essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
8aaa311 | The Face of Mars was created by aliens! No
it wasn't because it was a common landform in Cydonia and it looked like a face because it had unusual shadows that made it look like and Egyptian Pharaoh. The landform was called a Martian mesa, they are well known for looking like faces and are very common in Cydonia. If you think that aliens created the Face then how would it change over years and be in the land? I think that the landform was created by the erosion in mars and that it happens a lot.
Rock formations like the Face are well known in mars. But the Face was iconic because NASA unveiled the photo that was taken by viking 1 to the whole world and the world was surprised. They thought that the Face was created by aliens of course but that was because it was from a different planet and they didnt see all the other mesas that were in Cydonia. The photo also gave out many illusions of eyes, a nose, and a mouth. So people thought the Face was still created by aliens, but how? It couldnt have happened because the Viking 1 was snapping photos of the land form for 25 years and no aliens appeared in those photos.
The MGS and the MOC showed much clearer pictures than the Viking 1. The photos revealed a natural landfor not created by aliens. But not everyone was satisfied because the photo was taken 41 degrees north martian lattitude whre it was a cloudy time of the year therefore the MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Maybe the alien markings were hidden by haze.
Garvin says "it's not easy to target Cydonia" because the MGShad to look down 2.5 km-wide strips. The MGS snapped the picture at he right moment if it didn't we wouldn't have a photo. But in 2001 on a cloudless summer day in Cydonia the MGS drew close enough for a second look Malin's team took one last photo in the highest resolution. Each pixel in 2001 spans 1.56 meters wich is way better than the Viking 1 photo in 1976. What the phos showed you ask? The 2001 photo showed what looked like a butte or a mesa often common in the west of the United States. It was a landform not one created by aliens.
"The aliens made it" you said, but it was a lava dome that takes form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on mars. This shows that landform do form in mars and on any planet. Although we don't know if aliens are real or fake they did not make this. To conclude things, The photo that was taken in 2001 gives you a vivid look at how the Face was formed and shows you how lava makes them. If you still think that aliens did this then you need to look at the photos more closely. | 4 |
8aadd66 | In this essay I will be writing a detailed argrument convincing enough for others to join the Seagoing Cowboys progam. Soon after his high school graduation, his friend invited him to join the program. Luke thought about it and decided to sign up with his friend after he realized it was a once in a lifetime opportunity. Luke knew that it was hard work, but he learned about all hard work on his aunt Katie's farm. This all changed his life, but for the better.
Luke has gone to his first trip for Greece. While he is there he finds beautiful landmarks such as when he saw the castle in Crete and the Panama Canal. He had explored Greece, and seen the Acropolis in Greece. Luke has also taken a gondola ride in Venice,Italy. Bomberger has also had much fun on these trips where he and the cowboys played games such as baseball and volleyball when there was empty holds from where the animals were housed. They would also have boxing, reading, fencing, whittling, and table-tennis tournaments. Luke and the other cowboys got a lot more expeirence working with animals, especially barnyard animals. The "Seagoing Cowboys" sure learned a lot from these trips.
For Bomberger this has made him appreciate his life more. He has hosted many international students and exchange visitors for this reason. All of his overseas trips have taught him his value and how luck he is. The "Seagoing Cowboys" was more to him than an aventure. It was a life lesson. | 2 |
8aaee53 | Studying the planet Venus is not the easiest task. The planet has very high surface temperature. They can be as high as eight hundred degrees fahrenheit. The planet also has high atmospheric temperatures. Along with these high temperatures, the planet has volcanoes and earthquakes.
Scientists have sent probes to Venus but lightning strikes them and can destroy them. Even though these have been destroyed, that does not men that we should stop sending them. Humans are filled with so much curiosity so we are not giving up yet. NASA has an idea that can allow scientists to hover the fray.
this woukld aloow us to explore the plaet and learn more about it while not losing equipment or human lives.
NASA'si dea is amazing, however there are some complications that are currently stoping them from pursuing this. Scientists would not have the clearest view of the planet from a safe distance. This woud make photographing the planet difficult. They also would be unable to take samles of the rock and other substances of the planets surface.
We should not let this get us down though. THese are onky chalanges that our very intelligent scientists will one day be able to overcome. There is so much that we do not know about this planet that is in our solar system. It is evident that our scientists reserch and invent technologies that will someday help us to view this planet and other planets as well. We shall not let fear and dangers get in the way or marvelous discoveries. | 3 |
8ab16db | Face in Mars is Natural Landform
Is the Face on Mars created by an alien? The answer is no, in this paragraph I'm writing some reasons that prove that the face wasn't made by an alien. One of the reasons is that they took a picture 2 sharper. Another reason is that scientist saw a Martian mesa common in mars. And the last reason that I think it's a natural landform is that in 2001 picture 3 show that it was only a mesa.
First in 1998 a Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia, or mars, for the first time. A picture was taken and it was ten times sharper. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting to see when the image first appeard on a JPL website. The picture showed that the face was just a natural landform.
Nevertheless, a new high-resolution image and a 3D altimetry from NASA's Mars Global Survey spacecraft revealed that the Face on Mars was really a mesa. The scientist thought of it as normal because the mesas are common in mars.
And lastly, another picture was taken in 2001 an better image with more pixels. The camera had cought the camera's absolute maximum resolution. In paragraph 10 the author states that the picture taken in 2001 the image had 1.56 meters per pixel compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
That is why I think that the mesa, or the Face on Mars, is just a natural landform. And that it wasn't created by aliens. That is why I think its just a natural landform. | 3 |
8ab44d2 | The Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. I think the Facial Action Coding System technology that allows computers to read emotions could be valuable to students in a classroom.
One of the ways this technology could be valuable is because it would help students who are confused or bored, like Dr. Huang predicts,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." That would be valuable because students are sometimes afraid to ask for help so the computer could either inform the teacher or provide extra information to the student that needs it.
Another way that technology in a classroom could be valueable to students is because it could give teachers feedback on how their students are liking the assignment. If the students become bored or confused, Dr. Huang predicted, "Then it could modify the assignment, like an effective human instructor." So that would give the teacher feedback of how their students are liking the assignment. Then they could modify the assignment to be more enjoyable or less confusing for the students if needed.
The Facial Action Coding System that enables computers to identify human emotions could be valuable to a classroom for many reasons. It could help students that are confused on an assignment by reading the student's face to see if they are confused. It could also give teachers feedback on how their students are enjoying the assignment. If the students aren't enjoying the assigment or are confused the computers could inform the teacher. The teacher then could modify the assignment to make it less confusing and more enjoyable for the students. Those are some of the reasons why that type of technology could be valuable to students in a classroom. | 3 |
8ab659a | I don't believe a technology can identify human emotions. Because I think we all fakes our smiles sometimes, let's say that I don't feel good or I am angry, but I don't anyone or anybody to know how I feel because I am pretty sure not everyone of us is always ready to let people know how they are feeling, we fake our smile and still smile but we don't really mean it, we smile out side but we feel like crying inside, and most of the time if you come out and say how you are feeling no one will notice it except if you tpld them yourself, so what I am trying to say is that a computer cannot tell whether a person is happy, sad, fear,angry. and in the second paragraph it says that we or computer can "calculate" our emotions and I still don't believe that can ever happen because we express how we feel we can't count our emotions.
"Hold on! can we actually "calculate" emotions-like math homework? And how can a computer reconize the subtle facial movement we humans use to express how we feel?"
It's not true at all, there is no way a computer can tell me when I am happy and when I am not happy, maybe I am faking, maybe I don't even even want to show my feelings. | 2 |
8ab8d63 | In the passage, the author does not support the idea well. The formatting of the essay is incorrect. The supporting details are also extremely unrealistic.
In the passage, the author states that the surface temperature is so high, that it can melt a vast amount of metals, therefor it would make sense for humans to not go. Later, they state that scientists are working on a blimp-like vehicle to float thirty miles above Venus's surface. This refutes the the part of the essay in which the author is explaining that scientists would have to go to the surface to collect research samples.
Also, the whole idea of exploring Venus is undermined because floating thirty miles above defeats the purpose of exploring Venus, as the author states the atmosphere makes it difficult to view using photography and videography. This would make reasearch extremely difficult because they will not be able to see the planet's surface.
The author does not sufficiently support their argument. The evidence used is unrealistic. The author continues to make arguments for their side and then refute them. | 3 |
8abcbbc | Cars are a major aspect of transportation in the twenty-first century. Having the hottest, newest, model of vehicle is all the craze in todays car-loving society. But new research shows that cars are becoming a leading contributor to the pollution of major cities world wide, and cities all across the globe are doing whatever they can to help prevent the pollution.
Eupore has always fancied its luxurious cars, esspecially in upscale communities. But in recent years countries such as Gremany and France have made efforts to reduce the amount of cars on the streets in order to reduce the amount of pollution in the air. A new upscale community in Vauban, Germany has been built competely on the basis of no cars. Seventy percent of the residents of this community do not own cars, and those who do own cars, must keep them outside of the community. Many residents here feel that having no cars gives them a little peace of mind. Heidrun Walter, a resident of Vauban says, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." A major up-side to not owning a car is the relief from stress. Many people have many worries about their cars; whether it will work, the amount of gas in it, the cost of gas, and so on. Getting rid of the problem also gets rid of the worry. Getting rid of cars also allows new opportunities for better city building. Makeing cities and suburbs denser discourages the need for cars and promotes the idea of walking, biking, or skating to a destination.
The United States has always loved its cars, but recently many people have taken to the side-walks instead of taking to the streets. Transportation is the second largest source of emissions in America and it seems to be declining. Studyies find that after 2005, many Americans began to stop buysing cars and started to find other ways to go from point A to point B. Many people credit this fact to the recession around 2008. After the down turn, people became more money contious, and the unemployed didn't need to go anywhere anyway. With no cars, Americans can save thousands of dollars a year because of no payments and not having to pay those expensive gas prices! The fewer cars on the street has also had a postivie impact on the enviornment. Less greenhouse gases has made the air in the suburbs and some cities much cleaner. Technology has also made a huge impact on our commute. People connected with friends and family without even having to drive and visit them, and teleconfernces across countries and continents have reduced the need to drive or fly places to do buisness. Many mojor car producig companies have also rebranded themselves in order to make personal transportation a thing of the past and make mass public transportation a obtainable goal.
Smog is a big issue, not only in the United States, but also in places such as Erope and Latin America, both of which have started to make efforts on cleaning the air and redcing the amount of cars on the road. In the 1990's Bogota, Colombia started a tradition in which the citizens find alternative ways of trasportation to work and shops one day out of the year, and for three straight years, cars have been banned in the streets on this "holiday." Because this event has grown so poular, many people have started to practice life without cars on a daily basis. New parks have formed, hundreds of biking paths have been added throughout the city, and upscale resturants and stores have began to pop up in the city. The car-free lifestyle has definitely effected Bogota, Colombia. Europe has also had a great quarrel with its smog problem in recent years, and Frane has been making an effort to stop the smog problem from getting any bigger. Paris recently put a ban on driving in the city in effort to reduce smog. On Monday, divers with even license plates were asked to find other ways of transportation, and on Tuesday drivers with odd license plates could not drive. The population did not have a very positive reaction, but the congestion of cars in the capital did go down sixty percent on both days, and the efforts worked so well, the city was able to lift the ban after on week.
Car culture has been a part of our societ for a long time. However, large strides have been made all across the globe in order to reduce the amount of cars on the road and the amount of pollution in the air. These strides have had many positive impacts on the communities they have served in and continute to make tomorrow a better and cleaner world. | 5 |
8abfff9 | Hey Luke here, in your childhood have ever wanted to be a cowboy or wanted to sail the seven seas?
Well why not be both with our Seagoing Cowboys program. I did it and it chaged my life forever.
You can enjoy being the best of both worlds while helping others.
It may be dangerous, but so is everything else. People need us, but we need you to help us.
You may wonder why should I help people I don't know? here are some of the things I saw and did that you will be able to do too.
You can see many parts of the world like China or Europe.
Also you may see Acropolis in greece or take a gondola ride in Venice.
Maybe even Italy with sreets of water, or Creete with its Panama Canal.
Also if you are 18 or older this counts as military service, and when it comes down to it it's more safe to deliver suplies on a boat than be in the battle lines of war.
Plus You are helping people around the world by delivering important suplies like horses, young cows, and mules. Though you will have to feed alot of horses you'll be ok. I fed 335 horses and I was ok.
In concusion that is why you should be a seagoing cowboy. You will see parts of the world you never seen before, you'll be serving your country, and you will help people around the world. Join and you won't regret it, I didn't and you wont ether I promise. We need more Seagoing Cowboys for our program.
This is Luke Bomberger saying will you be the man or woman to anwser our call? | 3 |
8ac535b | The idea of new technology that can read your facial expressions to know how you're feeling sounds incredible. Who knew that technology could get this advanced. The idea of this technology does not bother me if it were to be used in classrooms. The computer could not just be used in school classrooms but can also be used for crime solving when the detective is trying to interogate a suspect or the actual crime commiter.
This computer can be used very effectively with friends or family. If you can suspect something is wrong with someone and you want to help them you can use this technology in order to help them or comfort them. If your friend or sibling acts like they are fine but when you use the computer and you realize they are sad or mad you can help them with their problems. A big problem in the world right now are students who are sad or depressed and dont open up to people and then they tend to be alone. This technology can help those who are in need and then counseling or just friends and family come into the picture to help those who are alone.
The computer was programmed to detect the little thigs that describe how our facial expressions would be like for every emotion. Expert say that the muscles around our face tend to move differently for each of our expressions but its hard to tell if you arent an expert because we tend to be decieved. Someone could be completely depressed but when in person they are the happiest person to you and are so possitive.
This technology only seems to have a possitive future is its already invented. Maybe sometimes it will calculate a persons a emotions sometimes but that can always be fixed by the manufacturers. Later on this could be used on phones to maybe but the camera of the phones will need to be changed in order to detect perfect muscles in your face. Other than that this would most definitely be smart to put in student classrooms to be tested out by many people. | 3 |
8acf0ad | Driverless car's isn't safe baceuse there are to may things that can go wrong.
Or someone could get badly injured or even die from a drivless car.
And in the article it also says what car is really the safest." The only safe car has human control at all times."And if there was an accident with one of these car going wrong it would be extremly hard to find who's fault it really is. It also says in the articel that
"If the technology fails and someone getting injured,who is at fault the driver or the manufacture."That is why in most places in the United States baned people from testing these cars."In most states it is illegal even to test computer driven cars." So really these cars is a big accident waiting to happen And the only person peopel can blame is the driver for buying the driver less car.
That is why I would not buy or drive one of these cars because there unsafe and dangorious to the public. | 2 |
8acfd18 | Cars can be useful in getting people from point A to point B but do they cause stress on the environment? Limiting car usage can lower the amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
In Vauban, Germany residents have given up their vehicles. Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district. Car ownership is allowed but there are only two places to park in a large garage at the edge of the development where a car-owner buys a space for $40,000, along with a home. This results in 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold their car to move there.(source 1)
After a number of day of pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Mondays motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or be fined 22-euros the same for odd numbered plate the following day. The cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. The smog cleared enough monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numberd plates on Tuesday.( source 2)
Bogota, colombia millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work yesterday. It was the third year cars have been banned with inly buses and taxis permitted on the Day Without Cars in the capitol city of 7 million. "It's a goos way to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a double seated bike with his wife. The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in the mid-1990s.
Limiting car usage can lower greenhouse gas emissions. | 2 |
8ad02ca | Hello my name is luke and im am in the Seagoing cowboys program. My friend Don Reist invited me to go to Europe on a cattle boat. I work two part time jobs in a grocery store. It was 1945, World War 2 ended in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins.
This was and opportunity for me to be drafted in the military service.
I couldn't tell my friend no. So I went with him. The cattle-trip were an unbelieveable opportunity for a small -town boy.
Also, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA(the United Relief and Rehabilitation). I had the side benefit of seeing
Europe and China. Seeing the Acropolis in Greece.
It took about to weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the united states and a month to get to china.
I was busy caring for the animals during the crossing. My job was to check on the animals every hour. I also found time to have fun on board. We played baseball and volleyball .
In conclusion, i learned that after i graduated high-school life got harder, but i cant let that get in my head. I will face lifes challenges and will overcome them. The trip wasn't about what did, it's about what you learded and its about the adventeur. | 1 |
8ad36ea | In today's world driving a car is a daily thing. People drive cars everyday either to get to work or run arrnes and do many other things. Cars should be put to limited usage becuase cars are a leading factor in air pollution. Also limited car usage is helpful because it can help you stay healthy and in shape.
Cars should be put to limited usage because cars are a leading factor in air pollution.
Like it says in source 1 "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe . . . and up to 50 percent in some car-intense areas in the United States." Cars release gases into the air which cause pollution. The pollution is bad for the enviroment and for civilians health. Like this one time in Paris the pollution form cars got so bad it created a smog over the city. After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced driving ban to clear the area of the global city. Citezens of Paris were fined if they were seen driving during the ban, only some cars were abke to be driving on specific days. Just after a few days of this ban the smog cleared enough for a vehicles were able allowed to drive. To reduce this we must do what a few cities around the world do. Some small cities around the world are reducing car usage by creating more accesible public transportation methods, with less parking space. Also the stores are placed on a walk way, on a main street rather than in malls which are far away.
Also, cars should be put to limited usage because it can help you stay healthy and in shape. If you dont use cars you be forced to walk or to ride a bike. Doing this will be physical activity and help you stay in shape. You wont have to sit in a car and just press a pedal to move. That will get you lazy and fat. If you ride a bike instead or walk you are moving and naking your body work, keeping yourself from being fat and staying healthy.
In conclusion, car usage should be limited becuase cars are a leading factor in air pollution and also limited car usage is helpful because it can help you stay healthy and in shape. | 3 |
8ad6d36 | The author study the Venus planet doing a good jobs in his laboratory whith his all experiments that he make whith a good equip fo workers for him even finding somyhings asowums for his life.
He dicovered that the Venus planets is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too. Even that Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetary neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds these diferences in speed mean that somtimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus is because Venus is sometimes right around the corner in space terms humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this could draped world where we the humans live whith all familiers and sharing good ideas each other with friends, witgh families, and neighbor. Also like the author says in paragraph 2 "Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a cgallenging planet for human to study, despite its proximity to us". How the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet the and these conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth, such an enviroment would crush even a submerine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable Venus, has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solara system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun.
And as a clonclusion, I think that the author did a very good job discovering all this somthings with the Venus planet because this is not easy to do in our live for that I think that him is a good sientific. | 2 |
8ad6fdb | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it states that Venus will be hard to travel for humans even though it is the closest planet to being earth like but we can do it. We have the technology for it, it atronmoers find Venus interesting so they are willing to put work into it, and humans could survive being near Venus.
As it speaks of in the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author addresses that us humans have technology for Venus to be explored and NASA is looking into a device to be used on Venus. We cannot just use any technology on Venus because of the hot temperatures and conditions but there are some machines that are not that fragile that would survive on Venus. They have a poject of using an older machine called a mechanical computer says the author "Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers."(para 7). Along with another one is using items that would survive on Venus "... some simplifies electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber stimulating chaos of Venus's conditions and have lasted for three weeks in such condtions. (para 7) meaning this could be a technology devic that will help people become more familiar with Venus.
Mars interest some people; but, people cannot just visit Venus because of the conditions. Although Venus is the closest planet to being earth like the author talks about in "The challenge of Exploring Venus" "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and icludes features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." (para 4). Which is very Earth like as we have those featues at multiple places on Earth. Astonomers are interestred in Venus as the author says "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus it may well once have been the Earth-like planet in our solar system." (para 4). As they are interested in making technology for exploration of Venus.
Humans cannot phyically be on Venus but we can get close to being there. The NASA is actually has one idea of how us humans can get close Venus as the author states the idea "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roilng Venusian landscape." (para 5). The conditons for this will not be easy but is survivable for humans. The author states in "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" "Not easy conditons, but survivable for humans." (para 5) meaning humans that go to Venus will not find this easy but they will survive and be okay. The author is talking about how it would be to go to Venus but he believes there are ways to visit witht the conditions. "... despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges." (para 6). By this the author is trying to get to the point that despite the unusual conditions for us humans there are still ways for us to get around it and we may face challenges but we can figure them out with our technology.
Overall in the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author does tell us the options for getting to know Venus even with the conditions of Venus. As we are fascinated by it also having the technology for devices to actually be on Venus and we could survive the conditions of being close to Venus. It is worth the studying and effort of trying to become more familiar with Venus. He had good point for the exploration of Venus. | 4 |
8ae14a9 | Life without cars would be different, would it not? Well that's what the small town of Vauban, Germany is doing. They are doing it in an effort to reduce greenhouse gases. they are also try to get other towns/cities around the world to participate in this "car-free" movement. Here are some ways limited car usage effects the world.
It reduces greenhouse gases. 12 percent of greenhouse gases come from Europe and about 50 percent come from the United States in the car intensive areas that is. if we were to start having limited car usage we could drastically decrease the car emission greenhouse gases by about 50 percent. Paris, France has a partial ban on cars and only lets certain cars drive on certain days which completely cleared out the smog that had been covering the city for a while.
It increases the amount of money the usual gas consumer has. the save a ton of money from not having to refill on gas all of the time. Thus, causing more money to be spent and having the economy increase. It can also cause for the city to start fixing sidewalks instead of roads because not as many people would use the roads as much.
People in the U.S., Europe, and South America are already taking steps to have a cleaner environment. new sidewalks, new laws/bans, and just the gneral public are helping. Will you be one of the people that helps? | 2 |
8aed5a6 | The electoral college isnt an normal conversating subject for everyday life, although it is important. Without the Electoral College We the People wouldnt have a president to help run our country as a whole. The way the College works may be confusing but it all ties together in the end- a new president is elected every four years.
Particurly, there are a total of five hundred and thirty-eight electors. But around two hundred and seventy votes is required to eclect the president. Everyone has jobs. Meaning, they are either all apart of parties or are in charge of an party that has decided to go and represent somebody that is running. The "state" of Columbia is in a way treated differently. The reasoning Columbia is quotations is because there was quite a discussion on wheather or not it should be counted, in the end result- according to the article "Source 1: What is the electoral college?" "For soem reason, in the following discussion the word "state" also refers to the District of Columbia". That being said the more votes the better and fair to all of the People. As each candidate runs to be elected for Preisdency the elector has a party in which they support fully and represent one another as a whole. As they represent they start to get people excited for the new incoming President and saying why they believe he/she is the best and deserves to dedicate their time. All of these processes go on because everyone deserves to share their opinion and say and choose their preferred President.
Another smart point is, everyoen should be given a chance. That being said, no matter if youre a women or man and have the desire to work in the Electoral College or even run for president, I personally believe that everyone should be treated equal and be given an oppurtuninty to show the wiseness and what they have to offer. Stated from "Source 3: In defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" just so hapeens in number four to say, "So other things are being equal, a large state gets more attention from the presidental candidats in a campaign than a small state does". Basically saying that everyone doesnt get the chance to choose if its not given and thats not how we the People need to be, if we want help protecting our country for the ones that are against us with grudges, and to help keep our roadways clean and avaliable, and to help hire us at the jobs we want, then truly we need to support them as well. and give them equality!
In summation, the electoal college is an important part of our Government and Presidency itself, but all the proscesses and ect. that is also involved also plays a role and makes it just as necessary. Without out we woudlnt be able to vote for the right and needed President because we wouldnt know what is need, required, and more. With it, it makes everything make sense. With all the people that are in the committee makes it ten times better in chossing who and how we want to be represented. Electing our president is just as important of the Electoral College. In other words, without the busy college, there would be no President of the United States of America. | 2 |
8af588a | People are planning to make driverless cars thanks to thee technology we now have. However, how are you going to teach your children how to drive when these cars come out? How are they going to get their license if they don't know how to drive? Lets not forget that technology can also malfunction at any time.
People have been talking about creating driverless cars and have those be the cars of the future. Right now there are many teenagers learning how to drive. They want to be able to pass the test to get their permit/license. If the cars were to come in now, there would be no point in teaching them how to drive if the cars do it for them. There is a small point while driving where the driver actually has to drive themselves, but that would be hardly ever depending on the situation.
Money is also another situation on our hands. These cars aren't just made of scrap. They need the high-end technology that the car would need in order for the dream to be accomplished. That technology comes with a price. It stated in the story that there was a device named Radar that was placed on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars itself. That's more than buying a single car that is set and ready for you to buy yourself.
The technology used might be high-end, but it also isn't perfect. There can be a malfunction at any time with the sensors and everything that's mentioned in the text. Technology isn't always a reliable source for everyone. There can always be a glitch, and everything blows over. What would happen if the car were to malfunction, and that was to cause an accident? That definitely wouldn't be a good thing.
These are a few reasons as to describe my position as against driverless cars. People wouldn't be able to learn how to properly drive a car, money doesn't grow from trees in order to help create these cars, and technology isn't our best source when anything can happen to it. Although it may seem cool to have those cars come in the future, not everything is as it seems. | 3 |
8af880c | For technology to be able to read the emotional expressions of students would be very beneficial . Some students could struggle with verbally expressing their emotion's making it hard for their teacher/learning coach to know the most successful way to teach them. Therefore if the student starts to get bored, anxious, or confused the computer could pick up on those emotions and make changes to the student's learning lesson to help get them back to focus and engage with their learning . ''A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, "Dr. Huang predicts. ''Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. ''
Mental illness is on a rise amongst people in general, Students suffer from it too they're not indestructable or working machinces.
Technology being able to read emotional expressions of students is very valuable it could help students to feel less stressed when working on a lesson they struggle with , without the panicky feeling of having to talk to the teacher about it infront of the class which could cause anxiety . With a majority of communication being nonverbal it can be hard to understand even for humans , technology being able to pick up on it would be alot easier and not feel as intrusive as the student having to explain themselve to the teacher/learning coach. ''Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication,'' notes Dr. Huang. ''So computers need to understand that, too''. | 3 |
8af8b09 | Cars polut the environment so a couple governments banned them. the bennifits of banning cars are actually better than some one would think. An advantage to banning cars is less polution, less clutter in the street and a happier life.
Less polution is great especially with all of the machines running now adays. polution causes holes to from in the atmosphere, the atmosphere is what hoilds in the air we breath. The atmosphere also plays a much larger role in our way of life. Ever heard of the word global warmming? Well itws because the earths outside temerature is hotter then what it should be, because there are holes in the ozone layer. The ozone layer is like insulation in your house it keep cold air in on hot summer days. most polution comes from cars alone just because they are used so much byt everyone.
Having less clutter in the streets is always a good thing. Having less cars will lead to less accidentrs and less fatalities. People will not worry as much and it'll cause less stress. with having less cluttered streets that means more people will be walking by stores and resteruants, which leads to more buisness for store owners.
living a happy life in very important. I believe that if your not happy then your not living right. Banning cars reducess stress and stress mAKES PEOPLE UN HAPPY AND NOT LIVE LIFE TO THE FULLEST. | 3 |
8afd659 | Science. Scientific. Fact.
These are the words you should have going through your mind as you wonder about the Mars landform, found by NASA's
Viking 1; The face. The pharaoh. The man on Mars. However, there are some who...Wish to believe.
To these folks, it is also the face. The
Alien. Martian on mars. These, are the people who we call conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theorists are nothing more than mere people who wish to emphasize something and twist it up to make it, of course, a conspiracy. These said theorists want to change the perspective and point of view via others, and themselves as well.
However, fact cannot be contained.
When it comes to the face on Mars, as previously explained, there is indeed, fact over opinion. In many aspects, not to mention. Landforms, shadows, and shading galore. In pictures, the face seems to contain basic details to give t the "person" type of vibe off. However, there is just one problem.
With the face being known as looking human, there are details still missing. Such as, the rest of the body. There would possibly be an outline of something more around the face, or where a body may be. We cannot go down and literally dig on Mars, thereore pictures were, or are the nex t big thing.
There is a lot of shadowing going around on Mars. The thick clouds, the different angles of rays of light shoning through.
This leads us to our final conclusion. The face is a landform. With the precise shadowing and the shape of some sort of facial stucture, who would know what to think. Blaming conspiracy theorists is not a preferred move, however, the theorists may forget to use fact. I believe, fact is that the face is a mere landform. An artwork of space.
Some, however, wish to believe. Maybe, we should let them. | 3 |
8afd92b | An earth like planet.
Venus.
And so close to, in space termonology that is.
Venus isn't a easy plant to work with, espically with the weather changing rapidly.
It's tough.
But why do people really want to investigate it?
Life. It can hold life on it.
Not very easily and effecantly, but it can non the less.
So why research so much about it and put millions of dollars towards funds for it?
Venus at one point in time was the only planet in our solar systme very similar to Earth.
It had the sustatial ecosystem our planet has, it didn't have an accesive amount of down ward gravitational pull and it wasn't in a constant chemical thermal storm or in high toxian heat levels.
It probably had a huge ocean like ours and had other land masses on it, such like our continants.
But why would we care to fund it so much if it's now in unsuitable conditions?
We are trying to get human intelligents down there.
We need samples of rocks, atmospheric gasses and even any life forms such as plants and/or animals.
If we can find out what materials are already down on the surface, we can certify that we'll be able to make other forms of objects down there such as trees, buildings and cars.
We need to know what kind of pressure would be experiancing.
How much oxygen is down there.
What kind and how much of gastro fuel we would need for high pressure compression suits.
We need all of those answers, and we know how to get them, but not 100%.
If the world were to end in 15 years and we knew about it ahead of time, there's a good chance we would find sulotions on how to get people up to Venus and possibly Mars as well.
There's not enough time to know ahead, but we can always start preparing.
So just like the old days in the race to the moon, we need to start helping NASA with their funds, researching ways to get up there, getting data, exploring new options and just not being afraid of what's out there. I know we're all afraid of going out into the unknown, but someday, we're going to have to go out there, and I rather be really prepared than not knowing what were even going for. | 2 |
8aff2ab | You know thoes movies were they are flying cars eveywhere and they can basically just drive themselves ? It sounds amazing that your own car drives itself with no help from you and you can just sit there texting or eating but is it really that convienent? Driverless cars in the future will not be a good thing because it will cause probems , money and can essientally put our lifes at risk.
Finding out who is lieing and who is telling the truth is hard at times because people will go to extreme lengths to hide the truth. In the story it states " California , Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have led the country in allowing limited use of semi-autonomour cars." Not alot of states are allowing it to be legal to just test run a cumputer driven car so why would any state allow to actually use a smart car? Trying to change that law will cause alot of contreversy and problems. So if someone was using a smart car and one day they got into an accident who's fault would it be? In the passage it states " New laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer"? Trying to fiqure out who caused the accident, was it the smart car or the person in the smart car. It will be difficult to try to fiqure that out and it
will cause chaos and a lot of lawsuits will be made as well as people or even the companys creating these smart cars
will try everything in their power to make sure it wasn't them who caused it so who knows what lengths people will go to cover something up and not make it seem like it was that persons fault.
We all need money to survive and essientally we also need money
to try and enrich our life as well but is it worth to spend money on things that aren't really needed ? Smart cars are obviously gonna be alot of money to purchase but also
to make one will need a lot of money so is it really essiental? In this passage it states" For startes , they needed a whole lot of sensors ". So the companys are gonna be wasiting alot of money on sensors for each car and then it goes on to state "Developing smarter cars someday wasn''t so much smarter cars as smarter roads.... These smart-road systems worked suprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical". So not only are they wasting a lot of money creating these "Smart Cars" but also wasting a huge amount on creating smarter road systems and it even states that it was simply too expensice to be practical so if it wasn't practical back then is it really practically now?
Being able to feel safe is something big and we all mainly try focusing on being able to feel safe so to try and get that feeling of being safe we might change our job or move to a different location but should we change who's actually in charge of our cars? Smart cars are operated from computers and all sort of different technologies that alot of us don't quite understandyet and onlt the ones who know about these technologies and the people who created it understand it. In the passage it states "The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheel and reduce power from the engine,allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone". So what if our car goes out of control and all of the "Buttons" that we could push to stop the car or even slow it down stops working what can we do? Do we just it there and pry that it will stop or hope we don't die when we crash? Or even if someone hacks into the technology being used in the car to harm the person in the car and we end up losing all control we thought we had in the car what do we do then ? There are so many unanswered questions that
should be answered before lunching them out to the public and risking peoples lifes.
Still so many unanswered questions and risks we will be talking if we do use a smart car.Maybe driverless cars should stay on television and movies. Driverless cars in the future will not be a good thing because it will cause problems, money, and can essientally put our lifes at risk. | 5 |
8b02a08 | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author describes how a new use of technology called Facial Action Coding System (FACS), tells what emotions your using my theory of the FACS Is that It will work, but It's not telling the truth.
My theory Is that they are wasting all their time and money, and the FACS is not telling the truth the reason beaging Is you can never have a computer tell you your own emotions, also " If It Is some how ture about your emotions than you just got luckey for It to work but that's the only time It will work".
Another reason Is the time and money, who In their right mind would spend all there family time, and most of their hard earnd money on something that wouldn't work. To me I would rather sit at home whrn I'm done working and spend time with my family, and I wouldn't speed a penny on that sofeware that Is not granted to work.
Third of all what Is the stictist there Is none In the reading that I read so, judt why not get something up and running and, not put any stictist It Is dumb on their part.
In conclusion there Is nobody that Is going to change my mind about this soft wear working If It does then I'll chang my argument about It untill then It's not going to work, and that my opiotion. | 2 |
8b08fad | Technology is improving everyday to make our lives better. Our society wants to improve on many things to make our lives productive. One of the main things they are currently working on is driverless cars. The google has been working on their driverless car. That project has been going on for 7years, and they have not been able to progress much. Driverless cars are waste of money, ineffcient to humans, and will cause controversy in the future.
The idea of driverless car originally was desgined as a car without human involved on the road. Now the techicians are claiming that we need humans to control the car otherwise this idea of driverless car would not work. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." That would be very aggriviating having to drive whenever the computer can´t."This necessitate the car being ready to quickly get the driver´s attention whenver a problem occures." that sounds very inconvenient. The passage is saying that we shoould always be alert of any mistakes that the computer makes. Humans might as well as just drive with our hands and feet. The car needs to be completly human control free, otherwise this technology will be very inefficient.
This idea of driverless cars isn´t just inefficient, it will cost money. This process of testing their prototype seems very costly. The author mentioned that one of the sensors costs about two hundred million dollars. Google needs to realize that not everyone has two hundred million dollars in their pocket. This isn´t the only sensor that the car has either. Other sensors on the cars seems very costly as well, because these specific types of technology was not around a long time. The prototype itself seems very costly, and they are not still completly driverless. A person still has to be alert so that it does not do anything dangerous. Trying to create more prototypes and ideas costs money too. If we are not progressing much, why do we need to waste so much money on something that may not even be efficient in the future? Driverless cars are wasting money on something they will not go anywhere in the future.
Somehow, in the far future, we do end up having this driverless car. It will be completely efficient and convenient to use. Now the society has to make new laws that apply to this driverless car. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault, the driver or the manufacturer?" We have to think about these kind of things and decide the best option. Our society already has many controversial laws, like gay rights or gun rights. The government does not need any more controversial laws to deal with, our society is already messy enough. Driverless car will be very controversial when they are introduced to our society, it is not worth the time and money to manufactur cars that will cause controversy.
Driverless car idea was interesting at first, but if we look into negative side of it, it does not sound very intriguing at all. This idea is wasting money in general, and it seems so far very inefficient to our human lives, and it will cause alot of controversy later in the future if we do have driverless cars. Driverless cars are waste of money, ineffcient, and will be controversial. | 4 |
8b09ca0 | I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because, You get to see and visit many cool or weird places that many people may never get to see in their life. You have a lot of free time after you clean the stalls, feed, water and groom the animals. With a lot of free time on your hands you have a lot of time to play games such as, Volleyball, Baseball and other games. A cool thing I have learned about being a Seagoing Cowboy is like me, If you turn 18 while on The Seagoing Cowboy progam, and you're able to be drafted, if you do manage to get picked, being on the Seagoing Cowboys Program counts as Military service.
When you join the Seagoing Cowboys you help people in need. You help people in need of food, and suplies to survive. Being a Seagoing Cowboy opens the world up to you and makes you relise that there all many people all over the world that need help. The UNRRA signed people who didn't have very good jobs or good pay and made them Seagoing Cowboys to help others trying to recover from wars and other disators.
While being a Seagoing Cowboy I had to check on the animals every hour to three hours. Cleaning stalls and feeding all the animals takes up a long period of time. You had to get down loads of bales of hay and oats which ment you had ot be strong. You also need to be careful around the ship and being on the ship, you could get hurt by one of the animals or something could happen to you like what happend to me, I fell down a slippery ladder and got caught by a metal peice hanging on the boat, I did crack a few ribs but I didn't fall into the ocean.
It takes long periods of time to go from country to country or from state to state, or even to the other side of the world to help someone in need, so you need a lot of paitcene for those long periods of time being a Seagoing Cowboy. Caring for the animals while going to diffrenet places kept me very busy, whilst still having planty of free time while abord the SS Charles W. Wooster. It takes bravory and gut to be a Seagoing Cowboy, being on the ocean for very long periods of time, not being able to see your family, not having the greatest of food and resorces, all to help other countrys, or states in need. | 4 |
8b0c0ce | Have you ever heard about the face on Mars? A lot of people have. NASA sent the Viking one up into space to try and capture pictures of mars. The Viking was taking pictures when it noticed a shadowy figure. Can you guess what that figure is? Conspiracy theorists have their own vision of what it was made by, but NASA's scientists had the facts about it!
In paragraph two it says, "The sensation of the face was short lived. Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa." The conspiracy theorists think otherwise. The conspiracy theorists think that the face was made by Aliens. They also think that the face was really think that it was made by Aliens, and that NASA knows it was, but they just do not want to reveal it. Conspiracy theorists think it's Bona Fide, and that it's evidence of life on Mars. This all shows that the conspiracy theorists have different points of view than the NASA scientists do.
In paragraph seven it says, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting then the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." When scientists put the image out online not everyone was satisfied with what the scientists said. Conspiracy theorists still think that it was made by Aliens. This shows that the scientists at NASA have facts and that the conspiracy theorists have only a picture.
In paragraph eleven Garvin says, "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image three times bigger than the pixel size. So if there were objects in this picture like aiplanes on the ground or Egytian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" In paragraph twelve it says, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." Garvin added, "It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." This shows that NASA thinks that the face was just a natural landd form. Everyone else thinks that it was made by Aliens.
In paragraph eight it says that the camera had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Now everyone is saying, "Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." They all think now possibly they were made by Aliens. This shows that we may have made a serious mistake in how the face was made. The face could've been made by both natural forming or by aliens.
In conclusion, the face could have been made by Aliens and we just do not know it. We could have been wrong for all we know! So we need to think to not doubt ourselves. We all need to think, was the face really made by aliens? It could've been! We need to learn to work together on our theories not against each other. Just think if NASA would've worked with the conspiracy theorists then we could've figured out what really made the face on Mars! | 3 |
8b19ef6 | "Drivless Cars Are Coming,'' is a article about the pros and cons of using drivless cars.I don't see the reasoning behind using drivless cars , when the cars people drive now are working perfetly normal.The old saying if it ain't broke don't fix it works perfect in this case.
Driving is a very common thing in the United States of America, almost every adult in todays society drives. If driveless cars become normalized then think about the people who can't afford drivless cars. The law would have to change so what would happen to the old car drivers. Would they have to follow the new ''Drivless'' laws or the old ones that where set? The law system would get very confusing ans would be hard on police oficers.
A big problem would be accidents. Who would you charge, the manufactures or the driver? You wouldn't know who's fault it would be. Since Sometimes the cars drive by there selves it could be either one. The compunies have the money so even if it was a cars fault the cumponie would get out of the Law suit and could leave the driver paying a lot for something that wasn't his/her fault. The biggest concern is safty. What happens when the car gets glitchy or if a circut goes out and the car starts to panic and crash. The children could get severly injured from something that wasn't your fault.
The car is almost aslways based on a computer sytem. People in todays society are smart and know how to work computers. Would the car have a firewalll of some sort. If not there could be lots of trouble if somme one was deranged and haked a car a ran it into stuff blowing things up. with the knew teroist coming up people need to think about things like that. That could be the next attack using our cars to strike fear into people. Then we couldnt tell who or where it came from.
In the end i do think Drivless cars could work i just don't think they're ready for use in the forseable future. they need alot of work and alot of explaining before the cars can be usable or to be common in society. So could it work of course , but I don't see it happening any time soon. | 4 |
8b1c3fc | This type of technology that can read human emotions should happen, this being made already whether we say yes or no to it its gonna happen no matter what anyone saids. This technology that can read peoples emotion. This could become greater coming impact to the future in someway it could help us. Lets say if we were catch a crimmnal we would know what there thinking depedning on thier emotion if there scared happy sad, if man kind can have this type of technology then we would never have to worry about how our girlfriend feeling and they wouldnt have to go through alot trouble trying hint at us that there mad or sad we just pull a computer or sum sorts and know what there feeling. Being able to tell human emotions. this technology would be able tell teachers or parents would know that soemthing is wwrong with us. this type of technology ciuld be used on students and teachers could how we understand and feel about these feelings we have while were in school. | 2 |
8b1dddc | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" talks about Venus a lot and how it's very alike to planet, and Venus has the hottest temperature, and lastly how the NASA is setting up ideas to send humans to learn more about Venus. It is also trying to persuade us to learn more about Venus and how interesting it is. The author's tone is very curous and is very into it.
Venus has similarites to earth that are even called "twins" and even in the text it says "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of denisty and size, and occasionally the closet in distance too."
which means that they may not be the same hight which is the same size but they still have some similarties that they share. Venus as well share the same similarites by how Venus has "erupting volvanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes" it has powerful storms just like Earth. Another reason for how Venus and Earth are alike is by how Venus also the surface of "rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters" it's amazing how they both have so may alikes. Lastly Venus has also been covered with oceans and supported varius forms of life just like earth. Earth has been through that as well. How it was covered with water that happened years ago not not and i'm talking about Venus.
Venus has one of the hottest surface temperature than any of our solar system like how the text says. It also says how the temperature is different here in Earth than in Venus. It says " temeperatures avarage over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." which means is bad for us to breath in Venus. Therefore the oxygen from Venus is highly different from Earth. Lastly the temeperature is extremely bad that it can crush a "submarnine accustomed to diving to the deeepest parts of out oceans and would liqefy many metals." which means that it is very horrible for us.
My last reason is NASA is giving out ideas to send humans to Venus. In paragrapgh 5 it talks about they are trying to send humans to Venus but also there's bad things can happen. Like in the last sentence it says "Not easy conditictons, but survivable for humans." throughout that whole paragrapgh it is saying that tempatures would still be 170 degrees Fahrenheit and how the sea level is close to earth. In paragrapgh 6 in the middle it is talking about how researches can't take rocks or anyhting from Venus because it is a risk. That's why it's a challenge.
These are my reasons for how Earth and Venus has a lot of commen things and Venus doesnt have a lot of dangers. Also Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. | 4 |
8b21814 | There has always been an argument about the "Face" on Mars since it was discovered. Many people believe it is natural, and others think someone made or put it there. A mask that looks perfectly in task can't be a landform, many people say. Since the face has been in magazines, books, and even tv shows, it is considered something everyone has an opinion about. There has been many pictures, and photographs taken of the face. In 1967 it came out as a clear mask, untouched as some would describe how it looked. Scientists and other specialists have studied and researched it as time has passed. Some people say it looks like it belongs with the Egptian culture. Spacecrafts, rockets, and monitors have supervised the face ever since it was found. Debatable I would say whether it is a landform or it is natural. The argument is quite fascinating in many ways. Books have been written about it, talk shows on televison have talked about it, and people have came up with evidence and facts for what they believe of the "Face on Mars."
If you are a person like me, you would believe the face is a landform. I could easily tell, and prove it is indeed a landform. It is too close to the sun, you would instantly die. When people found out about Armstrong's trip to the moon, they were excited. But can anyone go to Mars? Of course not, it's way to hot. The distance from Earth to Mars is a wide spread. Going to the moon is one thing, but going to Mars is another. Thinking and dreaming about going to Mars is all nice until you realize it is not possible. Everyone knows you can go into outer space, and the moon. But everyone also knows you can't possibly go to Mars, and come back alive. Plus to get there and back, would be tough. Fuel doesn't last as long as you think it does. Just ask the Apollo 11 crew about that. You have to be prepared and knowing the possibilities on what could go wrong. It also takes a lot of money to go to the moon, think about how much it would be to go to Mars. Nobody could have put that face on Mars. People would think you were insane if you told them that.
The Face is ordinary, there is nothing else like it or even close to it. Everyone has their own belifs and stories of what they think happened. There has been many people who tudied thius face. It is definitely a debate. Hopefully one day we will find the truth. Maybe it will be breaking news like it did when they very first found the face. | 2 |
8b2bead | Venus ia indeed a very powerful planet that can cause harm to the human race. "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 planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." (paragraph 3) Yes, there are a lot of dangers and the human race can be hurt, but what happens when the earth runs out of supllies to support the human race? Where will we ge then?
It is important to explore all of the other options we have when it comes to places for the human race to go when we run out of supplies and options. Yes, Venus has a lot of risk but when it comes to saving the human race I think it's a risk worth taking. There are a couple things that the Earth and Venus have in common. "Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." There are postive things about Venus as well. Every option is going to have it's negitives and it's postivies.
Some of our explores think they might have a solution for humans to live on Venus. "NASA's possible soltins 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 airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions bu staying up and out of their way." ( paragraph 5) There are a lot of dangers when is comes to living on Venus but we might have solutions for them. When is comes to the human race and having a plan B, I think this is something to consider.
Yes, there are quite a few risk when it comes to moving the human race to live on Venus. But NASA thinks that they have a way around that. There a couple things that Earth and Venus even have in common when it comes to the geographical aspects of the planets. Yes, living on Venus comes with changes and yes, it would be a big change. I think it's a risk worth taking. | 4 |
8b3111d | The positive things the author is saying about making driverless cars is more saftey because it got senses in it that can tell if you about to bag back into something it gives you a warning or if your going to fast it uses speed sensors to detect it and gives you a warning. If your brakes stop working while you driving it can detect it and use automatic break sensor to stop your car. The cars could handle the driving task on its own. It got a lot of sensors everywhere on the vehicle. It would have a video camera on the left rear wheel. A roatating sensor on the rood. Four automotive radar sensors. And it would have a GPS reciever. It will also have Dubbed LIDAR that have laser beams to form a constanly updating 3-D model of the cars surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. The negitive thing about having a driverless car is that it would take alot of upgrades and it would need smart-road systems. And the lawmakers says that the only safe way to keep drivers,passengers, and pedestrains safe is if the human driver is in control at all times. If the technology of the driverless car fails and someone is injured, they wouldnt know what to do because they wouldnt know who to blame. It could be the driver fault or the manufacturer. Some people wouldnt like a driverless car because they could get bored and tired of waiting for their turn to drive. And if any sensor breaks while the driverless car is going somebody could get hurt if any sensor is down. They don't got a back up sensor for none of the sensors. It's dangerous to have your hopes on sensors that can stop working anytime. Some people probably think if you got a driverless car what's the purpose of being behind the wheel? | 2 |
8b33cfe | The question is, for this advanced time period in the new discovery of technology being able to identify humans emotions, a good thing or bad? Well to simple start off my opinion to this idea, no; I don't agree with the new advancement of technology distinguishing humans emotions being good.
I don't agree with technology telling an individuals emotions, that being said; the reason why is because humans sound either already know or learn to identify how someone is feeling by the look on someones face theirself. Humans are capable of doing so. The technology, as explained in the story, looks at the forming of your lips, the squint near your eyes, your cheeks, and youre eyes themselves. All of which a human can do theirself.
The question in the article asks, "Does your expression in the mirror suggest an emotion?" In my opinion yes it does, expression is the number one thing that deals with emotion. It's shown in the face, goes to every indent and wrinkle and mark in your face. It can be distinguished easily by the human eye evern if the emotion is trying to be hiden.
Although the counterargument is, the humans can't identify emotion from the face muscles, i could disagree with that aslo because the face msucles is what produces the expression, the muscles move your smile up, your cheeks more purky, to seem more happy and or sad. Muscles are the first step to identifying visually how a person is feeling which doesn't exactly need a technilogical discoverance.
With all that i have said, I simply think the world using technology on something so silly is a waste, humans should practice identifying those things personally and it is a good skill to learn in the real world. I disagree and I think the reasoning is valid. Technology shouldn't take basic emotion reading abilities. | 3 |
8b3551b | In "Driverless Cars are Coming" is a postive development for these cars and for humans. The law focus on being safe, going out of town the car can drive by itself, and also the car is used as a phone GPS and a lot more technology.
One of the reason why it's a good idea for these cars to develope. Is becuase laws are more worried about people being safe. With these cars that can drive by itself and have the technology that it needs they will never get into a reck. If they built cars like this with the technology of a smart phone and could be a new game changer. Even though some people will get bored of not driving its for there own good, they can always drive when they want too.
People might like it more when they go out of town becuase the car can take over and not have to worry about getting no sleep. Why stay up all night driving when they can have a car that can drive by itself without a problem? Most people don't get because they only see the bad in it which it has a lot of reasons why it's bad to let a car drive itself. But I'm supporting the goood side about it.
Techonolgy is a big part in this car if we have enough techonolgy to actually make this car really smart and careful out on the roads it could be great. Some cars already out that are smart. For example i saw a commercial about a car that stops by itself when the driver is not paying attention. And that's how most people crash because they either don't pay attention or they on there phones.
My point was that there is more great reasons why this car should be built. For the saftey, the trips, and the technology people learn new things when they try new things. | 3 |
8b423cb | Dear, state senator
The Electoral College should be removed from our way of voting; we should change it to election by popular vote for the president of the United States because state senators are voting for our president and not us . As stated by Mr. Bradford Plumer in his article "
The Indefensive Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong
".
" Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of elcetors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to cote for [John] Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry. On the off-chance that those electors won the statewide elcetion, they would go to Congress and Kerry would get 34 electoral votes."
This claim tells how the president is choosen and its not by our votes its by the slate of electors votes.
Also,the Electoral College should be removed from our way of voting; we should change it to election by popular vote for the president of the United States because the electoral college is a disaster waiting to happen. Mr. Bradford Plumer states in his "
The Indefensive Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong."
"
The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse."
The importance of this quote is because it tells us that there could be more disasters to come from the Electoral College.
The Electoral College should stay our way of voting because with it we avoid run-off elections. Mr. Richard A. Posner states in his article "
In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President"
that we avoid run-off elections. "
The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. For example, Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent of plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electotal College (301 and 370 electoral votes, respectively).There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast; that pressure, which would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by the Electoral College, which invariably produces a clear winner...."
The importance in the counterclaim is that it shows that the Electoral College process had a clear winner.
Also, the Electoral College should stay our way of voting because of majority vote. The Office of the Federal Register states in their article "
What is the Electoral College?"
in the third paragraph. "
The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Your state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House od Representatives plus two for your Senators...."
This quote shows how each state has so many electors.
In conclusion, the Electoral College is both good and bad for our voting system. Some systems are wrong and some are right but its a hard decision to make with the Electoral College because its both wrong and right. We dont need no disasters in the voting system we already have enough disaters in the world that we live in. | 4 |
8b4327d | I think the election system should change to most popular state votes because it's only counting Americans who represent the Democratic and the Republican. The Electoral College does get its votes and completes the system but you have to vote for a slate of electors, not just that but voters can't always control their vote and voters would get confused about the electors and probably would vote for the incorrect candidate. The Electoral College is unfair.
In 1960, the Louisiana legislature nearly replaced the Democratic electors with new electors so John F. Kennedy wouldn't get the most popular vote, while that was going on electors were being defiant about voting for their party's candidate and voted for whoever they wanted to choose. also in 1960, a state sent two slates of electors to congress in Hawaii, but Vice President Richard Nixon validated his opponent's eclectors without establishing a precedent.
If the state uses a different system such as counting votes from different states, we wouldn't have as much problems we have with it now because the votes in the electoral college are outdated and irrational, even Bob Dole said "Abolish the electoral college!". Americans who vote in the electoral college would not be confused and fussy anymore about who their voting in a different type of system because the electoral college system would sometimes be unorganized and not allow equal votes.
An anachronism is a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruled and receives the most popular votes wins the president election. the Electoral College method is not democratic because the electors elect the president only, Americans are only voting for the slate of electors and voting for the presidentail candidate. The winner of the electoral vote doesn't win the most popular votes, but in 2000, Al Gore had more popular votes than George Bush but less electoral votes than Bush
So the reason why we should retain the electoral college sytem because it's not fair because they avoid the run off elections which happened in 1968 and 1992 to Nixon and Clinton but the electoral college reduced the electoral votes in the run off elections, the electoral college never thinks about the outcome and almost have the winning president lose, in 2012 Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote and had the same percentage of popular votes than Romney, and the electoral college turn off potential voters for a candidate knowing their votes will have no effect because they don't pay attention to the campaign. | 3 |
8b44b6b | Have you heard about becoming a Seagoing Cowboy? Well if one has I think that one should join because, it is really fun and there are a lot of perks of being Sea Cowboy. First off, after staying on the boat for a long time you dont just sit there on the way back we do a lot of different activities. Second off, If one gets drafted for service in a war, this could count for it. Last off, on ones way to a destination you get to see a lot of different old or prehistoric buildings that where made way before you were in the world. Now for why you should join being a Seagoing Cowboy.
Do you know how is said earlier that when you're done doing the load of animals? Well if you remember then we do a lot of fun games and other things. First of all, is we get to play a lot of sports such as baseball, volleyball, table-tennis, fencing, and boxing. Not only do we get to do sports activities but we also get too do acedimic things, for example reading. And lastly if your a more calm type of person we even whittle a little bit with our free times. Now for why it counts torwads doing service in the war.
You're probabley wondering why it counts torwads your service in the war? Well it counts for your service for a various amount of reasons. First, it counts for your service because you can spy on what the enemy is planning to attack us with. Also, It counts for your service because you can stop them from making any devious plans to attack america. Lastly, it will count torwads your service because, America could sneek in some there devious plans through live stock if they needed to if they couldn't come up with any other ways to attack the other country.
One may be asking right now well what kinda places you visit on these livestock trips to other countries? One might get to visit a bunch of prehistoric building or you might even see some of the newer landmarks but they are still pretty cool. First off, you will see a lot of prehistoric building or landmaks that we do not have in america. Second of all my reasons you might see some cool brand new buildings or landmarks that you can not visit in america. Now onto my reminder on why all this is true.
Remember, this is all true because you are hearing from a man who has experienced it all fom his adventues in the deep sea in many different oceanes throught the world. Like the pacific and atlantic oceans. First off, it is a first person perspective so you havve to believe its true. | 4 |
8b47ec8 | 2,000 animlals dead! What if you had to go and help take them across the sea?! Well Luke does, you can play games, you get to see different kinds of animals, and help different countries and see different things. Would you do this or would you not even think about it?
You get to play games, such as volley ball baseball, and table-tennis. Also fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling games. The other guys will play with you and things like that. Luke also is with his friend so you can talk to one of your friends. An if they wanted to do it with you.
You get to see different kinds of animlas. He gets to go to a whole bunch of different countries that got destroid. So they may need to take a girrafe or a monkey you've never seen before. You also get to take care of thoughs animals, and pet. You kinda get to be the owner of the animals.
You get to help different countries out and see different things. Like Luke got to see the Acropolis in Greece. He got to take a Gandola ride in Vinece Italy, a city with streets of water. He also got to tour an excavated castle in Crete, and marveled at the Panama Canal. He was happy that he was able to help people out.
I hope that you join this cattle boat. Hopefully you were inspired enough. Like I said there's a lot of things to do on the boat. | 3 |
8b49919 | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author believes that Venus is worthy of human research and time although the task poses multiple dangers. I stand by the authors claim because we would gain information on how our universe works, and how it was many millions of years ago. The article states that although Venus is sometimes "around the corner", humans have sent many unmanned spacecrafts to attempt to explore and learn about Venus as a planet. Those spacecraft have not survived landing for more than a couple of hours. This has discouraged humans enough that we have yet to send another spacecraft to Venus in over three decades.
The challenges are very rough and will not be anywhere close to a easy task. First they have to get through a thick atmosphere almost consisting of 97% carbon dioxide. After the atmosphere, you will have to survive the clouds which consist of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. Then you would need to figure out how to help deal with its average surface temperature of over 800 degrees Fahrenheit making it the hottest surface temperature of any planet in out solar system.
Next, you'll have to create something sturdy enough to withstand its atmospheric pressure which amost 90 times geater than Earth's. The geolocial features and weather such as volcanoes, earthquakes, and lightning strikes will also aid in ruining the journey.
If we can overcome these obsticles we could learn much more about Venus's past, present, and future. The more knowledge we have will help to futher even more research and hopefully explore even more in our universe. | 3 |
8b5116e | Final Draft: Is the Face on Mars really created by aliens? No, the Face is not created by aliens since Mars is also created by land, so it is not unusual if there is a landform that looked like a face. The Face on Mars could have been created by when Mars itself was being created. Many people may think the Face is a alien artifact, but it is based on an opinion and not facts. An example is that, there are a lot of landforms on Earth that looked like other living things, but they are not created by humans instead the land itself created it.
The Face on Mars was discovered around Cydonia on the red planet, so it is common to have another mesa around it. It is better to conclude an idea with facts and not
just some random guest, so the Face on Mars doesn't have much evidence that said it is made by aliens, but instead it has evidence that said it is created by the natural landforms if Mars. On April 8, 2001, MOC took a picture of the face close up and show it to everyone that the face doesn't really looked much of a face, but it looked like a hill that you can climb onto. According to MOC, the Face on Mars doesn't looked like a face, but "a natural landform with no alien monument." The picture that they took in the 1976 could have been an illusion since it was a cloudy time and the face was blocked with clouds and dust.
The picture that the Mars Global Surveyor took has shown that, there wasn't any objects of transportations, Egyptian pyramids or life on Mars that show that the Face was created by alien. People may keep assuming that the Face is created by aliens, but according to the author of Unmasking the Face on Mars, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms common around the American West." There are also other landforms that could have similar description of the Face that are found on other planets. The Face creation could have been created by a lava dome since according to the Garvin, the author of Unmasking the Face, the "Miidle Butte in the Snake RIver Plain of Idaho was a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face of Mars. Even though we know that the Face on Mars isn't created by aliens, there are other explanation that there could be life on Mars, but it the evidence that we have right now, strongly suggest that the Face on Mars is created by landforms. | 4 |
8b5367f | Do you honestly think that from reading the article " Unmasking the Face on Mars" and from reading theories and looking at pictures of the face that it is a real face? Honestly people it is a natural landfrom. If you look at the three pictures taken in the years 1976,1998, and 2001 you see that it is very blurry at first, but then throughout the years you get a better look at it. As the years go on the "face" loses its shape and doesn't look much like a face anymore. The landform is cracking and it looks from the sky like a mound.
My first reason I think that the face is just a landform is that the way it is indented, it could be a mountain or a tall hill. If so, then you could see how between the years 1998 and 2001 the face could have had an avalanch or a simailiar situation happen to it. Cracks form and it looks like by 2001 the left side of the face has a huge indentation in it. If you look closely in the 2001 image taken from the spaceship "Viking 1"
if you look at the outline of the face's shape, you will see how it kind of slants up like a slide. That is reason to beleive that the Face could be a hill, or a mountain or even a small or large mound.
Okay so econdly, do you believe in god? If you do then did you ever think that since god created everything, that he might have created this so we could study off of it and learn scientific facts. He could have put it there so we can study it and learn and eduacationally grow smarter with this. Another scenario is he put it there so people who want to be scientists or astronauts, that they could see this out in space and have a deeper curiosity for the thin they love and are interested in, whether that is space, or landforms or astrophysics. You never know it could happen.
I can see how you might think that this face structure is not a natural landform. You never know it could be a mound put there covering dead bodies. I know it sounds gross, but think if there is or was another species out there living on mars. Aliens or extra terrestrial creatures could have buried important objects or heirlooms to them there or have buried family or other creatures who have passed on there. You never know, but I can see why you might think that the face is not a natural landform. If I think about it too much my curiosity is kind of wanting to believe all of the unknown stuff such as history or mysteries unknown and veiled by this "face" object.
It could be a landform of mysterious identity. It could be a mound of buried treasure or bodies. We may never know. As it says in the passage," An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the red planet called Cydonia" [1] This face object may just be there to arise our curiosity. But one thing is for sure. This face in the region of Cydonia on the red planet of Mars is a mystery for sure. Buit I can agree with what you might think for in this situation, the possibilties and scenarios are endless. | 3 |
8b54528 | I think the hazerds of venus is the major earthquakes and erupting volcanoes and beyond high pressure heat, such as the temperatures are up too 800 degrees fahrenhiet. on peragraph 5 of NASA thinks that the air pressure would be close to sea level on earth but solar power would be plentiful, and the radiation would not exceed earth levels, not easy conditions, but survivable for humans.
I think what NASA is trying to test if any vechles would land seccuessfuly on this planet because due to the conditions of earthquakes, eruopting volvanoes and high pressure heat, some dont succed while they try to land or make it too venus, so what i think there doing is testing metal, or other powerful materials to make it on venus and see if everything like natural life would grow, for an example on planet mars they test it they could grow plants and beacsue they saw a little bit of water and clouds on planet mars, so maybe since venus is the nearest to planet earth maybe we could test it to see if it would grow.
Fun fact venus is the closest planet to earth terms of density and size, and it could not be a threat just because its the 2sec of the sun. | 1 |
8b57e29 | The author supports the idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represents because the amazin venus has that is different from out planet and why venus is an important part of our solar system and important information and details about venus that is good to know.
The reason why this planet is important even know all the danger this planet have like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes, and frequent ligjhtning strikes this planet is helps make up our solar system to. The temperatue on this planet is different from our other planets and the conditions on venus that is far more extreme and harder to live on and the enviorment around venus. Venus has some many resources and details that is intelligent to learn about and how venus became apart of our solar system and became a planet.Also scientist are trying to find away to send humans to venus to find more details and important artifacts to learn even more about our planet venus so we can gain more knowledge about it.
This passage "The challenge of Exploring Venus gives us details on how the planet can be dangerous but this passage also gives us details to how much this planet has to offer and the reason why this passage is so important and all the things we found out about venus from the passage to help us gain more knowledge and important information about venus. | 2 |
8b5b48f | Did you know that 75% of people believe that aliens exist? I don't think aliens exist because if they did space scientist would have reported it back in 2001 instead of waiting to tell us now. I also don't believe that there we're an alien face on planet Mar's, and that aliens exist.
I think if aliens did exist it would have been discovered
along time back when they seen it in 1998 and its 2016.And if aliens existed we would've had so many horror events going on out of space.
And i really don't believe that there we're an alien face on planet mars. if there we're a alien face on the planet mars how come they didn't say any thing just then when they we're making mars or either pluto an dorf planet?
So that's why i belive that there were not any faces on mars i think that was just something for them to say about the space planets, and that aliens doesn't exist. I'm sorry if every one else thinks that but if u ask some one who doesnt study space i think that they'll tell you they dont think aliens exist. | 1 |
8b5f1fd | The author does not give give well enough support on if the idea of studying the planet Venus is a worthy pursuit. The author gives the dangers of the planet in the article and does give interesting facts about the planet but does not make it sound safe enough to try to visit the planet itself. There are various dangers to this pursuit and does not make it sound worth the risk. The author provides evidence on how the planet is and facts about it but does not state that it is possible for any object to land on the surface of Venus without being destroyed, therefore provides some evidence that studying Venus is not a worthy pursuit.
The author states the dangers on Venus in the artilce and some examples of the dangers from the text would be stated in paragraph 3, such as, "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." The text also states how temperatures on Venus can average over 800 degrees, and that right there proves how dangerous Venus is because humans cannot survive in that kind of heat. The text also states how an environment like that would crush a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of the oceans on Earth. The author provides good information on how Venus is a very dangerous planet but does not well enough support how it is worth studying the planet itself. Though scientists may be fascinated by the planet, it still is not worth any risks due to the dangers. The text does state how there are some features on Venus that are similar to the ones on Earth. Such as, valleys, mountains, and craters. The planets also have similar size to each other and occasionally have the closest distance to each other too. Though this information is quite fascinating, it does not provide information on how Venus is worth visiting and studying.
Studying Venus is not a worthy pursuit. From reading the last few paragraphs, from the sound of the author, this seems to do with more of opinion and personal interests rather than factual evidence and support. The author does not make it seem worthy to study this planet in ways it has never been studied before, such as going there and exploring the surface for a long time and exploring more than just a small area, but discovering and studying larger parts of the planet because without actually seeing just about every inch of the planet, there is no way of knowing what is on the planet itself., which makes it a bit more dangerous but also makes humans very curious. Yes people may be fascinated in the planet and would like to achieve the goal of exploring the surface of Venus for awhile, but knowing the dangers of this planet's surface and atmosphere, it is not physically possible to do so. Scientists try with machines consistenly but those machines do not even last for more than a few hours on or around this planet, proving that it is an extremely difficult task to study the planet, Venus. Though scientists can continue to try and make machines more compatable due to knowing these certain facts about Venus. It can make it a bit more possible to study Venus more, but until then, it is not worth any risks due to the factual dangers on this planet. | 4 |
8b61136 | Dear senator, I believe the Electoral College System is wrong.
In source number 2, Bradford Plumer states, "Under the electoral college system, voters vote for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.". In other words, your vote is basically in the hands of someone else, and hopefully they vote for who you want what's even worse is electors are picked on at state conventions, sometimes state party's central committee, or even sometimes the presidental candidates, so you, the citizens don't get to pick the elector. Voters can not always control who their electors vote for and voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candiate.
Moreover, in source number 2, Bradford Plumer states, "The single best arguement against the electoral college is what we might call the diaster factor... state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people...electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please.". Furthermore, this shows how the citizens of the United States of America really don't have a direct, liberal,voting system to choose who they want to won the election because at anypoint the electors can just go against what the citizens want and vote for who they please.
Lastly, Plumer states, "the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each states, candidates don't spend time in each state because they know they hvae no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the 'swing' states.". Basically,this is saying that small states don't get to see campaigns or any of that because they're small states so they don't evem get a visit from the elector.
Overall, The electoral college is unfair, outdated and irrational. We should all have the right to vote for who we want directly and not have to go through electors which there is a very high chance they might change their minds and vote for the other party. | 4 |
8b627c2 | Dear Senator,
The Electoral College is a very unfair to many of the states.Some states are left in the dust without being visited or even seeing anything about a campaign. Also the voting is misleading because they vote for electrols not the president which the people should be voting for.In the passage
The Indenfensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong states
" Under the electoral college system ,voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." this information tells us that Electoral College is wrong and should be changed.
Voting for a new president is left for the electors we choose as a state to pick and we dont even get a say in the matter because we can not control who they vote for and it could be very confusing and people might vote for the wrong person.In the passage
The Indenfensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong states "Perhaps most worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case ,Elections would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president." With this information it shows that the election is out of the people hands that are going to be governed but to the governement that can make very bad decsions and has the United States populations fate in there hands and make the wrong move and have a crisis for the next four years to come.Also the winner take all system doesnt spread eqaully through the states, In the 2nd source it states" During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina ,and voter in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad." This shows that it doesn't matter that the candidates go to get states because they only depend on certain states that have alot of elctorols like California and Texas an Ohio.
The Electoral College idea is outdated and irrational and needs new ideas that wil make voters happy. It would be easier just to have a popularity vote to pick the president instead of going through so much chaos with all the election. Ther should be campaigns and a couple of debates but then one big election that every one vote on at the same time to elect our president. This idea might help bring togetheir the population in each states to decide on one president to run our nation. The Senate and the House of Represeitatives already have a job and doesn't need to be taking the job of the citizens. To prove my point in passage 2
The
Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the sysem are wrong states "
In 1976 a tie would have occurres if a mere 5,559 voters from Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hawaii had voted theother way. The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe" The citizens can be confused and easily mislead if something is confusing like the Electoral College. Swing voters can change everything .
In this type of election there can also can be segregation invovled which unfair because mostly all people in the Senate and The House of Represantives are white and maybe have a problem with different races or women becoming the next president. In source 2 the last paragraph :
"It's offical: The electoral college is unfair ,outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality.And the arguments against elections are spurious at best. It's hard to say this but Bob Dole was right:
Abolish the electoral college!"
I agree with this is and I beleive that the Electoral College should be abolished because it is so unfair to the voters because thet are mislead and are not voting for the prsident but for the electors to vote for the president. I hope you agree with my opinion and decide to take this matter in your own hands and make a better election and happy citizens.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
8b6750d | Cars have been part of our daily lives for decades and have become somewhat idolized in American culture. But cars are slowly killing our planet and are speeding up the Greenhouse effect taking place within our Earths atmosphere. We've become entirley too dependent on cars to get us where we wish to go, making many people lazy. Cars also emit gasses that can harm our internal body structures, causing problems with lung diseases and just the simple act of breathing. Many cities from all over the world have taken measures to limit the use of cars in daily life, making their homes cleaner and healtheir to live in. More cities should start to do this as well to help save our planet and oursleves.
Environmentalists have hated cars for a long time because of the harmful effect it has to air we breathe. When near-record levels of smog filled the air of Paris, they enforced a temporary driving an in efforts to reduce the smog and within five days the smog cleared enough to allow citizens to start driving once again. In America, the number of drivers and car owners has been steadily reducing since 2005 and many experts belive it will continue to. A revolution could be started if enough people stop driving personal vehicles and instead walk, bike, or even just use public transportation.
People have adjusted over the years to things being given to them without them doing much to get it. Cars contribute to this and have caused laziness in many car owners. In Bogota, Columbia they have initiated and annual car-free day where everyone has to get to their jobs by means of biking or walking or taking public transportation. Carlos Atruro Plaza rides his two-seat bicycle with his wife to work and both like the idea of limiting air pollution caused by cars. Pollution from cars can be dangerous for humans as well as the environment. By breathing in harsh gases we could aquire diseases such as COPD and lung cancer. Cars allow people to live unhealthy lifestyles in comfort while unknowing of the harm its causing. They are an insidious problem.
Cars have been gradually degenerating the planet and harming the people who use them. Thankfully many officials are working hard to limit this but we all have to contribute. Our planet will die if we dont do something to stop it, and if our planet dies, whats to become of the human race? | 4 |
8b68d5d | I feel that google or people and who ever else is making these cars should not put them on the market. I think this because if someone were to get into an accident who is to blame? Should we blame the car? The car company? The driver? No one will be able to asnswer these questions because driverless cars are dangerous. There are to many drunk drivers and people falling asleep at the wheel now a days to have a computer powered car. I feel that if they put these cars on the market we would have twice as much accidents then we did before. Alot of people now a days text and drive so add not contoling the vechicle and what do u got? 3 times the accidents! These driverless cars are becoming popular but we need to look at all the diffrent things that can happen when someone is controling the vechicle. For one drunk drivers. Alot of people drink behind the wheel and thats already dangerous enough. Another reason driverless cars are a bad idea is the fact that people text and drive way to often. 8/10 people text and drive and that could really put someone at risk. Yes i know there cars arent truley driverless and have driven half a million miles without an acident,but thats not the point. The point is why would we want a machine to cause more deaths and injuries then they already do? Yes they have antilock brakes and speed sensors,but how do we know they will be 100% effective? We don't. Driverless cars can steer,accelerate,and brake themselves,but what if they dont? What if the engine locks? What if the brakes malfunction, or the car speeds up too quickly? Who is too blame? If its almost "driverless" then how is the driver responsible? How many people are going to get injured or killed do to these malfuctions? If car companys are so conserned on saftey,then why would they want a computer powered car? Why wouldnt they just make the car more safe and efficant? Although GM has developed driver seats that vibrate when the car is in danger of hitting an object, how do we know that the car wouldnt stop for a living thing? Or human being? What if the car turns to neutral at the speed of at least 25 mph and you cant brake because its computer operated? Lets think about this. If someone is in need of a medical emergency and you dont have time to wait for an ambulance,would u put that person "safely" strapped in a driverless car; GPS set to the nearest hospital? Why or why not? Would u be willing to take that ride if it was a life or death situation? These driverless cars seem legit but look at the real textbook situations. They move by themsleves,brake,turn,sensor, and give you alerts if your about to hit an object. Thats right they accelerate, brake,turn ALL BY THEMSELVES.So i feel that we should not have driverless cars for these reasons. They could and can cause many more injuries and deaths than an human being can because they dont think,they just do what there motherboards tell them to do,and you know what that is? Drive. They might be programed to stop, accelerate, and turn, but who says they will when there supposed to? The car company? You? The car? All this can be avoided if we dont have driverless cars; and that's why we shouldnt have driverless cars. | 4 |
8b69b1d | Venus is often referred to be Earth's twin. They are different distances from the sun, but astronamers have figured out that Venus may of been able to have many life forms just like our planet earth. For example is says in paragraph 4 Venus has some features that are simular to Earth's such as Venus has a rocky sediment surface, and also have very familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and even craters. All spacecrafts that were put on a mission to land on Venus where failures, but with each failure we may get a bit closer to getting to our goal of getting to Venus.
Venus is very much worth the dangerous pursuit. Venus is a facinating planet such as Earth, since earth is now the only planet with perfect temperature for life and Venus apears to of had the same ability to have life on it as well. We all have therorys of why Venus got the way it is to day and is no longer able to have life on it, but the only way to get on answer is so try out best to get there to do the research. Such as we did to Mars with
the rover "opportunity." But Venus is going to be very tricky to get on since there is so much carbon dioxide and Venus's average range of surface temperature is around 800 degrees Fahrenheit (Paragraph 3) and the apmaspher can crush and liquefy a submarine.
With all this information I hope you see my reasoning for thinking Venus is a very fasination planet to explore in the future years, But as i said it will be very dangerous and absoulutly take an extream amount of time before we acomplishment it. After it is done we can cellibrate, even know the only people that will be cellibrating will probably only be the scientist that did it. | 3 |
8b7362b | The electoral college is a process that has been used since the first president was elected. Now it is being questioned as a rational way to elect the next presidents. The author of the article "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong", Bradford Plumer, argues that the electoral college is unfair and outdated, while the author of the artcle "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the president", Richard A. Posner, gives five reasons to why we should keep the electoral college. Though the method of electing a president is refered to as a "non-democratic method" it is an extremely important way to decide our nation's president.
Of course there are reasons why the electoral college should be abolished. Plumer argues, "the Louisiana legislature nearly succeedeed in replacing the democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy." Because of the replacement the popular wouldn't have gone to Kennedy. Plumer continues to state that "Electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please..." That means the opposing party gets the electoral vote because of the "faithless" electors. It understandable why the electoral college should be abolished; it is unreliable and unfair. However, we cannot abolish the only logical and reasonable way of electing our persidents.
It is important to note that | 2 |
8b7d41f | Dear senator of state,
I think keeping Electoral colleges is a key benifit for this state and also this country. According to the article "
Does the Electoral College work?
",The founding fathers established this process in the constitution as compromise between election of the president by a vote in congress and election of the president by popular demand. The Electoral college process consits of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote President and Vice President, and the counting of electoral votes by Congress. The Electoral college consits of 538 electors. A majority of electoral votes is required to elect the President. The passage also states that under the 23rd Amendment of the constitution, the district of columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the electoral college. for this reason, in the following discussion, the word "state" also refers to the District of Columbia,
The presidential election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. You choose your state's electors when you vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you're actually voting for your candidate's electors. Most states have a "Winner take all" system that awards all electors for the winning of thhe Presidential candidate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a Variation of the "proportional representation". After the presidental election, your governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment" lisiting all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The certificate also declares the winning of the presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of electors each year.
The electoral college is widely regartded as an Anachronism, a non-democraric method of selecting the president that ought to be overruled by delcaring the canidant who recives the most votes the winner. each partt selects a trusted elector to vote for the parties nominee. | 1 |
8b7fcc4 | Cars that can drive themselves?
Is a driverless car really a good idea? Manufacturing a driverless car has not even been a succeding task. Cars that can drive on their own still require an alert driver at times. If the self driving car was manufactured laws would have to be changed, the company and the owner would have issues if a crash did accure, and the owner possibly needed to be alert may not stay alert. The self driving car needs more time before being tried out with actual costumers.
The driverless car manufactured by google has made it half a million miles without a crash. However drivers still are alerted to take over the wheel when parking, navigating traffic, or road construction. What could happen if a "driverless" car alerted the owner but they weren't alert and did't take they wheel in time? Major accidents could be caused from this. A driver not focused on the road could put in danger themselves and other drivers around them.
If the driver was'nt alert and an accident did accure, both the company and owner would be in seriouse trouble. Certian laws would have to be made or changed to solve this issue. If there was a crash with two cars would one of the drivers be of blame as they are now or would both companies be blamed. Technology has instences when it doesn't work. Everyone has yelled at a phone or T.V before. Though when that technology doesn't work properly it's not a life or death situatiuon. Also how expensive would this be? It's well known how expensive a phone, T.V, or new computer can be. It would be too expensive to make them the sale price would have to bring back the money spent to manufacture one and the sales person would need money to actually make for the work. How many people could ctually afford it. The people it would help most likely can't even come up with the money to get one.
With the rate of accidents now drivers barely stay alert when they have the wheel. But knowing, or thinking, they have the freedom to do as they please while the car drives itself they will lose focus. Drivers won't pay attention to the road. People have way to much trust in their technology they wont even think of what would happen when they have to drive. How owuld they react if they tried to take a nap and was awaken to take the wheel? they may not have enough time to even think of what they need to do to avoid an accident.
What would be the point of a driverless car? Reduce the number of drunk drivers on the road maybe. Or give people who can't drive the transportation they need without public transports. This would all be great! But what would happen when the car needed them to take over. Of course you'd still need to go through training and so on to get your liscnes so people who have the inability to drive may it be physical will have no prevail in it. Also if a drunk driver was alerted they would still be driving after drinking. The only ones that coul use this technology are the ones that can already drive. Then what is the point of the driverless car anyway? There's too many saftey dangers and pointless reasons to start manufacturing a driverless car. | 4 |
8b8137e | In 2006 a trend began to grow in Europe, United States, and other places around the world to seporate auto use and the suburban life in to a movement called "smart planning." Most of the greenhouse gases emissions are up too 12 percent and is climing to greater than 50 percent in the United States and in Europe. Most of our development after World War II has be n centered on the car or other means of transport. 80 percoent of laws have to highways and only 20 percent to other transport in the United States.
Many efforts in the past two or three decades have maade cities denser, and better for walking, planners and now taking the concept tho the suburbs. Homes to 5,500 residents within a rectangular square mile have to be advanced experimentin some low-car suburban life. the reason the usages of cars and other transportation would help the world and the the residents around you.
If there only 80 percent of appropriation have by law for highways and only 20 percent on other transport because lager role in a six-year federal tranaportation bills that are being put throw to be checked and aproved. The laws they have on transportantion and other means is to reduse the effects of the greenhouse effects that are happening are the world.
For the third stright year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis alound to dive during the day in countries around the world to reduce smog and greenhouse effects that happen. which if you think about the ideas that ae being share around the world with other countries the world is be comung less likely to be effected by the grren huse effects around the world. | 1 |
8b81a7a | Theres so many positive and negative when we imagine the idea of driverless cars. I believe that driverless cars are very dangerous and can cause many conflicts. First, I know that even with the law of don't text and drive, people still do those things. Secondly , if we allow driverless cars I know that people who are tired from work are going to fall asleep knowign the car is in control, but at the end when theres trouble, they will still be asleep. Lastly, I believe that people will start sueing companies and people will not feel confortable of being stalked while driving.
First of all, there are many reckless drivers around us anyhow. How can we be sure that we are safe when driving?
In the passage " something not avaible to the drivers trying to text with a cell phone." I can not imagine but we do know for a fact that texting and driving is very dangerious but there are also people who are out there doing it. These situations can lead to mass accidents. If you are given the chance that your car does not need you and you do get bored off of the heads up display, what would you really do? Since our society is all about iphones and samsung , I do not think that its safe to be in a car with your cell phones on. I sense that teenagers are especially going to disobey the law because they just tend to think its going to be okay, which in reality its not. We should be very concerned of everyone driving safetly.
Seondly, I believe that exuausted and drunk people are going to take this advantage of having driverless cars. What if you car needs your help, and youre asleep and that you're too drunk to get self concious? This will lead to more troubles because than people that are drunk will still drive and think that their car has it all in control."They can steer ,accelerate, and brake themself, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills" The driverless can be very dangerious if in case in need of a human skill if someone is really tired and drunk.
Lastly, I believe that your rights are being taken away when you're beign stalked on while driving. I wouldnt want to be stalked on when i'm driving or anything. it violates someones privacy when youre watching them because some people od have to do certain things when they are parked for example like having to use an emergency or changing clothes. "While the driver watches the road , the car watches the driver" Do you really think that drivers are going to watch the road when they dont have to? I also believe that peopel will start sueing companies because who is at fault if theres an injury or accident?"if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is al fault- the driver or the manufacturer? I think that people who are being responsible and driving with great cautions will be upset and it would not be fair to them if they are under control of their own car and than there is someone els thats not drving but lettign their car being controled by a computer than they get in an accidents. I do knwo that there are accidents from many reasons, but I believe that driverless cars can cause a lot of problems.
In conclusions, I do not agree the fact that driverless cars should be allowed. It has many safety issues for the community and it will cause a lot of problems. It will violate someones privacy,someone can take advantage of driverless cars when they are drunk or tired, and lastly peopel will be upset. I think it depends on the indivuals who are driving. People should start caring more for others when driving because someones life can be at risk if they driver recklessly.
Driverless cars will lead into many big problems as well as to many life lost if youre not prepared when your car needs you. | 4 |
8b82486 | The human body is a complex network of muscles, bones, and organs to create one functioning person. These muscles, bones, and organs create diverse emotion whether it is through the face or through the body. The emotions help express themselves to others in order to relay their feelings to events or surroundings. A technology able to read a vast amount of emotions and help indicate their feelings would be incredibly beneficial to society as it would make understanding each other easier. This could help students in the long run by helping the school or instructor understand what interests them and what disinterests them by knowing their feelings to the emotions they convey.
The problem in schools around the country is the struggle to encapsulate a student's interest and maintaining it for numerous years. A technology that can help lead students in the correct direction, from the first day they step into a school, can lead to a more productive society. As Dr. Huang puts it, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication,' notes Dr. Huang. 'So computers need to understand that, too." (D'Alto.) If we can use this technology, we will be able to put the expressions and emotions into words and percentages. This removes the barrier of people struggling to understand each other. This technology will pave the way to a brighter and more efficient world by making people interested and happy to do what they do from the first day.
Technology is the way of tomorrow and will help create a better world. A technology that helps understand human emotion consistently will be the next big advancement for communication and language. A student needs to be understood in order for he or she to understand. A program that can easily make that happen in a few seconds as opposed to several years can help everyone enjoy what they do a little more. | 3 |
8b85452 | The Electoral College is a process in which electors pick the president instead of the people, but is it worth keeping. No, the Electoral College is not worth keeping because it reflects the view of the electors instead of the people.
Some people would argue that the Electoral college should be kept because it ensures the certaintity of the outcome ( source 3 paragoh 18). However this relies on a winner takes all system which makes the say of the minority voters pointless since even if they do vote then their vote is pointless. Second of all the presidents only campaign in states they are not sure of and completly ignore the states they know they will win (source 3 paragraph 19). This may be a good strategy but if we instead abolished the Electoral College then everyones vote would matter and the canditate would have to campaign in every state to ensure his victory. In all the Electoral College should be abolished becasue it takes away say of the people.
Not only does the Electoral college take away the say of the people, it also has no protection against a tie of states that have an even number of electors (source 2 paragraph 11). For instance a state like hawaii that has a total of two electors if they both vote for differnt people then how are the votes decided well it already happened in 1960,but Richard Nixon who was the vice president at the time and known to be against the Electoral College decided to only aknowledge his opponents electors. That is why we should abolish the Electoral College.
Allow me ask a hypothetical question what if the electors were corrupt and voted for whomever they pleased without even considring the peoples vote (source 1 paragrqaph 2). We have no system to ensure that the people vote matters but the electors does therefore electors that are picked by former canditates may be more likely to return the favor and ignore the peoples vote and vote for their canditate. There are many important figures whom are against the Electoral College such as Richard Nixon, Jimmy carter, and Bob Dale there are many more but thes are all politicians who see the Electoral College the same way the people do (source 2 paragraph).
In all the Electoral college should be abolished because it ignores the peoples votes. The votes that werre granted to the people by the constitution therefore the Electoral College not only doesn't care about the people, but it is also violating their constitutional rights. | 4 |
8b885de | The electoral collage should be disbanded. Not only is it unfair to minority party voters, but it also is unreliable.
The electoral collage consists of people voting for an elector, which in turn votes for a presedent. This may sound like a good idea, but in reality, it over-complecated and scrambles things. This has lead to a less wanted canidate able to win the election. During 2000, presidential canidate Al Gore recieved the popular vote, but not the precidency, due to the proccess of voting for the electors, rather than the presedents. This led to Al Gore recieving 266 electoral votes, and George W. Bush winning 271, therefore electing a less popular president. Not only that, but the ellectors being voted for may not even vote for the canidate they say they will.
The winner-takes-all strategy was placed to reduce the chance of ties and have the canidates focus on taking over the swing-state votes, but an unintended consequence was the reduction of voting from minory party votes, for example, when a Democrat in Texas or a Republican in New York votes, they hardly get any say, and therefore may stop voting. A popular vote for presidency would allieviate this problem and make it able for anyone from a state to have an equal voice in the state.
Popular vote would lead to members of different states having the same amount of power, while the electoral collage leads to unequal representation. Because of the Senate's two representitives per state, people in less populous states have more power. For example, California has 2 Senate representitives and 35 million voters, and Wyoming, with a much smaller population, has the same amount of representitives in the Senate, leading to a Wyoming resident having much more than a Californian one.
All in all, the ellectoral collage is a bad idea. Not only does it ensure inequallity, but it also leads to inaccurate voting and discrimination against a voter who votes for a minority statewide canidate. To trully be fair to all voters, the popular vote method should be implemented to resolve all the problems. | 4 |
8b9296d | If I were a scientist at NASA I will not believed alien because most of scientists said aliens are not real and I think they just made up of alien. A face on Mars is maybe when the wind blow the dust it trun that face or when they goes there they died and their dead body face is still there. But it's really interesting because that face is really big and it image 3 times bigger than th epixel size. But I believed there are not alien in the other planets or in earth because alien are not real but I have to makesure that I have to ask more question to the smartest scientist and ask about how did that face happen and how are we gonna prove about that. I have to ask more question about that too and they said that face look like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian style pyrmaids or even small shacks, you could see what they were. Some of them don't believe it because they don't see it and they just guess that answer. But when I looked at the picture I think I saw that crown and their face look shiney and in 2001 that face look destroy . I don't believe in aliens but if there was some aliens in that planet they might made that face too and they hid away from that face. I wish I see that picture for real and take some picture and prove it. | 1 |
8b96e59 | Summary
The "Face on Mars" was found during a search for a possible landing site for the sister ship of Viking 1,
Pictures were taken during the search, a showy likeness of a human face was spotted.
An enourmous head close to two miles from end to end, was looking back at the camera.
Scientists believed it was just another Martian mesa, common around a region of Mars called Cydonia. But it had unusual shadows that made it look similar to an Egypt Pharaoh.
The "Face on Mars" is a huge rock formation, which resembles a human head.
Shadows gave the illusion of eyes, a nose, and a mouth, and because of this, it caused alot of attention to Mars. People believe that it was an alien monument, but proof showed that it was, just a natural landform.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argumentative Essay
Few Scientists believe the Face was an alien artifact.
Photographing Cydonia and the Face became a priorty for NASA.
Eighteen years after the Viking missions ended, Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in September, 1997.
On April 5, 1998 Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin, and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team took a photo ten times sharper than the original Viking Photos in 1976.
Thousands of web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site. To no surprise at all, revealed . . . a natural landform. No alien monument after all, Just rocks.
When the photo was taken it was winter in April '98. A cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. The camera on board MGS had to look through wispy clouds to see the Face, skeptics believe that because of this the alien markings were hidden. As said in the article
"Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maxium resolution."
The pixels in the 2001 image spans to 1.56 meters.
While the best 1976 Viking photo had 43 meters per pixel.
In a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size, if there were objects on the ground in this picture, you could see what they were just by looking at it.
The picture shows the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, commonly found around the American West.
"It reminds me of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," says Garvin "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." | 1 |
8b9aea0 | Imagine that it's 6:00am, Monday 2026 and you wake up to the smell of gasoline, fuel, and fogged air; you look outside and all you see is car after car commuting to one's everday life and spreading pollution every where. Cars are used way to often by many people who don't even need it most the time. If you do your part and limit car usage only good things will come to the world. Limiting car usage in todays' environment sounds like a difficult thing to do since people work, go to school, etc. but in reality limiting car usage is saving the environment around us and by saving the environment you are saving yourself.
The high number of car usage is polluting our environment in numerous ways due to the smog it creates that corrupts the air. Sometimes it takes seeing what one is doing to stop and think about how they are affecting it. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city ( Source 2, Paragraph 10)". You can see that because of the increased pollution in Paris they put-forth a law to limit the car usage in the city. If you limit usage than progress in the environment will occur. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog ( Source 2, Paragraph 14)". In only "five-days" more than half of congested pollution decreased due to the limiting of car usage in that area. Cars can just destroy the atmosphere but we as people can make a big change by just walking or riding a bike in the times where you don't need a car and just doing that is a great way to decrease pollution by limiting your car usage.
Some places and people in the world seem to thrive without cars in their everyday system. People who don't own cars seem to have less stress in their life. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way... ( Source 1, Paragraph 3)". In some areas of the world the government has days to support the limiting of car usage by banning them for a temporary time. "BOGOTA, Colombia- In a program... millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took busses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams" ( Source 3, Paragraph 20)". Having a day free of cars has a great chance of decreasing some of the modern stresses of life. Living a life without cars even if it is for a certain period of time is helpful in reducing the pressure on ones' life and gives nature a fighting chance on this planet.
Limiting car usage is beneficial to world whether the impact is small or large it all plays a good part in protecting our health and the environment around us. People have made changes some take to the extreme others don't do something about it until they see for themselves what it does. If one limits their car usage then they are being a great benefactor and get to experience the advantages of it. You stop imagining and now you think "I'm going to ride my bike to school today". | 4 |
8b9fe60 | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthly persuit despite the dangers it presents because Venus has been hard for scientists to study the planet and been hard for them to get sample and landed spacecraft on Venus.
It has been difficult for scientists to land spacecraft on Venus because most of them would stop working. In the text it state "Since no spacecraft survived the landingfor more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touch down on Venus in more then three decades."(3). These quote is important because it explain why it has been difficult for a single spacecraft to touch the ground
because they doesn't last long and stop working.
The atmosphere in Venus is way different
then earth and that can cause problem for people to lne there.In the text it state " A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid on Venus's atmosphere"(3). This quote is important because it explain that there are many danger to study the planet with it highy corrosive sulfuric acid which would cause problems.
The comditions on the planet may cause it to be a danger for a person or a spacecraft to be there.In the text it state " Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface (3). This quote is important because it gives reasons why the planet has so many dangerous thing happening and diffcult for someone to be there and study it, like erupting volcanoes, earthquakes and lighting all ways striking.
In conclusion, Studying Venus is a wrothy pursuit despite the danger its presents because the planet has many conditions which would be hard for someone or a spacecraft to vist there and landed there, but would be a worthly pursuit to be able to land there with out any problems. | 3 |
8ba2d9d | As a nation wide situation, cars are a main factor of what causes pollution. Limiting car usage helps to make the enviorment we live in better. With the fact of owning a car can be stressful,and the precent rates of car traffic and car purchase has decreased, people have commited to a automoblie free zone.
If in a perseptive of a mother or father, you would prefer for your child to stay inside and not play close to the road because of the slight chance they could be physical hurt by a car. According to Source 1 Heidrum Walter was always tense when owning a car and now living in a city where cars are very limited she is happy. As a citizen in Vauban; where giving up cars is normal, some don't want to. To own a car you must only have the option to park in to places. One is in a large garage at the outskirts of the development and or a house you have to purchase inn order for you to use the parking space. As the limiting of car usage, it would be a lot easier to walk from point A to point B instead of being abnormal and driving further to park. A average amount for a house to citizens that own a automoblie is fourty thousands dollars. It would much cheaper to walk,bike, run, or even skate to a destination.
In Bogota, Colombia it has become a trend to banned cars for one day out of the year. As people enjoy the car free day, they bike, walk, hike or took buses on the rainy day. Rain could not stop the passionate feelings against cars on that day. Many agreed that for just one day the air they walk everyday was different. Not only in Bogota and many other Colombian cities, Paris has joined in on the trend. Many were happy to see no car traffic on the busiest streets in Paris. As before the car banning, the air was horrible and rivaled against the world's most polluted city; Beijing. After the participation of car banning, the smog cleared up enough for the city to continued as before. It has been stated that less people are now involved and well known to a life without a car. People in a range of 16 and 39 dont even bother to get a driver's license because of the droping rates of owning a car. It can be expensive but also dangerous. With limiting car usage people just phone a friend and catch a ride or public transportation. Later on when people have the need fora car, like when having children, working, etc. it will be cheaper and easier to get a car since compaines want you to have one becuase of the lower rates and money not coming in from years before yourself.
Advantages comes with disadvantages as well. Limiting Car Usage comes with a change in enviorment, a better feeling in safety, decreasing in Congestion,and a future that you can see happening for yourself. | 3 |
8ba4781 | Making Mona Lisa Smile the authour describes how new technology called The Facial Action Coding System Enables computers to identify human emotions. The process beging when the computer constructs A 3-D, Eckman has classified six basic emotions, The facial expressions for each emotion are universal.
Why I disagree with the authour is because you can't tell people emotions even with the computers. In the story its says that "The process beging when the compputer constructs A 3-D Computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the modle must move like humans muscles"(3). A human can move there face in many different ways even if there sad they can have a happy look on there face if the happy they could have a sad look on they face. So what this proves is that computer try to tell your emotions by your face expresions but really can't.
Humans have a lot of emotions some you can see and some you can not see but all humans have there main emotions. "Eckman has classified six basic emotions happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles"(3). So what this is saying is that your main emotions can be known by a computer because you so different expressions when you are in them emotions. But even if you are show different emotions it would still be hard for a computer to tell how you fell even if it was the smartest computer in the world because say you are mad but even know your mad you showing expressions of being happy so what would the computer say it would most likely say your happy even know your not.
Everybody show there facial expressions for each emotion. in the story it says that "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal, observes DR Hunang, even thought individuals often show varying degrees of expression like not smiling a broadly"(4). And what that is saying is that when you are happy you show a facial expressions or even sad or depressed. Some people do show a lot of emotions but somepeople dont could make it harded for a computer to read if your happy are not.
So what I have proven in The process beging when the computer constructs A 3-D, Eckman has classified six basic emotions, The facial expressions for each emotion are universal. Is that computer would not be a very good way of reading people emotions. Because have there own way of showing the feelings and emotions so show heavy emotions some show light emotions. | 4 |
8ba94ea | Venus is like earths twin. The author stated in where the plant is loctaed. Venus tempature on the surface is 800 degrees. NASA is wanting to send people to the planet venus.
NASA is wroking on other approachaes to studying Venus. They smiplified electronics that are made up of silicon. They are trying to make the modern day computers even faster then they are today. NASA trying to create a machine that well last long enough to contribute to Venus. Their wanting to make gear that also dont need electronce inquired.
People call Venus "The Evening Star" becuase it is one of the brightest spot in the night sky. Although people mistaken it for a star its a planet. Venus is safer to see from the distance its been very challageing to exmane Venus. This planet is the secound planet away from our sun. Venus is the closest size to earth.
The NASA is very facinated by Venus because is the most earth like planet. Venus surface is very rocky like valleys and mountains. NASA is request to send some people to go check out the planet Venus but that is nearly impossable . They think that at one point Venus was just coverd inh ocean. Venus is the nearst option to vist.
I think that we should try and go vist Venus how know what could be on the planet. If we do we should be real cafeul because there could be dangerous stuff there. Its an opertunaity to see what Venus good values are. We can also compare earth o venus. | 1 |
8baa9c6 | Facial Action Coding System has not been around since the early ages of technology. When it comes to technology, developers think of various ways the technology can affect your daily life. With FACS (Facial Action Coding System) there is new wonder to the system everyday. In "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto, D'Alto describes the many ways a computer system can benefit learning styles of students by using examples of FACS: classroom computers, complex algorithms, and 3D models created by computers.
Classroom computers may seem like a boring and old piece of machinery to most students. Although classroom computers are not that exciting, students can have a great benefit from the technology that can be accessed from the computers. Students might not be able to notice any difference in the computer's hardware. However, they may be confused when they see certain ad's showing up depending on their facial expressions. A student's facial recognition can be very important when encouraging students to learn "a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" (D'Alto). Classroom computers being able to read facial recognition helps students' lessons become modifyed to help their learning experience.
Complex algorithms can help a computer detect facial structures and emotions portrayed from within an individual. With technology becoming more efficient in the daily live of an average person, some computers are now built with sensors that can be used to unlock the device. Some home computers; however, are not able to "handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile. But we can write down some simple instructions that 'encode' different emotions" (D'Alto). Software engineers, computer engineers, etc. are working nonstop to help write certain codes that will help create features that will be able to sensed. This big leap into technology can help when classroom computers are being built, thus helping student to learn better.
3D models created by computers are something individuals normally wouldn't see on a day-to-day basis. 3D models are usually created to help people working in the medical fields determine certain diagnosis and such with individuals. If a patient is getting a scan and the doctors need to see certain muscles "the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles" (D'Alto). With computers being able to read and detect muscles located in a person's face, engineers can use that research to help enhance the function of computers being able to sense facial expressions.
The use of FACS examples: classroom computers, complex algorithms, and 3D models created by computers can all make an impact in a student's learning style in the passage "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto. The use of technolgy used today's society already has a huge impact that can lead to an even bigger impact and that impact can help many young individuals learn specific and various ways. | 4 |
8bb3873 | We should abolish the Electoral College and change the election to popular vote for the president of the United States. The Electoral College is corupt compared to popular vote. They're more cons than pros about the Electoral College. A lot of people agree that we should change our voting to popular vote. Electoral College voting should not be the way we vote for something so important.
The Electoral College System is wrong. In source two, Bradford Plumer said that "under the Electoral College system, voters vote not for the president, but for a state of electors, who in turn elect the president". You have no clue who your voting in with the Electoral College system. Plumer also said "they can be anyone not holding public office" and "electors could always defy the will of the people". Do you really want someone who you dont know and can't trust to be an elector? If you wanted someone like that you might as well let a child do the job. In source one the Office of the Federal Register said "when you vote for your canadidate you are actually voting for your candidates elector's". More than one source said that you vote in electors when voting for a your candidate.
The Electoral College system is said to be unfair to voters in source two. The Electoral College system has a "winner-take-all" system. Which means if a Democrat candidate wins they will have Democrat electors and if a Republican wins the will have Republican electors. In source one the Office of the Federal Register also said that the "winner-take-all" system "awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate". This is not fair to the voters or the United States. If a tie happened it would be even more unfair to voters. if a tie did happen the House of Representatives would break it. In source two Plumer said "the House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people. If the voting doesnt even show your will why vote? Plumer also said in source two that "the Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and irrational". I agree with plumer, the Electaral College needs to go.
Even though the Electoral College has a lot more cons than pros they have some pros. In source three Posner give you the "five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President". Posner said the first reason was "certainty of outcome". The second reason is "the Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal". the third and fourth reason is "swing states" and "big states". the fifth reason is the Electoral College system can "avoid run-off elections". These are all pros of keeping the Electroral College, but are they really worth it? Would you rather have these pros compared to having fairness?
We should abolish the Electoral College and change the election to popular vote for the president of the United States. Popular voting is alot better for everyone. The pros of popular voting excedes the pros of the Electoral College. Popular voting gives everyone a fair chance and doesnt just have a "winner-take-all" system. it actually gives both political parties a chance. I agree with source two when it said "Abolish the Electoral College!". Source two was right we need to put an end to the Electoral College system! | 4 |
8bb458d | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author leaves the reader to infer that exploring Venus' surface is a good idea. I believe that the author did very well supporting his claim. In Paragraph 4, the author states, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." If this is true, then could Venus become like Earth once again? I believe the author is trying to say that Venus is worth exploring to see if it is able to be like Earth once more. In Paragraph 6, the author suggests, "Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough misson to understand Venus would need to get up close and person despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges." I believe the author is correct in this statement. If we start looking at exploring Venus as a challenge instead of a risk, it could possibly give researchers more motivation to get out and explore. In Paragraph 8, the author claims, "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 curiousity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." The author brought up the word "challenge" again, and I believe that he really thinks the challenge is worth it. I agree with him in this claim because if humans can explore Venus, I also believe we can go on to do bigger and better things with exploring our solar system. The author did a good job in making his claims and then proceeding to back them up with evidence and facts. Although he had some opinions, the article was overall well written and well put together. The author convinced me, as the reader, that exploring Venus is definitely worth a few more tries. | 4 |
8bb5e74 | Have you ever been in a situation where you have very little to no control at all? How anxious were you in this situation? This feeling is something that we have all been through at least onces in our lives. Having known this feeling very well myself, I feel that having Driverless Cars would be a huge mistake. Having the ability to sit back and watch your car drives itself would lead to one being distracted more often because they would have more time to check a phone or send a text. Having independent cars could also result in more accidents that were the after effect of a computer malfunction. Another flaw that was stated in the passage dealt with the fact that if one crashes, there could be an endless fight of who is really liable, the driver or the manufacturer. Having the technology to make self dependent cars would lead to more time for distractions, a higher chances of malfunctions, and law sutis over liablity.
Having Driverless Cars would allow most of the population to have more time to get distracted. If a teen has just gotten a new tablet and wants to get it all set up and go some where at the same time, they would be able to do this. They would jump into their car and start messing with their new toy. If a little kid happens to run into the road while the driver isn't paying attention, the car probably wouldn't have time to react. Now the driver has to deal with a man slaughter charge just becuase the car was supposed to do it for her. The situtation is also a perfect example of how these cars could malfunction.
Another flaw to the new concept of self driving cars is the fact that they could suffer computer malfunctions at any time. If the driver needs to drive through a dirt road, the car could hit a bump that would knock a wire lose that controls the speed of the vehicle. The car could also get rain water into on of the control panels that migh end of leaving one stranced on the side of the road due to an electrical fire. Another computer flaw is that nothing is perfect. Not every single computer hard drive or control panel is going to be exactly right.
One little mistake by the developer could lead to an entire city worth of cars having to be recalled. At this point if a driver is in a recalled vehicle and gets into an accident, who is there really to blame?
The final reason to keep independent cars just a dream is the fact that there is no way to tell who is really liable for the accident. If a civilian is driving through a street in the city while another is on a bike and they hit at a intersection with numerous blind spots, who is going to take the blame. Will the pedestrian on the bike be charged because he wasn't aware of the unknown blind spot? Will the civilian in the car be charged with unvoluntary man slaughter because he/she expected the car to stop, or will the manufacturer be charged because their flawless design lead to the death of a innocent citizen? There are so many reasons to just leave this unlikely vision in the minds of the creators: however, these three are really the things that companies need to pay attention to.
The way that people can get distracted so easily, the way that computers can malfunction, and the way that people will try to put the blame on others are three reasons why companies need to leave independent cars in a dream. People should never have to worry about a car with a mind of its own killing innocent people. The entire idea of Driverless Cars is completely filled with flaws that could lead to infinite problems in the driving world. Driverless cars should not be part of our future or any one else's after that. | 4 |
8bb5ea3 | dear state senator, i believe that you should get rif of the electrical collage because the votes are biased and with the citizens voteing you can get better results.
first of all,even though the electoral collage consists of 538 electors i think it would be better if all of citizens from across the globe can help more due to more people and more relibilty then with 570 people.
secend of all,if "the popular vote"was gone and was taken seriesly then we would have better quality presidents like al gore even though he was popular he still lost the presidency. according to bradford plumer over 60 precent of voters would perfer a direct election also,how are we sure to trust the electors anyway? is texians vote on john kerry they might not lisin and vote on whoever they want out of spite. also we don't want to repeat the 2000 fiasco agein and the system allows much worse and they occasionally refuse to vote for the party canidate. and disaster will happen is two slates of electors to congress like when it happend in hawaii in 1960 when richard nixion only wanted elector voters but luckly he did it "without establishing a precedent". and what would happen if theirs a tie in the electoral vote? then the electorals would be thrown to the house of represenitives and they vote on the president there.
incluclosion,we should get rid of the electoral collage because it's unfair,outdated and irrational. | 2 |
8bb7ea1 | Have you ever wondered about the Face on Mars? You probably told yourself it wasn't real, or you're one of those people who have done their research and love the idea of it being real. Well, I'm here today to tell you how it's not created by aliens. Aliens don't exist to our knowledge yet, so therefore we cannot assume that it was made by them.
First, as we refer back to the 2001 picture, it looks cracked and it looks like it was covered. In the 1998 picture, it looked like it was somewhat burning. In the 1976 Viking 1 picture towards the middle of the article, it shows the shadows, making it look like a human face. The eye was caused because of a hole, so it was dark. The nose was caused by the shadow on the right half of the face.
Then, NASA knew it was going to get popular very fast, and it did. It was a pop icon all over the world. For example, "It had starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows, even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years!" (5). That goes to show NASA was in it for more fame, because who doesn't want to see a face on Mars?
Finally, it's just a natural landform! As the article states, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image appeared first on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform" (7). You shouldn't always believe what you hear. It wasn't (an) alien(s) who made it. It was a natural landform with a few shadows on it, that's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
The Face on Mars wasn't made by aliens. The pictures show it. NASA also just wanted to get popular off of it, because they know how us people are. We'd die to believe anything is true. It's also just a natural landform. Why would you believe what other people say? Why would you let others make you believe soemthing, why don't you just believe what you want to? | 4 |
8bbadfe | Has driverless cars ever came to your mind before? To think that car companies and Google are working on these futuristic things are mind blowing. In a few years we could be in the future era of cars. Cars like this would change the world. They would use less fuel, help improve safety, and allow the driver to have fun.
First reason driverless cars would help improve our life is they use less fuel. Having to use less fuel would save people big money. The cars would be able to travel more miles per gallon. Since these cars will only need half as much fuel, people could select cars not based on how much gas they use, This would allow customers to choose the car they really want.
Second reason driverless cars would help improve our life is they can decrease the number of car crashes. Inside all these cars are loads of sensors. These sensors help the car stop, slow down, or brake automatically. By having this kind of technology, the car accidents around the country would drop. That also means more people would buy these cars knowing they are safe.
Last reason driverless cars would help improve our life is because they would allow the "driver" to have fun and relax. Some of the manufacturers would put in-car entertainment and information systems in the car. These display systems could turn of instantly in case the driver wanted to take over the car. Drivers in the car could also text if they wanted too. They would not have to worry about hitting someone or something.
Driverless cars would greatly improve our society. They would use less fuel to save us more money, decrease car accidents, and make drivers less bored. It could take many more years for these type of cars to come. They might not even come for another 20 years. When they do, we will all be living in the future era of cars. | 4 |
8bc26eb | I personally think that driverless cars are not a good idea, they seem to me to be very dangerous and although it might seem cool you will still have to give your full attention to the road if not more, like stated in paragraph 7 none of these cars are completley drivedrless, you will have to watch out for construction and traffic accidents and take control.
Another good reason as too why we should not begin using driverless cars would be, people might fall asleep, driving at night, for a long period of time can make you very tired and you might doze off, what if you are in a postion where you need to be paying attention to the road and you are asleep, that is your life on the line and anyone else that might be out on the roads.
With that being said, I do think it could be a goood training technique for people that are handicapped or blind, giving them a sense of independence. I do think it would be useful but I am very much against driverless cars, it seeems like an accident waiting to happen. | 2 |
8bcbb1d | In the article ¨Driverless Cars Are Coming¨ it gives us information about how the future is coming up with a whole lot of knew technology, but they have there downsides. Although there are still some problems with the driverless cars, I think it would be a great invention. Driverless cars could reduce car crashes, it would be less expensive, less pollution and many more great features. There are some small bugs at the moment, but anything can be fixed.
Driverless cars could help cause less accidents because of all of the sensors it would have. Google´s modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimation sensorson the right wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive sensors, a GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor. These are the recent added technologies and if we wait a little longer possibilities are endless. They would help lessen the amount of crashes because the sensors tell you when things are around or in the way of the car. Driverless cars could help avoid accidents and although they aren´t fully capable of reducing all accidents they could reduce most accidents.
Gas prices have always gone up and down. No matter what car you drive it requieres fuel. Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a public transportation system that use half the fuel of today´s taxis and offere more flexibility than a bus. Driverless cars would be less inexpensive, they could economically help us. Gas prices will most likely not change but instead of spending 50$ on gas wouldn´t you want to spend 25$ on gas or maybe even 30$. Although buying a driverless car would be expensive and mostlikely cost you two arms and a leg in the end it would be worth it.
Lastly I feel like it would be the technology we need to better our future. It would look nice having cars that potentially save pedestrians lives and help the driver stay safe. Some manufacturers hope that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. They also hope that some of the in-car systems could help reduce the amount of people who are on their phones while driving. This type of technology could save endless amount of lives and help better the world.
I feel like driverless cars could help many people. Especially as a teen and driving is new to them it could help because all the sensors would be there to help. Creating and legalizing driverless cars could help economically and safety wise. The world will never know whether this will be an actual thing or not but only the futere can tell, and I wouldn´t mind driverless cars driving around my home. | 4 |
8bd04fe | Venus could present a new ground on which to lay ideas and should be taken into more consideration in our spacial explorations. As quoted from the article, "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." - "The chalenge of eploring venis."
Selling ourselfs short on the idea of researching venus and its potential gain will never allow us to advance. Furthermore the information gather could provide insight on the distruction of our so called "sister planet" which was once thought to be able to carry orginisms of life. The various rock formations such as mountains, valleys, and volcanoes can also prove that restoration may be possible. What we need is a push a way to udilize our limitation and to research which the aurhtor of the article does a great idea of explaining.
He states that using a ship floating above the surface at a safe heght; would allow for the dangers to be minimized. The only problem would be that the clouds block the view from even our most advanced of cameras.
Although as stated in paragraph 8 "...human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." in which we believe we can surpass and exceed. | 2 |
8bd5589 | Driverless Car or Safety Car
Is a car that is driven can be called driverless car? As Abraham Lincoln once say impossible is not a word because the word says ¨i m possible¨. Sure,there can be a future where Sergey Brin foresees but does it going to change anything. One mistake could be public-transport taxi system.What does the word taxi reminded you? The next mistake would be naming a car that have a driver as Driverless Cars. This show that they are capable of lying. The last one is camera and entertainment.
The greed of this problem is an issue.They would still charge you the same amount of money. What about for the poor and homeless? Public-transport taxi system is nothing but a name in itself. This is much worse than the daily taxi because in passage 8,it say one got to wait until the other one is done. This could lead to many thing. For example, for a student like myself, I do not want to be late. First, I would be in a loss state when I came not knowing the thing my friends in class know. I would fail the test and many more. This is one of the issue that would cause many major problems.
As the problem goes deeper, the real main issue is one got to drive if he want to ride on the public-transport taxi. Can this really be called Driverless Cars? As far as thing goes, when there is a driver, it is not called or known as Driverless. Would that change the problem between drunk driver? One of the astonishing new would be drunk driver. One of the reason many people get on taxi is because they do not want to drive or they do not have car. What if a drunk person drive the taxi? Would not that cause the problem for the other?What if an underage drive?
Don´t you feel weird when you know someone is looking at you? That is how the driver would felt. In passage 7, it stated that while the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver. What about the entertainment? It also stated that bringing in-car entertainment. Would not you be curious if someone laughs suddenly or someone cry suddenly. While you drive, if someone shout really loud, would not you panick? The problem lie on passanger instead of the driver. Some might get in for the entertainment. Would not parent be worried when their child come home too late?
Finally, as the car improving, the issues would also rise. One would be the money charge the same as before. Another would be the driver. What if a teenager around 8 or 9 drive? And the last one is entertainment and camera. As a human, we think it is weird when someone look at us 24/7. What if it ruin the daily peace? Would it annoyed the parent? The Driverless Car might bring the problem for an educational student like us. Would it lead kid in a bad way? | 3 |
8bd7089 | Not many people think of all the advantages of limiting car usage. However, I believe there are many good reasons to limit car usage. Too much car usage is horrible for our planet. We our polluting our air,and killing our planet. Limiting car usage would make an enormous difference, To our plant and to our everyday lives." Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," Carlos Arturo Plaza states. Putting limits on our car usuage will be better for our health, we will be able to inhale better air.
Limiting car usage will do a lot for us, our atmosphere, and our enviroment. A day without cars is part of an improvement campaign, in Colombia. Their goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. "The turnout was large," source 3 states. "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders" said Enrique Rivera. They made a difference.
In the United States car rates are going down each year, little by little. Sociologist believe the pattern will continue. Sociologist states "it will be beneficial" if the pattern does persist. "Different things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a shift," said Mimi Sheller. If the rates keep dropping, and car usuage keeps decreasing. We'll be creating a better world.
This movement that could change everything. "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009." We need to continue working in sure a matter that we are limiting ourselves more and more. Pollution is a problem we should be the solution.
LIMITING CAR USUAGE, should began to occur. Lets work on a better world. We are responsible for the mess, so let us clean it. Lets take care of the world we live in. Less car usuage, less pollution, better world. | 3 |
8bd955a | First, I have to say that from Lukes point of veiw he is saying that being a Seagoing Cowboy is good because your giving supplies to countries so they can rebuild their country and you get to travel world, so it's a win win. Luke would want people to join because joining forces with countries to help other countries is something that is helping the less fortunate countries. Some peolpe just think their going over sea to help other people and that's boring,but, when your heading back home you can use the empty space that you put the supplies in for fun activities. I think people should join the UNRRA(the United National Relief and Rehabilitation Assosiation).
Next, Luke would want people to join because you never know what you might learn over sea. You may learn how to do things you never knew how to do like fishing or you might learn about the different countries you go to and you could share that knowledge with your friends when you get home. You could even visit muesems and see things you never knew existed. The things you see could inspire you to make something compared to that and it might be in a muesem one day.
Finally, Joining the UNRRA
is a great oppurtunity because you can do and learn thing you never knew how to do and learn you never knew about the country you might be inat that moment. You could visit muesems and see acieneit artifacts. You could see famous art pecies painted by really famous painters. If people would give the UNRRA a chance you could probably have a very nuce timeand think about inspiring kids to join when they grow up. | 3 |
8bdc6d6 | Can you imagine a world with driverless cars? I cant. The human population seems to be getting lazier and lazier by the minute. The concept of futuristic driverless cars is something that souldn't even be considered. You can never trust technology.
First off to even make a driverless car will cost fortunes. If it cost fortunes, then it will cost even more to get a driverless car. Who has enough money for that ? It will be a waste of money.
Secondly, a driverless car is not safe. What if there is a malfunction and the car wrecks into walking pedestrians? If the roads ahead are too complicated for the driverless car to steer itself that puts the passanger at risk. Currently, " all the driverless cars are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." What if the human doesnt respond becauss he or she fell asleep? That is something you have to consider.
Lastly, there will be tons of liability sues if something goes wrong. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault , the driver or the manufacturer?" Why would anyone bother to go through all this. Considering that half of America is obese, why would anyone want to continue to add to the problem. Instead of people being lazy and wanting a driverless car, they should just walk where they need to go.
I feel that driverless cars are a bad idea. They dont solve any problems. They just add more problems. Driverless car will be very expensive, they arent considered safe, and there will be alot of lawful problems. No one should even consider going through all that. You can never really trust technology. | 3 |
8bddab9 | The use of this technology in a classroom would be useful because it can help teachers identify how a student is feeling, if the are confused, and if the need help. For example," a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. huang predicts. " Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instrucuture." This is really helpful to some students because when taking an online lesson some of them might be comfused and the teacher is no there to help. So the computer can take these facial expresions and modify the lesson so you could undestand it better. This also follows along if a student needs help with the lesson, the computer could see you are having a hard time and t to help you by changing the lesson.
Also it could help teachers identify emotions by the facial expresion. "You can tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. Of course most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait."
If the student is acting up the teacher can use this new technology to see if the student is sad or angry. Then she can ask the student if everthing is okay or if he needs to talk to someone.
In conclusion the new technology would be usful in a classroom because it can help teachers identify how a student if feeling, if they are confused, and if they need help. | 3 |
8bddae6 | I am with the people who are for using tecnology to read students emotional expressions. I am sure that this tecnolgy will help out everyone in different ways.
If teachers are not able to tell what is going on with a studant it make a teacher just get mad but the proplem with that is that thaey dont't know what that kid is going thought. In many different ways people are not all the same and some times school empolyees don't understand that. This technology works in many=y diffrent ways but it starts off when the computer constructs a 3-D computer modle of the face. The movement in one or more muscle is called an "action unit"
In paragrah 6 the auother gives example's for what this technology could be in a classroom In the this paragrah it siad " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" and this examople really shows how teachers can really benifit from have technology to help and tell what a student is felling and when they do teachers can try to help out and not just be mad at student for being confused. A student can really benifit from this as well,If a student feels confused there not going to want to make it seem that why. They will just keep flowing along and make it seem that they understand everything and when it comes to test time they will just fail and it's easy to understand that they don't want to seem like fools in frot of the class,but if we had the technology that we really asked for teachers will just know that a student will need help and stop the class to help the students a littel more.
Overall we need technology to help some student that have proplems learing in a school inverment and be able to puch them to new limits. Just thick about this technology will change the way we learn in school's ang just make everything much more easy thanks to a man called Thomas Huang who mad this type of technology. | 3 |
8bdeb9d | Who would want to sit in the driver's seat but not drive, and just watch the car moving by it self, and just looking stright a head and not do anything. That would be so boring. just talking about and thinking about sound really boring. I don't think that "driveerlss car" should be invented for many reason.If people
are going to invent a driveless car, the people who used to drive would be bored, and if there is a driveless car why would anyone need to practice how to drive a car? "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still meeds a driver? whouldn't drivers get bored waitng for their turn to drive?".
If the driver is not driving for a while then they would not know when to contoal the car and they would dose off for the rest of the way, and
they would also forget that they were driving. If there is going to be a driverless car than why would we need car? The driverless car would not know when there is an emergency or anything else that is going on.
It would onlt know the things that it's prgram for, and it is also counting on human to control them. But why would anybody want a car that is going to take over the 90% of the driver's job and the driver gets only 10% of the driving? Not only do they driver not get to drive they also don't get to do anything but to hold the whilee the whole time. | 2 |
8be1708 | In the article Making Mona Lisa Smile, the ariticle states, " She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, 2 percent angry."
The value of using the technology to read read students' emotional expressions is a good thing. in the the text it states, "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal." Each muscle has a different job to do in the artical one of the examples that is given it the orbicularis oris muscle. This muscle is aroound your mouth and it tightens when you get angry.
"Eckaman has classifiied six basic emotion- happiness, surprise,anger, disgust, and sadness- and then associated with characteristic movements of the the facial muscles." All muscles are different, each muscle controls a different part of the face. In the article, " The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model musr move like human muscles." People show various amount of facial expressions and by using this technology researchers can tell what peoples emotions are.
In this study of facial expressions researchers found out that there are many types of facial expressions.
The subjest of Leonardo da Vinci's painting of Mona Lisa during the Renaissance is a major topic of this research. Mona Lisa shows four emotions: happy, disgust, fear, and anger. The software that Dr. Paul Eckman has created known as FACS which stands for Facial Action Coding System. The FACS can recogmize all of Mona Lisa's emotions. | 2 |
8be1cc9 | I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because you can have a lot of fun and take care of horses and other animals and go sightseeing.
When I first went to the Seagoing Cowboys program my friend invited me and I couldn't say no to him. So I went with him I had a lot of fun i took care of horses and after we unloaded the horses we would use the hold where the horses had been kept and played games like volleyball, basketball, table-tennis and stuff like that it was really fun. Anytime I go there I have a lot of fun. Once we went to Italy and i reod the gondola reide in Venice, Italy and the we went to Greece and I got to see the Acropolis.
This is why i want you to join the Seagoing Cowboys program so you can have a lot of fun and go on adventures and sightseeing. | 2 |
8be72fa | Limmiting car usage could be benificial to our scociety. Cars poulute our atmosphere and cause alot of deaths and damage. Furthermore cars cost a lot of money. Limmiting car usage would cause less car crashes, give us more exersise, and ease up on polution.
Cars cause alot of deaths in america. People get in car crashes all the time and most of the time they wind up dead. Cars also cause also cause infrastucture damage.
Cars cause alot of polution. Cars put out monoxide which is bad for the enviorement. Monoxide is the cause of global warming. plus cars use oil wich drainds our natural resources. And if the car crashes that oil leaks out into the envirorment.
Limmiting car usage could be benificial to our scociety. Cars poulute our atmosphere and cause alot of deaths and damage. Furthermore cars cost a lot of money. Limmiting car usage would cause less car crashes, give us more exersise, and ease up on polution.
Cars cause alot of deaths in america. People get in car crashes all the time and most of the time they wind up dead. Cars also cause also cause infrastucture damage.
Cars cause alot of polution. Cars put out monoxide which is bad for the enviorement. Monoxide is the cause of global warming. plus cars use oil wich drainds our natural resources. And if the car crashes that oil leaks out into the envirorment | 2 |
8be9ba7 | Everyone loves fast, loud cars. The kind that make loud screeches, and speed away from the police in our favorite action movies. But in a social sense personal vehicles seem to be going out of style, especially in America's youth. Not only are less young people attaining their licenses, but simply less people are driving. Some countires put restrictions on driving to limit the excessive ammount of polution produced, and finding the effects to be quite positive. Is it time for the world to move on, and stop using this massive cause of pollution on our planet?
In the years of 2001-2009 there appears to be a very noticable social shift. Young drivers, between 16 & 21, have started to give up the desire to operate a motor vehicle, we know this from the 23% decrease in legal teens on the road. First thinking about that, I felt it was a bit exaggerated and mostly caused by urbanized cities where everything is walking distance. But then I thought, not about others but about me, personally. I recently turned 16 and I have yet to attain my license. My lack of desire to get it shocked my parents, they would continuously tell me how quickly they got their license. It's not that I didn't want to drive, I just didn't have the effort to pay the ridiculous sum of money to sit through headache inducing online modules that our state requires.
The average number of miles driven by American citizens is also steadily decreasing. Studies show the number of miles per person peaked in 2005. Eight years after that in April of 2013, the average had dropped nearly 9%. This may not seem like an abundance (it is), but that put the number right back where it was in January of 1995. That means after the driving peak, eight years went by, and then it was right back where it was 10 years before the climax. Not only is the driving of young people in America dropping, but the entire driving population in our country has a whole has dropped.
Many countries are noticing the changes in their enviroment, the large amount of pollution that their land is withstanding. In an effort to fight this, places like Paris, France as well as Bogota, Columbia have initialed "no-drive-days." France being more congested, ordered that people with even number plates not drive one day and then odd number plates not drive the next to reduce smog and congestion in their city. Smaller places like Bogota and a few cities surrounding it have gotten their population to be completely on board with parking the cars for a day or two. Maybe people are starting to catch on, its not smart to intentionally pollute our planet for our convenience.
Socially, car use is declining. For the sake of the only planet we have, car use is definitely declining. The only "consequence" is that large car producers will go out of business if they can't think of a different product to provide. But morally, should we focus on benifitting big business or our earth? Cars are a very convenient source of transportation and walking everywhere wouldn't necessarily be fun. But when the consequences are weighed, which would be more benificial in the long run? So lets abolish cars, for the only planet we have. | 3 |
8bedd80 | Im for driverless car , becasue i believe that it would make driving alot more safe for people and would let people know whats happening before it happens. it saves money too. the reason i say ir saves money is becasue it would be better on fuel . "use half he fuel of todays taxis." it would be both more safe for the driver and the other person becasue it alerts the driver when something is about to happen or if it needs human skills to move through an area.
They started creating and thinking about driverless cars late 1950's , the first concpet car was made by general motors , the car ran on a special test track that allowed the car to follow it . another company tried a similare thing , but it worked with magnets in the road. so instead of the techonolgy begin in the car it was in the road , the system worked well , but it would be to expensive to replace all the current roads with this new one . It wouldnt be praticial for anybody.
Now the concpets of driverless cars arent that far away because of all the techonoly we have now in the world. Google modifeid the Toyota prius . They use sensors on the left wheel to position it , it has a rotatiing sensors on the roof, video camrea mounted on the rear , it has four automotive radar sensors , and a intertial sensor. All the techonoly i just named off helps the car be aware of its surrondings. the rotating sensor on the roof makes a 3-D model of the cars surrondings to keeps track whats going on. the driverless car mimics the skills of a humam at the wheel. The driversless cars are not fully without need of human skill, in diffcult or dangerous sistutation the car will alret the driver to take hold of the wheel and move through it . The car stills requires the human to remain alret the whole time while in the car .
The only problem with dreverless cars is that most law makers do not know if it is more safe with driverless cars or with humans drivers. Law makers know that the safety is best when they have alret drivers. Since lawmakers think that driverless cars are illegal in most states , expect for California , Nevada,Flordia , and the District of Columbia. Those states though hae limityed use of semi-autonoues cars. Most manufactures believe that more states will follow with the others one once they assure them that they ae reiably safe. Another thing is needed once the say its legal, they would have to make new laws just incase someone does get into an accdient. who would be liable for the acceident , the car or the human behind the streeing wheel.
The facts and states i put above in the beggignig and middle paragraps are the reason i believe driverless cars would be more safe. They have the techonolgy to keep us alert and safe at all times. They adjust their selfs to the apporiate sisutatuion . They would safe gas and more then likely save lifes in the long run , because of the techonolgy they have in them to keep us safe and out of danger. | 4 |
8bee04f | Cars, they're one of the most important means of transportations, varing from busses down to smart cars. The more cars being bought and used, the more pollution it makes. Researchers are saying that cars, their dense amount of smog being created, are damaging the Earth. Logically, it would be easier to say that limiting the amount of vehicles being used would allow for a cleaner city or town.
Limiting car usage in the past and present already shows a positive feed back upon the community. There has been cities dedicated to create a car-free city. An example would be in Vauban, Germany. There the city runs purely on no car usage and showed to be much cleaner, safer, and easier to navigate around in. It says in the first passage how the city is "...better for walking..." and that it is "...more compact and more accessible to public transportation..." In other areas, where car usage is an everyday expense, they have started to enforce driving bans to reduce pollution in the area. In Paris, they almost reached near-record pollution which reduced greatly ever since the ban. They limited the use of cars has cleaned the air and their "congestion" was down 60 percent allowing getting around easier. Although having car free cities and bans, others thing differently.
Others, whom oppose the idea of limiting cars use, has done research to show that it isn't necessary to limit car usage. They state that in America "Americans are buying fewer and fewer cars" They claim that the drop of perchasing and that the usage of cars is dropping to the point where pollution won't raise up anymore. In source 4, it states "If the patterns persists it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the envrionment" It also states that people will "find less reason to resume the habit"
Although some advantages are seen in the opposing ideas, it still would not be enough. The passage focuses to much in one area instead of looking around. Limiting car usage would asist around the world proving to be much efficient. There are programs that are created to reduce the usage of cars for one day, which showed to be a success. In source 3 it shows how 118 miles of bicycel paths has been created since the day. Also shows how the day cut trafic and allowed for constructions of new buildings to be much easier to do. People started to go outside to the point where "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating," said Bogota.
The advantages of car limitations has shown to be much more efficient and benificial towards cities and towns which participated in it. The advantages are that it made the town more productive, cleaner, efficient, and better to walk around in. Car limitations has proven to be an outstanding practice to be used around the world. | 4 |
8bf13d5 | Have you ever wonder if someone is lieing?! Well their is a new technology software that can decode how other people are feeling. Using this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. Since it can let you know when someone is lieing, or needs help from the teacher when its afraid to ask, also when someone has worries about something.
"The Facial Action Coding System enables comuters to identify human emotions." This system can be very useful for school class rooms since it can detect when someone is lieing. Because the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; with all 44 major mucles in the model move like human mucles.
That "classify the six basic emotions like happiness, surprise, anger, fear, and sadness, which then assosiats with each characteristic movement of the facial muscles."
Or it can let you know when it needs help and he/she is a afraid to ask. Its like when you look at someone and see that they are sad or happy. It can detect an espression like that. "Now imagine a computer that knows when your having trouble."
The most important thing is letting your teacher how you are feeling, she can help you out when you are worrying. "The facial expression for each emotion are universal, even though individuals often show a varying degrees of expression." In a why in which you can help express them. That's why Facial Action Coding Systems sould be used to read emotional expressions in classrooms. | 3 |
8bf170a | The author studys Venus is a worthy pursuit despite dangers becuse there are many things out there that could be discoverd worth thr dangers.
In paragraph 8, it says "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only becuse of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also becuse human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally could be explored and lead up to much bigger things. If we dont take the chance and explore we could be passing up many great discoverys, such as a new plant that couls help cure canser or even a animal that could help save the enviotment. Many people may say they dont want to risk peoples lifes or to scared of what could go wrong. This is a risk that should be takes becuase if not there is a chance we could missout on a discover that could do big things."our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation" is what was stated in the story saying this is a big project we dont want nor need to miss out on.
moral of the stoy we need to get out there and discover new things. | 3 |
8bf172b | I remeber through my childhood my mother would always tell me not to be lazy. i think we all grow up with our parent reminding us we have to be independent because when your an adult you have to do thing's for yourself without the help of others. Now think, if you grow up learning about this independence your going to have to have. What does it say to future generations to have such a simple task of driving removed from something they have to learn to be responsible for? Simply learning how to get yourself from point A to point B is being replaced with driveless cars. I am not for the development of driveless cars because they will make this generation and future generations lazier and hopelessly dependent on technology when we can easily figure it out on our own.
In the article it says that Sergey Brin "believes such cars would fundamentally change the world" . Its clear this guy is using his head to develop this product to put us all in driverless car .But developing this product would encourage us more than anything NOT to use our own head. In this century we have technology already being something that distracts us in our cars. Things like cellphones and tablets distracting us from the road cause accidents every year. Although in the article it says "the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires". If a human already living in a technology based world is sitting in a driverless car you can imagine they'll find other ways to occupy their time while the car does all the work. Now if their is a time that a human needs to take over who says the person will actually notice ?They have all this extra time in the car you can imagine they'll be facebooking tweeting or instagraming .To distracted to pay attention...Thats the same problem that kills thousands every year. So what i this really solving?
We all look forward to the scary time we are hoping and praying to pass our driver's test. future generations will know nothing of this anxiety because of this driver less car being developed they're will virtually be no point of studying day and night for your driver test. Or working extremely hard to get your first car. you wont be driving it so whats the big deal? Teenages in future generations wont have a clue how to drive. A simple skill we all realize we will have to learn weather we are afraid to get behind the wheel or not will basically become a skill we dont need. to me driving is a privledge . But the privledge will dissapear and become pointless.
Finally these cars will come at a price. In the articel it said to make smart roads was"simply too expensive". So how much do you think it would cost to replace billions of cars? These cars already need a boat load of sensors just to be able to park. something a human can do effortlessly by the way so i can only imagine why we would want to spend more money. I know i sure dont. and i sure others dont either when we can just drive oursleves instead of spending thousands of dollars.
In the end these drivles cars will make us lazy and clueless on something as simple as driving. i dont think that driverless cars are a good idea for anyone to pursue. Although it is tech savy it is not soething i would like to see change in favor of technologies progression. Driving is someting that has been around before me or anyone was born and it would be pointless to let a self driving car to do it for us. | 4 |
8bfa298 | I think that driverless cars should be accepted. Theses cars arent really much dangerous. The cars can since when its in danger so it sends vibration to the seats and also, has blinking lights. They also, state that drivers have to stay alert and they have cameras to make sure that the driver is paying attention so, furthermost these cars should be acceptable. I also,think that the driverless cars are a bad idea because everyone isnt as alert as others.
If the car has to pull into the driveways and out of them this is very safe you will be focused on paying attention to your surroundings. If your not paying attention to your surroundings others would be alert of whats going on due to your lights blinking. Alll of these things makes it really safe to drive a driveless cars. When your backing into something the car will alert you and your seat will vibrate that is really getting you more alert. The car also announces when its time for your part so people will be notified that its there time to take the will.
There's also some bad about driverless cars. What if a person who buys a driverless car is death and cant hear? What if someone who buys a driverless car cannot feel? Those are some negative affects. What if someone getsinto the car not knowing that you will have to know how to drive and get into a car wreck beacuse they dont know whats going on? These cars can really be a positive and negative affect on peoples lives.
I personally think
that the person who buys a driverless car should have a drivers license and be aware of whats going on. I think that everyone with this car should be tested with the car also so people can know whats going on in the cars and when your not paying attention. These cars can really change hidtory and be a positive impact on peoples lives and also negative depending on how you treat your authority with this car. I think this car should be a privledge. | 2 |
8bfb48a | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author describes how a new technology called the Final Action Coding System rnables computers to identify human emotions. Dr. Huang show varying degrees of expression not smiling nothing but Mona Lisa demostrate him is really good to bring a smille toyour face everyday she imagine how it would be to have a computer to know when you happy, sad, or angry like she says in paragraph 6 "if you smile when a Web ad appears on you screen,a similar ad might follow. but if you frown, the next ad will be different." Mona Lisa show them their is nothing to be sad or angry its much better having a happy face everyday insted of been mad everyday, your day would not be good you would be so bored and tired. so that's why is more better to be happy everyday of your life. sometimes you have problems but you need to keep going with your own life to be happy. and that's what Mona Lisa show Dr. Hung to become a happy man everyday not a sad and boring man or lonely. | 1 |
8bfc1f0 | I am against on the value of using this technology to read student emotional expressions. why? because if a computer can read a students facial expressions then the computer can mostlikley see them and that means no personal space for the students. "While it shows just how much this computer can do, imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad. I also choose to disagree on not having this techonlogy becuase if the computer can tell your facial expressions then when you get bored in class then the computer can see that and get you off topic while in class, astudent can become easily distracted and tooken to another site . "A Classroom computer could recongnize when a student is becoming confused or bored,"Dr. Huang predics."Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective himan instructor."The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgery. Therefore I chossed no for many resonings and with them I stay the same, having this kind of technology is good to have but not helpful at all in classrooms. | 2 |
8c00849 | I think luke can bring people to ride the waves because luke has a friend that like riding waves but luke hasn`t rode a wave yet. Luke has so much of enthusiasum to go on this once in the life time trip. Luke also went to ride wave s with is friend because luke wanted to help people that was injured in world war II. Luke turned eighteen while going to Greece. Luke knew that ment to be in the military sevices.
I think luke could bring society in because riding waves can be fun. For luke its absoulutley fun because he was waiting for a long time for his friend to tell him ''want to go ride some waves with me?'' Said lukes friend. If I was going to ride waves. I would bring my family like mom,dad,sister,sister,and me.
Conclusion.
My conclusion is that if it is very hot outside. Ride the waves if you live by the ocean or at a hotel by the ocean. The other thing is live your life until you cant live it any more. | 1 |
8c04088 | the article, Making Mona Lisa Smile, the author describers how a new technology called the facial action coding system enables computers to identify, human emotion the university of amsterdam, Dr. huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for human and copmputers to communicatre. a computer recognize the subtle facial movements we human use to express we feel. the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the the face, all 44 major musclues in the model must move like human muscles.
the new emotion, recognition softwere track these facial movements in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa, the different unit, thte softwere can even identify mixed emotion, each expression is compared against a neutral face showing no emotion. the humans perform this same impressive every day. for instance, we can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, that artist such as da vici studied human anatomy to help them paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotion.
his new computer softwere stores similar anatomical information as electronic code. perharps Dr. huang emotion algorrithmms are different sort of "Da Vinc code" the Mona Lisa demonstration is really internded to bring a smile to thet're face, while it shows just how much this computer can do. a computer that knows when they're happy or sad. if they're smile when a web ad appears on they're screen, a simily ad might follow, but if they're frown, the next ad will be different.
a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. the same technology can make conputer animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery. most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, note Dr. huang, so computer need to undersatand that tooooo.
had his actor carefully reproduce smiling and frowning as a way of creating these emotion on stage. feeling someone else's emotion state, may happen because they're unconsciously imitate another person's facial expression. whoever thought that making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotion. Dr. Huang just want people to used the technology about the computer of Making Mona Lisa smile. he want all the wourl people happy of about he did. he just want to see people are smile. he don't want people are sadness. that's why he making these technology. | 1 |
8c07a5f | Driverless cars are a thing of the future. Maybe even the near future. Since 2009, certain people have been testing driverless cars. Except, they aren't quite there yet. The cars still require human assitstance in difficult situations that the driver can't handle. But is it a good idea? Can we rely on computers to do something that can be dangerous? The answer is no.
Humans have faults. So do computers. A computers doesn't have the traits it needs to be able to drive someone. Not to mention, the whole process of making an almost driverless car is expensive. There simply isn't enough money to manufacter that many cars to drag people around.
Another issue is the driving itself. The cars they are testing today do not have certain abilities that humans do, such as parking, driving in difficult traffic, or going around accidents. Of curse they have sensors to alert the driver. But how alert will they be? A car can drive itself for most of the time, so why pay attention? It could be very dangerous if the human at the wheel isn't alert. Accidents will be prone to happen, and there may even be more accidents than we have now.
A present problem that is also important is traffic law. Trafic laws are written to make the assumption that a safe human driver is in control at all times and is keeping themselves and the pasengers safe. Places such as California, Nevada, florida, and the District of Colombia even outlawed the testing of computer driven cars. This proves as a giant red flag of if we should have computer driven cars or not. The manufacturers assume the laws will be changed in the future. But if there is an accident, is the driver or creator of fault? The creator of course. There's no doubt that in advertising the car, the manufacturers promised safety and reliability. But that didn't happen, and the driver wasn't at fault. It was the computer for not doing what it was supposed to do.
In conclusion, driverless cars controlled by computers is a bad idea. It is expensive, dangerous, unreliable, and shouldn't be tested for. | 4 |
8c0e66a | Cars. Everyone has cars. On the street, in their driveways, in parking lots. You think everyone uses car. Well your wrong. Not everyone has cars or uses cars for that matter.
In Vauban, Germany residents given up their cars to walk the streets. Where we generally park in like parking lots, parking garages, street parking, home driveways, and home garages are all forbidden. In Vauban their streets are completely car-free. They do allowed cars there but some people just want to walk to safe their community. But if you have are car you can only park in two places. Those two places are your house, and large garages at the edge of the development. I would never give up my car to live in Vauban, Germany. In matter of fact 57% of people have sold their cars to live there. To believe or not 70% of Vaubans families do not own cars. To me its hard to think that people actually walk everywhere they go.
Paris bans driving to clean the air of the global city because of pollution. Due to the ban of driving people who are caught driving will be fined 22-euro which is $31 in america. France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Its hard to believe that diesels make up 67% of France, compared to 53.3% of average diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe. The smog cleared enough that French part rescind to ban odd numbered plates on Tuesday.
Today Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less, and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions. This thing has left people like researchers woundering a fundamental question " Has America pass peak driving?" As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was neraly 9% below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995.
Its carzy how some countries have no cars allowed policy. Some countries baned cars, dont allow them on the streets. People would go carzy if they didnt have their cars and had to walk everywhere they want to go. | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.