged to take other means of transportation, like bikes or busses. Violators faced a $25 fine. The dark gray rainclouds didn't stop the citizens of Bogota from taking away stress and air pollution. This year, for the first time, two other cities, Cali and Valledupar, joined Bogota in the event. Cities around the world like Paris and Bogota are making efforts to reduce air pollution and leading better lives in cleaner cities.
Driving in America hit it's peak in 2005, when the number of miles driven in relationship to population was largest, according to source 4. Since then, the stats have dropped steadily, now sitting 9% below what it was in 1995. Many sociologists believe that the biggest decrease in milage is shown in young people between 16 and 39. Studies show that driving by these people decreased 23% between 2001 and 2009. Many experts now believe that America's car culture has hit its peak, and is now on the decline.
There are many advantages of limiting car usage. The people of Bogota, Vauban, and Paris know that in most cases, cars cause stress, and that even a day without it can refresh your mind. The citizens of Vauban, who do not use cars in their daily lives, are living comfortably, and happily, without producing carbon emmisions into the environment. Even Americans are jumping on the band wagon, where young people are now using cars only when public transport is unavailable. Cars make moving easy, there is no doubt in that. But can the emmisions of the vehicles be avoided, without sacrificing the quality of our daily life? According to Vauban, Bogota, and Paris, it can be done, and it will be done. | 4 |
b8f5028 | Dear Senator,
I believe that is is time to get rid of the electoral college. The electrorial college is outdated and irrational, the best arguments are only assertions that dont have much basis in reality.
There are too many faults and risks in the electoral college such as the coming of a tie in the voting and that even though one canidate may win the popular vote they can still lose the election. As Bradford Plumer says "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now" (paragraph 9). It would be better in elections for it to go by popular vote instead of representatives deciding for you. A solution for this could be to simply go by popular vote. There is also the fact that the electors could defy the will of the people.
The electors are not trust worthy. "Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy" (Bradford paragraph 11). They did this so the popular vote would not actually go to Kennedy. In the past electors have refused to vote for their party's canidate and cast a vote on whomever they want. People are thinking we have "faithless" electors because of this. We need to select electors that we can trust will go by the states overall decision instead of their own personal preference.
It is hard to vote for the president not knowing if your vote is actually going to mean anything. Us as voters cannot control what the electors do and who they vote for, we just have to hope that our canidate wins. Us as voters also sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong canidate. The voters need to know that their vote is going to mean something for the canidates running and that their decision will be taken into consideration.
To conclude the electoral college is not a safe and trust worthy system. I believe that the arguments against electoral colleges are much stronger tyhan the ones saying to keep it around, give the people what they want. No more electoral college!
sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
b8fbfa6 | Bob is out drinking with his friends, he decides that he should go home and get ready for work the next day. Bob gets in his car and heads home, not realising how under the influcence he was, he does not notice the semi taking the corner and Boom, Just like that Bob is dead, his wife has to get a job and his kids are missing their father. It could have all been prevented with the introduction of driverless cars. Autonomous cars are more reliable, more effective, and safer than modern vehicles.
Autonomous cars will be much more reliable than common cars. Google has had cars out that have been semi-independent sine 2009. While the cars do have drivers for some issues such as complicated traffic the car does the majority of the work. With slight developments the cars have the potential to be fully autonomous. One easy solution to this is to simply have the cars GPS connect to the local news studio and hire people in that building to update the GPS to show heavy traffic and road work so the car can just avoid them.
Recent developments have made the cars more effective as well, for example they would offer much more flexibility than your avarage bus. The bus has a set route of stops and pick ups, wherein the car could pick people up at the bar and take them safely home. This not only reduces the amount of tickets, but it also saves lives. Think how great the world would be without people dying to drunk driving. Not only that but the cars also consume less gas and require less people.
Speaking of people, The cars would be much safer than your avarage taxi, people never know the whole story behind a cab driver. It's possible that a cab driver isn't a certified cab driver, found the taxi sign at a junkyard, painted his car yellow. This leaves people in a dangerous spot when calling a cab on the streets of new york. A driverless car could pick people up and there would be no danger for the user. Another part that makes the car safer is that it can sense things better than a human can. This cars are outfitted with a massive quantity of sonars and sensors to check for other vehicles. Not only is the car safer for the person inside it is also safer for everyone else. A smart car will never have road rage, as it is a computer, without the capability to feel it will never get angry. A smart car won't run people off of the road because its feelings got hurt.
In conclusion, Autonomous cars are very reliable, effective, and safe. Think of all the Bobs in the world who because of one bad decision have not only lost their life but ruined the lives of those who loved them. it is possible that autonomous cars can prevent it from happening in the future. Google cofounder Sergey Brin believes such cars can fundamentally change the world. Do you want to help change the world for a brighter safer tomarrow. | 4 |
b902f23 | What if teachers couldn't teach anymore and we had to rely on technology? The technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because, it can help educate the children. There's technology out there that can help people learn.
With this new technology children can learn faster and better. If a computer can realize when a young child is confused or just plain bored of all the school work, then why shouldn't be able to reteach the information a better way so they understand. The key to sucess is having a good base of knowledge. With better education comes better and greater opertunities.
Technology that can read emotions of students in a classromm is valuable because it can lead to a high education. With a higher education comes better job oppertunities that others can't get. It also helps them retain more information compared to staying up all night to study for a class they don't pay attention to. | 2 |
b90d8f4 | Can you imagine a computer guessing everyones emotions, and tell wether their sad, happy, confused, etc. Well a 3-D computer can model all 44 major muscles. Dr. Paul Echman the creater of FACS has classified six basic emotions happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. using video imagery the computer can track these facial movements, the software can even recongnise mixed emotions. Inorder to identify all movements of one or more muscles is called an action unit. Using video imagery and recognising the facial movements the software can identify mixed emotions each expression is compared against a nuetral face. Every human can make the same face everyday, but you can probably tell when your friend is sad or happy just by looking at their face. While for somepeople its hard to tell when their friends feel happy, sad, confused etc. Dr. Huang got a picture of the Mona Lisa and made people look at it to tell if a computer can recognize your feelings. They also showed people a web ad that appears on a computer screen, If the person frowned the ad would change and when you smile a similar ad would appear. Dr. Huang predicts that a classroom computer will recognize when a staudent is becoming bored or confused. | 1 |
b90f1b5 | Dear state senator,
It is the utmost respect that I ask for the method for presidental election be changed from the electoral college to something more suitable for the opinion of the people. The electoral college is an unfair system to the people, it can allow for individuals to decide what to do with the votes, not by the people of the United States of America.
Revising the electoral college system may seem like a bad idea but the good that could come of it overlies the bad. If the election of a president was based directly by the voters , then candidates could promise money to the people who vote for him/her. There could also be other propblems with direct democracy such as what would happen in the chance of a tie? Who would break the tie? And how would it be decided fairly. The electoral college shouldn't be removed, but should definitely be revised.
The electoral college permits the power of the electoral votes to go to whoever the choose. The electoral college is unfair to voters due to the winner-take-all system, whichh causes candidates to focus only on states the are "swing" states. In the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see candidates at all. The electoral college is an out-of-date system and either needs to be replaced or revised.
When running for president, the candidate has a group of electors. With each candidate habving their own group of electors, it provides without having to visit each state to nget their vote. The only thing the president is required to do is to wait. In reality, the preisdent doesn't even need to campaign, since the electors in the college votes are what matter. So, the candidate could just bribe the electors for certain states and he/she has that states' vote.
The voters do not vote for the candidates, but vote for the slate of electors. The electors are picked at state conventions, the state party's central comittee and sometime the presidential candidates themselves. The biggest issue with the electoral college is the disaster factor. The diaster factor are the potental problems with the system, such as back in 1960 when segregationists in louisiana legisllayture nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors with new electors who opposed John F. Kennedy.
The electoral college is an outdated way of elections. The electoral college puts the power into indivduals' hands not the people. It was created back before the eduaction was nothing close to what it is now. Therefore, the method of voting on representitives who then vote for the presdient is obsolete. | 4 |
b92304e | In the matter of the electoral college, being either abolished or kept intact, i take the side of keeping it intact for the reason that even though you are technically not voting for the president, but for a slate of delegates that are loyal to the candidate, it is in fact very useful. First, the number of electoral votes are given by the population of each state, and second, there is a near certanty of a outcome because of the winner take all system.
To begin with, the electoral college is based on the population of the state, meaning, that the bigger the state population, the more electoral college represantitives they get. So, if California has the biggest population in the U.S, and the district of Columbia has the smallest, then it isn't fair that they get the same number of votes, either small nor large, because there are more people in one state then the other. Although people say that the electoral college is a bad thing, and think that it is an anarchism, it is not, for it is one of the things that keep our counntry in near perfect shape.
Another reason that the Electoral College should be kept, is that there is a near certainty of a outcome. Take the 2012 election between Obama and Romney, where Obama recieved 61.7% of the electoral vote compared to the 51.3% populatrity vote cast to him. People argue that the electora l college has a diaster factor, or that the system allows for much more to happen that doesn't. Thats the problem. It hasn't happened and most likely won't happen, because if were going to happen then it would've already happened and Congress wouldve revised it and made sure that it didnt happen or that it could be delayed so that a solution was made possible, and that the election went as continued.
To conclude, even though the electoral college has many flaws that are yet to be shown and or fixed, it is the only way we have to elect presidents, and thats how it should be, because you can't have a perfect thing without flaws that have to be fixed | 3 |
b92bdee | Driverless Cars can help people life more easier. Even if it can make the environment much better than before. Because now we have many cars drive on the street and they will have some bad thing to make the environment be bad.
A lot of people, they are smart. They think that in one day, we maybe making computer-diven cars. In fact, this is a smart way to make people llife easier. But this make more and more people to make smarter than this way to make people life easier.
Then they find a new way to developed driver's seats and they have lights. It can help them drive on the road at night and make people to be safety.
So, my opnion is I believed that is the smart way to make people life more easier, But it will make people to be lazy to drive.
I am not agree to make this type of cars. Because if people life to be easy, they will be lazy in their life. | 1 |
b92d9e6 | Venus also known as Evening Star Is planet no to different from the planet earth. However this planet shows many challenges that don't allow us to learn more about it. The author males it very clear that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author supports his idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger many times in this article for example in the text it says "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one paerticularly compelling idea of sending humans to stufy Venus." How are we gonna send humans down to a planet we dont know that much. This is just one of the many text eveidnce the author put in the text to show Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
The author from the very start of reading this article shows that Venus is well worth the time and effort we are putting towards it. In the text it says "Often referred to as Earth's "twin" Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size". Venus and Earth are alike in many ways for example Earth Venus and mars are our lanetary neighbors they orbit thr sun as different speeds. These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times closer to Venus because how it says in the text "Venus is sometime right around the corner in space terms." This is other example on how well the author supports his idea of Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present.
We have tried many ways to try to learn more about Venus but there are many things getting in our way of learning more about Venus for example in the text is says "Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this could-draped world". We are more then exicted to try to learn more about Venus but thats not the only thing stopping us from learning more In the text is says "However peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limtied insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." As you have read normal taking photos will not be enought just to learn and see how Venus surface is we need to go down and see ourselfs however that will be very hard somce no spaceraft survived the landing for more than a few hours as stated in the text. The author shows why his statment of how Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present in many ways.
Astronomers are fascinated with Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system a long time ago. If Venus was once like Earth maybe it can be again because our Earth will not last forvever we will need somewhere else to go and maybe that place is Venus. In the text it says "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported varous forms of life just like earth today Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on earth. The planet has surface of Rocky sediment and includes familar features such as valleys mountains and craters." This text evdience shows why we are interested in learning more about Venus and once again supporting the idea of the author that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present.
The author has shown more than once that he strongly believes that Venus is well worth all the time and effort they are putting into it. However this planet shows many challenges that don't allow us to learn more about it. The author from the very start of reading this article shows that Venus is well worth the time and effort we are putting towards it. Astronomers are fascinated with Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet. We have tried many ways to try to learn more about Venus but there are many things getting in our way of learning more about Venus. In conclution The author never let up on his idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger. | 4 |
b92da64 | The article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto presents an idea that a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System can recognize human emotion. The article mentions that It can determine your emotion even if you seem like your not trying to express a specific emotion. This would be extremely helpful in classrooms so that students can have a better learning experience.
In the classroom, students tend to let their minds to drift off and sometimes they get confused but they're to shy to say anything. With having this new Facial Action Coding System, the system could modify the lesson plan based on how the students feel about it. For example, Dr. Huang from the article says that, "This classroom computer can recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This technology would also help the teacher learn more about their students so that they can help them when needed. This technology would play a big role in the future of schooling.
The Facial Action Coding System, is a different kind of computer. It determines your emotion which makes it different from the rest. This techonolgy plays a benefical addition to the classroom. If we incooperated them in the class, students would have a better learning experience and it would help the teachers learn more about their students! | 3 |
b92df25 | In 2001 an image captured by NASA finally put all of our theories away, explaining why there was a face shaped rock in the red planet, or did it? Many people have came up with many theories but the most talked about one is that there is an ancient civilization who used to be in the red planet. That theory was quickly put away after NASA captured an image in 2001. The reasons why that theory was put away are, the picture that was taken in 2001 used the absolute maximum resolution, so if there were any objects in the photo such as Egyptian-style pyramids, or even a small shack you could've easily seen what they were. The picture tooken in 2001 showed that the face on mars is the martian equivalent to a butte or a mesa- landforms common around america west. If there was an ancient civilization NASA would like to tell everyone and not hide it because its better publicity for
NASA to make such a great discovery.
First of all if their was an ancient civilization that would mean they had to make shack or pyramids to live in and in the image taken in 2001 did not capture any pyramids or small shacks in photo. If it did you would've been able to see it since the image was taken with the absolute maximum resolution so it would've been easy to see what the objects were, but there were no objects. In the photo you can only see the face not any other objects and it would be really hard to live without shelter so if their was an ancient civilization there had to be pyrmaids or shacks near that face but like I said the camera did not capture any of these things.
Secondly the image taken in 2001 showed that the face on mars is martian equivilent of a butte or mesa which are landforms common around america west. Now this could be true and may explain why the face is their. Since these landforms are common around america west it wouldn't be suprising if this is just a landform of the red planet. Many scientist have came up with this theory which is the one that has more credibility.
Finally NASA would rather it be true that there was ancient civilization living in mars since they would gain publicity. NASA would not hide this information if it was true because this would make them more prestige because they would be the ones taking full credit od the discovery and would get higer rates economically speaking. They face on mars since has become a pop icon and more when it was first discovered snd even though NASA had already said thst they figured it was a lanfdform, imagine if they say there was an ancient civilization many people would give them more publicity.
In conclusion the reasons why the face is a landform and not a whole story of how their was and "ancient civilization" living in the red planet are because, the picture taken in 2001 used it absolute maximum resolution so it would've captured any pyramids or shack in the background, but it didn't, also becaus ethe image taken in 2001 showed that the face on mars is martian equivient of a butte or messa which are landforms comon in america west, and finally because it would be better for NASA if there was an ancient civilization in the red planet since all the credit for the discovery being made would go to NASA ad would potentially give them more publicity and higher rates econmically speaking. So what do you think? | 4 |
b937932 | Let me tell you what advantages you got when you limit your car usuage. Well first which everyone can tell you is that you save so much money. Second you can just ride a bike or walk so you can stay in shape. And last not using alot of fossil fuels leaves less air polution for the world. Those are just some advantages you got when limiting your car usauge.
Well the first advantage when limiting your car usage is you save so much money. How much is gas these days per gallon? 3 something? And when you add that up it ends up to be alot of money to just fill your tank up. And to fill your tank up its like forty to fifty dollars depending on how much it takes to fill your car up. And an average person fills there car up close to 1-2 weeks. So in 2-4 weeks you could have spent eighty dollars on something else like grocries, your girlfriend/boyfriend, maybe its someones birthday, bills anything than just gas. Thats one of my advantages to not driving.
My second advantage to limiting car usage is you can just ride a bike or walk and you can stay healthy that way and in shape. If you think about it, when you fill the car up it gets close to around 200 miles you get to drive untill you run out. Instead of paying forty dollars to fill the tank up you can just buy a bike and ride that 200 miles and you stay in shape. And if you really want to save money you can just walk and its for free. Not only is it free but when your walking for longer than 10-20 miles which i doubt youd be walking that far but it really keeping you shape also starts burning those muscles and gets you stronger.
My third advantage to limiting car usage is the less fossil fuels you burn the less air polution your letting out into our world. And those fossil fuels that your buring and releasing into the air, it is really bad for our world. When first of all our fossil fuels arent really that renewable. And second its just bad to have that just going through our population. Where everyone is breathing in all that air polution and making people sick. Its just really bad to be burning alot of fossil fuels, when theres many alternative ways you can be transporting than driving a car and burning fossil fuels.
In conclusion, i just told you three advantages to limiting car usage. One, you save lots of money, second there is alternative ways for transportation like riding a bike or walking and staying in shape, and third when you burn less fossil fuels it leaves less air polution in our world. | 3 |
b9379d7 | Have you ever wanted a computer that can read your emotions ? Yes right? Me too. Its good to have a computer that can read your emotions because if its teaching a lesson in a boring way it can change it and make it a little more interesting. Second, it will detect your emotion and know what you like and what you don't like. Third, it will know when your happy or sad and it will know what to put on your screen.
First, it will change the mood of the lesson if you're getting bored. This is great because now the lessons won't be so boring and you will actually do them.
You will learn faster if you like the way they teach. In the text it say
" ' A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, ' Dr. Huang predicts.' Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor' "
( paragraph 6, D'Alto). This states that if the student is getting confused or bored the computer can modify's the lesson and the lesson will be better.
Second, the computer will detect if you like or not like what you're watching. For example, if the video you're given isn't a good one and you really don't like it then the computer can change it and give you a better suggestion. Also, the computer will understand how some people only express with emotions. " ' The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive - for video games or surgery. ' Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, ' notes Dr. Huang. ' So computers need to understand that, too " (paragraph 6, D'Alto ). This explains how computer can undertand when you like something and also how they need to understand that most communication is used my emotios or expressions.
Third, it detects if you're happy or sad. If you're happy it will make sure to keep you like that but if you're sad it might play you something so you can cheer up and do your work. Its difficult to do your work when you're sad , when you're sad you don't even want to work. "Imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad. For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen,a similar add will follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different"(paragraph 6, D'Alto ). This supports my reason because it talks about how the computer knows when you're sad or happy.
In conlcusion, having a computer that can read your emotions wouldn't be bad to have in a classroom. I think they will make the classrooms a litltle bit better. First, because if the student is getting bored the computer can modify the lesson. Second, because it can detect what you do and don't like. Last, because it will detect when you're happy or sad. | 4 |
b93974a | The face in Mars is obviously just a natural landform. NASA, actuaslly have done their research on this topic while conspiracy theorists just base off the details. Now, since NASA is doing their reasearch they probably have a more than likely chance of being correct they've actually studied the object to see what it actually was. While these conspiracy theorist go with the common opinion about it floating around, and do no reasearch at all. The conspiracy theorists think that may NASA is hiding the fact that aliens have made this from the public because it may harm their budget. Taking this to 1976, camera resolution wasn't high enough to take good high quality photos yet because the technology was behind. The picture was blurry and it was one of those, "you've got to see it to believe it" moments because nothing could be made out from it. This is probably where that "aliens made this" conspiracy came from, the photo is so blurry looks as though some sort of alien space craft had landed here or the doing of aliens for artwork. Now, when you fast forward to 2001, you can obviously see more clarity in the picture. It almost looks as though this could be some alien artwork, but this is more than likely just a from a ship that has landed there and made this odd face like hole. Furthermore, if this was created by aliens it would be far more complex and wonderful than a face.
In closing, this "face on Mars" and the fact that it may have been created by aliens could be true. But reason rules this out, these faces are just a natural landform that were there from the beginning, human created, or were made from a landing ship. | 2 |
b93c06a | Do people vote for the man who runs the country. No, thats the Electoral Colleges job. The Electoral College is a process in which a numerous 538 electors cast there vote from the people of their state want as their president. The people have no interaction but to put in there ballet and choose there own electors who favor the candidate. Congress counts the votes, and if a total of 270 votes are cast for a candidate then they are elected president. For most people this how they think this is but it's not. Who chooses the Electors the answer is the state. So the sometimes the popular vote never wins, but that that happens rarely.
Many people like Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole dislike the idea of Electoral College for this reason, the popular vote sometimes never wins. Al Gore who won popular vote but lost the presidency to Bush, lost the because of the Electoral College people believed that this was unfair and blamed the electoral college. But there is some benefits to the process, example is that if the people voted the states with the larges population would always keep the balance unchecked,or if there there is a tie in the popular vote we wouldn't have to rely on a thousand voters to decide. But the voters of the Electoral College to decide.
There are some draw backs to the process though. Since the number of electors are the based on the population of a state most state with few population numbers, careless about the election. There are reason why people find that we should keep the process,there are also reason many dislike the idea in the first place. Viewing the benefits and the weakness of the idea of the Electoral College made think that even though the College has flaws. Those flaws are rare and can be fixed, with proper work and planning. | 2 |
b9425e5 | Using this new Facial Action Coding System in a classroom would be a valuable asset for understanding how students feel during a lesson. Students will often start to feel boredom or confusion and the facial recognition system will be able to pick up on those emotions. With this information given to teachers, they can change their lesson to make it more meaningful to those students who feel emotions like boredom or confusion. There are many possibilities with this technology when it comes to understanding how students truly feel through out the school day.
The Facial Action Coding System uses a serious of percents to show how a person is feeling. For example, the famous "Mona Lisa" painting displays eighty-three percent of happiness, nine percent of disgust, six percent of fear, and two percent of anger(D'Alto, Nick). If this technology is applied to students, then teachers can finally understand how each and every student feels during their class period. Teachers would also be able to recognize if someone may be overly sad or angry. This could enable students to receive help faster from a counselor or parent if they are depressed or anger over something. Understanding is a student is depressed with this new technology could save so many lives due to the fact that teen suicide rates are higher now than they ever have been.
With the new rise of facial recognition software, it can be used in the classroom to help teachers identify how students are really feeling in their classroom. The system could be used to determine if a lesson is confusing or boring a student, which helps the teacher know how they could change up their lesson plan. It may also be used to save lives by recognizing a student who is depressed so that they can get help as soon as possible. To finalize everything, this new technology would be extremely useful for both the teacher and the student in identifying true emotions throughout the school day. | 3 |
b94370c | The Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. But is this advcanced system valuable or particularly necessary? In my opinion, although this coding system is brilliant, there is not a need for it in the classroom.
The fact that I live in a time where computers could calculate my mood and or my emotions is nothing short of amazing. But, this coding system doesnt benefit the consumer at all. In paragraph six, D'Alto gives an example of a computer analyzing your mood as you come across an ad. So, if you come across happy or smiling the computer will continue to display like minded ads but, if your computer sees that you are frowing upon seeing the ad it will direct you to different ads. Now this is great for the compant who sells whatever is in the ad, they get to literally profit by this technology. But what does it do for the one viewing ads? Nothing.
Another example given in paragaph six is in a classroom setting. Dr. Haing states "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then, it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". I'm not saying that this technology cannot do what it claims but what it does is utterly uneeded in a classroom setting. If a student is becoming confused about a certain topic they should raise their hand and ask a teacher (even online run courses always ave a teacher there to supervise). They should seek out a teacher guidance because, at least in my school district. cirriculum cannot be altered.
My district is made up of is five different highschools. All five teach the same exact math, english, and science curriculum. So, the computer would not even be permitted to change my lesson even if I was confused. So whats so helpful about a notification appearing on my screen saying thay I am about 63% confused? the answer is simply, its not.
In conclusion, although this software sounds very talented in what it is capable of achieving, is not useful in the classroom. This specific technology would quite honeslty serve me and my fellow classmates no use at all. What this software can do is what almost any human can achieve with sight and cognitive skills. Give me valuable software that will give me alternate youtube videos or websites to hellp me if im confused not software that just tells me im confused. | 4 |
b946dc0 | The expcerpt "The Challange of Exploring Venus" brings up many unthought of ideas by just regular people who would just passivly think about the planet. The author explores many different reaons why venus would be a better planet to explore and learn much more about the interesting planet.
In the excerpt the author brings up many different points about why venus is a good planet to explore more and get more information on. His main idea is to study Venus to see what all is there because if the planet is earth like then it may have other things there that we have yet discovered about the planet. He supports his ideas in many ways by stating that Venus's environment is closest to earth.
At last the authors point may be questionable but at the end of the excerpt his says that Venus is not the main point its the idea of exploring something that may not have a big meaning but may led to larger things. Venus is only the beginning of what humanity can do for advancements in the human race. | 2 |
b94c2b6 | Venus may be the most brightest points of light in the night sky, but it is the most fascinating planet. Venus, also known as the "Evening Star," has many interesting facts including how it is Earth's like twin. Which because of that has various forms of life and is the nearest option for planetory visits.
Venus is the second planet closest to the Sun but is also the closest to Earth. Either in terms of density and size. Venus has various forms of life which include valleys, mountains, and craters. Althogh Venus is the nearest option for planetory visits there are many dangers to those who travel there.
On Venus' surface, the "temperatures travel average over 800 degrees faherheit, adn the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our planet." Even with the dangers, NASA is working through ways to still examine this amazing planet. NASA has certain jet airplanes that can travel in high altutides which hopefully will allow them to float above Venus and stay out of its way.
Venus, yes has many dangers, but with the right equipment it is surviable for humans. With our fast growing technology, astromomers will soon be able to explore Venus and its fascinating ways. | 2 |
b94fe27 | Driverless cars are coming. The author made very positive points about the driverless cars, but i'm going with all the negatives. Although having a driverless car would be cool, easy, and fast i think it's still highly dangours. There is really no point to having a driverless cars because, you as the driver, or "passenger" still has to stay alert when the driverless cars are is either around accidents or traffic jams. When you are in a regualr car you place for feet on the gas and breaks, in the driverless cars where would you put for feet if the car is doing the driving for you, and not to mess up the car's flow you have to sit unconfortable. Stated in paragraph 8, it says wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive? I thinking for everyone here. We all know driving in our world today we as drivers are fair on the road but not fair. How so? How so because we as drivers somtimes do not pay attention to the road, and just go when we think its are turn. While in the driverless cars if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault? If someone was injured due to the driverless car no one wouldn't really know who to blame so you could say the manufacturer, but it would not be fair because at the end of the day no one gets any money. Even though driveless cars can be cool, easy, and fast there bad in my veiw. | 2 |
b9514fb | The reality of driverless cars being on the road is getting closer and closer everyday. Technology is advancing and people's dreams of driverless cars are no longer fantasies. Driverless cars could change the world. But I do not support the idea that the driverless car will make driving safer because they are not truly driverless and require way too much human assistance and also need many new laws so that they can be implemented into society.
One reason as to why I do not support driverless cars is because they're not truly driverless. Sometimes the car requires the person it is transporting to drive because the car has come across a situation in which it cannot handle or is not smart enough to handle. In paragraph 7, the author states " But all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." Even if the driverless cars make it on to the roads, they will still require people to have the knowledge to drive and also require people to stay alert at all times waiting for the car to run into a problem it can't handle. And if that is the case then people should just always be in control of their vehicles.
Another reason why I do not support driverless cars is because of all the legal conflicts they will cause. Lawmakers would have to think of new laws that they believe are going to work even with driverless and regular cars. Car accidents are going to happen no matter what and when they do people will not take responsibility for the crash and will look to blame the car manufacturer which leads to many lawsuits against those companies. In paragraph 9, the author states,"... New laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident". The author then goes on to say, " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault, the driver of the manufacturer?"
Many of these cases can be avoided if driverless never made it to the road. And in the case of an accident the driver can be held accountable most of the time.
In conclusion I still do not support the development of driverless cars. I believe they require too much assistance to even be called driverless, and they also require a lot of change in road laws for them to even be on the road. Also I believe that they would not integrate well enough with people who do not own a driverless motor vehicle. Another reason also as to why I do not support them is because they would take the pleasure that a lot of people get out of driving. Hopefully in the near future the technology being used in the development of these cars is largely improved or that people will see that driverless cars are not a necessity in the world and the idea will be dismissed altogether. | 4 |
b9558cb | The author supports further Venus expiditions because of the insight we would gain from it. However, the author seems to forget that these kind of enviromental hurdels take time and money to jump over. A mechanical computer would have slow the process of gathering intel from Venus's surface. Even though silicon carbide electronics sound more appeasing because they last longer, it costs money to buy the materials and build these devices. Rocket fuel is also a bit pricey as it has to have enough fuel to launch and leave orbit and direct itself to Venus. The engineers and scientists have to be paid as well. The author doesn't have an explaination as to where all the money would come from. Venus will chew through the devices and even people we send there.
The idea of sending humans to Venus sounds dangerous, especially since Venus is a hostile enviroment. Venus has a ground temperature of more than 800 degrees Fahrenheit, as mentioned, that temperature will melt tin. If tin can't survive in that heat, so can't humans. The author brings up the idea of having the scientist float thirty miles or more above the surface. This idea seems legitiment except for one thing. Earlier in the article, the author mentioned that the clouds are made out of highly corrosive sulferic acid. The author does not mention how to overcome that obstacle. How are we supposed to explore Venus further if we can't get the money and we can't find a safe way for humans to explore it?
The author does not have many ways as to how to accomplish exploring Venus. Only radical concepts that would only work in a perfect world. They propose these ideas yet they won't elaborate further on them. Maybe this article was meant to inspire some one else to find out a way to explore Venus. However, The author has many ideas, they just need to exlain them. The idea of float in a zeppline above the surface, how do we do that? They need to go into detail as to how we accomplish these things. The author doesn't do a good job of supporting the study of Venus because they don't give an explaination to their ideas. | 4 |
b95a421 | This is a great idea, because with those kind of cars there will be no more accidents. People are tired of driving, most of them fall asleep while driving. It will be like having a butler doing things for you exept the part that you have to do by your self for example; showering, brushing your teeth, and eating. The car is going to drive until it requiires the human skills. This project should be approve.
This project has been tested and there has been no problems with it. The car has sensors all over. One of those sensores tells the driver when too take over. Also, the sit vibrates when the car gets of track . The car will required human skills when there's an accident, constriction issues or traffic.
This project should be approve. If they approve this car there will be no more accidents and less people hurt. Everyone will be please by this car. | 2 |
b95b6d2 | Do you ever sit in class so confused that you don't even know what you are doing? Well now we have a technology that could read your expressions and put everything into perspective for you. But the question is, could it be important or valuable in a classroom. Yes, it could be important and valuable because it could change the way our classrooms operate.
This new technology could be vaulable in a class because it changes how classes in todays society work. For example the text states, " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. This proves that this technology could help a student if they show signs of being confused. Meaning that it could help a student faster than a teacher probably could.
So as you can see this tech could ultimately solve problems for our generation of kids. It would because it changes everything about how we learn. This is important because it can make it easier for kids to learn. It also wouldn't take as much time for kids to get thet subject that they are learning. | 2 |
b95f77e | Many people have joined the Seagoing Cowboys lately. Mostly because of the feeling you get when you get to help someone out. World war II has left many Eurepean citys in shambles and with-out the needed suplies. I am here today to list the good and bad facts about this job.
First of all my time at the job was amazing, fun, and not all work. On your trip there you watch horses, mules, and/or cows. That only consist of cleaning pens, feeding, watering, grooming, and exersizing. On your way back you get to see many epic sights and amazing views. You also can relax and play games like table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games to help pass the time.
Now a bad thing to show you, so you can see its now all fun and games. Once I was night-gaurd and it was raining I slipped and fell feet first down a hole I landed with only a metal rail to stop me from plunging deep into the great unknown.
That feeling of acomplishment is the best feeling ever. Imagine this. When you get there you see hunger people surviving with the clothes on their back and food from the rubble of houses. They smile and you see many kids watch from still standing houses and you smile back as they help to unload the cattle.
Little things do help. There are many little things you can do to help out with this. Things as simple as recycling or not wasting food, its hard to eprectiate what you have untill you see others that have lost it all. I have I've seen people who have been happy and far then lost it all because of war.
I've made eight trips so far and am incuraging you to come helpout with this uphill battle. I hope that I've shown you how important it is to help others, because I have found out that it only takes a simple deed and your on the right track. I hope you will join the Seagoing Cowboys soon. | 4 |
b9606a9 | Driverless cars can be a positive thing because it can prevenet fewer accidents, notifies when it wants the driver to take control of the wheel, and it can help a lot of disabled people.
First, we can prevent fewer accidents because when people are drinking they won't have to worry that much about crashing or spending their money on taxis for when they want to go home. They still have to be careful so when the car tells them to take the wheel, they are ready for it. As well with younger people, when they first start driving they can be lessed worried that they will have an accident, but it will be difficult to get them to focus since they aren't at the wheel. Younger drivers will be distracted by texting.
Secondly, it notifies the driver when there is danger. As it tells you in paragraph five, "...those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." Since 2013, the BMW have modified a car that will vibrate a drivers seat when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object. "The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over."Paragraph seven informs the reader about everthing the BMW has done so that the car can drive by itsself.
Lastly, when you really think about it not only will these cars prevent fewer accidents and notify when it wants the driver to take control of the wheel but it can help a lot of disabled people. For those people who have a hard time driving this would be perfect for them because it's basically driving by itsself and they would rarely touch the wheel. For the people who can't drive because they aren't capable of following the rules of the road, this car would be good for them.
In conclusion, Driverless cars can be a positive things because this car will prevent fewer accidents, it will notify the driver when it needs to take control of the wheel and it will help out a lot of disabled people. There maybe a few flaws in this car but this car is mostly a good use for many more reasons. | 3 |
b961e76 | Dear Senator,
I am a student writing to you that we should be changing the Electoral College, to the election by popular vote. If you change the voting system to the elcetion by popular vote, then people are able to vote for who they want to vote, rather than having someone for president as a mistake during the voting. I believe that people should have the right to vote based on the president, not the slate of electors. Also because of the "disaster factor," and because of the "winner-take-all" system.
First off, you should change the system to the election by popular vote, because people should be able to vote based on the president and not the slate of electors. It is not fair that the people who pick the electors are people from the states convention, party's central committee or the candidates themselves. The voters should be allowed to controll who their electors vote for. Since they are part of the country, they should have a say in the country too. We should not be confused about the voting for the "wrong" electors, but be able to know what we are doing.
Secondly, may I recall the "disaster factor," the biggest crisis the century? The Louisiana legislature back in the 1960's, they had some trouble in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors. In fact, they almost did not succeed in doing this. The state's legislatures are probably the ones who are responsible for this incident, because of picking the electors themselves. By keeping the Electorial college, you could probably make the same mistakes again.
Lastly, another reason why we should change the voting system to the election by popular vote is, because of the "winner-take-all" system. Candidates runing for president know they have no chance in winning, if they spend their time in the wrong states. So instead they spend all their time in states are probably going to vote for them.
All in all, we should not be keeping the Electorial college, because its unfair to voters who don't know the real reason why they voted for a candidate, people also do not want to make the mistakes they made in the past, and the "winner-take-all" system is just irrational. | 4 |
b9657e2 | The author states in paragraph one, "While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely." This is stating that Venus is safe, but you need to know challenges come along with it. In paragraph eight it says, "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value." the author values the challenge and strives for the goal.
Although the author may enjoy studying Venus and it's challenges, this study comes with it's difficulties. The author states in paragraph six, "Or maybe we should think of them as challenges."reffering to how they, "cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance." The challenges they face predict how worthy of a pursuit Venus really is. The author states in paragraph five, "Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." this meaning that this would be a risk, but they will survive.
The author states in paragraph eight, "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts." this is saying what we do or where we travel should not be limited by dangers and fear. If we let dangers and fear overcome us, will we ever get anything accomplished? We let danger and fear go, and let the power of adventure come through. | 2 |
b969335 | Aliens are real, Frank I'm telling you. The aliens made that face on Mars. Why do you think that, Grayson? No one can step on Mars. If a person steps on Mars, they will die. No one has ever been to Mars, Still to this day. Are you sure about what you are saying? I'm sure about this. Aliens live in the galaxy. They can step on any planet whenever they want to and not die.
Well I have something to say. Aliens do not exist. If they were real, they would have took over the world. They would have been making us do work every single day. f they came here they would probaly have killed us by now. Have they killed us, have they started making us do work? No, they haven't.
Grayson? Yes, Sir? I heard you and Kevin talking about how aliens made that face on mars. Both of you are wrong. You were right about the no aliens part, but everything else was wrong. We just now figured out that it was just another Martian mesa. It is common enough in Cydonia. When we took the picture, I have got a lot of e-mails saying "what is that thing?" I even got a e-mail from Michael Bay saying that he is going to use that image for a movie. This stuff is crazy!
Thats awesome sir! Wait, Grayson there is more. The picture is accually the Martian of a butte or mesa. It's common across the American west. I hope we can find more stuff like that. Me too that was a wierd experience. | 2 |
b96cd59 | Dear,
Sate Senator ,
We need to keep the Electoral College . It clearly states in paragraph 1 why we need to keep the Electoral College there are so many reason why but only one can bring it to staying in the system."Electoale College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the constitution as a comprise between election of the President by vote in Congress and elction of the President by a polular vite of quarified citizens". What i am clearly trying to state is the the Elecotoral College needs to stay in the system.
Many people will say different but only in my opinion we need ot keep the Elcectral College, it is part of the Constitution of the United Sates of America if it clearly staes stuff about the Electoal College in the Consistitution then that means you need to keep it in the sistem to help with all the dier need that the world has to offer for the Electoral College just dont get rid of it for no reason you need to have a really great suggestion to remove it out of the system.
All i am trying to say is that in my opinion if you care at all, the we need to keep the Electoral College alive dont just kick it out the system if it sates its name in the Constitution then it need to stay where its at dont delte it from the program just becauss of some stupid process you need a darn good reason to remove it not just because you feel like it thats not good enough you need to show emotion about how the Electoral College is in the Constisution
Please look at my reason in why to keep it in the sytem thank you so greatly much. Just take me up on my opinion i am usally right in cases like this i show great emotion in stuff like this all you need to do is look at the facts and you will see why i want the it to stay moving and not to be kicked out. | 1 |
b970805 | Have you ever wanted to be a seagoing cowboy? In this essay I will give you the pro's ,and con's of being a seagoing cowboy. I will also have evidence from the text to prove my statements.
Now there are good thing's about being a seagoing cowboy. Like you get to see different places as stated in the text, "Beside helping people, I had the side beneifit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,"Another piece of evidence from the text states, "So was taking a gondala ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water.
There are also some bad thing about being a seagoing cowboy, Like getting ingured on the job. This evidence from the text explains why you would get hurt on the job "One rainy night,after making his hourly report to the captain he slid down a slippery ladder on his backside. Luke's heart raced as he shot feet first toward an opening on the side of the ship. A small strip of metal along thge edge stopped his side, keeping him from flying overboard into the dark
Atlantic."
Another piece of evidences from the text states "He was happy to be alive. But he couldnt work for a couple of days because of cracked ribs"
In conclusion, I think both of these paragraphs show some pro's and con's of becoming a seagoing cowboy. Now let me ask you again, Have you ever wanted to be a seagoing cowboy? | 2 |
b9717ba | Some people would like to believe that is a sign from aliens but I believe that it is just a natural landform. It is just shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose and mouth.If what im seeing is true that there is a face on mars created by aliens i would like to know why it didnt say the same over time.No it changes just as the earth's landforms changes over time .
i would like to know if it was a creation from aliens why on earth would the do it useless they wanted us to know that the are real. I like to think of it as the same thing as vampires they wouldnt do something so bold, that we come and look for they.
In 1998 thousands of anxious web surfers waiting for the image that proved that it was just a natural landform no alien monument after all. They don't pass over the face very often so why mess with the picture if it was an alien. It's not for attention because they get a lot of attention from just going to the moon and them showing pictures of what they brought back fron space. I don't think that they would lie for attention especially if you guys think they covered it up.
People came that the reason you didn't see any alien life force is because of it being such a cloudy day. The cameras took more pictures of when it was a clear day the said thta it was clearer than the first picture,so when they took it on a clear day no alien life force was reported. So why cover it up? That's my point they wouldnt keep taking pictures if aliens were there simply because there is no aliens just science by that i mean landforms are the form of science i am talking about.
The pictures show a similars features to landforms here and one is around American West ,Middle Butte in Snake River Plain Idaho. The lava dome thta takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as Face of Mars somthey wouldn't
have the same features if it was made by aliens .In colusion i believe that they are just landforms made over time by something like the tectonics plates. | 3 |
b971d15 | Gravin states that it reminds her\him of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. I think that by reading this passage and knowing a litte bit about it before it is just a natural landform not created by aliens. Aliens are not even real. People just think they are real.
I think it is a natural landform because not even humans could make something that looks just like a persons head that good. It might be from the Earths winds pushing the sand over and making it look like it a face. It also could be the gravitation pull of the Earth. I think that you should believe that is not aliens because if it was aliens dont you thinl they would be doing more than just that? That means if it reall the aliens who made this they must have a lot of thinking and knowledge about stuff like that. That also means that when earth moves the face moves with the Earth. Does this have anything to do with the man in the moon?
People probably think that it is made by aliens because people don't go to Mars. People that go to Mars have to be very brave and other things too. the camera has taken pictures because it has to have proof that it really does look like a face. I think again that it is just a landform that has been made over the pass years by the gratational pull and Earths winds. | 2 |
b972096 | This article is at the "The challenge of Exploring
Venus."
"Evening Star" this article state in, venus is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky,making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot.
"Twin" this article state in, venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too.
"The venus blanked." The article state in the venus atmospere have almost of 97 percent of carbon dioxide.
"Venus surface." the article state on the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greateer than what we experience on our own planet.
The article essay, thia articlo explain about "The challenge of Exploring Venus"
venus is a planet nd look like a star because brightes points of light in the nigth sky, and tambien is a "twin" is the earth's twin, venus is it really closest at the eart and tambien look similar in the size and in the density, tambien look are similsr in the distance. | 1 |
b9732f5 | Some reasons to join the program A cowboy Who Rode The Waves are that you get to have some fun while travling around while luke bomberger was moving across the world they hade games and mini tournaments. To luke bumberger it much more than an adventure it opened the world to him like it can open the world to you. Pluse at the same time you are helping other people around the world.
The places luke went like Venice,Italy,a city with streets of water. luke also took a tour an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China.
If you work alot befor you join you will be good at alot of thing they do like the danger of the sea. Luke was not ready for the dangers of the sea but he still did it he was out ther with the dangers of the sea .
He was with a seagoing cowboy for along time. Would you be the in the seagoing cowboy for along time like luke did.
In conclusion that is why you should join the seagoing cowboy. If you are a hard worker and like to have fun while working at the same time | 2 |
b978e8f | The author supports his idea
very well. Why? Well let's get into this shall we. The author has already suggested that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Yes it is dangerous to study Venus but it is a good planet to study their is so much information that is unknown to us until we have been knowledged by it.
The dangerous of studying Venus and exploring it is how close it is to the sun. How close it? It is the second closet plant to the sun yes venus is a planet in our solar system as we know part of a galaxy. Venus is like a twin to Earth. Why? Well in paragraph two it states that " Often
referred to Earth's " twin". Venus is the closet planet to earth in terms of density and size, occasionally the closest in distance. Venus is a interesting planet to study because it is one of the brightest point in the sky at night.
" Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetary neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds". Sometimes we can end up being closer to one planet then another. What is crazy is that there is people that have been up to Venus and landed on it with spacecrafts. Exploring Venus like landing on it etc. On the other hand is not the best idea. Why? However it is good to observe and study from a telescope the not so good idea would be to try and land on it because of the dangerous it has actually brought to scientists. " No space craft 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!"
Venus is a worthy place of studying but on the other hand it comes with a small or large price. Venus is dangerous and should be kept at a distance to study. There is harsh chemicals in the atmosphere like sulfuric acid. Aswell as Venus is so hot that the tempatures average is just over 800 degrees Fahrenheit so think of when it's not on average. " Venus has the hottest surface tempature of any plant in our solar system ". Scientist have been discussing further visits to the surface but is that a good idea? No! Well because how many space crafts have made it back not as many as there should've been all the spacecrafts should've returned but did not. So that ends up telling me why would you wanna risk it all to go see a planet that is highly dangerous, because I know I wouldn't put myself in that postion.
At the end of all this and my reasoning for why I think the author thinks that Venus is a worthy idea of studying is because it is as long as you keep your distance from it. The author still suggests that there are people wanting to go up there is wild because of the dangerous that it can cause. Venus is an extrordinary place to explore but isn't the safest no one can outstand being on something at 800 degress Fahrenheit but if you want to explore Venus then go for it because there is always hope and chance that you can make it back now there is new, faster, safer technology that can help you out for going on a trip to Venus. You could be able to study Venus at a distance like hovering over it or flying over it. " A vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendy ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. So at this point in time yes the author is right that " studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents". | 4 |
b97afcc | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" Venus somestimes 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.While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely.
The reason the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is The atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphere. 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 own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth.
Another reason studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers Such an environment would crush a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of the oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even 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 to land on its surface.
The final reason the idea that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans
In the article " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" 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. While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. | 3 |
b984bfa | The electoral college is an unfair and outdated system. It is unfair to voters. A states electoral votes often do not tell what that state truly wants. And no candidate should face what Gore did in 2000, with a winning popular vote, but less electoral votes losing him the election. It is an outdated system that should not be used in today's modern society.
When we vote for a specific president, we are actually voting for a slate of electors. The chosen electors are supposed to support the winning candidate, but they can easily decide to ignore that and cast their vote toward whomever the please. This can cause a president to get the greatest popular vote, and still lose because they did not get as many electoral college votes once all states' votes have been combined. This should certainly not happen. Whatever candidate is preferred by the most people to take office should win the election, period. In the past, maybe it would have been good to let the more educated electors choose the president rather than any citizen, but in this modern age of knowledge, people can be trusted to choose a leader that shares in the best interests of our country. Al Gore in 2000 lost the election after winning the most popular votes. That shows us that this electoral system does not work effectively, and should not be used today.
Perhaps more worrying is the electoral college's winner-take-all system. If a candidate wins a state's election by a tiny amount, they get every electoral vote for that state. This allows candidates to ignore smaller states, or states they know they will win, and focus on larger states and ones that have a very tight election could be easily persuaded for advertisements and campaigns. Ohio is known as a state that looks at their candidates closely, and can be persuaded to choose one based on what they know about them. Candidates tend to focus more resources here or in other similar states. It makes some sense to focus more on larger populations, and states like Ohio that are more interested in the election, but during the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, and could not make educated descisions during the election. In a close election, half the people in the state's views will be ignored, and will not matter to the elction. That means half of California's 35 million voters would not matter at all in the election. The fate of the election should not be put in the hands of Ohio or other "swing" states, just ignoring less important ones.
Today's society needs a more fair system of electing a president. A popular vote from everyone is the most fair way to make sure the most popular candidate wins the election, and will cause candidates to focus on all citizens, focusing on large populations, but still trying to gain popularity with rural areas as well. America's citizens deserve a fair, proper election, that satisfies the most people possible. | 5 |
b98a8e7 | "Venus, The Earth's twin.''
by STUDENT_NAME
On this proyect am going to talk about ''the earths twin'' Venus, i am going to tell some important things about why venus is a worthy pursuit of despite the dangers.
venus is one of the bringhtes points of light in the night ski, venus is the second planet next to the sun. Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and ocasionaly the closest in distance too.
Venus has some different things caompared to Earth, the atmosphere is almost of 97 porcent carbon dioxideblankets, the clouds has a highly corrosive sufuric acid. On the planet's surface temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric presure is 90 times greather than the Earth.
Venus is the most Earth-like planet on our solar system, venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth. the planet has a surface of rocky sediments and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and caters.
The NASA has one particular compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus, NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientistics to float above the fray. At thirty-plus miles above surface, temperatures would still be teastyat around 700 degrees fahrenheit, but the air presure will be at sea level.
On conclusion venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because if a human would not can touch because of the danges that are the clouds amd the really hot weater that this planet has. | 2 |
b98dd39 | I have mixed feelings about driverless cars for many reasons even though it does have its positive effects. Can these cars be the next step of evolution in the manufacturing industry or can it be hazardous?
Driverless cars do seem like a futuristic idea that does sound very amazing and can possibly happen, lets talk about some of the positves of these cars. Driverless cars are very efficient in the fact of not wasting fuels and or saving fuel as stated in paragraph one. Driverless cars will always be very aware of its own surroundings, they are equiped with sensors to stop the car, alert the drivers, or shall I say "Passangers" of any danger, etc. Google has had these cars go around the country and they have gone more than half a million miles without a single crash, in my own opinion, a car with a driver would have most likely crashed within those miles. Although these cars have their positives, they are also negative because they are not completely "driverless".
These cars are not independent for the most part. They require a driver to be in the car, but stay nuetral until the car needs help moving around an obstacle, for example a traffic jam or car crash. I do not like the fact that this is not a fully independant car, the passanger of the car is supposed to be fully aware of the vehicle and its surroundings while it is moving, but lets be honest, being in a car and not having to drive for once will make the passanger not pay attention to their surroundings, they can fall asleep and or be on their phones, etc, that is a problem. What if the car has an engineering problem and nearly drives off the road or causes an accident, is it the drivers fault or the cars fault? These are the limiting factors that make this vehicle a 50/50 chance of happening, personally I dont want to take a risk with these cars, but I will stay nuetral.
I personally have nuetral feelings about this vehicle it does have its positve effects and its negatives. If manufacturing industries can have a guarentee of the vehicle having no failures or malfuctions with proven tests, I will approve of this idea of "driverless cars". I believe it will be very stunning to see driverless cars, but I care more about the safety of others more than anything. I love the fact that this will cut the amount of fuel used in half, but I do not like the fact that the car can not do everything on its own, so many things can go wrong if the passanger does not monitor the vehicle.
In conclusion, this does seem like a wonderful idea, but it does have its downfalls and possible safety hazards that can or will occur. In my opionion I do not approve of this idea for now. | 4 |
b98ed7f | While
writing the "Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author knew almost everything he or she needed to know. The auhtor knew the risk and danagers, the benifits, and even the history. With the author knowing the facts I think he or she didn't do a good job of realy supporting his idea, that exploring venus is valuable due to the fact that, he has more negatives than positives that cancle out the beinfits of the exploration.
"Researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas, or anything else." If researchers can't take back sample or any physical testing iteams from Venus, It'd be a huge waist of time. Not only a waist of time but also more importantly money. That's important because if you can see the planet that should be just enough, instead of spending millions of dollars on a dangerous space mission for you not to be able to take test samples and to risk lives flying astronounts through a "highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere."
Not only does Venus have a high acidic atomsphere but it also has a really high level of pressure that
would "crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans." This statement alone completely debonk's the authors entire idea that exploring Venus is a great idea. The idea of exploring Venus after reading that argument shouldn't even be close to being considered due to the fact that we wouldn't be able to get a ship in the air space of Venus. But if we were to even get a space craft
pass Venus's highly acidic atmosphere without melting, then the spacecraft would more then likely slowly be crushed.
Last but not least, actually landing a space craft of any sort, with it lasting for a long enough time is virtually impossible. Due to Venus's "surface tempurature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit," It'd liquify many many melts. Not only is the ground tempurature scortching hot but Venus is full of "erupting valcanos,powerful earthquakes and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
In conclusion, that author did not do a very good job at supporting their idea. The main reason the author failed to do a good job is because he or she had more facs to go against their argument, and aso their arguement was almost just an imagination of a way to explore venus by hoveirng 20 to 30 miles off the surface. | 3 |
b992d5c | FINAL DRAFT
MONTH_DAY_YEAR
PROPER_NAME
Face On Mars
Hello my name is Scientist STUDENT_NAME. I would like to tell you somemfacts about the "face on Mars" that me and some other scientist have discovered. You have probably heard that he face was created by aliens. You also might have heard some fact and some opinion. I am here to help you understand more about it.
First off i would lke to say people have there own opion, but when it comes to facts you cant say its wrong. I have done a lot of research over the past 24 years. We have used different objects to capture pictures over time. The Viking 1 photo shows an enormous head almost 2 miles from end to end, with a face on it.
The face became a priority to me and some scientists. The Mars Blobal Surveyor arrived at the Red Planet on in September,1997. The MGS flew over the face, Michael Malin and his Mars camera team took a picture that was 10 times sharper then the first photo. The photo revield thtthere was no alien monument at all it was a natural landform.
On April 8,2001 the MGS got close enough to get a second, bettr picture. There were no objects in the face. If there was you would be able to see them,because each picture was 1.56 meters instead of 43 meters.
So, the face is actually the Martian or a butte or mesa. Which are landforms common around American West. Therefore, the face was not created by aliens, and didnt have any object in it. Maybe you could do some more research about it . | 3 |
b996081 | Even though some may disagree with the creaction of these types of cars because they may be dangerous, but disagree i prepose that the making of these driverless cars be made.
In the story it begens to tell you in detial that for some cars, they may already have similarities to the driverless cars such as, in 2013 BMW's annouced the development of the '' Traiffic Jam Assistant ''. The car can handle driving functions at the speeds up to 25 mph. Also they can steer, accelerate, and brake by themselves, but they dont require the system knowledge to notify the human driver when the road ahead requires hands-on contact for directions.
For manufacturers they consider using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver. In consideration for some driver this may come in use, because some car accidents are cause by sleeping at the wheel, texting, or on the cellphone talking. This system may be of some use to businessmen who are constantly on the phone. In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety precaustion. | 1 |
b99b705 | I think that the face is a natural land form because it has the features of a face, it was naturally found on the on Mars, and it was said to be a rock formation.
In this essay I willl explain the reasonings why I think its a natural landform.
This landform was found untouched on Mars.
The passage says in paragraph one that "NASA's Viking ship 1 spacecraft was circling around the planet, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2, when it spotted the shadowy like ness of a human face."
The article aslo states in paragraph seven that "On a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all."
But some argure that the face was an alien artifact.
Some scientists say that
"There was an ancient civilization on Mars,"(Paragraph five). Another thing some scientists think is in paragraph eight which says "Alien markings were hiden by haze."
The Face might look like a face but we dont know if it really is a human face.
The face on Mars is said to be a human face.
The text states that in paragraph three NASA says
"A human head... formed by shadows giving it the illusions of eyes, nose, and mouth."
The passage also says in paragraph one that the face was
"The shadowy likeness of a human face.
An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from the region of the red planet called Cydonia."
Scientists have proved that it looks like a human face, but how did they prove that it was just a rock formation?
Scientists proved that the face was just a rock formation on mars.
The faceis just
"huge rock formation," (paragraph three) because of the picture in paragraph five.
The picture shows that the face is a big rock with shadows in it that look like a face.
The picture in paragraph five was taken by the Viking one in 1976.
The fact that some believe that it was made by aliens could possibly be true because we don't know for sure if Mars had life or not.
In this article, I thought that the face on Mars was ain fact a face because it looked like a face, it was found on Mars and it was a rock formation that just happened to form into a human face outline.
There are still some who argue that the face was made by Martians and there are some who think that it occured naturally.
No one will know for sure but in the future we willl hopefully develope equiptment that willl allow us to travel to Mars, and find evidence that will help us solve this mystery. | 3 |
b99ba91 | As a child I can remember the many times my teachers would have conversations about pollution. I can remember that they would tell to not throw my trash on the grown and to recycle. But they never told me a major factor which causes pollution. That factor would be cars The following articles: "In German suburb,Life goes on without cars" by Elisabeth Rosenthal, "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky and "The ene of car culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal. All these articles let us know the effect of pollution and the advantages of reduced car usage. The advantages are great and help reduce the pollutionin the air.
Less cars can reduce stress on many leves and can also reduce car congestions. In lines 3-4 Heidrun Walter says "when I had car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Driving a car is a stressful task and a coasting one also. Having to constantly pump gas into your car to make sure you don't run out in the middle of nowhere. Driving responsibly and safely for your safety and other people's safety. But also getting caught in a congestion can cause stress. Having less cars in the streets can reduce congestion. " congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france." As stated in "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer. Less congestion can mean less accidents which can drasticly reduce the crude death rate all around. It can also increase safety in the streets.
Less car usage can dramaticly affect the pollution being done everyday. "It's a goood opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." As writen in "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky. The less cars roaming the streets the lower the polution will drop. The lower the pollutin is the better the enviorment will be. Reducing car usage has much more Pros then Cons.
Reducing car ussage has many advantages and perks. It can lower stress as well as pollution. As a bonus it makes the world a tad bit safer. Pollution won't stop in a day but reducing car usage is a great way to start. | 3 |
b9a006f | The claim for the value of using this technology to read students emotional expressions are amazing, and could benefit a low risk of suicide and bullying of other students or people. The technology could keep peoples mind focused and maybe make them more open minded. Like if you were sad and the computer detected that then the computer might pop up a game or video hat could make you feel differently.
The computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face. All 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. The muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful. According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even produce them.
The conclusion to this statement is that new technology could be a good thing doing through the decades of the universe. Mostly because some people dont know how to show their emotions, or hide them from their friends and family and could really be feeling self vulnerable or have a very low self esteem of themselves. | 2 |
b9a4531 | Dear Senator,
The Electoral vote should be not used in the office anymore. It is casting the popular vote aside,its also basically saying that we the people don't know how to vote for the president ourselfs, and it brings too much confusion. It might have been used in the past when it was needed, but this it the 20's century and there is no need for them any longer. Somethings just have to change and try new things.
Popular vote is the vote the people cast on who the new presidnet should be,the one representing our contry. The motto of this contry since the consitioution was signed was "We the people" as in we the people have a say in what we belive is right and justice. The Elector vote although gives someone else power to vote for us, like as in a state has more people lets try to win this state over. The amount of electors given to the state is based on the amount of people in the state and in the house of representives. For example the state of California has 55 electors becuase it is one of the larger states in the United States. In the passage "In defense of the elecortal College" by Richard A. Posner, he states it himself " The advocates of this position are correct in agurging that the Electoral College method is not democratic...when it is the Elecorts who elect the president, not the people.". That right there states that our votes are no longer taken into consideration, but now it is only the Electors voting for us, and not "We the people".
The method of using the elelctors is saying that someone is needed to represtent the ideas of the people, as if one doesn't know how to express them alone. The liberty of freedom of speech was granted as one of our very first amendment, as one is able top express their. One might be able to vote for whoever we want but in the end the vote may not matter in office. The vote of the people does not go towars the presdient it goes to the electors of the state, it takes a lot of time out of osmeones day to vote, the least that should be is that we can at least vote for the presdient himslef and not someone to elect for us.
The electoral vote is was used before and it seemed to have been sucessful because its is still used in todays society; but that was back then when the people weren't informaed as much as we are now about the things that are around us. the Electopral voted severed its perposed but now it is time to let it go and be able to give the power to " We the people" and to do it ourselfs. Thank you for your time Mr. Senator and please take this under consideration.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.