essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
ca986e1 | Would you ever wonder what it would be like to go to Venus, well as often reffered to as Earth's twin. Many people suggest that Venus was somewhat like Earth long ago. In many cases people have been working on other projects like mechanical computers despite the chaos in Venus. Furthermore I think if we study Venus more challenges will come upon but, other good innovations will come too.
One reason why people should study Venus more is because more advancement in technology will come. Also more ideas from the scientist's on how to make airplanes travel at a high altitude. According to the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" "Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions (5)." Furthermore if studying Venus and creating technology we could have another so like Earth.
Another reason why people should study Venus is because it has some familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Also creating machines to last longer in Venus now that there has been some cases that other spacecraft don't survive. According to the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" " Many researcher are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus (6)." In addition if we create machines that can last long and survive the pressure, we could land in Venus for the first time.
While some people may say what is the point in making spacecraft airplanes. People think that if making a spacecraft that the same thing will happen when they sent a spacecraft off to Venus and did not survive because of the pressure. "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degress Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet (3)." Furthermore I justify that if scientist ever have the curiosity of going to Venus that they go.
In conclusion would you ever like to go to Venus and study? I surely would because it could tell me a whole lot about the planet. Also how it is different from all the planets from our solar system. Another the features and similarities that is has with earth. Lastly the technology that would come if we go to Venus. | 4 |
caa1ffe | What comes to mind when you hear the phrase, driveless cars? Does this phrase bring fear and discomfort or confidence and curiousity to mind? There is a phrase that goes as follows, curiousity killed the cat, and I believe that our curiousity will provide fatal outcomes in the future with so called, driveless cars. The author of the article "Driveless Cars Are Coming." provides some key points on why driveless cars may never be completly driveless and some problems they might provide as well, for example the author states about how in some situations human skill may be required, as well as how the law doesn't fully approve of so called driveless cars and even if it did many laws would have to be placed just in case there may be some faults in the technology and etc.
One problem with the so called driveless cars is the fact that human skill may be required in certain situations. For example, the author talks about how in certain situations such as traffic jams, work sites, and around accidents human skill may be required. If human skill may be needed then the purpose of driveless cars is defeated. What would be the point of having a driveless car if you just had to sit there and wait for your turn to drive the car out of a challenging situation. That doesn't sound very driveless to me.
Another problem driveless cars impose invlolves the law. For example the article states that most driving laws focus on keeping everyone safe, and they all agree the best way to do that is to have alert drivers at the wheel. Many laws would have to be put into place to even allow the full use of so called, driveless cars. How would a driveless car react to a regular automobile passing them on a highway? Even if driveless cars did become legal and functional not everyone would be running to buy them. As well, whose fault would it be if the technology some how fails? Technology doesn't always work, and with lives being at immediate risk of a technological fail and more, the chances of the law allowing it seems very low.
To conclude, driveless cars would not be safe and or even driveless. The need for an active and alert driver in a driveless car would defeat the purpose. As well, the law and it's laws would have to change a lot to provide the safest way of travel using the so called, driveless cars. Sure it sounds like a good idea on paper, but in reality I believe that it just wouldn't work or even be driveless at all. | 3 |
caa3e02 | The face on mars is most known as a alien creation , however people don't know if its a natural landform or a alien creation. People who would actually try to look in to it to find facts if its a alien creation or a natural landform.
People don't always think that creations like that can be made by a natural landform. If you see in the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" they give ecidence showing that the face on mars was actually a natural landform. It states " A few days later NASA unveiled the image for all to see . The caption noted a "huge rock formation ... which resembles a human head," The qoute is saying that when they out the image closer it looks like a human head made by rocks "
"The image first appeared on a JPL website, reavealing ... a natural landform , there was no alien monment after all." According to the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars". This qoute is saying real evidence that there was no alien monument the face on mars was a natural landform.
Although few scientists believe the face was an alien artifact, a scientist named Jim Garvin proved them wrong by saying "What the picture is actually showing is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms comman around the Amercian West." Scientists Garvin is proving that the face was a nautral landform. | 2 |
caa6e26 | The logical explination for the face being on the moon is the metiors had to hit the planet Mars and they all had landed together to make a face like object in this planets crust to make it look like this. Well because in this acrticle it says in paragraph 3 it was a huge rocks formation.
Also another logical explination would be it was really hot one day and a big fire had started on a mountin where there was lots of dried out land and a big fire started and when the fire stated there was a big spot and the fire had reached it and then it was it the praticular shape of a face so it stood out onto the earths crust. It also says in paragraph 12 that it is a lava dome .
This big landmark could also be made by a big cannion or mountain that is in a direct shape of a face or just a bunch of trees could be gathered together to have a perfect form or shape of a face. In pargraph 12 it also talks about a plain which is a open area with alot of mountains.
Anways this all has an explinations other than aliens doing it. Also like there could have been a massive sand storm and the wind picked up really heavy and was throwing rocks and blew alot of sand and rocks and it could have created a face like object that you see when you look through a telascope at mars. Also say a huge rock formation in paragraph 3 | 2 |
caa8993 | The Face is nothing more than just some landmark. Sure, it may have looked like a face in 1976 but now we have better technology to study it. From what we have found, its just a landmark, you're a scientist, not a conspirasist. You are just believing what you want to beleive, and what you believe has no scientific evidence.
When the mesa looked most like a face was in 1976, that was over 20 years ago. Technolgy has advance since 1976, I mean look at what we have now compared to back then. The NEWER photos from the NEWER peice of technology, the Mars Global Surveyor, has taken better photos of the mesa. That's right: a mesa.
Even when you get disproved, you try to argue about it, now you're just arguing from a point of ignorance. Gavin said, and i quote, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the sameheight as the Face on Mars."
In conclusion, there is no face on Mars, just a mesa. You are arguing from a point of ignorance because anything you can be shot down almost immedently. Technology has advanced to meaning that we can get a better look at the mesa. So just look at the facts, and stop believing everything you hear. You're a scientist for crying out loud, act like one. | 2 |
cab5c96 | Dear Senator, I am writing to you to speak about the Electoral College versus the popular vote in choosing the president of the united states. I am in favor with the electoral college for many reasons. I am with the electoral college because of certainty of outcome, swing states, and big states.
First, With an electoral college vote there is gonna be arguments but it isn't as likely to happen as the popular votes. Electoral votes exceed popular votes. It is possible to tie because 538 is an even number but it is however very unlikely to happen.
Secondly, Swing states usally vote more cause they pay more attention to the campaign. They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters. Swing states like to listen tothe competing candidates. Swing states also known as ''toss-up'' states are problably the most honest but thoughtful voter because of how much attention they give to the campaigns.
Lastly, The electoral college restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the senate decreed in the constitution. A large state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign then a small state does.
Even though popular voting helps I believe that we should keep the electoral college voting versus popular voting because of these 3 things that i specified above.
Sincerly, PROPER_NAME | 2 |
caba4d4 | The author supports studying Venus despite the danger it brings in many ways. Venus is the closest planet to earth that us humans could posibilty go and explore. But, there are many enviroumental issues in Venus that we could not with stand. So an alternative was given to us. We could go far above the surface of Venus but we still would'nt get the full discription of Venus.
Venus is just like earth is some ways, but we would never be able to go there due to the conditions Venus has. If a human went to Venus even taking every safty percauton there ever was they would still die. " A thick atomshpere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atomshpere. On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what er expirence on our own planet. These conditions are far extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an enviroument would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many meatals". But maybe there is a different way we could "explore" Venus.
An alternative was given to us by NASA most likely the only way humans would ever be able to encounter Venus is any way. Going above Venus's surface where the conditions would be bareable and looking at Venus from that perspetive. " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet air planes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 Degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would no exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivavle for humans". This idea seems to be the only way to ever be able ot see Venus.
If humans did successfully did go to Venus we may could discover amazing things that we would of never could even to begin to think existed ever. Venus is a mystery to humans and we want to know what that mystery is. Going to Venus would expand our knowelage we know about planets in our solar system today. We could possiblty discover many new species, rocks, life, and many other extranorady things. " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us to many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. Saying that going to Venus would be a huge pro for humans. Finding new discoveries could possibly change the world.
Venus is an extranorty place that humans have no idea about. Going to venus would improve the world today in many ways. Exploring other planets and what we could possibly find would end all the curiosity and being new inventions for the world today. The author for sure supported the idea about going to Venus and studying it despite the dangers its presents. The author provided many details and explaination to prove he supported this idea. | 4 |
caba837 | I think we should keep the electoral vote. My reasonings are: certainty of outcome, everybody agrees with him/her, swing states, big states,and avoiding run-off elections.
There is a certainty of the outcome if we keep the electoral voting system. It will be more accurate than using the most popular vote. If the election of 2012 would have been accounted to popular votes than Barack Obama would have lost the election.
We want to have a president that believes in what we believe in. We also want a president that appeals to everyone not just one region of the United States. We want to have a president that gets things done like Obama has because we are in a lot of debt.
Swing states have a big impact on whether he/she is in office or not. They are more likely to pay a attention to their campaign than other states. They have more of an impact to whether they win the election or not.
We need big states to help win the elections. Without them the presidents wouldn't get as much electoral votes from bigger states than from the smaller states. You need more electoral votes then the opponent to win the election not just popular votes.
With the electoral college we would avoid run-off elections. Run-off elections are when nobody gets the mojority of the votes. With the electoral college we would be giving the presidency to the candidate who has the most electoral votes not the most popular.
So in conclusion if you have more popular votes that doesnt mean anything. If you have more electoral votes you will win the election. | 3 |
cabd0a3 | There are plenty of pros and cons when it comes to driving computer manufactured cars. The driverless carsacan be very helpful for someone who may not be the best driver, needs a break from driving, or enjoys the extra features the smartcar comes with. This car became popular in 2008 due to their amazing ability to drive itself. there are severa different brandsof cars that have this ability. Not to mention that a smartcar takes half the amount of fuel today's car take. Smartcars are also much more felxible than a bus. Forthe logest time, self-driven cars have been a dream to people. They used thesecars in movies. Howver, Google has made it possible for sefl-driving cars to become a reality. When I thinkof driverless cars, I think of taking my eyesoff hte road and letting the car do alal the work. From accelerating to breaking and even steering the car to where I want it to go. However, I would also be wrried the whole car ride. In myhead there wouldbe a million different senerios happening. "What if it doesn't stop in time?"
"Can it see the woman crossing the street?" I would too worried to drive a d riverless car. Sensors are an important feature for the smartcars. That would be just another worry, however. It could easily breaki in the middle of the highway and not know how close it is to another car. | 2 |
cabe99b | What would it be like without cars? Well acording to the passages there are a lot of cities that are trying this car free world. The one city that are free of cars is Vauban,Germany. So lets see how they like the car free communtiy.
The frist place were looking at is Vauban,Gremany. they have a total car free rule. they cant have car in the town . but if they have to park them they have to buy a space for $40,000 along with a house. As a result 70 percent of vauban's families do not own cars.57 percent sold a car to move here. Vauban completed inn 2006 , Is a example of a growing trend in Europe, The united states and elsewhere to separate suburban life from auto use. As a componet of a movement called "smart planning".
The end of car culture. President Obama's ambitious goals are to curb the United states' greenhouse gas emissions. Unvail last week, will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in America behavior,recent studies suggest that America are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year gose by. Americas love affair with its vehicals seems to be cooling down. when adjusted for population growth ,the number of miles driven in the united states peaked in 2005 and stedily dropped thereafter. Therefor if the pattern is perists and many sociologist belive it will ,It will have benefical impacts on the world's carbon emissions. so let all try to be car free and hgelp the enviroment! | 2 |
cac714f | The author finds ways to evaluate the dangers of exploring Venus as they find it as a worthy pursuit. Since Venus is a planet and it's next to earth, it only makes sense to explore more of what's already been explored. It's been decades sense something has landed on Venus, and no man has ever set foot there. Venus was once Earth-like in it's time.
Venus is something we see all the time. "Venus, sometimes called the "Evening Star" is one of the brightest points of light in the sky, making it simple to spot." It won't be easy but at least it's close. Every spacecraft sent to this land is unmanned. "Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world." With this they can build something stronger. They can examine what didn't work and what technologies could be better to use so they can work their way up into being able to go for themslves. Also if Venus was once like earth, theres more they need to look into, as in how and why it isn't so much like Earth anymore. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth."
As these datails could go on, Venus is something we don't know too much about because of it's dangers. But from past experiences, we could change some things to get us there. By working on new equipment and examining things extra causiously, it could get us to where we want to be to be able to explore this planet we call Venus. As it is dangerous, it can lead to something wonderful as we can discover more things. It's worth a shot! | 2 |
cad0481 | There are many reasons of why we should all join the program of UNNRA. There are many other possible ways to get people to join, and I will show you a few.
One possible reason is that many people care and love our pets and animals of the world, and we can all help them out more by joining the UNNRA team. You can give them shelter, and food. Another reason why we should join is to explore the world and make it a better place. When you join the UNNRA team, you can visit other countries and help them out with hunger and shelter too. Another possible reason is that if you join, you can be known as a famous helper, caring with animals and people. The best thing is knowlege, so if you join, you can visit other countries and learn things you never know about unique places. Some people like to have something to work for in life, such as goals. If you sign up for this team, you can consider yourself working for a goal to celebrate in your life.
Some people are sick of staying home all day, doing your daily chores of work, but if you sign up, you won't have to do daily boring work like you always do. If you join, you can consider this as a job, but also a adventurous job, that you can have fun doing, with a smile on your face, showing you care. So hop on over to the UNNRA team, and sign up. You can make a difference in this world. | 2 |
cad1883 | The idea of having driverless cars is something that brings many questions in my head such as how safe they will be and how they will improve our atmosphere. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" they bring up many good ideas about driveless cars and some ideas that I just plain out think would'nt be good for our world at all. In my retrospect after reading "Driverless Cars Are Coming" I feel as though these driveless cars would be an amazing idea to contribute to our community. These cars would benefit our community in many ways not just for our safety but for our atmosphere.
Having driverless cars would impact our safety in many ways such as reducing accidents on the streets. Having these driverless cars would reduce car accidents because the driverless car would have laser beams to constantly update the surroundings of the car such as the other cars making it safer for humans to drive. Not only would the human be aware of his or her surroundings but the computer would be tracking the safety too which would help even more while driving.
In paragraph four of "Driverless Cars Are Coming"
it states " it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings". Driveless cars would also have antilock brakes which would be provided in these cars incase of rollovers and skids. According to the article of "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states "automakers used speed sensore at the wheels in the creation of antilock brakes. Within 10 years,those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out of control skids or roll overs". These cars would help our safety of everyone in many ways possible.
These cars would help our atmosphere with all the pollution that we as humans make everyday. The tank for these driverless cars would only use half of what a normal car uses today. This would reduce our pollution by a dramatic decrease and it would help nature and many of the animals but most importantly us. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states "The cars he foresees would use half of the fuel of today's taxis". Just imagine a cleaner world for everyone. These cars would help make our world a cleaner,greener and greater place to live in.
The awsome thing about these cars is that it would only make us drive in bad traffic,working zones and around accidents. But the car would announce before we are needed just to be aware. Not many times will the car need someone to be in control over it. It would introduce the problem way ahead of time due to its GPS that the car will include. You will be able to most likely avoid these problems before you even get to them.
In conclusion I believe these cars would be a huge bonus to our community. Not only in safety but as well as our enviroment and our world. It would gives us a better world to live in and maybe a safe one too if everything goes well as plan. These cars are the future and will make our future better than ever before. | 4 |
cad19f2 | Would you like to be able to not drive you car or to drive your car. I would like to have driveless cars. Can you imagine the time that you get into to your car and the only thing you have to do is say car start. Well that where are cars are tranforming into we are starting to get cars that we don't have to drive the cars drive for us.
Driverless cars well also help the driver. In the text it say's " they still alert driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork accidents." So the driverless car well also let the driver know when to take over maunally by vibration of the seat. So the driver well always have to be aware of whats going on. driverless cars well also get you to where you're going in the shortest amount of time possible.
I think if we have self driving cars there wont be as many car crashes as there have been in the past couple of years. From people texting and driving or driving drunk or stuff like that. In paragragh 7 the text says'' They can steer ,accelerate , and brake themselves." So if the drivers are careless and not paying attiention to the road like there text or something the care can stop for them and not cause a crash.
Thats why i agree with the idea of a driverless car. I can see why some people wouldn't want a driverless car because what if the car crashes or something went wrong with it you might be the one responsible for the car crashing. So i can see why they might not want a driverless car. I think that driverless cars well be a good thing to have in 2020 | 3 |
cad1f5b | In the article the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursit despite the dangers it presents. Thus for that reason the author wrote many claims in the article to support his idea. I also belive that the author is fasinated by the planet Venus because in paragrah two he tells us the readers facts about the planet venus on how it is a twin on the planet Earth. Also mentions in paragraph one that it is easy to spot Venus in the Earth ground level.
The author is so fasinated of Venus he knows there is dangers to do further investigations on the planet. For exapmle, in paragraph 3 it tells us that the atmosphere of Venus is 97 percent carbon dioxide witch basically blankest the whole plant with it. Another prime example will be that the surface level in Venus is 800
degrees Fahrenheit witch is way to hot for a human to step in it. For those reasons it will be too dangerous for a hman to do research but, NASA has found a way to investigate Venus to make it sutible for a human to survive. There reason will be that they will have a shuttle
hover 30 or so miles above roiling Venus lanscape. making it decently suitable for a human to survive and do further research.
In conclusion, those will be the reasons why the author thinks it will be suitable for a human to do reseacher for venus even though it wil be to hot but yet stainable for a human to continue in the reaserch on venus. i have informed youi about the article. | 2 |
cadee56 | Many conspiracy theorists say that The Face On Mars is proof of alien life. Some even say that NASA is trying to hide evidence of aliens. The face is nothing more then an illusion though, caused by shadows. Although technology was not advanced when the first photo was published, more recent pictures have proven that this is nothing more then a crater with shadows, creating eyes, a nose, and a mouth.
In 1976 when the first photo was released people quickly began to theorize that alien life was on Mars, but this is simply not true. The picture was taken in low resolution and was very blurry. The Viking 1 Spacecraft was circling the planet searching for landing sites for The Viking 2, when a landform that resembled an enormous face was spotted. This enormous two mile long "face" is nothing more then a mesa.
In 1998 a new picture of the mesa was released, but people were still not satisfied. Since it was winter while the mission was launched there was a thick haze over the Red Planet. Many think that NASA is trying to hide evidence that there IS lifeforms on other planets, but this is not true. We as scientists wish to share information on space with the public, but we will not spread false rumors about alien lifeforms when there are none.
On April 8, 2001 we launched another mission to take a more high-resolution photo. Since it was summer there were no clouds to hide the mesa. Mars Global Surveyor rotated 25 degrees to center the Face in the feild of view. They then took a photo using the camera at maximum resolution. After all the hype about alien life on Mars since the first photo was released, it was clear to see that the Face was nothing but a mesa.
After years of research and three missions to take photos of Mars, it is clear to see that the Face was no evidence of life on another planet. The Face is very similar to something like on Earth. Although the mesa has not proven there is life beyond Earth we as humans still do not know what is beyond. | 4 |
cadfa0a | The advancement of technology has helped humanity a lot in several ways, such as comuters,phones or even, planes to travel the world. These advancements could help students to learn in school. The facial recognition mentioned in this article is amazing for the following reasons: it could give students an easier time understanding material, it could introduce new ideas into peoples minds about career oppurtunities, and it could draw students focus into their work.
This facial recognition could help students understand their material better by molding the lesson if the student is confused or bored or possible even distracted. This would be immensely helpful for students who may have trouble comprehending certain subjects like math or English. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson,like an effective humn instructor."
By shaping the lesson around the student it makes it more possible for a student to pass a class and graduate from highschool or college. If the student seems confused the lesson can slow down and work through the problem with them. If the student seems happy then the lesson can speed up and throw harder work at them.
Technology such as facial recognition in an acedemic situation could take the slowing down of harder classes and us that to drive new ideas of new technology into peoples heads. These programs could take calculus and make it to appleal to students with a mind for working with computers. This would open job oppurtunities for millions of people in the United States alone. It could take biology and slow the lesson to then advance it into so many different branches of biology.
Students get distracted; it's a thing that happens. what if it wasn't as easy to be distracted. what if your lesson shaped itsel ito something you liked because you undersood it, because you could make sense of what the lesson was about, and pllied it to real world situations. A lot of the reasons students get distracted is because they dont understand their subject or it's too hard so they stop to take abreak and dont come back to it baecause they know that they'll be just as confused when they come back to it as they were when they left. If your lesson slows down to incorporate your confused look or your stares of boredom it could mke the lesson easier to help you understand it which will in turn capture your attention again. I know multiple people who would love to have tis tech, myself included.
This would be an amazing advancemement in the acedemic worl but it's very far off. When this becomes widespread it would boost the economy of its country by a lot. I believe this technology would be beneficial for the following reasons: it would help students undertsand their material, it could introduce new ideas into peoples minds about career oppurtunities, and it could draw students focus into their work. | 4 |
cae51a8 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author supports his idea well. I agree with him because he makes several valid points and its logical. Throughout the article the author states how Venus is our sister planet and was once an Earth like planet. By saying this he proves how we are trying to make our way to our sister planet and also throws in more ideas.
Firstly, the author states in paragraph 3 "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." This quote from the passage shows how the author is trying to get the point across that Venus is very inhospitable. This helps support his idea because it then allows him to state ways on how we would be able to reach our sister planet and gather more data from it.
Secondly, the texts states in paragraph 4 "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Eath. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." This supports the authors claim by stating Venus was once a planet just like Earth and was able to Host life forms on it. By researching Venus more we may be able find out what caused the demise and of the once habitable planet.
Thirdly, the article states in paragraph 5 "Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, tempatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Eath. Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." This supports the authors claim because it show just how we could survive Venus harsh conditions. He says it wont be easy, but with the rate technology is advancing we will soon be able to make a Venus trip possible.
In conclusion, I would agree with the author because getting to Venus may take time and advancements in technology, but it would all be worth becasue we would get to see the origin of our sister planet. We would also possibly get to see what caused Venus's demise. By finding the cause of Venus's destruction we could possibly prevent it from happening to our home planet. As the author stated "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." | 4 |
cae7a1a | The curiousity about Mars has been going on for centuries.
People say that there is or once was life on Mars, and now they are saying that there is a face on Mars.
Humans all around the world have questioned whether the "Face" was created by aliens or just a natural landform.
Well calm down earthlings, it's just a natural landform.
In 1976, Viking 1 took photos of Mars and found a huge rock formation that remebled a human head with shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth.
This was soon to be known as the "Face on Mars".
People made a huge deal out of it.
The "Face on Mars" appeared in books, magazines, and radio talk shows.
Some people even say it appeared in haunted grocery store checkouts.
On April 5, 1998, NASA's MGS flew over Cydonia, the siting of the face, to snap more picture to reveal that the Face was just a natural landform and nothing more.
The majority of people accepted this statement, but there was a select few people who say that aliens made the Face.
The Face Theorists weren't satisfied with it being just a landform and tried to find evidence to prove NASA wrong.
The Face Theorists found out that the location and date of the April '98 photo was during a cloudy winter.
Skeptics said that the alien markings were hidden by the haze. Three years later, NASA proved our skeptical theorists wrong again. With advanced technology, the right location, and the right season, NASA got the clear picture of the Face they needed to show that it was just a landform.
NASA even suggests that it may be a butte or mesa.
Sorry Face Theorists, but NASA
has crushed your dreams multiple times.
The "Face on Mars" is just a landform.
Nothing more and nothing less. | 3 |
cae9df8 | I do not believe that we should have driverless cars. First off I think they would be more dangerous then they would be helpful. In the article it said that humans would still have control over the car when needed but for the most part the cars can sort of drive itself. Imagine going down a high way and there's a crash. It says that it needs help manuvering around objects like that.
Well what would happen if you were not paying attention because you believe that the car can drive itself? You might be looking at something else or messing with the radio and someone wrecks in front of you. You don't really notice though because you are not watching or paying your full attention on the road. SInce the car needs a human touch to go around that and you wasn't paying attention, you would most likely wreck also.
Not only is it kind of more dangerous but it is also sort of irrelevent, don't you think? After all these years we have been fine with normal cars. That is what they are made for. They are made for humans to get around much faster and travel further distances. There's no need have a car that drives its self, none at all. It is kind of lazy to me, us humans have everything that we need and we can travel the world but people only want to do it if they don't have to drive. It's too hard for them to push down on a pedal? I guess so.
I do not believe it would cause less accidents either. There could be many different things that could go wrong electrically and could get someone killed. It'll takes years before they have it perfected and even then there would be some kinks to work out. I do see a few upsides in in though. Maybe if people were too get drunk? it would be alot safer for them not to drive and the car to find it's way home without a human telling it where to go. There may be a few upsides but there are way to many down sides to consider this an option.
We would kind of have to change all of the roads, how we drive, when and how old we have to be to get a self drivable car. They will also be much more expensive im sure and there will be people that can't afford them. We would have to change all of rules and everything. I don't think it is worth it. I say we just keep it how it is because it has been the same for years and it has been working for us alright. | 4 |
caebbee | I think that the face is just a natural marking,and there is no proof that it was created by aliens.In the unmasking of the face of mars it looks nothing like a face would you still think it was created my aliens?Scientists didn't even think it was face.Even though some might think it was created by aliens there are a lot of things on this earth,that are weird looking but we don't know how they came about.I don't think aliens would do anything that perfect looking.On the JPL website it revealed a natural landfrom,there was no alien monument after.Even though some people weren't satisfied with the picture,they probably were still thinking it was created by aliens.The face is located at 41 degrees north martin latitude,where it was winter in april '98 a cloudy time of year on the red planet.The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Skeptics think alien markings were hidden by haze,but it is cloudy around that time.I say I have proven my point ,and i dont think that it was created by aliens. There are many artifacts on earth some may be created by aliens some cloudn't.The face on this palnt is a natural artifact. | 2 |
caf4c50 | Driverless cars are the future of driving. It is an inevitable fact, people are already spending countless hours trying to figure out how to make cars safe and driverless, and have made some cars that are nearly driverless. I think that driverless cars are a bad idea. These cars will just help fuel americas lazy lifestyle. Having cars the drive themselves will take all of the fun out of driving. I think that driving is a lot of fun and if we take away peoples ability to drive then we will miss out on a lot of fun and skills that can help in everyday life. Automatic cars are not safe, if there is an accident on the road or constuction or anything blocking the road then the automatic cars will need the assistance of human drivers. The cars that are being produced now are not even fully automatic.
There are some car manufactoring companies that have already made cars that are almost driverless and have been working on making driverless cars for years and years. Some of these companies include General Motors, google (using a Toyota Prius), BMW, Tesla, Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan have all either come out with a car that is almost driverless or has released plans to release them, Tesla in 2016 and the others in 2020. These manufacturing companies have already started making automatic cars and have been working on them for a very long time. I think that if the companies keep working and progressing on the safety issues with the automatic vehicles then maybe these automatic cars can be a good thing.
The American lifestyle, some might say that it is hardworking and free, others howeveer might say that we are lazy. I have to agree with both, we have many citizens that are very hardworking and strive to do their best and improve themselves and others. Sadly that is not all of out citizens, we have a gigantic amount of people in our contry that are lazy, they do not want to work for anything, and expect everything in life to be given to them without them putting forth any more effors than applying for some things online. If the automobile manufactorers release a car that drives itself, that will just be one more thing that the lazy americans do not have to do. It would be another thing just handed to them that they would not have to work for. These cars are made by the hardworking to make life for the lazy easier. I do not think that this is something that needs to happen or something that should even be considered.
When I get in my car and just drive, it is always fun. The feeling of being free and being able to go wherever you want and just to be able to drive is amazing. I think that many people love to drive and if we made automatic cars the manual cars would start to dissappear. Making many people upset and many others miss out of the wonders of driving. Diving a car can help build and develop many skills that can be helpful in every day life and even at work. Driving can help you develop your reflexes and your ability to spot details and be somewhat predictive of what others might do. That can help with plenty of jobs including sports. Learning to drive a car is one of the memories that you will remeber forever. If we have automatic cars then we will miss out on those memories.
Automatic cars will not be safe. These automatic cars can not handle anything besides normal road conditions or even pulling in and out of driveways. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents" (Driverless cars are coming, author unknown). These cars have been built to alert the driver when they need to take over the vehicle, but are still not capable of functioning without a human driver, which could be a safety hazards. If the vehicle is not able to handle the road conditions ahead it will attemp to notify the driver inside, but considering it is an automatic vehicle the driver may have fallen asleep due to the lack of entertainment of activities to keep them alert and then the car nor the driver is able to manuver the obsticles ahead and the could cause an accident resluting in the death of anyone involved.
Driverless cars are coming, and they are going to be dangerous. Driverless cars are coming and they stilll have a lot of issues to work through that could be dangerous. Driverless cars are going to reward the lazy for being lazy, and make them have to do even less work. Taking away the need for human drivers in vehicles will take away great memories, fun adventures, and many valuable skills that peple can gain while driving a car. These cars also can cause many safety issues including accidents from the lack od the cars ability to handle certain situations and could also cause issues if the drivers of these cars fall alseep when there is a sitiuation where there is a need for a human driver. RIght now these cars do not have enough safety features and they do not have enough driving capability to be safe for public use. If the manufactoring companies continue to work on these cars and make improvements, then these cars might not be completely bad, but as of right now they are not safe enough or skillled enought to be sent out to the pubic. | 5 |
caf4f81 | Almost everyone owns a car because people are traveling constantly to get from point A to point B. No matter who it may be, that person at some point in their lives needs some way to get around. Everyday people need to either go to the store, pick up their kids, go to work, go to school, you name it. That doesn't mean that owning a car is a necessity, all around the world many people are trying to cut down and limit their car usage by having a whole lot of other options. There are buses, people can car pool, walk, skate, bike, and many more. People are coming to the conclusion that if we, as a whole, decide to start cutting down on our usage of cars it can benefit the way we live.
Lots of people actually don't mind not having a car just yet. Most teenagers do want to get their license and a car but there's so much other things they need to focus on. It really is not a priority for them because they have school, work, plus if they do need to get somewhere they can always take the bus and get a ride from a friend (Source 4). In Germany, there is a city by the name of Vauban, that is known to be the most advanced experiment in low-car suburban life (Source 1). Vauban's goal and idea, which is to cut down on cars for a better living, has made it'a way around the world, so that other states and countries can aspire to do the same and little by little we could have a world that is not so dependent on cars. The idea of using cars, for some, it causes them stress and they're always tense, not using a car makes them happier, as stated by Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two (Source 1). The stress aspect of this could be due to the fact that in the most recent years, the percentage of car crashes and accidents have gone up. Many people abhor the idea of using cars because they have been in an terible accident themselves or someone close to them. Also, it can even just be all the traffic jams that occur during rush hour, which makes people late and accidents do happen. For example in Bogota, Colombia, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to their designated location, to leave the streets due to traffic jams (Source 3). Since they knew that lots of their citizens were deciding not to use cars they started making uneven, pitted sidewalks into nice, smooth, replaced ones for them (Source 3).
Another reason why people want to limit their usage on cars is because of all the pollution cars create. Passenger cars are rsponsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States (Source 1). Not many people think about the effects of air pollution like smog, but it is a big deal. Since people don't think about it often, there is no way for the majority of us to try and find a solution to put into action to stop it or help it go down. In Paris, there was a partial driving ban to clear the air around the city (Source 2). Paris' partial ban was their idea to try and make their city a better place. With the ban being enforced and put into play there were about 4,000 drivers fined (Source 2). It turns out that since the driving ban was made the congestion, car traffic, had gone down 60 percent in the capital of France, just after five days of less smog pollution and Paris is typically known to have more smog than any other European capitals (Source 2). This goes to show, that slowly people are actually becoming aware of what's going on and they actually care enought to try and make things better.
All in all, there are many ways to try and cut down on our car usage for the better. It can be anything from not buying as many cars, to deciding to not use cars at all and deciding to walk, skate, and bike, etc. Not only will limiting our car usage as a whole stop traffic jams, car accidents, air pollution, and more, it will help to benefit our lives for the better whether or not people want to believe it. If things keep going from here, and more and more decide that less car usage is better than over a time span of let's say 20-30 years, there could be a lot less dangerous things occuring in our lives. | 5 |
caf5ac3 | In "Making Mona Lisa smile" the author describes a new technology that is called Facial Action Coding System. The Facial Action Coding System is a system that can cacualte your emotions. The technology should be valuable in a students classroom for a couple reasons. One reason is because if a lesson is to boring then it could chnage it up to where you are having fun but still learning. Another reason to why the Facial Action Coding System should be valuable is because sometimes we have to pretend like we are fine when we aren't.
The Facial Action Coding System is a system that can caulate your emotions. Wouldn't it be couls if you could caculate your emotions like a math test? I think it would. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" it tells us how you feel according to the face expression you do. For example, in the article its says when you raise your eyebrows it means you are surprised. The article also says when you force a smile or if you actually mean it.
When you fake smile your mouth is stretched sideways. When you actually want to smile the zygomatic major lift the corners of your mouth.
The Facial Action Coding System should be valuable in a students classroom because if you are trying to pay attention but it's to boring the computer will detect that and it could change it to where you are having fun but still learning. Another reason to why it could be helpful is because if you are becoming confused about the lesson or have a question about it the computer will also detect that and it could offer you extra help. Wouldn't it be nice to get extra help when you need it? I sure would like it.
Having the Facial Action Coding System could help when letting your feelings out. There are some people that have to pretend like everything is fine and pretend they are happy when they aren't. Like it was said in the article people often can tell how you feel with the face expression you have but they don't kmow if you are faking it.
People see you look happy so they never ask "how are you doing?" "Can I help you with anything?" so you have no one to talk to but with the new system it would be different.
There are other reasons to why the Facial Action Coding System should be valuable I just said a coulpe. I think the new system would really help out alot of people and not only in school but also outside of school also. | 3 |
caf5cc2 | This sort of technology would not be usefull in a classroom because we would not use this all the time and and it will be a waste of money that the school does not have.
The only class that we would use the FACS is in a Psychology class but we wolud not use it all the time so it will just be staying ther and if a student deceids to mess with it he or her may break it and the school would have to buy a knew one or repair it which would cost alot of money.
And what is the need of having one of these machines when all they can do is read facial expressions and that is the only use we can use it for and we can read facial expressions so there is no need for it for a machine to tell us when we can read it ourselves.
AND also if its a highschool it there would need to be more then one because there would be lots of students in Psychology clasess so there would be more then one Psychology class in the school which would make a large sum of money that the school might need in the future .
Those are my reason in why this the FACS is not valuble in a student classroom. | 2 |
caf6416 | The three reasons that I have will make anyone want to join in the program, Seagoing Cowboys. First of all there are a lot of really cool and fun experiences. Also, you'll get to help people and make there lifes better. Lastly, it's a once in a life opportunity. Its going to be exciting.
You're going to having lots of fun here. If you like animals well this is the trip for you; you're going to be spending most of your time with animals. While you are on the way to your destination you'll get to see or visit places you've only dreamed of, like Japan. Lastly, if you ever wanted to see the pasific ocean,well you're going to sailing on it. Your in luck because your going to help out too.
Also you get to help people. I'm really sure everybody would be happy to help people out there. You may even feel like a super hero afterwards. Also you can even save lifes in need. It's only offered once.
It's a once in a life time chance for you and others. This chance is the only time you'll get so don't regret it latter that you didn't join. It will be an honor to serve in the Seagoing Cowboys program. You can join with a friend if you want. Now lets reasume it all.
Make sure you join us because, you'll get to have really fun experiences. You'll get to help people. Lastly, it's a once in a life time opportunity. So join now and you'll never reget it. I garante that if you join you'll love it. | 3 |
caf6bec | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy dispute despite the dangers very efficiently and clearly. They clearly explain the argument in the second paragraph. They also properly list all the advantages to exploring Venus and then weighed it out with the challenges and risks that would stand in the way. They finally finish by stating their claim once more in their concluding paragraph.
To start their article, they begin in paragraph 2 by stating some facts about the planet and a bit of history to go into it, which helps us understand Earth's history with Venus itself. In Paragraph 2, it states, "Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner - in space terms - humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours... ...not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades. " This explains that we have tried to land spacecrafts onto Venus to study the planet before, and have failed, therefore causing us to give up until now, which is where our argument comes into play.
The argument for this article is simply "Should we try to study Venus again?" and the author believes we should, after they weighed out some of the challenges that were in our way then and are in our way now. Paragraph 3 states "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater that what we experience on our own planet." These facts are about the surface of the planet, and as the author also states in paragraph 3, "these conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and liquefy any metals."
The author then asks at the beginning of paragraph 4, "if our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?" Then proceeds to explain, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." This explanation tells us that Venus could have been exactly like Earth, and may even still be in certain ways. Their explanation continues with, "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." Using this information, we could theoretically use Venus as a second Earth, or maybe a pitstop on the way to other planets, or as a way to research for other lifeforms, which is worth the risks that come with it, and that's what the author is trying to say when asking, "The Value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?"
The author explains that, "The... ...Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." The author continues to go on and explain that NASA has a plan to make a vehicle that would hover over Venus and observe from above, where the conditions would be less severe. they continue, "At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but 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." This means that their solution would be managable, but not perfect.
For their final paragraph, they restate their claim, saying "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." This proves that they believe it will lead us further if we listen to our curiosity versus when we don't follow through due to risks. They also state "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation" which backs up their claim. | 5 |
cafa345 | The automobile has been a staple in human history ever since it was first created, they have been used by people wether it was grocery shopping or during war. These days limiting car use has more advantages than ever. Such advantages are that it helps reduce the amount of pollution to the enviorment, helps people save money, aswell as it helps people become more sociable and less stressed.
The limiting of car usage has many advantages one would be that it helps to reduce pollution cuased by fuel emissions. Using vehicles creates green house emissions which cause the Earth to become hotter and then global warming becomes a big problem. According to the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars." by Elisabeth Rosenthal "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive area in the United States. So limiting car usage reduces the amount of emissions produced greatly. Smog is also a great threat to the enviorment, smog is created just like fog except polluted air gets into the mix of warm days and cold nights. Then instead of getting fog there is smog a more dense unhealthy version of fog. Paris has had a rough time when it came to smog which according to "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer resulted from the fact that "Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France.
Saving money is a big plus to the resriction on car use. With more buildings and shopping centers being built closer to suburban area makes walking a good way to save money. Andrew Selsky author of the article "car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" made a comment on the situation in Bogota saying "parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout the city- new resturaunts and upscale shopping districts have cropped up". With more shopping centers for people to be able to reach by foot, bike, car-pool, or bus can greatly reduce the amount people spend on gas and car repairs.
Limiting the usage of cars also in a strange way helps people become more connected with each other. Limiting car use will alow people to hang out more in things such as carpooling, bike rides, walking, public transportation. Allowing for people to meet more people. Also it wil allow people to use things such as social media to stil feel connected to thier freinds without having to drive out to meet them. In another article by Elisabeth Rosenthal "The End of Car Culture" Rosenthal interviewed professor Mimi Sheller Who stated "the rise iin cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arranments,includiong the evolution of shared van services for getting to work. The restriction on car usage allows for people to meet new people through the carpool service and such things.
A limitaion on car usage would have so many advntages to people and the enviorment. It helps reduce the amount of pollution from fuel and carbon emissions, helps people save money and not need a car to get to a store or park, and have people become more connected to each other. | 4 |
cafe815 | I feel that the idea was outgoing but you cant hold technology forever or always profound it as good yes I can be valuable and a pretty cool equmeint. But to say if this facial action coding can be relibel and give you accurte resluts is hard to believe. because just cause a machine tells you one thing doesnt mean its ture one can be happy and it can show the person mad. I just think for a fun a silly thing to try or do yes its valuable. But for something to speak on as if it acutlly works and did work and is giving accurte resluts no its not valuable. Like he said " she was 80 percent happy 9 percent disgusted 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry. Yes you can have a lot of mixed emtions but to have one after another by a machine telling you come on now. it then again could be ture but I couldnt see that unless she presented that to us her self how she was really feeling at that moment and time. | 2 |
cafeccc | In vauban, Germany Residents of this upscale communitiy are suburban pioneers, were a few people like to call home because street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district. Also as an advantage there are only two places park a large garage or buy a home for 40,000 and u get a parking spot.
As a result 70 percent of vaubans families do not own cars and 57 percent sold there car so the could move to there. The good thing is that some people were really tense when they had a car and now they are more happier in there new enviorment. In 2006 they were an example of a growning trend in Europe, the Unied States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movment called ''smart ''planning''.
The good news also is that parks and centers also have bloomed throughout the citiy. New Yourks new bike sharing program and its and its skyrocketing bridge an tunnel tolls. with all these changes people who stopped car commuting as a result of the reccesion may find less reason to resume the habit. An also pedestian, bycicyle private cars, commercial an public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network. | 1 |
cb01da9 | Driverless cars are coming to us in the near future. These cars are capable of driving themelves. For now, they still need human interaction or assistance and human skill in order to safely navigate through work zones, or around accidents. This means that the driver would have to remain alert at all times when the car is driving itself. Driverless cars can cause a lot of problems, but have some features that could really help us on the road.
Driverless cars should not be further developed or put on the market because it is too unsafe to have technology do something as dangerous as driving. There are endless situations, which means that you cannot program a computer to do all of them for you. Especially when it comes to driving through a contruction site, on back roads that are not marked on a map, or up a driveway where precise steering is required. The only reason that this whole push for driverless cars was created, is because people found it too much of a chore to pay attention at all times when driving. Driving should be something that people take very seriously, which people in this day and age seem to miss. Drivers should want to drive safely, which is why the push for driverless cars makes no sense. There is no way that a computer can do everything that a human can do when it comes to driving. However, some of the features of the driverless cars could be helpful, like the cameras on the rear of the car, and on the rearview mirror to help with backing. This could come into play when using precise backing, where you need an extra set of eyes to look behind you in order to see all angles. Also, the GPS reciever would be very helpful if you were ever lost and needed assistance on directions to find your way.
We should put the idea of further development of driverless cars away, and focus on some of the features that would go into a driverless car, that could better improve our cars right now. Driverless cars would just be too unsafe when it comes to the needed actions, like human skill. Drivers would not feel safe enough to drive them, and in the future when we finally get used to driving them, drivers would not pay enough attention to make the actions that actually require human skill. Driverless cars can cause a lot of problems, but have some features that could really help us on the road. | 3 |
cb02c27 | Dear State Senator,
It has come to my attention the many problems that the Electoral College has. I would like to ask that we change to election by popular vote for the President of the United States. You see, not only is the Electoral College unfair, but it also creates a lie that tricks everyone into believeing that our President was the one that the majority of America voted for, when that is not always the case.
First off, the fact that the number of electors for each state relies on the number of members in it's Congressional delegation is just illogical...lets say Florida has twenty because of its size, and California has fifty. if both states want to vote for someone different, then California is going to win only because of the size and population difference. So really, you aren't voting for the president...you're voting for the electors who will choose the president. An argument can be made against this...that the electors that you give your vote to will be trustworthy and vote for the person that your party wants. How does that give us a say though? For example, as it says in the article, Al Gore was the president that the majority of America voted for in 2000...he was the one that everyone wanted. Yet he lost the presidency because of this form of voting. This is a free country, or so we're told, so we need to be given the right of popular vote.
Furthermore, the Electoral College system is flawed...there are millions of people in America and yet only 538 votes are counted. There is no way to be assured that the person you voted for, or anyone else, was selected. We need to ask ourselves what the best thing is for our country... letting everybody be dissapointed in who was voted for, or seeing that they got what they spent time on going and voting on. This isn't just a captain for a football team, or a manager at work. This is the president of the United States, and he or she will be running our country for 4 years or even longer, so we need to question this method of voting. We are a unified country, and our unity shows what we want as a country..we shouldn't have one thing chosen and get something completely different in return. The election by popular voting would be a better overall choice for our country.
All in all, arguments can be made both ways...for the Electoral College process or against it. The citizens of America deserve the very best person to lead them, and that's exactly who we should get...the one that America votes for. I know that there are more efficient and fair ways to do this, all we need to do is use them. At the end of the day though, using the election by popular vote would ensure that everyone would be 100% sure that their vote went for who they wanted, and that's what counts. | 5 |
cb066eb | Dear state senator,
I write to argue in favor of the Electoral College. The Electoral College is as it says on the 3rd source "widely regarded as an anchronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidates who receives the most popular votes the winner." That was in my opinion pretty self explanatory. This letter is based on information from article sourses I read.
First of all, I would like to start by saying that the Electoral College is helpful to avoid problems where no candidate got a majority. For example in the 5th part of the source 3 it says "Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College (301 and 370 electoral votes, respectively)" which backs up my claim. I understand the "wrong" part of it like in the 2nd source it says "If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for [John] Karry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry." meanning voters vote for a slate of electors and they choose the president. Honestly I dont see it as that "wrong" but thats my opinion.
Second, I agree with the Electoral College despite the lack of "democratic pedigree" for five reasons. First, "Certainty of Outcome" meanning winning candidate's share of the Electoral College exceeds his share of the popular vote, example, Obama vs Romney. Second, in the Everyone's President part it says that no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president, for example, "Romney was in the South, has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states, for he gains no electoral votes increasing his plurality in states that he knows he will win". Number 3, "Swing States" the "winner takes all method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates-as we saw in [2012] election-to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states". There is also number 4 where the Electoral College "restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution" amnd there is number 5, "Avoid Run-Off Elections" which is what I used in the second paragraph as a claim.
In summation im in favor with the Electoral College for many reasons. After reading through this side and the opponing side of the argument I can honestly say that I prefer this method as it is. Yes there is a bad side to it but there is a bad side to everything and it shouldn't be big enough for anyone to oppose it. Well thank you for taking the time to read through this. | 4 |
cb07a2e | Dear state senator,
I trying to understand why we have the system of choosing our state's electors when you vote for president beacuse when you vote for your candidant you are actualy voting for your candidante's electors. This process is easier for most individuals beacause you do not have to sit in a room, for hours, counting up millions of votes; all you have to do is count up the elector's votes in stead. This process is what our founding fathers established in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a popular vote of qualified citizens. How can you be a qualified citizen, arent we all the same? I know that the electoral college consists of 538 electors and a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. So, another thing that I would like to know is do you believe that this process that has been going on for ages is still a acturate system.
Does voting for people to vote for the president of your choice is a great idea. Does it not seem a bit ludacris that you have to choose your state electors in order for your vote to be counted since you think that who you pick as the electors will actually pick the vote you wanted. Why cant we vote for our won presient, why should we have to go through someone to vote for our president. It has been known that president's may be the popular vote winner, but still can lose the presidency. Why is that? Individuals that vote on their electors can not always control who their electors choose for president. Occasionally, sometimes the electors you pick will not vote for his or her party's candidate; they will cast a vote for whomever they please.
Some of these candidates that people choose are what you call "faithless" electors because of the winner-takes-all system. This means that most candidates do not spend time in states they know that they have no chance of winning. Meaning, they only stay focused on the "swing" states which in other words means the states that will either go for the person they like or against him. During the 2000 campaign, 17 state had not even seen their candidates at all and the voters in 25 of the largest media markets did not get to see a single campaign ad. So, tell me why we are still using this same system that cheats citizens out of their votes. Is it beacuse we are not qualified citizens?
If you do not already know by now the electoral college is a process, not a place and this process needs to be abolished. Who picks these electors, are they just people like you and I or are they the qualified citizens. They can be anyone not holding an office and the state actually chooses the electors. So, this means that the people really have no place in the president election. The electors are chosen by the state and even if you choose those electors they can go against what you decide and choose who ever they want. What happened to what the people wanted, why are those candidates choosing who runs our country for four years. What did they do so amazing that they get the final say on the matter. No, they are like us so why should we have to go through them just so we can make sure are vote matters in electing the president. Most of America has to deal with making sure are kids are getting a good eduacation, making sure are water or light bill is paid every month, and we also have deal with getting up at seven in the morning working and not coming home untill eleven at night all the while praying that our kids are safe since we could not pay for a nanny. With all of these things worrying us, putting a lot of stress in our minds one of the only things that we should not have to worry about is if our vote is going to count in electing our president. In conclusion, I believe, senator, that we should change our election by popular vote for the president of the United States of America. | 3 |
cb1082b | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. We learn from the passage that Venus has extremely hot temperatures, and also has an atomospheric pressure that is 90 times greater than we experience here on earth. Even though Venus is "inhospitable", many astronomers are still very much fascinated by Venus.
The author supports the idea of Venus being a worthy pursuit to study by stating many beneficial features that Venus has. The author says, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life." (Paragraph 4-lines 4 & 5) By inplying that Venus could have all these things, the author is telling us that Venus could also be used for things like what we use Earth for.
The author compares Venus to Earth for a reason. The author supports the idea of studying Venus being a worthy pursuit by stating that Venus has Earth like features such as; valleys, mountains, and craters. Since this planet has more Earth like features, than any other planet, astronomers are desperate to study more about the planet.
Since "the value of returning to Venus seems indisputable", NASA is helping with the idea of studying Venus by coming up with ideas of how to send humans to Venus, to study the planet. The authors explains that, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." (Paragraph 5-lines 3 & 4) This help from NASA is very beneficial to the astronomers because NASA is proposing ideas of how to safely get to Venus, for astronomers to study.
Despite Venus having extremely hot temperatures and having a dangerous presure for humans to study on Venus' surface, NASA is helping astronomers propose ideas of how to safely study and get to Venus. The author supports the idea of Venus being a worthy pursuit to study by comparing Venus' features to Earth and stating that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. | 3 |
cb1522b | Dear senator,
Retain the Electoral College. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors and a majority of 270 electors is is required to slect the President. Each state has his/her own electors which are chosen by the candidate political party. You should keep the Electoral College because you have certainty of outcome, and the President is everyones not just yours.
The first reason why you should stay with the Electoral College is because you are certain that the outcome will be in favor of one of the candidates. A tie in the nationwide electoral vote may happen but it is very unlikely that it will even though that 538(number of electors in the Electoral College) is a even number(S.3).For example in 2012's election, Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral votes compared to 51.3 percent of the popular cast for him and Romney because all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis even a slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state(S.3). However,because of the winner-take-all system in each state,candidates dont spend time in staes they know they have no chance of winning, they only focus on the close,tight races in the "swing"states(S.2). But, the winning candidates share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote.
The second reason you should keep the Electoral College is because the president is everyone's. The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president by themselves. So for example,a solid regional favorite,such as Romney was in the South,has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states for he gains no electoral votes by increasing his plurality in states he knows for sure that he will win(S.3).A president with only his regional apppeal is very unlikely to be a successful president. The residents of the other regions may feel like there votes dont count or that he really isnt there president.
In conclusion, you should stay with the Electoral College simply because you most likely not going to have a tie and because the president is everyone's. | 4 |
cb15b48 | Limiting car usage has many advantages, from saving money, from helping save the planet. We spend tons and tons of dollars on a simple fossil fuel just so we can get around. Although, having a car may be nice, but also you may need to think about the long term consequences that are yet to come. For example, driving around while fun, is dangerous, you are facing the threats of drunk drivers, people not paying attention or something in general going wonky with your car, or how incredibly expensive cars are, you must buy the gas fill it up almost every two days, you will have to pay for any damages and also for the tune ups. Cars arent just expensive but they also do loads of damage to the environment. Cars, create fumes that are let out into the atmosphere that contributes to global warming. Sure, it may be nice to fdrive a big bubba truck with huge tires, some smoke stacks and to be able to "roll coal" but also think about what that does to the earth, it helps melt glaciers causing polar bears to be hot and hungry.
Driving a car may be convenient, but when something is convenient something else has to suffer. This something else would be the environent, there is less and less clean air for us to breathe, everything is getting hotter and everyone is suffering. Smog is one of the most relavent and visible issues, especially in bigger cities. Smog is a mixture of smoke, and fog, this smoke coming from vehicles and mostly factories. Going into a major city like New York City may be fun but while your there look around and notice the thick layer of smog. You are breathing all of that through out your body. While New York City may not be the smoggiest city around such as Beijing (Source 2: Paris bans driving due to smog, Line 14) but it is still an on going issue everywhere.
All in all, leaving your car at home and taking a bike to work instead can have many health benefits but also many environmental benifits, so next time you think about bringing your car to work, think of the polar bears and the future of the environment. | 4 |
cb16964 | Self driving cars in my opinion is a cool consept and could become succeful in later years but in my eye are technology is not advance enough for this to work out. In my opinion society is still not ready for this type of tehchnology nor are they willing to be wise with it. Self drivin car may help drivers in some way but nothing is perfect including these cars. Kinks in the these car are always going to be present so may be fixable some may not. These problems or kinks could be small or really big. My reasonig are as followed.
Self drivin car are going to be dirvin be technology sensors and a mainframe to recieve this data as talk about in paragraphs 5 but these sensors and computer hardware and software are not gonig to last forever like almost everything it going to break. Lets say this software breaks in the middle of the freeway or while driving through traffic not only do you put your self at risk but the people around you as well. In addition to this, the car will have to be driven manually and is going to have to be fixed and the self driving car will no longer be a self driving car till it is fixed and in my experience with computer software and hardware its not cheep to get it fixed and to imagine getting software that complex fixed is going to come at a high cost. There is also another risk to using this technology, hackers they could hack into your automotive's hardware system and cause many problems on the road. Weather also play a key component the heat could overheat the system, the rain could fry it, cold could freeze it and brake it and etc. Also the cars inablitiy to drive hazardous roads which is inform to us in paragraph 7 means that the switch be autopiolt to manual is going to have to happen this appens in other modes of transportation like airplanes. But given that not all drivers are reasponsible enough to always chhep there eye on the road when they are driving imagine them going at 30 miles per hour not paying attention and the car switches to manual. | 3 |
cb202d1 | Using the Facial Actrion Decoding System in the classroom would be valuable. There are many benifits to using this program in classrooms. Many students do not enjoy the time they send in school, so this could be a revolutionary approach to changing the way the American school system works.
One of the reasons the decoding system would help students is that it could help inhance student's grades. Because thecomputeris actively trying to bring the student's mood up, it could hep them to fully enjoy the information they are given. If the computer is constantly trying to inhace emotions, liking the material will cause the student to enjoy learning more. If a student truely enjoys what they are learning, they will work harder to do well in a class.
Another reason the decoding system would be benifitial to classrooms isbecause it could help students understand the concepts better. Not liking classroom material results in students not fully understanding the material and not wanting to pay attention. They soon become easily sidetrack and loose sight of remembering the information later on. Knowing that they enjoy the concepts will help with the understanding of the material. As stated in the text, " A classroom computer could recongnise when a student is becoming confused or bored" and also states, " Then it can modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Some might argue that a human instructor may be able to do just as well relaying information as the computer, but most of the time a teacher must give the material to the class as a whole, and can'tfocus soley on individual emotions of the student, and if every student is enjoying the lesson.
The last reason why the coding system would be benifitial is because it could help with teenage mood swings and depression. teens seem to be less happy when they are confused and overwhelmed by schoolwork, and helping to adjust the material based of their moods could help increase their level of happiness. Helping to improve their happiness during school hours might in turn help them to be more happy overall.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System would be valuable in the classroom for many reasons. It can help to inhance grades, help students understand concepts better, and help with the teenage moodwings. | 4 |
cb21e2f | I think that Facial Action Coding System could help us humans in the future.A claim I have for my reason that I think it woukd help is that the software can identify certain emotions we can't.It would also be use full to teachers because they could figure out or try to help a students that's feeling down or depressed.
Without the technology teachers wouldn't even know what is going on and it could affect the students work and the rest of their life.It even says in paragraph 6 that the machine could "Paint facial muscles precicsly enough to convey specific emotions".That could help with lessons taught by teachers to make the learning enviorment better for the kids.They would be willing to try to learn more and pay better attention to the lseeon if they can interact.The schools would see a great improvement in test scores and all around.It could also help the teachers just not with helping the kids but themselves as well.If the kids are doing well they would proabaly get in increase and salary.This would be good for children all over the world and would be a great value to kids.That is why I think kids everywhere should get a device. | 2 |
cb2b378 | The author had a really good idea of exploring Venus. The ideas he gave is that it would be a risk to get someone onto venus the probblem with that is no aircraft have surive landing, the planet it is way to hot to even get to the surfis of the ground. The temputer of the planet is. 800 degress fahrenhit that is very hot thats pass blowling point. The planet has 97% carbon dioxide. Venus has colds that are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The pressure on Venus is like the ocen if you go way to far down you get crushed.
The people see this as a chellange to get to venus there are alot of dangers so not alot of people can get on the planet well not even one aircraft has handled down on to venus so that would make it even harder for a person to land down on Venus. | 1 |
cb2dd7f | Have you ever wondered what a planet outside of Earth looks like? There are many planets in the outer space, but we can't see and examine details about those planets if we don't have people go out there and do it. Although, it is hard to try and study a planet when the atmosphere and evironment won't let you. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit depite the dangers.
The author supported this idea that studying Venus was worth the dangers the planet presented. Venus is an dangerous planet to examine. The temperature, and atmosphere is dangerous and more extreme than what we encounter on Earth. Venus has the hottest surface than any other planet in space. Venus is the only planet that is like Earth in some ways. Humans have sent several spacecrafts to land on Venus, and none of them have survived. Although; it is dangerous on this planet scientists continue to make more plans to examine Venus. The text says: " Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a through mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks" (The challenge of exploring venus). The author sucessfully explains the details that they found out from research, and that no matter the risks they still continued to study.
In conclusion, the author backs up the idea that studying Venus is worth it no matter the dangers. The text explains how dangerous Venus is, what scientists planned to do, and how the dangers didn't stop them from human curosity. The author gave plenty of evidence and reasoning for his position. | 3 |
cb2fcde | Going to Venus without any complications would be a dream. To travel there and just be able to land on it's surface without any damage would be a miracle. If you're travelig to any planet it's going to be difficult, but if you're travelling to Venus that's a whole other story.
The author knows the dangers and problems that could occor, such as: the temetures being too extreme, the time it would take to get there and the limited insight on ground condistions. But dispite these problems he's still finding ways to pursue the idea of people goung to Venus. Theyr're working on a new study that has to do with silicon carbinate electronics, and putting them in a chamber to simulate the effects of the surface on Venus. The electronics only hold up to three weeks, but they still haven't given up. They've even started to look back at mechanical computers, these use levers and gears to opporate. They've been looking at these again because, you couldn't bring a normal laptop or computer up there because the temetures are so extreme.
In concussion, I think the author does support his idea. He gives reason why it would be dangerous, but also tells us that it would be worth it. The author says that the dangers and doubts shouldn't limit us, and we should be using our imagination for what could happen in the future. | 3 |
cb32d29 | I had fun joining the Seagoing Cowboys program and so will you. If you join you will have so much fun you will want to join again.
I think others should join in the Seagoing Cowboy program because it"s so much fun and not only that but you can travel to many places and also help others. The places that I went to were across the Atlantic Ocean and to China. When we were doing our crossings careing for animals kept me busy. It was alot of hard work but it also was fun. On my secon trip I stayed overnight as a watchman. Other places I went to were Venice Italy, Greece and along the Panama Canal. I also found time to play on board. We played baseball, volleyball, table-tennis,fencing, boxing, reading and whittling. Being a Seagoing wasnt just an adventure for me it opend the world to me. I am grateful that I took the opportunity.
I hope you can take my essayto make you think about being joining the Seagoing Cowboy program. Trust me you will never regret joining. | 2 |
cb3376d | The Face isn't made by aliens becuase it is just a natural land form, and if we look at pictures taken be our spacecraft is will show us it is not a face. Also the Face was proven to be just a land form by Global Surveyor when it took a new picture in 2001.
The face is also not alian made becuase if it was there would be more then just a face to prove that they were there. Also scientists can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size to see if the picture was right and that it's not a face. Also another thing is the picture actually shows that it is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa that are landforms common around the American West.
Another reason it could have looked like a face is the took a picture of the Face on Mars and its located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April 1998. Witch means the camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Witch could have messed up the picture. The new picture was taken on Nevertheless April 8, 2001a cloudless summer day in CydoniaMars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look at the face. They had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view. Malins team captured an extraordinary photo using the cameras absolute maximum resolution. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. Before they got that picture they had to do alot of hard work.
Heres what the did, Mission controllers prepared to look again. they said Its not easy to target Cydonia. In fact, its hard work. Mars Global Surveyor is a mapping spacecraft that normally looks straight down and scans the planet like a fax machine in narrow 2.5 km-wide strips. They just dont pass over the Face very often. The first time they took the pickture it wasnt that good of a picture. This is what happened before they got the good photo. On April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing. a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. It was a better photo then the first one taken by the viking but it had a glare and wasn't as good as the second one.
This is why the face isn't an alien artifact, and it is also why it is not being looked at alot and observed. The Face is just a natural landform on mars that is sorta like a butte or mesalandform found around the American West. It alo kinda looks like the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. The Middle Butte a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. Thats why Its not Alien it is just a natural land form. | 4 |
cb35509 | Have you ever sat back in thought to yourself how would the world be with or without Driverless cars? well if you have been thinking about the driveless cars that is a good thing because driverless cars will be amazing we should have driveless cars we need to start to investing into driveless cars it will be great. These cars will change the world. Driveless cars will help make the world a better place. I say this because it can really help people out. When you have a long day at work late night on your way home you are tired you are ready to go to sleep you have eat you are just done if you had a Driveless car it can help you solve that problem because it will do all the work for you and you wouldnt have to really worry about driving are falling alseep on the road a driveless car will take care of that
If we have driveless cars we can really help out mom who was a new born in the car while they are driving . when the mom is driving she has to be focus on the road she cant turn to the back in see whats going on with the baby because she is driving but if she had a driveless car she can turn back in make sure the baby isnt crying and he/she is fine because the driveless car will take care of the road and she can do what ever she needs to do to make sure the babys doing fine on the car ride
Also if we had a driveless road trips wouldnt be so borning and so long because drveless car will do all the work that a human will have to do on a road trip you can take you mind off the road and let the car do most of the work well thats what driveless cars are made to help make driving more easy and fun for the people who are on the road alot take your mind off the road for a few and relax while you are driving
Driveless cars will make the road more safer i only say this because some people text and drive that isnt safe at all but if you have driveless car you can text and drive because the driveless car is driving you can send those messege or emails without putting anyones on the road life on the line also driveless cars is great to have when you are running late for a big meeting and you didnt have time to get all the way dress you havent put your shirt on yet you can put your shirt on in the car you dont have to worry about a thing everyone in the world should get a driveless car it will help you out with drving and alot more you can relax whilr driving talk on the phonw when driving put a shirt on drving how cool is that get a driveless car you everyone is getting on dont miss out on the greatness | 2 |
cb38785 | Driverless cars are swiftly becoming a viable possibility for the near future. They are capable of outperforming many human drivers, as well as being able to return control to the driver in the case of a more complex situation that requires more thought than the car can handle. This duality is the main factor that makes self-driving cars appear to be a good plan for the future of transportation. The car is manageable and not overriding the human input, and yet it still mantains a feeling of helpfulness and convenience.
When it comes to transport automation, control over the process, and the ability to halt or override it, is a chief concern. A system that controls itself and denies all outside input cannot sustain itself for long. That is why, to quote the passage, "Google cars are not truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues." In short, the car is not perfect, and therefore has to fall back on the driver's help in some situations. This prevents crashes due to the car's incapability to surpass a unique situation on the road, as well as promoting driver awareness even when the car is operating itself. By doing this, the self-driving car model itself promotes safety and good road etiquette.
While the car may not be able to do everything a human driver can, it has proven to be much better at the tasks it can do than an average driver. The cars provide "far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." This can be coupled with the fact that these vehicles are being constantly upgraded in order to allow for "more and more [automated] driving tasks." Perhaps in the future there will come a car that is capable of doing every driver task there is, leaving the driver to sit back and relax.
In conclusion, while the industry has yet to truly take off, self-driving cars are a definite viability for the future of human transport. They provide comfort in the fact that you are in control, and they also perform better than most human drivers would on average. Overall, they promote a higher level of altertness and safety than the average modern vehicle. These facts together provide a strong argument in favor of the autonomous, or self-driving, cars of tomorrow. | 4 |
cb44d67 | What Does it Look Look Like to You
The "Face on Mars" is just a landform. Like many other NASA scientist i do not beleive that it was an made by ancient civilazations of aliens. The pictures that we have taken from the planet Mars first indicated a type of face. But now that with our newer technology we've seen that it is just a mesa or butte. NASA has even provided real photos taken on the Mars. But still, many disagree that it is simply just a landform.
Nasa sending out the Viking 1 and bringing back that picture has made a big impact on NASA. Alot of scientist did not beleive that it was a face. But "the Face on Mars" has become a pop icon. This "Face on Mars" starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows-even haunted grocery store checkout linesfor 25 years. But NASA scientist were still a bit doubtfull.
In 1998 NASA felt that it was important to tax payers to see the for sure if the "the Face on Mars" was really a face at all. When Mars Global Surveyor(MGS) flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper that the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural alndform. So all these people believed that it was a face but it actually turned out, from real pictures taken, to be a landform.
But still not evryone was content with that. The "Face on Mars" is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April 1998-a cloudy time of the year on the Red Planet. The camera that took the last picture of the "Face on Mars" had to peer through wispy clouds to see the "Face". So in April 8, 2001-a clodless summer day in Cydonia- Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. And once again the even more advanced picture of the "Face on Mars" looked like a mesa or a butte.
Now some people will say that NASA is trying to cover up something, that they are hiding something from the public. Others say that NASA doesn't want people to know if there are aliens out there. But what people lack in that accusation is the fact that if NASA would've discovered aliens, it would be one of the most popular and profitable organizations on Earth. NASA trying to verify, by spending millions of dollars on global surveyors to take pictures of Cydonia, if the "Face on Mars" is really a face is not them trying to hide anything. In fact its NASA trying to satisfy the public in best ways they can. And people even say that the pictures arent good enough to tell for sure. NASA's surveyor's camera pixel in 2001 had a span of 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
So in conclusion, even though you dont beleive that its a natural landform, and i understand why, facts and real photos beg to differ that idea of a face on the Mars. All the times NASA has sent out surveyors to bring pictures to the public, the public just gave them garbage. So honestly all i can say is that all the facts and pictures that NASA has provided us with to understand the face or landform is for a reason. And thats so people can see and decide for themselves wheather it a face or a landform. But really if a scientist and an entire corporation of intellegiant scientist with high degrees say its a landform, then that they're aren't going to lie to an entire planet of people. | 5 |
cb4bb86 | In the article "The Challange of Exploring Venus," The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author uses a few reasons to support his argument, but he tends to dwell on the challanges of going to Venus and not the rewards.
First, his first and body paragraph focuses on how it is hard to get the right timing to go to Venus, and how all of our unmaned missions have not made it or not survived more than a few hours. He ends paragraph 2 by saying that it is hard to get the right timing to go to Venus and we have not had a spaceship touch down in more than three years. This is not a good way to start his article becasue it leaves the reader wondering why we would even bother going to Venus. The author makes it sound very challenging from the start and does not leave the reader with much hope for the journey to Venus.
In paragraph 3 the author describes the deadly charectaristics of Venus. He talks about how the planets surface is 800 degrees Farenheit and how the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than are own planet. Then the author gives examples on what those conditons can do such and melting metals and crushing submarines. Once again the author dwells on the challanges of going to Venus and not the rewards. Between the first and second paragraph the author does not build a compelling argument to go the Venus.
In paragraph 4 the author starts to build his argument for going to Venus. He states that it is the most earth-like planet, and it has a surface of rocky sediment that has planetary fetures close to ours. Other than that he does not build a case for Venus that a lot of people would back up. His argument that it si the closest planet in case we ever needed to leave earth is an invalid argument becasue of the state of our tech compared to the extreemley harsh conditions of Venus.
In paragraph 6 the author describes ways that we have tried to research Venuns that haven't worked. In paragraph 7 the author describes possible tech made by NASA that could solve some of the issues Venus poses, but that tech is simply not ready yet. This of the essay starts to make going to Venus sound more feasable, but the technology he is describing is not ready yet.
In the article "The Challange of Exploring Venus" the author tries to make an argument for going to Venus. He explains all the challanges and then tries to justify them by the payoff being to settle human curiosity. The article is well written he just makes more of a case for not going to Venus. Maybe in 50 years the technology will be in a good place to go to Venus, but as of right now it seems too challenging. | 5 |
cb4c1e1 | Electoral College is loosing potential voters and making everything extremly difficult and unfair!
Small states most likley have the most potenital and smartest voters and they just get left there. No canidates go and visit and talk about the presidental run. They just think they'll get there votes. All they care about is the big states. Then the popular votes may not even count because of the Electoial College. It's insane and disrepectful! I mean, yeah, big states have alot of people but its unfair for the little states to be told nothing and see nothing and then go vote for someone they barley know anything about.
Sometimes the popular votes dont even help with winning. What's the point? Exactly, there isn't one. Wouldn't you rather see someone people want as president instead of someone who won just because the Electoial College. I sure would and so would a bunch of other people.
The Electoral College is unfair on the most basic level to voters because of the "winner-takes-all system", only caring about the "swing" states. In 2000 seventeen states didn't see any of the canidates at all. That's just crazy and dumb! Every state should see the canidates even if it's the small states.
The arguements to keep the Electoral College are mostly assertins with out much basis in reality and the ones that are against are the best arguements with great facts and it's reality. Ohip have yet to make a swing vote. In 1997, a tie would have occured if a mere 5,559 voters in Ohio abd 3,687 voters in Hawaii had voted the other way. The single best argument against the electoial collefe is what we might call the disaster factor. The american people shopidl consider themselves lucky that 2000 fiasco was the biggest electon crisis in the century; the system allows fior so much worst to happnened.
Most states have the "Winner take all system" except Maine and Nebraska, they each have variation of "Poportional Represnation." Why go through all the work of trying to get popular votes, and have them not help at all.
I say we vote with popular votes because everyone wants to see the people that is more popular then someone who only won because of the Electorial Vote! | 3 |
cb51647 | The technology to read people emotional expressions is valuable. The six basic emotions are happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness. It associates each characteristic movements of facial muscles. Its good to have a technology that actually can tell whats their emotions. Telling whats their emotions is good for us because we can be there for them when they feeling down.
Each expression is compared against a neutral face that shows no emotion. You can tell how someone is feeling simply by looking at their face. Most of us have trouble at describing each facial trait that conveys happy,worried,etc. Human anatomy is to help the painting to facial muscles precisely to convey specific emotions. A classroom computer could recongize when somebody is becoming bored or confused.
They could indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. Moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions but can even help to produce them. Feeling someone else's emotional state may happen because we unconsciously imitate another person's facial expressions. To whoever did this type of technology we wouldn't know people faces that can reveal so much of their emotions. | 2 |
cb5292e | I think the technology for the facial action coding system is a good idea beause the computer will be able to tell your emotion and see weather your happy or not. It can tell emotion from celebrity's and how they are feeling. It can also determan if someone is fake smiling or not just by the muscles in there face. the computer can tell 6 diffrent moods you might be in, happy, sad, angry, fear, disgust and surprised.
The articles says "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles". That is telling you how the computer would be able to detect your emotions. The article also says "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal". Meaning if you are happy and act like you are sad it can still tell that your happy.
The new computer technology can even identify mixed emomtions as well. The article claims that "each expression is compared against a neutral face", meaning showing no emotion. Therefore you can tell how someone you know is feeling with the new technolgy. Its all about the muscular units in your face that tells it all.
That is why i think that the new technology called facial Action Coding System is a good idea. it is something fun to do and help figure out what people are feeling. To an expert, faces dont lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful.
. | 3 |
cb5293e | Have you ever heard of venus? Well if you haven't ill you all i know about it. Venus used to be able to live on. Then it became overrun by thunder and earthquakes that now is pretty much you can't live on anymore. Venus is secound planet from our sun.
Once you were able to live on Venus but now its dangerous to even get near it. It was probaly once beauitful and now its destroyed. "Long ago, Venus was probaly covered largely with oceans and could have supported varioius forms of life, just like earth."(4) Humans could of maybe lived there. It could of supported humans and other forms of life. Now to this day it isn't in living conditions.
In conclusion, Venus was a great planet and was able to be lived on until the earthquakes started happening. Venus and Earth were once twins until Venus was destroyed. This shows that there are probaly many others planets that were like Venus out there. There are many dangers of going to Venus because of the pressure being different. You could die by being crushed because the pressure is different there. | 2 |
cb53110 | The Unmasking Face on Mars is just a natural landform on Mars. Many objects on Earth can resemble a face it could just be a mountain of sand that some how looks like a face. In the article it claims of huge rock formation that "resembles" a face. The picture was taken by a space craft at a far away distance forming shadowing giving the "illusion" of a nose, eyes, and mouth.
First, the reason why the "face" is a natural landform is because on Earth you can compare a face in many objects around you. Some natural landforms on Earth such as Middle Butte in the Snake river Plain of Idaho looks like it has a face also. You can make out a face in even day to day objects. Even a tree near your neighborhood could look like a "face".
Secondly, the reason why the "face" is just a natural landform is because the huge rock formation causes shadows. The shadows of the huge formation of rock can create the illusion of a face. The shadows can make it look like it has a nose, eyes, and mouth like structure in cases such as this one.
Lastly, the "face" on Mars is a natural landform because the photo was taken by a satelite. The pictures come in pixels meaning it could come out blury or unclear to clarify. The shadowing of the mound also gives the illusion in the picture of a "face". The "face" on Mars is only a natural landform that was mistaken as something else more than that because of the illusion of a face. | 3 |
cb563a5 | Venus is a wothy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
Venus is a planet from our solar system is simple to see from the distant, exploring venus is a challenge because present dangers. Numerous factors contribute to Venus' s reputation. More challeging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphera; NASA is working to studying Venus.
First, "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" because is simple to see from the distant. "it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely." ; exploring venus present dangers because is a planet close to sun.
Second, numerous factors contribute to Venu's reputation for study to humans."often reffered to as Earth's "twin" because venus is closest to Earth in differents factors like density, size and sometimes in distances too.
Third, " Even more challenging are the couds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venu's athmosphere" because their conditions are extreme to humans on Earth. High pressure, geology and weather present additional impediments to see:
naturals reactions like erupting volcanoes, earthquakes, and this make difficult to study venu's. NASA is working to studying Venus and they try differents things using materials with differents elements to see how reaction each one for example; "some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tasted in a chamber simulating the chaos of venu's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such contions."
In conclusion, really exploring Venus is a difficult challenge because differents factors are impidiments to humans to study close. weather, high temperatures and geology is not a good help to know more about venus because not reaction like on others planets like Earth. Actually NASA is trying and trying differents projects with simple electronics in our life. | 3 |
cb6af4d | The author is making the claim that we should go to Venus, despite the enviroment, to study it and make more sense of it. Some of the dangers that they will have to deal with it extreme heat. Around 800 degrees fahrenheit. Also there is the insane amount of pressure that will have to overcome. The amount of pressure there is around 90 time bigger than our atmosphere pressure. It is even raining sulfuric acid their. Despite all of these problem they will have to overcome, studying Venus will help us understand things better. For example, one of the things we believe that Venus was just like our planet. Have land, full of ocean, etc. But later something happen to the planet which caused what Venus is like now. If would make a machine that will be able to stand the condintions of Venus, we will most likely understand those things better. Also NASA has an idea to where we would be able to send people there. It would be a blimp like vehicle that would hover above the surface and that would allow us in theory to withstand the ground conditions. But that is only the ground conditions, we would still have extreme heat. But instead of around 800 degrees, it would be around 170 degrees fahrenheit. We will most likely be able to complete sometime because of the fact of human curiosity and the want of understanding. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not just be based on danger but on imagination and innovation. | 3 |
cb72ed0 | To the author, the limitations that exploring venus brings, should not be enough to kill the curiosity that many of us have. Although it has been a long time since a spacecraft has touched down on Venus, the author believes that with the technology and willpower we have today, Venus could be explored.
The author keeps referring to Venus as earth's twin. this could show that the author is trying to get across that this planet is not much different from ours. This technique can help pursuade people into believing that it is beyond possible to touch down on Venus. The author writes about alot of the reasons why we could go to Venus, but makes sure to touch on the challenges people may face and the limitations. "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to the 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." These limitations stated in paragraph 3 of the article are just some of the challenges associated with exploring Venus.
The author believes even with all of the limitations, studying Venus could have so many benefits in the future. But another limitation is that hovering Venus at a safe distance might not give the insight on the conditions that people may need. Although he seems to be focusing on the negatives of it all, he brings in light to work around the limits. "NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for weeks in such conditions." Here the author is bringing in the positives which ultimately outweigh the negatives. The limitations seemed to revolve around the harsh conditions, but the author introducing this peice of technology that would work around it helps support the authors ideas.
To conclude, the author has many doubts and fears about studying Venus, but remembers to tell about ways to work around the natural challenges the people would face. The authors idea that claims that studying venus is more important than the dangers pursuades many people into believing that as well. Finally, the author does a great job getting his point across. | 4 |
cb73756 | I think that they should develop these driverless cars. If they did, first of all, it would be cool to have cars that drive themsleves and second because if you needed to get somewhere and couldn't drive then you could. There are a few reasons why I think that they should be developed.
The first reason is because it would cost people a lot less to fill up their cars. They are also not fully driverless. They will alert you when you are pulling in or out of somewhere, or dealing with traffic issues such as construction or accidents. It feel that it could benefit a lot of people and would also make people more interested in driving.
They have been wanting to invent something like this one day. I knew that when they had the opportunity to create a vehicle or anything can can go on its own they would. This driverless car can apply brakes on individual wheels when needed too. It can also reduce power from the engine to help in the need of an emergency. This can help make driving safer because if someone isn't paying attention and a car or something is coming at you, your car can sense that and apply the brakes for you. It is nice that they are also considering using cameras in the cars to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. The car watches the driver and the driver watches the road.
Because of all the reasons I mentioned above, I think that they should develop the driverless car. It will be weird at first having these cars around because you wouldn't expect to see something like that but after a while it can benefit people in the long run that either can't drive like they used too and need to get somewhere, and also most will buy it just because it sounds super cool and to see what it can do. | 3 |
cb7624a | Driverless cars would be a good idea. It would use less fuel, cause less accidents, and there wouldn't be as much traffic. Driverless cars could save many peoples' lives.
Think of it, if a person driving were to get to close to another vehicle the it would stop on its own, preventing the accident. With that preventing the accident, that leads to less traffic. If we had no accidents we wouldn't have as much traffic. The cars would know how to follow all the road signs which would stop all speeding and prevent people from running red lights. Also to all the drunk drivers, that would allow them to not be able to drive drunk. It would be much safer for everyone to have the driverless cars. If you were coming up to a road construction, accident, or traffic the car should let you know atleast five miles ahead of time.
Personally, I think this would be a great way to not use as much fuel, prevent accidents, and traffic. It would make driving so much easier for everyone and not cause as much frustration while driving. | 3 |
cb77f5e | The electoral college, a mistake? Many Americans are unsatisfied with the electoral college and the system it follows. The electoral college has disapointed millions of Americans of any social class. According to
The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong , by Bradford Plummer, " Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of the electors, who in turn elect the president." America should abolish the electoral college as it has upset 60 percent of americans and elected unwanted Presidents.
"This year voters can expect another close election in which the polular vote winner could lose the presidency", as said by Bradford Plummer. Every year Americans fall stricken by dissapointment from the electoral college. The system of the electoral college is a poor representation of american ideals as canidates do not even bother spending time in non-swing states. According to Bradford Plummer, in the 2000 campaign seventeen states did not even see the canidates at all and 25 percent of the largest media markets did not even see a single campaign ad. As previously proven, the electoral college must be abolished due to the unfairness of its system.
The electoral college believers say that the electoral college stops disaster from happening, this is false. As Americans vote they vote for a slate of electors, which definitly creates a loss of the opposing or minority votes. This is because of the winner-takes-all system that the electoral college runs off of. When the majority of the votes is accounted for, the minority votes are basically thrown away in a sense. Also, the electoral college ruins the chance of a more correct voting experience for old and new voters, making Americans ashaimed and unwilling to vote because of the feeling of their vote meaning nothing or perhaps being crippled by the electoral college.
When the founding fathers of America created the electoral college it was an age without technology, making the electoral college a grand idea. Long ago, the electoral college served a patriotic and noble purpose as their was no technology and much less people. In todays age of technology, the record keeping and election process could not get any better as long as the electoral college is abolished and never reincarnated. The electoral college abolishes individual votes for the majority, crippling the American voting experience and smuthering it in shame and dissapointment. The electoral college is outdated in many ways and should be dismissed from America.
In conclusion, the electoral college is shaming Americans from every state. This system should be permanantly abolished becuase of its lack of fairness and reliability. Every American vote should count just as much as its opposing vote instead of being dismissed. Free the vote and let the electoral college be forever dismissed of its dutys. | 4 |
cb7833a | The 4 sources talked about the advantages of limiting car usage, but also the reaction of people and what they think about it, if they're for or against what the government made for a solution of car usage problems. We can see that the number of cities hwo cared about those environmental problems increased, and so they reacted by different methods.
We're living because of nature, without nature we can't live. People finally react because of the warnings of nature, for example: Smog in Paris, "despite gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota". They finally saw the problems that they caused. So that, Gorvernment found some solutions to have less smog, so they banned driving but none all of them will stop driving if they don't talk about money, so they made some fine (31$) if they don't leave their cars at home. As they expected, not all of the french people obeyed it because we all know that Paris is an extremly busy city that can't avoid of using cars even if they have to pay. But people have to see how the environment is really bad because of cars.
Limiting car usage is very important and it's mostly because of the environment, because the number of people using cars is increasing every year. The nature is now becoming scary because of us. Let's think about what will happen in the futur when you will have children, we're not even sure if they are going to live because all the damage that we committed to the environment, I'm sure one day the nature will take a revenge and it's just at that moment that we will realize that we made a horrible and big mistake.
Look how happy the germans hwo live in that city that don't have cars anymore... Or just a few but not that many cars. They are showing us that we can live without all those cars, and they said that it's "less stressful", and it's good for the body. They are different methods to avoid those cars, EVRETHING IS ACCESSIBLE EVEN IF WE DON'T HAVE CARS, their is a lot of ways to change places, like bycicles in New York, or you can walk, and there's even buses that can take more passengers than a simple car hwo is too big for just one person. It's world-wide now, the number of cities hwo reacts is increasing everywhere. Than why not us ? Let's do the same and don't forget to think about your futur and the futur of your children. | 3 |
cb7e33d | My Opinion on Facial Action Coding System
I would have to disagree with what the article is saying. Ok i get that technology is everything nowadays but this is a little to far. You might program it to have emotions,but its hard for the software to know what the person is feeling and understand how they feel. Its easy for a person to connect with another person because thats how they feel. Humans can usually give one another help and advice because they most likely have been through it themselves.
Its easy for a person to help and understand it because they understand the emotion that is happening to them. But when you just program something to have emotions its not the same. These people are writing emotional things and want people who understand that. It is very hard for a piece of software to understand that. If I had to write something very personal i would want someone who can relate to read it.
But it could be a good thing for the school because it could help the school know if the kid was upset or bad. The school could help the kid and figure out whats wrong. In paragraph 9 they gave you examples on good ways to tell if someone means the smile on there face. It has some pros but there are alot ot cons to it.
This article has alot of good points in it but I still dont agree with what it is saying. Science can be a good thing but I dont think science can be used and be helpful in this situation. Plus it uses the schools money and it can be used for better things. We can use our time and think of things and that would be useful.
In conclusion i think that this is useless. I totally disagree with what there saying and doing. Technology is soon going to be everything and we dont want that. Its like soon we are going to be run by robots. I just think we can use our time worrying about other things. I dont think this will help us at all in the future. | 3 |
cb7e6c4 | Soon the world may be using driverless cars. This means no more human use of driving. Driverless cars should not be used because driver would get bored waiting for their turn to drive, driverless cars may become safety hazards, and human skills are still required.
First, driverless cars are not the best idea because drivers will get bored waiting for their turn to drive. As said in paragragh eight, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" Many kids around the world are waiting to get their license and if you make cars driverless it takes away the opportunity of some kids wanting to be able to drive their own car. Also drivers that already have their license may love driving and then there is not point in driving if you do no have to do any of the work.
Secondly, the cars may become safety hazards. In paragraph nine it says "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." If the human drivers are not fully alert to due waiting too long for their opportunity to drive, some may fall asleep or just lose complete focus. Maybe the cars programming fails, then what if the car can not stop itself, pedestrians and others may be killed or injured.
Lastly, human skills are still required, so why not let the human driver have complete cotrol at all times. BMW says "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 miles per hour, but special touch sensors make sure the keeps hold of the wheel." If the car still requires human assistance, then why are they calling them "Driverless Cars." Humans are more effective than computers when it comes to driving.
In conclusion,driverless cars should not even be considered available to the public. Driverless cars should not be used because driver would get bored waiting for their turn to drive, driverless cars may become safety hazards, and human skills are still required. Technolgy fails all the time and who can guarantee it will not fail this time. | 4 |
cb7f6a0 | I am all for these driverless cars. There are a few exceptions but for the most part i feel that they could bring a sense of relaxation and stress relief for drivers on roads. As a consumer i fell that is what feels more comfortable while traveling. As it says in the article, the driverless cars need assistance from the person driving it at all times. We could put forth funding and technology for this program and in a few years, we may just have driverless cars that could take you anywhere.
I see that if there was to be a wreck involving one of these cars it could easily be blamed on the manufacturer. But reported as today there have been no accidents involving these cars. These cars are getting safer and safer as we speak. Although there are people assisting these cars they pretty much drive the most part for themselves.
As we put more research and effort with funding into these cars we could have a flawless car that is safe and ecofriendly. The driverless car may become the new trend here in the next few years. There could be zero room for mistakes and therefor making this driverless car the safest way to travel. | 2 |
cb7fe75 | Come and Join the Seagoing Cowboys
Come join the Seagoing Cowboys. This essay will give many reasons as to why you should join, the Seagoing Cowboys.
If you like taking care of livestock then this is a job you will want. While you are on the boat you will have to,clean stalls,feed the livestock,clean livestock,and possiblly do night watch. While you are coming back from the place you dropped off the animals at,you could paticipat in table tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games.
If you like traveling then this is the perfect job for you. You are traveling all the time with the Seagoing Cowboys program. Going place to place is something something we Seagoing Cowboys do all the time. Trips as long as a month have happened or some as long as one day. I have taken nine trips now.
Also us Seagoing Cowboys love to see tourist atractions. So far I have seen The Acropolis in Greece, the City of Venice,Italy a city of streets of water, toured an excavated castle in Crete, and marveled at the Panama Canal my way to China.
The danger and risks you will take are huge! Once I was on night watch and I had to go down and check on the animals every hour. I was coming up a ladder,and slipped. That night I had almost fallen into the Atlantic ocean. I was lucky to escape with my life,but I broke a couple of ribs. That next day I couldn't do my job, so my captin let me take a day off.
I hope you join me and my crew. Become a Seagoing Cowboy. Seagoing Cowboys have to be tough,both pysical and mentally. I took the risks, will you? | 3 |
cb82dc0 | This sounds like a great idea because teachers wouldn't have to worry about getting around to everyone in the classroom, re-teaching the same lesson, trying to figure out what activities/ lesson can help the kids understand more but this could aslo be a big distraction.
I think that the use of this technology to read students expressions is valueable because whatever lesson it is being taught if the student is bored or confused it will modify the lesson. I think this is very useful because as a student i know that when a lesson is boring or not interesting its hard for me to pay attention or get focused. So the fact that it could tell that im not really into it or getting it and it'll change itself to something more "my style" is great. I know that teachers can't be everywhere at once to help or make you understand so when you're at you desk with your hand up waiting on the teacher to get to you probably frustrated by the now the computer will sense it and help you out before your teacher has to see you. This also helps by saving time in the class rooms because somethings not every student will get right away and instead of the teacher re-teaching it over and over the computer will see that your not getting it and change the lesson to something a little more complex, that you get and understand.
Now as much as i am with this idea, a downfall could be students getting too carried away with it. Even though we are in high school kids can still be a little immitaure, this could be a distraction to the kids. They'll try to play with the sytem by making the wrong facial expression on purpose to see if the computer could guess how they're feeling. This could take away from valueable class time. | 3 |
cb8c409 | Say you're going on vacation for Spring Break to Florida, or going out of the country. Yes, its nice to sit back and look around at the nature and cool things you see while drving there, but wouldn't get tired of not driving and just sitting there? That doesnt sound like fun, especially me being in the back seat all the time, its boring. Every so often get a hold of the stiring wheel. This doesnt seem appropriate for our generation and for how lazy people are now a days.
Driverless cars are totally not needed. How does it know what the speed limit is? I dont like the fact that the car may not always know what its doing with itself. Or what if the car gliches or does something wrong and you wreck? Who is it really on? was it you or the car itself?
It is also giving people the time to be lazy. I feel like its taking away communication because if you're not driving, than you're more than likely on your phone on instagram or Twitter. Without the automatic cars you can say "What are you doing, the lights green!" because you will be too busy ingraved in your phone. That takes away so much commnication.
Many people count on themselves on what time they should leave the house to go out eat in order to get there on time. They count on what route is easist for them. Does this driverless car stop at every stop light and take me where I need to be at the correct time and place?
Is it you put in your destination in a GPS and it takes you there? does it stop at every stop light? How does it know when to stop and break? Can we really trust that this car is gonna take me where we need to be? Can I trust that it's going to keep us safe and not cause us an accident? These are the real questions. i think thats whats so scary about it and makes people not want driverless cars. | 3 |
cb90005 | As Luke says you can take many great expeditions, and it made him more aware of people and their needs. Luke had just turned 18 and that meant he could be drafted into war. But he was on a cattle boat so he could keep doing service there.
By the time of 1947 he was discharged, Luke had taken nine trips! That's a record for any Seagoing Cowboy. A big reason that you should join it (as Luke recalls), is because you get to help people in need. And get to lean more about there country. In the story Luke says that he got to see the Panama Canal. Wouldn't that be amazing?
Luke felt that it would be a chance of a lifetime to go and be a Seagoing Cowboy, and he just couldn't say "no" to Don. In 1945 WWII ended and many countries were left in ruins. So Don and Luke signed up to help. They helped for about two years before they were released.
He says that he also has much fun on board as well, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. They played games of tennis and volley ball where the animals once were. You'd have much fun on board and on trips.
Those are just a few examples of why you should want to be a "Seagoing Cowboy". As Luke says it is much more than an adventure. It opened the world up to him and is grateful for the oppertunity that he had. There is so much more to learn about as well but if I were to try to explain it all I would need a lot more space. | 3 |
cb95cc1 | Here are the reasons why I think you should join the program. You will be able too see parts of the world that you've never seen, In the text it states "the cattle boat trips were unbelievable for a small town boy,besides helping people I hade a side benifit of seeing Europe and Chinaand Greece. You will be helping the nation in the text it states ''To help these countries recover their food supplies.'' but there are some reasons not too join, for instance you are on long trips to other countries in the text it states, " it took about two weeks for us to cross the Atlantic Oceanfrom the eastern coast of the United States, and a month to get to China. Another reason not to join is, it is dangerouse on the ship with waves rocking the boatin the text it states " one rainy night, after making his hourly report to the captain, he slid down a slippery ladder on his backside. Lukes heart was raced as he shot feet first toward an opening on the side of the ship. He couldn't work for a while do to cracked ribs. those are the reasons to join and to not join it your choice to join. | 2 |
cb989ad | Driverless Cars would be great. But in all reality how safe are they? Are they going to be expensive? Should we trust these cars with our lives? There are a lot of questions that could be asked about these cars. But can they all be proven? Well people will soon come to find out.
How safe are these cars? They are safe until they have a technology mishap or faailure. You can not always trust technology. Any question of these cars could be asked. But what if they can't be proven? For instance if your car doesn't warn you of danger, road construction, or any detours and you're asleep. But your car didn't warn you. How's that your fault? That's the thing they will tell you that you were "driving" so it was your fault.
These cars may not be safe. They may not even be cheap. Do i think driverless cars are a good idea? No i think they are a terrible idea. I'm sure many people would agree. There are enough accidents as there is. But if a car is going to fail there's another. And it may not be your fault. But you were the one driving. | 2 |
cb9a225 | The development of driverless cars will not be easy and it will probably take a long period of time to complete. In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming", it is explained to us how the development of driverless cars is going and to point out to us all the pros and cons of these driverless cars. Should these cars be invented? I believe these cars should not be invented due to the fact that there would have to be many upgrades to roads which are expensive, safety concerns for passengers and pedestrians, and new laws that will need to be created to protect either the rights of passengers inside the driverless car or the rights of the manufacturers who built these driverless cars.
Driverless cars are a good idea to a certain point. These cars would not be a good idea because many things would have to be adjusted to existing roads, which would be very costy . In paragraph 3 the author says," These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." This proves that cars like this would require many adjustments, that are not cheap, to existing roads and that the cars.
Our country is always looking for whats best for everyone, and having driverless cars may put people in danger. Manufaturers are planning to put some kind of form of entertainment in these driverless cars. Distracted drivers are very dangerous for pedestrians and the passengers in the car. The author states," Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and informatin systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over -- something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone. In this way, the in-car system is actually safety feature, and safety is a big concern." This section of paragraph 8 can help prove my point because if manufacturers put entertainment in cars that would be distracting the driver which is not safe for the passengers and the pedestrians.
Many new laws would have to be created by the government to either protect the passengers in the cars or the manufacturer. Who would be responsible for an accident if the person in the driverless car got in a automobile accident. The author proves my point when he or she says, " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault -- the driver or manufacturer?"
This quote helps prove my point because in this quote the author brings up the fact that there many be many problems when deciding who is at fault if an accident occurs in a driverless automobile.
In life there are many up and downs and pros and cons to everything. In this article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming", the author points out many pros and con to driverless cars. I find that there are many reasonable pros and things that manufacturers should be proud of, but i also believe there are some things that the manufacturers need to think about. I believe that these cars should not be develop due to the things in explaikn in paragraphs before such as: expensive new upgrades to roads, safety concerns for passengers and pedestrians, and laws that would need to be created. | 4 |
cb9d205 | The main topic of this story is that the Electoral College are not making votes fair for other people. So i will tell them what is really going on with the U.S.
To begin with, I personally think the Electoral College should change because over the years after people voted it seemed they wanted to change it, so they decide to cause a riot around there city, maybe the U.S. Some people do not like how the Electoral Law is set for our U.S. My opinion is that some of the people running for presidents usually get helped, not only by us, but by other members of the Electoral Collage. As you see the evidence is how you turn on the T.V at night and see what is going on with the vote and election. For example Afganiscan, they are destroying there country becuase of how much they dislike our president, because of a unfair vote.
Think about it would any of this happen if the Electoral College made things fair with making people at least vote twice? As you see how other people are getting deeply hurt of what you are doing. Now am not asking you to abuse this opinion just to make people happy, but the main topic of what i am writing you is to think and observe around you. According to everyone else opinion, i am not only speaking for me now, but people are thinking to redo the election. People all country would like to vote for the same president of the U.S i know there are some states that have a president but like im saying, they want to change that.
People can see that its up to us to choose who is president, but its not the members of the Electoral College job to add more credit to the person losing or winning. People are dieciding to make plans because they do not get things there way. Just like the riot in paris with the terriots, there had to be a reseason for it. Think about it why would terriots want to kill people? Not only for fun but because of the presidential voting. Every bad thing on the U.S is mainly about voting. Just like people holding up signs on the street to change there election.
As you can see the Electoral College is really selfish. They tend to pay more attensiion to themselves but not others. They do it for the money and the fact to usually get other people upset. The presidents that the Electoral Collage want to win they win. Its a fact that most presidents win to easy. They win with a plethora of help, not only with the U.S but with the members of the Electoral Collage.
In Conlusion, the electoral colage has to think about other people. They ned to focus more on the atmoshpere then sitting in one small room thinking about themselves. | 1 |
cba180a | The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the author gives many good reasons as to why driverless cars are the next big thing. Driverless cars will have driver alert features to them but the question is will they function correctly and not fail us causing an even bigger mitsake? According to cofounder Sergey Brin drdiverless cars are the next big thing for the future. It is no longer flying cars it is now driverless cars. Brin is a believer that a driverless car will fundamently change the world. As exciting and wonderful a driverless car sounds its is not a good idea. Technology brings many new wonders and fasinations, but the technology that will be used for a driverless car will eventually fail the driver.
A driverless car seems very intresting and many good ideas and opinions are being published to the public but will the true story about driverless cars ever make it through to the public? No because the manufactuer will always find something good to say about the car whenever the public says something negative. A driverless car will be another mistake to our generation of new ideas. The author of the article said in paragraph 7, " They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills. " Then later it also stated, " This means the human driver must remain alert. " The human driver needs to remain alert at all times because we will never know when the driverless car will need human assistance. Leading to the fact the already the car hasnt been made but they already know that the car will need human skills at times. Already the cars technology cannot be trusted. As the human driver you will get distracted or may fall asleep. You may not even know the car is going to need assistance at times and before you know it your at risk for a crash the driverless car haas caused. Drivers will also rely to much on their car because they will thik it is so up to date on technology that it wont fail the driver. The human driver may go out to a party one night and get drunk. The human driver won't care because the car will take them back home safe and sound as they were told. Will it really though? Along the way the technology may stop working and before you know it the drunk driver will be behind the wheel not only putting himself in danger but everybody else on the road.
Some other issues with the car may also occur. For example the driver alert functions may stop working out of nowhere. In the acrticle it stated, " GM has devloped driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in dnager. " The vibrating chair may stop functioning correctly and the driver will not know. The driver may not also know how to properly use it and may put the car in a mode that isnt supposed to be in at the moment. Who still reads the instructions? That is a very low number and many people just jump straight into using the object. Drivers will be to excited and they will just jump into the roads and not know how to properly use it. They will have to read the instructions while on the road and then what will happen? The driver may come up with a situation where the car needs human assistance and the driver won't know what is happening and they will start to freak out and just get themselves and the car all worked up. The driverless car will bring up accident rates higher. One of the many rates we as a country are trying to minimize as much as possible.
If the driverless car was to crash and cause a death to somebody who is just walking down the street or in another car, who will be most likely blamed for the cause it won't be the manufacturers. It will be the human drivers fault and be charged with many things that maybe wasnt evenn the drivers fault. For example the cars technology might fail, technology will not always be up to date, then the car goes out of countrol and the driver may not know what to do then the driver will have all the issues on his hands.
There are planty more reasons as to why a driverless car will just be another mistake of our generationbut those are a few. Would you want to put your child or somebody you love out in the roads risking somebody to put them in danger just because the human driver does not know how to use a driverless car? We as a country are trying to bring down death rates and a driverless car will just make the rates higher. Rates as in accident rates and death rates. Rates that we should be trying to minimize as much as possible. Driverless cars should not be part of our generations future. | 5 |
cba2be0 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars however, the positive aspects outweight the negative aspects. Developing these cars can be an enormous help to everyone. They can notify the driver when the road needs human skills, sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer, and have the driver's seats vibrate when the car is in danger of backing up into an object. Being able to have these driverless cars will help to have more safe driving,
Having sensors and computer hardware and software helps drivers be notified of when they are needed to navigate "through work zones and around accidents." The driver's seat being able to vibrate to alert the driver of when they might back up into an object helps prevent accidents or crashes. These cars can also "steer, accelerate, and brake themselves," but still are designed to tell the driver when they are needed to do tasks only the drivers can do. The information coming 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 driver can manage alone. Having cars be able to do such things like that help us in everyway they can.
Being able to develop these driverless cars will make everything much safer well, in driving. These cars can do anything a driver can do but still need a driver. Yes, you may ask if they are driverless cars then why do they still need a driver? Well, the answer is simple we need them because they still need to be able to work around crashes and navigating through work zones. "While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver," with this being said the car helps the driver as much as the driver helps the car. | 3 |
cba7a80 | Exploring Venus is one thing poeple in NASA want to do, becasue it close to our plant.Venus was once the closest plant to be Earth.We know that if we study more about Venus and learn more about it we can make it like Earth. Just thinking that we can live in different plants and learning more about outerspace.
If we can live in different plants we can fix our plant as will but one mistake and we can say goodbye to our plant and Venus.
So before anything we should learn more send drons than if we can somehow fix the atmosphere we can do live in Venus.No matter what happens if we do failed we can try again and find a better plan. Scientist and other people say they know how old our plant are but who real know. Our plant can be close to the end and we don't know it. We should find other plants to live just in case if we do lose our plant.
No matter what other people think we should explor Venus. We don't know what things could happend or what discoving we can find. The thoughs of Venus and other plants are endless. What if we can life in outerspace. Only we can find out what things wait for us. | 2 |
cbb9876 | I do not believe that driverless cars should be legal. Cell phones already make us unaware of the world and what is going on around us, why would we lose even more of that awareness all because people are lazy.
This would be giving people even more time to be on their phone.
The quote from the article "All are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents.
This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." There are so many dangers of not having to pay attention to the driving, what if the driver fell asleep and didnt notice the alert? What if the car malfunctioned and didn't alert the driver?
This invention is accidents on accidents just waiting to happen.
Also the article states, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?"
This car wouldn't just be bad for someone's safety, the manufacturers will be sued and have plenty of lawsuits filed against them.
I disagree with the use of driverless cars.
They are unnecessary and unsafe.
Electronics aren't perfect, phones that don't mess up haven't even been made yet, how can they expect people to put their lives at risk for something they can do themselves. They are an accident waiting to happen. | 3 |
cbbc4a8 | No, we should not have diverless cars. One reason we should not have them because they are dangerous. Someone could die from a malfunction and they would loose their life because of the company. My next reason we should not have them because they cost too much. We are barley affording to pay teachers let alone have money to pay for reaserch and materials. My final reason is because they are just pointless. Without drivers that would put so many people out of a job.
My first reason is because they are dangerous. Anything can go wrong and end up killing innocent people. Technology has malfunctions everyday and sometimes we dont know why. No person or people should loose their lives because people are too lazy to drive their own vehicals.
My next reason is because they cost too much. Here in Richmond, Indiana we are barley affording to pay for schooling and teachers let alone driverless cars. Driverless cars should be the least of our worries at the moment. Instead of focusing on driverless cars, we should focus on how to lower the cost of an education. Education should be our number one priority.
My final reason is because they are pointless and would put many people out of a job. With driverless cars, taxi drivers, bus drivers, and many others would be out of a job. The passage says " Can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars because no one needs them anymore?" That statement proves that many jobs will be lost because people are getting too lazy and too pre occupied to drive on their own.
In conlusion i do not think that driverless cars are a good idea. Our poverty rate will go up, and children and familys will starve. Where will we get the money to pay for the reaserch? We would have to take away even more jobs just to pay for the reaserch. We should not have driverless cars because they are dangerous, they cost too much, and they will put many poeple out of a job that they actually need. | 3 |
cbbcc9f | Space exploration has always been a challenging but exciting venture for scientists looking to study other planets. Venus has proved to be a planet of risks, and made many aprehensive to study it. However, Venus just may be the most likely planet for us to be able to visit. In this article, the author suggests studying Venus as a worthy pursuit. The risks, advancing technology, and benefits of studying Venus in this article, prove how well the author support's their idea.
Venus has shown to be a quite abrasive planet. It's risks have detered many scientists from studying it, but for good reason. Venus presents many challenges such as volcanoes, earthquakes, and lighting strikes. In the article, the author explains how overall temperature exceeds 800 degrees farenheit, and a pressure 90 times greater of our own planet would make entering the planets atmosphere almost impossible, and staying long enough to gather any data out of the question.
Although the risks of Venus seem to out weigh any possible benefits, the author presents possible solutions to many of these problems. With Venus's atmosphere being hostile, it would make landing and gathering data on the planet impossible. However, the author presents NASA's solution of a blimp like vehicle that could stay above the threatening atmosphere. Although conditions would be difficult to sustain, the air pressure and temperature would be liveable for humans. The author also adds the idea of using mechanical computers. These old pieces of technology would allow humans to make calculations, without having to worry about harsh conditions as much.
Venus may be dangerous, but exploring and studying it may provide more benefits that compensate for the risks and dangers. With scientists working to improve technology that could survive Venus's atmosphere, the author explains, this could "contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." The author suggests looking at Venus's risks as challenges, and that by preservering through these challenges, we could be lead to accomplish more/equally intimidating forces.
While evaluating the risks of Venus, benefits, and advances in technology, the author proved that studying Venus would prove a valuable endeavor for many scientists. Advancing technology could work as a two birds with one stone dynamic, allowing scientists to study other similiar planets and forces. These technologies could also further help the Earth as we continue to study Venus, and possibly lead to people finding a way to inhabit Venus. Overall, the author proved studying Venus would expand technolgies innovation, and human perserverence. | 4 |
cbc19cc | In 1976 Viking 1 spacecraft was obiting Mars, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sester ship Viking 2. When it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face. This face is actually just a common landform. Scientists have taken several pictures of the "face", and scientist would benefit from These are the reasons why I believe the Mars Face to be a simple landform.
My first reason is the fact that there are similar landforms like it on Earth and Mars. Such as mesas in the American west. One specific mesa is the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. There is also several other landforms like it on Mars. The passage states that "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh."
My second reason is that scientists have photographic evidence that it is nothing more than a mesa. April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and His Mars Orbiter Camera team shot a picture ten times sharper then the original photos. Revealing that it was just a natural landform. April 8, 2001, Malin and his team took an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute Maximum resolution. Did you know that you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size meaning that if there were objects on the ground we could tell what they were.
Some people might say that NASA would rather hide evidence of life on Mars, but NASA would actually benefit from an ancient civilization. Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars.
These reason are why I believe the Face on Mars is only a natural landform.
There are similar landforms on and off Mars, there is photographic evidence, and NASA would actually benefit from life on Mars. | 3 |
cbc28c7 | The Challange of Exploring Venus is the name of this article that I have just read. The author of this article seems to be in full support of pursuing the dangerous planet, but why thats what I'm here to tell you.
First I'll begin with a description of some of the harshness of the planet. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venu's atmosphere." That is a description of the air and sky of Venus, now I will give a description of the surface of Venus. "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 time greater than what we experience on our own planet." Those are some harsh conditions. The author seems to be with the idea of exploring Venus. There are some very interesting things that the author brings up such as "a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way." this seems to prove that it could be possible but what about power, the temperature, and air pressure well the author also included that. "At thirty-plus miles above the surface, the temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees farenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful." So then what about the danger of radiation well it turns out that that is also brought up. "Radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." so that explains almost all the troubles of this trip and exploration, but there won't be much to see through all the clouds and the fact that going to the ground is too dangerous what could you possibly do. The author seems to support the idea of studying Venus really well, but I don't think that we know enough about the planet to determine whether going is in our best interest. | 3 |
cbc3627 | Will this technology be of any value in the classroom? This technology seems cool and all but will it really help? If this technology can read facial expressions then it could be a good thing but this is why it would not help.
When you are in school do you ever feel bored? We all do sometimes that is just how things work. Now do you think that if our computers could tell if we were bored that it would make the lesson any more exciting. The lessons that we are taugh are mostly given to the teachers or the teachers make it. If our computers think that we are bored of the lesson it wants to change that. How does that happen? The teahcer would have to make more than one lesson to teach the class. There are also things that are just completely boring at school there can not be a way to make them any better.
Then there is also one or two good things about it like if it were able to detecte if someone were not feeling very good about themselves. They might need help but not come out and say it, this technology could help with that. If you put this in a school you would just get a lot of stressed out faces that have to much homework to do while still trying to have a life. But is this taking things to far is this a violation of peoples personal space. Sometimes people want to keep their emotions to themselves. If this technology is used in schools then there goes all privacy that we have.
This might be a good idea for advancement in technology, but is it the right thing to put in schools? This technology seems pretty cool it could be used in other places but should not be somewhere like a school. This would just be one more thing that makes school not a fun place to be in. There are some lines that do not need to be crossed and this is one of them. | 3 |
cbc7883 | You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because you can explore places see how other people live. The program lets you sightsee the Atlantic Ocean and you can see certain animals that live in the ocean. The program teaches you about hardwork.
I was working at a bank when my friend asked me if I wanted to join him in the Seagoing Cowboys program I accepted. It was the opportunity of a lifetime. I heard the program taught you about other countries what they had been through. Some countries helped out in World War two then Europe bomed them. I went to help pick up ruins of the citys left.
I crossed the Atlantic Ocean four times already I helped over 2000 people. I was glad to join the program because I got to meet people that I became friends with and they joined the program. I got more and more people joining the program soon we had 15000 people helping us. I crossed the Atlantic Ocean eight times already more than any other Seagoing Cowboy.
Some people didn't join I didn't pressure them to join I became friends with them,but sometimes they would ask me if they could join i always said ''there's always room for one more.'' I let other people join the program they became friends with everyone. I would sometimes have people that i didn't know join the program.
That's why I would join the program so you could make friends and have more people join the program. You could also beat my record of fourteen trips back and fourth. You could also see the animals in the Atlantic Ocean that's why you should join. | 3 |
cbc7fbb | Driverless cars have been a theory for a while, but have never been brought to a reality. You can argue that they can be a valueable asset like the driving itself part but it would be way to expensive. Or the new fetures that are being added to newer car models. The fun in the traditional way of drving could be lost with all the new tech people are trying to develope for this new feture.
The ability for a car to drive itself has always been; so far nothing but a theory. But now people are actually trying to make this into a reality with starting from basic perks. The original theory was to build "smart roads" which used a so called simple algarithem of magnets with alternate polarities. This was suppose to be intended for the car to interpret like a binary code as stated in paragraph 3, but later it proved to be to expensive so they turned to a "smart car". Plus the cars needed to be equiped with state of the art sensor tech. that quite frankly wasnt available at the time the thought was originated.
On the other hand cars are being now equiped with the best sensor technology we have so far. For instance BMW announced the development of the "Traffic Jam Assistant". which it was a start to the self drivin car theory but still a ways to go. GM has also developed their own assistent system such as seat vibration when a vehical is in danger of backing into an object. They have also considered placing camaras to watch for unfocused drivers. Telsa has projected a 2016 release of a car that can drive on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan are planning to have cars like that release sometime in 2020.
Now i might sound alittle bias but the fun of traditional driving is a possibility of being lost in the new technological advancements. Most people, car lovers ect. could argue that this new self driving feature could only be a hassle. As stated in paragraph 8 "wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive". From my point of view I agree but lets just state the obvious, there has to be a consideration for the law. Would smart cars be able to drive without going on sidewalks, would they be able to recognize traffic lights or even traffic itself ? The question still remains on if an accident were to happen, who's fault would it be ? Would it be the driver's fault or the manufacturer ?
A lot is still un answered with the theory of the smart car like how people would enjoy it. Or the bigger question how much would it cost. But there are upsides to this such as possibly safer driving, less accidents, and even a better parallel parking. | 4 |
cbcf284 | Dear, senator
I honestely think that it should be popular vote instaed of the electoral college. i think that because its going to effect our lives, our way of living, and how our way of life is going to work. If we pick a president then thats who we wanted now what a group of people want.
Having a popular vote is the same thing but with more people and more accurate.
The way we like to live is the better wa, not being forced on how to live our lives. It is also a faster prosses to vote. If the group all are equal then they have to wait a longer time to see who the presedent is going to be and no one wants that. If i can ask you one question its going to be "how long will you be willing to wait to see who the new presedent id going to be?" The people of nthe united states dont want to wait, they want to see who the presedent is going to be the week after they vote.
Can we live the way we want to live
? can we live our lives without something happening that changes everything? Most of the time no, there is always something/someone that changes things in our lives. Like in 2001 the twin towers got hit by a plane, that changed everything. the way we go through airports, the way we fly, the way how people find jobs, and how people look and their beliefs. Some people are judged by what they do for living or what they look like , but thats the point of freedome in the united states. If we have a popular vote in the US they most of that will change and i can garantee that more laws will be fast that will help the US.
I'm going to agree with Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bob Dole. they all wanted the electoral collede to be abolished. there is no need to have them if we have the people in out states. The people in out states have a big use in voting. without the people then whats the use in being in states why not just one big land. Every state has its own way of voting but the peoples votes really dont mean anything with the electoral college. The electoral college just take over voting and wont let the people oppinions work in voting. Without them our votes will mean something, not just thrown away and just be forgotten.
If they stay they should be used for emergencies . If by any chance everyone has a tie they should be the tie breaker.
Most ruls shouldnt just be in texas or california.
They should occure in all states.
why do only two states get special treatment? If every state had tghe same rulls do you think it would be more fair to all the states? If not then i dont know what to say, because im pretty sure in one of the amendmendments it states thats "every human being will be treated equal no matter what."So this is my tought on how we should vote and that is by popular vote.. | 2 |
cbd105f | Dear, state senetor
I think that we should change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States of America because it makes more sence to change to the election of most popular votes because lets say people vote for one president more than the other president but the president that got less votes gets picked because he/she has more electoral votes than the other.it says on paragraph three in source one that"The electoral college process consists of 538 electors.A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president". This states that the president can get more electoral votes than the other and still get to be the president. i disagree with that i think it is not fare for the president who gets more qualified citizen votes. The citizens are the ones who need/want the presidnt why not give the citizens what they want and what they all vote for? You should give what the citizens want because hey are the ones who are voting for the new president or the same president one more time.it says in paragraph 10 source 2 "under the electoral college system,voters vote not for the president,but for a state electors.who in turn elect the president".
sinceraly,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
cbd358f | I believe that the so-called "Face on Mars" is actually just a rock formation that appears to be a face because of low-tech cameras from two decades ago. I'm going to explain why I believe that my claim is correct.
First, it is clearly obvious that the face only appers as a face because of low resolution cameras and odd shadows, as you can see from the most recent photographs of the rock face. Even in the 1998 picture it is pretty clear that it is not in fact a face but is just a rock formation. The clouds obscure some of the face in the 1998 picture so it might not be conclusive, but the 2001 picture proves it.
Also, if there were alien life of Mars, that would skyrocket NASA's budget to get to Mars because the public would be going crazy and the whole world would want to know. If there were alien life on Mars and NASA was the administration to discover it, the whole world's eyes and wallets would be on them, expecting them to put some men on mars to try to make contact with the Martian life forms, thus winning the race to put astronauts on Mars.
In conclusion, I believe that the "Face on Mars" is just a rock formation and nothing more than that. There are clear reasons as to why NASA would want this to be alien life more than anyone, and reasons why they would not keep it a secret from the public. | 3 |
cbd49f8 | The purpose of this passage is to convince the reader into why we should visit and learn about Venus. The author did a very good job of explaining the reasons on why Venus is the closest planet to Earth , however he did leave out a few important ideas. The author failed to mention cost, reason, and a plan to actually get to Venus. A trip to Venus has a lot of reprecussions that the author didn't explain.
The author failed to bring up cost on why we should explore Venus. He did so purposely because the astrinomical cost of making a trip to Venus is far greater than our need of another planet. The obstacles scientists and astronauts have to overcome sound very expensive. In the text it states that Venus's average surface temperature is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and that atmospheric pressure on Venus is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These 2 obstacles, around a 700 degree temperature increase and 90 times greater pressure than on Earth would require a lot of funds to overcome these problems.
The author talked about how Venus compares to Earth but never addressed why there is a need to compare the two planets. He did mention that Venus is Earth's twin and Venus could have provided life in the past, but he didn't talk about why we should be so concerned with Venus. According to the text efforts to travel to Venus were made, but never came close to working. The text states that no spacecraft successfully landed on Venus for more than a few hours. If we tried to travel to Venus and it didn't come close to working, why continue with this mission that seems impossible.
In the passage, the author talked about Venus and compared it to Earth. He talked about a few ways we have tried to explore Venus, but they didn't seem to work. He never talked about a possible plan to either live through the harsh conditions, or get rid of them. The text states that the author thinks that insight to another planet will benefit humans even though we have a .1% chance to live there. The author still wants to make a trip to Venus even though the dangers strongly outweigh the benefits.
Based on the information in the passage, I do not think we should even consider going to Venus. The immense cost, the lack of reasoning, and the failure of a plan in place leads to my conclusion that Venus is not a planet for us to worry about. The author is dreaming too big for reality, and leaving out crucial answers needed for a journey of this magnitude. The author backed up his points very well, but left out the main points of this discussion. | 5 |
cbd5c1b | I think that we shoud include this type of technology into the classrooms. So that this way we could know what a student is thinking about the subject he is learning. If he/she is bored the teacher can maybe think of a way to make the class a bit more fun or entertaining in a way. The text states "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This type of technology could also help with class debates were the teacher says something like who ever wants pizza raise your hand and who ever wants salad raise your hand. Which ever one gets the most votes is what we will eat. And some where between the kid some one might say make sure to vote for pizza or else were not friends anymore and with the machine we could detect if a kid is truthful to what they voted for. | 2 |
cbd6a23 | Imangine being able to know the emotions of students during class, such as when they are bored, or when they are confused. Thats what the new Facial Action Coding System would achive. This kind of technology in the classrooms would be a nessestiy for teacher to effectivy teach to thier students, and idetify when they need help, or when they are getting bored during thier lesson.
Studnets get bored during class, and dont pay attention becuase of that. Students also get confused during class, but sometimes a bored student can get confused with a student that is confused on what the teacher is taling about and needs help. The FACS would change that, becuase teacher would be able to analyze whether their students are either board or confused, or enjoying their lessons.. It would also help teacher identify which lessons thier students are enjoying, and would be able to use that data to plan which lessons to include, and which lessons or activitys to throw away becuae they are boring and would not do the theire students any good."'A classroom computer could reconize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr Haung predicts 'Then, it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor"' (D'Alto). Meaning that the FACS can help with digital lessons too, improving the effectinsy of them as well. Another asepct fo the FACS, is that it can help students learn more about identifying emotions. "To and expert, faces dont lie; theses muscles clues are somtimes used tospot when a 'smiling' politician or celebrity isnt't being truthful" (D'Alto). This tecnolgy can spark an interest in psycology in students making the more interested in learing about emotions and how they can idedetify them in their peers. It can also cuase students to be interested in the technology behind it all. "His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code" (D'Alto). This can also spark a interest in coding and working with computers.
Therfoe, the FACS will be a valuabel tool for eaching in the classroom, for both the teachers, and the students. people assuem tht sudents do bad in school becuase they dont pay attention, but thsi is usualy becuase the lessons are either confusing or boring. | 3 |
cbd7ec6 | Voting for a president is one of the most important decisions you can make. This person you vote for will be changing the country for better, or for worse. Electoral colleges are a way to see what each of the states want, although some people don't seem to like it. However, I belive it is a good way to see the majorities of the states, which will take account for the majority of the country.
Some people say that electoral colleges aren't a good way to determine which president is good for the country. They say that it's non-democratic. (source #3) However, you are still voting for the person you want. The people are still making a great contribution to the decision. Because in the big picture, your vote really does count. It's a lot better than not being able to contribute at all. Of course things can be better, but the thing is; everything can be better in some way. Theres no such thing as something that can't be improved in some way. And there is obviously no way at all that you will be able to please everyone. So I think the electoral college is a good way to avarage up all the votes.
While there are a lot of variables in this system, it would be difficult to come up with a more solid way. The main complaint is that people think that this system is not a good way to show who the people really want. However, I think this is is not true. You are voting to get the electoral college votes for the president you think will do a better job guiding the country. Your vote truly does count. It adds more chance of the electoral college voting for your side. It shows that all the states are one, and the majority vote shows what side the people of the state want. And that seems like a nice idea to me.
Some of the counter arguements for electoral colleges is that the bigger states get more recignition. And this is true, but isn't that how it should be? Theres more people in the bigger states, so there will be more votes. However, they all count the same, so they don't really get any special advantage. The electoral college is a fair way to really show what the country wants, and some people don't like it, and I think this is a normal occurance.
The electoral college is a good way to show what all of the states want, by putting the majority vote into account to put electoral votes to show what president should be the leader of the country. There are admittedly some problems to it, but I think there would be even more problems with putting it to a popular individual vote. Every system has it's quirks, but overall, the electoral college is a great way to put all of the votes into account, and it's very more organized in the long run. It may not work for everyone, but honestly, nothing can. | 4 |
cbdb095 | Do you think is valuable to read the emotion expressions of students in a classroom?
I believe using technology to read emotional expressions of students is valuable because you can identify how they are feeling and learn their emotional expression. Is also valuable because you can tell if it work well or not. This is a way of testing this new technology and using it. Is to see everyone emotion such as happy,sad,angry,excited, shocked, etc. This is also a good idea to use this technology so they can identify if the students emotion is real or fake.
"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." The purpose of this technology is to identify each emotion expression. You can see the students emotions even if they are trying to hide it. The article also said that "new software has been developed that improves accuracy in perceiving the emotions of others." Is a better way for humans and computers to communicate, also can calculate.
Teacher can help the students by identifying their emotions because it will make them feel better. This technology will be so useful because you don't have to worry about looking at students let the technology handle it. Is valuable because it shows how they feel their expression and emotion." The technology can identify six basic emotion happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. "The technology can associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles."
The article said "the process begins when the computer constructs a 3D computer mode of the face, all 44 major muscles in the model. What the technology does is first it identify the emotion expression then is match with the characteristic movements. Each facial expressions emotion are universal stated in the text. Is valuable because the technology can also identify mixed emotions, it can do alot of cool things. It is believe that humans perform the same impressive calculation everyday, which is true.
In conclusion i really believe that using this technology to identify students emotion expression is valuable. Not only does it help the teachers but i think it can really help the sudents too.
The most valuable thing from the technology is identifying multiple emotion or mixed emotions. This technology can also be really useful in the future becasue it has tons of things it can do. I agree with this claim that using this to identify emotions are valuable and helpful. | 3 |
cbdf284 | Many of you people who believe in the paranormal think NASA is trying to hide that there is life on Mars. You can put your doubts to rest bacause there is multiple evidence that "The Face of Mars" is NOT an alien formation.
As shown in many photos of the face there are unusual shadows in this formation that do seem to appear to be a face. But there are also many formations on Earth that take the shape of faces and everyday things. "What pictures actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa--landforms common around the American West" says Garvan, who is the chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program.
Acording to Gavan when they first took the pictures of the face they were very surprised by this discovery, but later dicovered "...a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." "it was just another Martian mesa, commom enough around Cyndonia." Cyndonia is an area or Mars. So, once again it has been scientifically proven that there is no alien monument or formation.
There are many pictures, blurry pictures and well taken pictures, of the The Face of Mars that show that there is no alien monument. The formation is just your every day mesa that just so happens to look like a face. | 3 |
cbe244c | The author is talking about a new technology on the computers, well this new computer can be very helpful and interesting because the the computer can see if the students aresad, angry, happy, and bored.
The process begins whe the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face, all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles.
This computer can help alot of people because when you know the emotion of somebody you already know how is the person and what we can do for them.
The facial expressions for each emotion are universal.
Empathy (feeling someone else's emotional state) may happen because we unconsciously imitate another perso's facial expressions. whoever thought that making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotions. By the way, did making a happy face in this experimentalso make you feel slightly happy? well the theory of emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them. In fact the humans perform this same impressive "calculation" everyday. | 2 |
cbe879e | Transportation. A means of arriving at your destinations, a reliable way to get around. Humans use transportation everyday whether its by car, walking, biking, running, etc., but we mostly rely on cars to get around. Cars, although very useful in needing to travel, have very unresourceful qualities that humans tend to overlook. These qualities are effecting the enviorment in negative ways. Many countries are taking action to enforce a better protection for the enviorment by limiting usage on cars to reduce the smog pollution and to distance human's reliability on cars.
One of the main issues faced today is pollution because it causes diseases and illnesses, ruining the earth's population. Smog is caused by car pollution which is increasingly more common found throughout the world because of the mass amount of vehicle usage per day. Paris has banned driving on Monday's "...to clear the air of the global city". (Par. 10) Many face a 22-euro fine if not obeying by the no-driving policy. This has helped decrease congestion by 60 percent and decrease smog pollution. Diesel fuel was blamed for most of the problems in France due to the majority of diesel engine fueled vehicles. Taking away usage of vehicles minimizes this problem. This drastic change in transportation has encouraged Obama to spread limited car usage to the United States to help the greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. is most reliable on cars for transportation. Less people in the U.S. over time have delayed on recieving their leaners permit and license, decreasing car usage. "...beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviorment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions...". (Par. 34)
Although pollution is a prime issue, humans rely way too much on cars as a means of transportation. In order to help this problem Vauban, Germany has gotten rid of cars. They have limited car usage to only a few places, such as huge highways where they're necessary, and they have limited parking to huge garages instead of ones in your house. This has become an increasing impact on the world and other countries by showing "...an example of a growing trend...to seperate suburban life from auto use,...". (Par. 4) Bogota, Columbia is also eager to spread the decrease in car limitiation to other countries by taking off days from car usage. This has helped humans to become more proactive and to become active in keeping the enviorment safe and pollution free. Relying less on cars benefits humans as well because not as much of their money will be turned towards automobiles. "In previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport". (Par. 9) This has impacted the enviorment and humans in a beneficial way.
Promoting more car-reduced communties, has proven to be more effective in caring for the emnviorment. Many countries that take action in reducing automobile usage have more control financially and decrease pollution meandering through the earth's precious air. Limiting car usage is an advantage on society because it reduces smog and makes humans less reliable on cars for transportation. | 4 |
cbedebe | From the research and development of Dr. Huang and his colleague, computers are now able to understand what people are feeling based on the muschle movement on their faces. These muscle movement can be classified into basic emotions that human are experiencing. With the help of this program, computer can detect the emotions of people and make changes accordingly. I think this technology should be brought into classrooms for students as this can help them understand better by interpreting whether they are confused or not.
In Dr. Huang's prediction, he claims that the use of this technology can recognize the emotional status of the students. When they are detected to be confused, the computer can make changes to the lessons in order to make it easier or better explained. This can accelerate the progress of the study as teachers will not be worrying about which part that students do not understand. More specific explaination can be made immediately when students seem to be confused, and skip easier parts when students become bored. Classes will be become more efficient for both teachers and students: teachers will not be guessing what students do not understand and waste time on easy parts while students will always be learning what they actually need to understand.
Not only is this technology valuable in teaching students, but also crucial in finding out the feelings of them. Because this program records muscle movements on our faces, students will not be able to show an unreal emotion or it will be detected. Therefore, when teachers are trying to help students on their emotional difficulties, such as anger and sadness, they can understand what they are actually feeling. Students will not be able to hide their feelings by making false expressions that may help them escape from the help that they actually need. Teachers can understand what students are really feeling in their real emotions, and provide help as soon and helpful as possible. This technology can be crucial to students' lives even though they may try to avoid the help that is provided as they may not understand the outcome of those bad emotions. Therefore, I believe that besides the efficiency this technology can provide in education, the importance of it for teachers to communicate better with students should also have a considerable power in deciding whether or not it should be brought into classrooms.
The development of this technology can truly help the communication between people as they are able to understand what others really feel and express. Misunderstanding can be made right through this program as people can read the expression of others. In the classroom, students' expressions to different ideas can be detected and analyzed by the teachers. They can then give extra help based on the understanding of those expressions. Students feeling upset can also be understood, and teachers' immediate attention can be provided to them. This can save much time and effort in interpreting the real feeling of the students, making the school progress much more efficient. Therefore, I think that this technology will become very valuable in classrooms with its various ways in helping students and their teachers understanding of each other. | 5 |
cbee6a1 | Self driving cars are mystifying to some people, and the thought is a great fantasy that some want to see come true. While fantasies are fun to think about not all of them should come true. These are my three reasons as to why we should not go into this business.
So, imagine you wake up for work, everything is going alright, and you get in your brand new self driving car. It was tested by Google, so you think everything will be okay. The car pulls out of the drive and you're on your way to work. You're speeding up faster and faster, but you reassure yourself that everything is fine. The car doesn't stop at the approaching stoplight, which results in you getting in a crash.
The car is totaled, you're in the hospital, and it's all because your self driving car bugged out. Sure, more and more cars can be tested to ensure that there will be no bugs, but then there are people in this world that are mean. This sort could either have nothing to do with what I'm saying, or they could hack into your car and take control. For what reason that I don't know, but it's still a con of the self driving idea.
After this crash you go to sue the manufacturer of this car. The manufacturer says he has nothing to do with it, it's not his fault, so you have no right to sue him. This gets you in the long process of court duty, a lot of research, and stress builds up. It wasn't your fault, you think, the manufacturer could've made it safer. Maybe he could have done a few more test runs.
The manufacturer comes back at you saying that you bought the car, and therefore should of thought about the consequences that could commence. This lawsuit goes on and on until finally they ask the jury, and they decide that you're guilty. They say that you should have thought of the reprucusions, you lose the fight that you started, and to top it off you've lost even more money.
Apart from that visual story I've laid out for you there is also this to consider, why have self driving cars? Shouldn't humans have the intellect and mind capacity to be able to drive in a giant metal box to get to their job? If we're so capable we should drive to our workplaces and homes. It's not just a fantasy that some people thik about, it's also the aspect of laziness in America.
Think about it, the self driving cars make us do one less thing in our lives. It's an important thing too! Driving down the road where you have to trust other people in their cars and in your ability to drive your car. What would we do in our cars then? The car would basically be a very weirdly based time machine that we hop in. We'd be texting in the car, checking our social media, eating our breakfast on the way to work. We wouldn't realize what's going on around us.
We wouldn't look up at the world outside, we wouldn't see the trees as we pass them or the way that the snow falls on the ground. You won't see the birds on their first or seventy-first flight. The deer in the medow, the squirrels in the tree brances, and the people you pass by. Have you ever driven past one of your friends, honked at them just to see them see you and smile? That connection that you feel then, would no longer be here.
Everyone is so in love with the social media fad. You'd be seeing Celine's status update about her going to the mall with her friends instead of the sunrise.
You'd see your friend's new profile picture and tap the like button while another one of your friends drove past you and honked. That friend still has a self driving car, and they still honk at you so they can see you. You don't look up, they see you relaxing in the front seat checking out your favorite band's Facebook.
Your friend drives away without seeing your smile or wave. They see the squirrels playing together and the birds flying freely. How your friend wishes to be playing with you like when you two were eight years old, and just thought trucks were 'oh so cool'. To be free lke those birds your friend saw, he has that freedom. The freedom to make his own decisions. He's flying away to greater heights while you're stuck on the ground in your self driving metal box.
So, after all of these reasons, the technical issues, the lawsuits, and the progressing laziness that America is becoming; this is why I do not like the thought of self driving cars becoming a thing. We have the freedom to drive and so be it. Don't let the robot or computerized world take your life over. Don't let social media and laziness catch up to you. Be the bird and fly free, not the stone whom corrodes. | 4 |
cbf0828 | Since 2009, google has been developing driverless cars. Cofounder of google, Sergey Brin, believes that with these cars it would "fundamentally change the world". More than a million people have droven the cars without any accidents but that driverless car isnt fully driverless it still requires the driver to take over at some points. I agree that driverless cars are the best new cars of the future that should be accepted.
Google should work to make this car available to the public around the world because this new generation depends on technology. This new technology also makes people feel safer while driving on the road. In the passage it says", Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors....The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel(5)." The cars are programmed to go by human actions which may guarantee fewer accidents and crahes. Regardless,humans should still pay attention because the driveless car cant do everything. "....navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires"(7).DRiverless cars are still very dependable it makes driving alot easier.
Googles new creation of driverless cars is a gold mind. It's a great way to get consumers attention and more money for the company. Although the car cant do certain things, it can do most things that cars todya cant do." Sebastian Thrun, founder of the Google Car project, believes that technology has finally begun to catch up to the dream(6)." The new driveless car may change the future of cars. | 3 |
cbfb6ff | To support the authors details,I'm going to use details from this passage. The author thinks that Venus is worthy to pursuit, despite the dangers. Here is one detail from the passage that supports this. "Often referred to as Earth's "twin,"Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size." But it would be very challegning only because the conditions on Venus are very rough and must be elevated off the ground at most 30 miles above the ground to get a good look. Plus more details from the passage say "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planets surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees. Despite all those dangers I think it is very possible to get a better look at the beautiful planet that we live next to! heres a quote to show that nasa doesn't let little things get in the way."Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imgination and innovation. | 2 |
cbfd6dd | Cars are starting to beome more and more expensive everday. Why pay when a person could either usea train,bike,or just walking. Stated in soure 1 "As a result, 70 percent of vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here..." Many people are glad that they had sold thier car because it just cost to much money for others. Therefore many people need to limit their car usage.
To begin with, Cars could have many flaws that may infect the environment or humans. Stated in source 2 "After dats of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." So because cars take in gas it may effect the environment because inside of the car is more chemicals a that comes out of the exhust system. Stated in Soure 1 "Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill to be apporved this year, Mr. Goldberg said." this may be true because gas prices may go down and the environment will stay clean. However, waiting for public may mean waiting for a couple of hours. But when having a car a person can get to their event or job on time. Stated in Source 3 "The day without cars is part of an improvent campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s." Maybe if the United States started to start a campaign then maybe their wouldn't be so much smog in the air thats pulluting the environment.
Also, in America many people would never give up their cars just for the looks. Stated in Source 4 "But America's love affair withits vehicles seems to be cooling." So i guess that would be a great start for the environment for America. But how long will America last with out a vehicles? From my point of view, not for long that's my opinion. Although, stated in Source 4" Whether members of the millennial generation will start buying more cars once they have kids to take to soccer practice and school plays remains an open question." In my opinion i wouldn't take a bunch of kids on the train just to get to school or to a soccer game and then once that is all over with then have to get back on the train just to take tem back home. Anything can happen. That's why having cars have pro's and Con's. But others may think of the train ride as bonding time or just getting to know the full team better.
Stated in Source 3 "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city;uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic." So having cars helps everyone a lot less accidents would happen and park and sports centers are making good profit. So now everyone could be happy and go on with their life. Stated in Source 4 " With all these changes , people who stopped car cummuting as a result of the recession may find less reson to resume the habit..." I would totally agree with these , because when u stop driving it means more money and better health.
Finally, cars should be limited for many reasons. Limiting car usage would many better health and less gas, and also less accidents on the road. Stated in Source 4 New York's new bike-sharing program and its syrockiting bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new pririties." Therefore many jobs aren't complainig about the less car usage and some people aren't complaining about it. Many people should stop using cars to help the environment out and to get into shape. | 4 |
cbff5cb | Students Expressions
Everyday people are coming up with new technology to help the students learn in class. They give them computers and let them use phones and calculators. But the new software that can identify students emtions is going to help in so many diffent ways. The Facial Action Coding System will not only help the student but also help the teacher. If a student is feeling a certain emotion and doesn't want to participate in class that day then the teacher can help them due to their emotion. One other reason FACS could help, is with all the school shootings that are happening you could detect that a student was mad or sad because of a bully and help them before they do something disasterous. Another reason FACS could help is to stop a bully. If the software can dectect happiness it can detect hatred and it would be helpful in many schools if they could stop a bully before the bully found a victim. These are the some of the many reasons why the Facial Action Coding System would be valuable in school.
In many classrooms students hardly ever show up to school ready to work and learn. With the FACS teachers could use it to help those students and make sure they do their work so they student can suceed. Then on the other hand if a student is ready to work and very energetic the teacher can help them learn at their pace. Most students would agree and say that learning is hard if its not at your own pace. With FACS the teachers can learn what the students pace is and teach them accordingly.
School shootings are becoming a regular thing in America and most of America feels the way I do; they need to stop. Students have emotions that lead them to committing acts of terror like this and the FACS would be able to detect if a student was sad or mad because of a bully. All the teacher or adult would have to do is talk to them and it could be avoided. The most effective way to stop a disaster of that magnitude is stop it before it happens. With the Facial Action Coding System it could easily be stopped.
Bullies are everywhere in schools: classroom, hallways, cafeteria, bathrooms, etc. The Facial Action Coding System is able to dectect emtions of a bully, such as hatred for another student then the teachers can talk to the potential bully and make sure they don't become a bully. If the bully is mad from something at home then the FACS would detected that emotion and an adult would be able to help in anyway they seem fit. The FACS can help stop any potential bully or even stop a current bully.
The Facial Action Coding System could be such a valuable tool to use in schools and these reason prove why. There are tons more reasons why the FACS would be a valuable tool in schools but these, in my opinion, are the best reasons. Helping a student learn and paticipate in the classroom easier, helping teachers stop a disaster from happening, and stopping a bully from ruining a students life are some of the many things that make the FACS the next big thing to help students in school. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.