essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
1461849 | Driverless cars both have good and bad aspects. I have reasons on why we should not have driverless cars. With driverless cars it makes people more lazy, accidents are more likely to happen, and a lot of people are not going to know the rules of the road as they should with driverless cars.
It is lazy to have driverless cars because people would feel since they don't have to drive they don't have to pay attention to the road. Also, most people will just sit there on their phones and chat and think that it's okay. No one will actually pay attention because of the fact that it is a driverless car, but they do still need to be driven by a human when it comes to specific complications. Such as, when there is traffic or certain road conditions. If people are not paying attention then how exactly will they know.
Accidents are more likely to happen with driverless cars. All drivers should be aware of the rules of the road. If the driver is not paying attention and the car is in need for a human to drive it is likely that the car will lose control and an accident can happen. That would make the roads more dangerous than they already are. That's why if there were driverless cars the driver still needs to have all eyes on the road.
For new drivers with driverless cars they will not know the rules of the road like they should. If they are driving a driverless car they most likely are not paying attention to the road and knowing exactly when to go, when to stop, and what the signs on the road mean. Without knowing the rules of the road it is hazardous for you and other people driving. If driverless cars are to happen everyone should still practice they rules, especially if the car is in need for a human to drive. That will make the roads safer.
In conclusion, driverless cars shouldn't be taken into consideration. It is hazardous and more likely to cause accidents. People should be very careful and know exactly what they are doing if there will be driverless cars. | 3 |
1464c1a | I personality don't think that we should should have Driveless Cars, beeacuse there are alot of things that can go wrong with driveless cars, there are more likely for there to have an accident to happend. Although it an great
idea of having an driveles car there is no proven fact that the car will not spin out of control and, crash we really don't know if the car wiil be save enough for us to put our lives in the hands of a car that is not an 100% sure that is will not crash. But if they make an driveless cars
I would rather have an regualr car so if I get into
an car crash i know it was my fault and not the car there are alot of things that can happend if your not in control of an car alot of live could be in at risk, car crashes are a big deal you can not
just depend on a car to drive you around and knowing that it could be dangerous ifyou get inro an car crash. We do not need our lives in the hands of a car that is more likely for you to be in a car crash it's not safe at all little kids need to know that they can walk across the street knowing that an car will not hit them we need to think about the kids to driveless cars are a big are to dangerous for the kids it's a big no to me beacuse u cant always depend on a car to drive for you to much stuff can happend I think that they should reconsinder there option. | 2 |
14675ef | People are always interested in looking in the future. Now, driverless cars are becoming more interesting to people. Yes , they do have negative aspects, but they are a great idea. This will help deduct nearly half of the usage of fuel we use today, a bigger help on the public transportation buisness, and is a new fun way for drivng, so people will be interested in buying these cars.
Today, we use so much amout of fuel. This is bad because one day the supply will run out. These smart cars are a great way to help save fuel and save money. In the article it says, " the cars he foresees would use half of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus". With a regular car you would continously pay for gas, but with the smart car, its great on gas.
With the help of these driverless cars, public transportation will be so much better. The article states, " a future with a pulic transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system". With the help of these transportation systems, people could save money by not having to buy a car or having to waiste money on gas. Also, they are more flexible than just riding the bus. It can take you directly where needed and back to where you came from. This would be a great help.
Though these cars are expensive to make, its a fun way to drive and safe. This means people will be interested in getting a car that drives its self. This is not only giving the buisness money so they can make more vehicles, but its making a drivers life a little more easier. It says " we have to interpret the driving fun in a new way. some manufactueres hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays" This allows the person to be entertained which will satisfy them with their car, but it will notify you when you need to take over the driving.
The smart car brings both benefits and negative aspects but there are many great ideas and things these cars may bring. They help with public transportion, the usage of fuel, and the car makes the people interested in buying it which helps bring money into the economy and buisnesess. These cars will "fundamentally change the world" as said in the article. It is a great idea and people are looking forward to better models of a self driving car. | 4 |
1468510 | Professor Thomas Huang and Professor Nicu Sebe have worked on a software that can detect how a person is feeling. The software is called teh FAcial Action Coding System, or FACS. The software can use muscle detectors to analyze and detect how a person is feeling. From my perspective, I think this is a great software to have, especially for certain situations. Some situations may include popping up media.
One reason why I think this is a great idea is because of it's function where it recognizes what you're feeling, and make modifications based around it, so you'll feel better. In the text, it mentions of how the software can detect whether someone is confused or bored, and can make some modifications to better suit the person. This shows that when it does that, it can help students better understand the topic. In the text, it mentions how when the software detects your emotion, it sends over an ad based on how you feel. This shows that if someone is feeling sad, they can send them an article about how to get better or how to overcome a loss, which is really useful. This is great for using media to assist you, but of course, it has a human-caused benefit.
The software can help you make random faces, and when done, it can help you with your emotions. In the text, it states that making fake smiley faces actually causes you to feel slightly happy. This shows that when you're making a fake smiley face when down, there's a chemical in your body that actually can help you get better. In the text, it states that Stanislavsky has his students make happy faces and frowning faces, due to the previous fact to help them better act. This shows that the software can help you detect whether or not you're actually acting a feeling well or not. Now, there is a benefit for those who don't have a software.
The software can detect facial muscles, and that helps it point out what a person is feeling. In the text, it states that the software succesfully recognized Mona Lisa's facial muscles, and it showed her to be 83% happy. This shows that the software can go through many paintings and easily detect how they're feeling. In the text, it states that with it's muscle-detecting technology, it can detect whether or now a politician or celebrity is being truthful or not. This shows that the software can detect whether or not a celebrity is lying, and that can helpful, especially in an allegation.
Overall, I believe that this technology is good to have around. It can detect how you feel, and attempt to assist you. It can cause you to make fake happy faces and actually feel happy. Finally, it can help out with detecting a truthful person or not. With that said, I believe that this will go great with classrooms in the country. | 4 |
1469a70 | Having a driverless car can have positives and negatives about it. It could help people. It could detect accidents even when the driver isn't paying attention.
Some positives are that there are some drunk drivers out there,but if there was a driverless car they dont have to drive the accident rate would be way down. Another positive is that the disable are able to depend on themselves more. Some negitvies are that the sensors could fail and cause an accident. Some people drive drunk causing accidents but if there was a driverless car then they dont have to drive. Another negitative is that when there is road work and the driver has to take over and he is too drunk to drive. The negitave outlook on the disable driving is that they are not able to drive and then there is and the sensors turn on then the can have an accident and it would be there fault not the manufactors. then there would be a courtcase. There are also cars that can do arrands for disabled Therefore the driverless cars can be a bad thing and a good thing.
There are some cars that can drive them selves but not completely. there are many things these cars can do. | 2 |
146aae7 | Mostly everyone is aware of the so called "global warming" and air pollution issues we have going on around the world. Both of those are mainly caused by motor vehicles that we use on a dialey basis. Lately places around the world, like Paris and China, have been trying their very best to limit the percentages of these and the pollutant in the air by banning cars for one or more days and having citizens rely on taxis, buses, walking, bikes, etc.
Because of this, scientists have already began to prove that the percentage of air pollutant has gone down, not drastically but there is at least 9% less, which is still improvment. Less air pollutant also means healthier citizens, which is what these countries are mainly aiming for in this experiment which they call "smart planning". They began this study in cities to make them less denser and better for walking, now they have move their plan over to the suburbs.
In Paris they banned all vehicles with even number plates for the day and vehicles with odd numbered plates the next. Violators were fined a 22-euro($31) ticket. In Vaubban, Germany they have asked people the gove up cars and the roads a "car-free" zone, excpet for the tram and a few of the streets on the edge of the community. They also had large garages down at the egde of the community which were sold for $40,000 along with a house.
Studies have also shown that along with physical health, citizens ahve been happier and more "stress-free" when it comes to not driving. one mom in Vauban said it was nice the hear the swish of bicycles and chatter of children instead of the occasional distant motor. America was a step ahead of all these other coummunities though. Their number or cars and liscense that have been given a year has a decreased effincently and is almost the same as it was in 1995. | 2 |
14706c7 | Highways, roads, streets; they are everywhere. No matter where you are or what part of town, these are always found nearby. Wherever roads are found, so are cars. People have been driving vehicles since the 1950's and over time, have had many positive effects on the world; but they have also had many negative effects. Luckily, the government has been helping to reduce car usage to save the world. Limiting car usage helps the world become a better place by decreasing pollution and keeping individuals active.
According to Elisabeth Rosenthal, cars make up "12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe" and can be responsible for "50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States," (In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars). These percentages show how much humans rely on cars, which is negatively impacting countries. Greenhouse gases are extremely awful for the environment, and if they are not decreased significantly, then the Earth could become a bad place for existance. In many places, government officials have been trying to limit the percentage coming from cars, which has helped greatly. Rosenthal claimed in a different article, The End of Car Culture, that "As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was...equal to where the country was in January 1995." The drop of this percentage has decreased the amount of greenhouse gases in the world. Many events all over the world have contributed to the lower percentage. For example, the Car-Free Day in Bogota, Columbia has been a huge hit since the mid 1990's and is continuing to grow each year (Andrew Selsky, Car-Free Day is Spinning Into a Big Hit in Bogota). This activity along with others will continue to bring the percentage down until it is hopefully extremely small.
Fast food and the lack of exercise has increased the number of obese people greatly. With a lack of transportation, there is a bigger opportunity for individuals to eat healthier and exercise more. Andrew Selsky, a writer from the Seattle Times published an article about Bogota's Car-Free Day. He confirmed that "It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths," (Car-Free Day is Spinning Into a Big Hit in Bogota). The building of new sidewalks has increased the number of people using them each day. With more people walking and exercising, the rate of obesity should decrease dramatically. Not only is exercising important, but eating healthy is as well. According to Elisabeth Rosenthal, cities in Germany are now stating, "stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway," (In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars). Since there can only be a limited number of shops in the city because they have to be close by, healthier options have been chosen more often, keeping people in shape. Not only do the individuals look healthier, but they feel better.
Saving the Earth and other people are two huge causes for limiting car usage. Keeping both alive and healthy can keep everyone happy and safe. Reducing car usage has great advantages and all humans should consider different methods of transportation; walking, bking, or even carpooling are great alternatives to help the world. It may not seem like it now, but the decision of limiting car usage can be a life or death situation. | 5 |
1473f9c | Honestly I think they shouldn't change the Electoral College. I have three reasons why they shouldn't change the Electoral College. This Electoral College has made this nation historical,it would be too much work to change it,and it wouldn't be the same if they changed it.
Changing this Electoral College wouldn't be the best thing to do cause it's made this nation have so many historical moments. We had so many presidents that changed this nation. George Washington was probably the most remembered president. Washington fought for our country in wars that happened long ago. He made this country have so much meaning to it.
Another reason why they shouldn't change the Electoral College is because it would be too much work. It would seem very tiring to change the Electoral College. There are so many rules and amendments that they would have to change. They would also have to change the number of votes that the president has to get. I think it would be better if they left the Electoral College the way it is.
The last reason why they shouldn't change the Electoral College is because it wouldn't be the same. There are so many great Amendments that should remain the same. It would be chaos if they changed the Amendments. Plus a lot of people would have even more opinions about why they changed the Electoral College. The Electoral College should remain the same. | 2 |
1482f42 | The Mystery of the Unmasking Face on Mars
In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" people think that the face was created by aliens. In this essay I will tell you if the face was created by aliens or if it was just a natural landform. Why would people think this face was created by aliens? Or was it just a natural landform? What would you think about the face being created by aliens?
Now that we got that out of the way, Why would people think that the face was created by aliens? There was not much evidence that the aliens were the ones that created the face. People can not just go around saying that aliens caused the face to happen, Because there was very little proof that it caused by aliens. Garvin also said, "It reminds him of Middle Buttle in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." In paragraph 12. And in paragraph 7 it also says that there was no alien momentum after all.
Also, Some people think that the face is just a natural landform. I think that the face was caused why a natural landform because I found more information that the face was caused by a natural landform. Like, in paragraph 7 Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team took a photo and when the image first appeared on a JPL web site it revealed that it was a natural landform.
I think that if the face was really created by aliens there would have been more evidence or proof saying that aliens had created the face. Because there was more proof saying that the face was created by a natural landform. If there was more proof about the face being created by aliens than it just being a natural landform then I am not sure what I would have done.
Last of all, I found out that there was more proof in the face being created by a natural landform than the face being created by aliens. There was more people talking about how it was not created by aliens and there was also people saying that there was proof saying that the face was created by aliens. But, I would have to say I will stick with there being more proof about the face being created by a natural lanform. | 3 |
148f1e2 | Using this technology would be good for students in a classroom. It would be good, because if the student is getting bored the computer could make the lesson more entertaining. Also if the student seems to be getting confused the computer could go into more detail about the topic it is teaching. If the sudent liked that type of teaching style the computer could tell by his/her facial expressions and teach like that again. If the sudent got bored while in a lesson on the computer the computer would notice and make the lesson more entertaining. From personal experience whenever I am getting bored in a lesson I just space out, but with a more interesting teaching style I would not get bored. The author states, " 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Haung predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'" That example shows that the computer will be able to be more like a human teacher and switch up the lesson type if you are getting confused or bored.If the student starts to get confused the computer can notice that and go into more detail like a real human teacher. The author states, " 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Haung predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'" Having the computer notice when you are confused could really increase the learning growth by going itno more detail whenever the student gets confused. The student could also like that type of teaching style and the computer could teach like that again. The author states, "For example, if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow, but if you frown the next ad will be different." Having the computer know when you like something and do not like something could be a really good thing. If you do not like the teaching style the computer can tell then try something new, but if you do like the teaching style then the computer will teach like that again. Choosing to use this technology would be good for the students, because in this time period everything is being done on computers. So getting this new technology would really benefit the students of today, and into the future. | 3 |
1493f33 | The face on mars that you guys keep hearing about is not in fact a piece of landscape made by aliens. It is a just a form of land like we have; moutains,rivers, pyramids and stuff like that.Just because it's on a different planet doesn't mean it was made by aliens. Do you think the moutains, rivers, and pyramids on earth were made by aliens? Well I did some research on some on this stuff and I looked in a artical called "Unmasking the Face of Mars." The text said," Scientist figured it was another Martain mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharoh." What that information was telling me is that the the pictures they took made it look like a Egyptian pharoh something that's on earth, a shape or some what, so if the planet has wind blowing on it like on our world then the sand on the planet can make a shape of anything. I also was reading in this artical and I saw that it said," There was no alien monument after all."What does that tell you and if you don't believe me I got another explination.
In the artical I was reading the text also states that," It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," says Garvin. " That's a lava dome that takes the formor an islolated mesa about the same height as the face on mars". I that information quality enough for you. I mean we have volcanos the same size as that form rock. Even though I got some of this information from an artical dosen't mean it's not true even though you guys got that false information from an artical your selves. I know it's the truth because if their were Martains who did this don't you think we would have saw traces of someone building it like hammers and ladders ect. If you really look at the photo it just looks like craiters and sink holes making the shape of a face.I know you played in the sand before and you know that it can just slide through or fall and move by its self.
Thats all it really is to this arguement you opposed with me and if you don't wanna believe me make a ship and go see it for yourself. My final claim is that it is not made by aliens, it's just a natural landform. | 3 |
1494422 | In The Challenge of Exploring Venus the author was suggesting that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers we would have to pass through. The author wrote about the dangers of Venus and how different it is if we could find a way to life there. The author talks about how we could benefit from the information from Venus, that Venus is the closest to Earth in density and size and how we are might eventually need another planet if Earth runs out of recources or an event happens that would result in the Earth dying and we need somewhere to go.
The infromation that we could get form Venus could be never ending, the information that we could get could change everybodys life on Earth or potentially on Venus. We could use the "insight to be gained on the planet" to improve our ways of life on Earth and change them for the better. The travels that we take "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" in order to improve our society and how we live on Earth and change it for the better we need to have the information to understand how we should change for a new and simular Earth.
We all know that the Earth can't last forever, the Earth lasting forever would be impossible. Even though living on Venus would be hard and uncomfortable the strength of the "human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally imntimidating endeavors" If Earth's recources last longner that most people are expecting there is bound to be wars that would break the Earth down eventually. The Earth needs a backup that is close enough to the Earth that we could still survive the durastic change in atmosphere.
Venus is our worlds closest match the difference in the sizes of the worlds uncanny. It would shock some people how the sizes are closer than any other planet in the solarsystem. Venus is also "Often reffered to as Earth's 'twin', Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." Scientists have been working on a new kind of blimp that can go as high as our jet planes that would just be "hovering over Venus" and "would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way" This way of living would be hot and cruel to people no used to the pressure of having to live in such a small evironemt but sometimes life isn't good.
The scientists that are trying to help our population as a planet are doing the job that nobody wants to do. They are making change and people who cant open their eyes dont see what the scientists think need to happen for survival. The author talks about how we could benefit from the information from Venus, that Venus is the closest to Earth in density and size and how we are might eventually need another planet if Earth runs out of recources or an event happens that would result in the Earth dying and we need somewhere to go. | 4 |
1498b6e | It is just a face. The Face on Mars is natural. This is evident because it is similar to the landforms here on Earth, and there is no sign of alien or human life.
One may argue that it is possibly a sign of alien life on Mars. They might say that the fact that it does look like a face could mean it was aliens who made it. Maybe they'd argue, "The timing wasn't right. You can't see all the details." At that point, they just sound ignorant, but no matter their claim, they are wrong and have no strong evidence in saying it isn't natural.
This Face found on Mars is just a natural landform. Scientists have even compared it to buttes and mesas here on Earth. An example of this comparison was by Jim Garvin, the chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program. He said that it reminded him of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho stating, "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face of Mars." Also, Mars is known for being a very dusty and rocky planet. It would be very easy for the formations of Mars to erode together and make such a landform as this.
In addition to it just being a natural landform, there is absolutely no evidence of life near this area or anywhere else. This goes to show that it can't be man/ alien made. The NASA scientists, are using the highest quality cameras in technology today. They zoom in to 1.56 meters per pixel, allowing them to see every little detail. After doing this they found no shelter, no water, no life showing any forms of a civilization. There has never been any life, outside of maybe bacteria, found on Mars, and even if there was, NASA would quadruple their funds after that kind of discovery giving them no reason to hide it.
The Face of Mars is simply a natural landform similar to a butte or mesa similar to those on Earth, with no alien interaction. There is no evidence to say otherwise, and a lot of evidence to back these statements. | 4 |
14a0088 | Becoming a Seagoing Cowboy is an amazing opprituinity.
You can see some of the most amazing things that you never thought you would ever see in a million years.
Joining means your putting yourself in a postion that you have to take seriously, but of course you need to make sure you have fun along the way.
If you join the Seagoing Cowboys you could see Countries like China, Europe and more.
In pharagraph 2 it states that when you become a Seagoing Cowboy you take care of horses, young cows, and mules that are being shipped over seas.
You'll make new friends along the way, too!
Pharagraph 7 explains how Luke, a Seagoing Cowboy himself, was ready for this hard work mostly because he helped his aunt on her farm as a boy.
Becoming a Seagoing Cowboy changes a persons life.
When they see all the amazing sights: caring for the animals and, how they are making new friends, and caring for others.
If you join you will see how much being a Seagoing Cowboy may change your life.
By taking on the responsiblitiy of taking care for the animals and others.
It could just change your life too! | 2 |
14a1792 | Many people believe that there should be technology in a classroom, but do we really need technology that reads emotions. The Facial Action Coding System is the system that was designed by scientists to read emotions. They believe that teachers could use this system for lessons online. Even though it could help teachers, it shouldn't be used in a class. This technology could have many flaws that would produce false readings. Especially when reading kids emotions. This technology does help in many ways, but there are some things that humans have to do by them selves.
Teachers need to stop relying on technology to teach. A teacher should be required to take classes that can help them become a better teacher and to help them with reading emotions. Instead of them using the Facial Action Coding System to find out kids emotions they should take a psychology class. That class will teach them what they need to know about humans. Especially humans going through adolesence. Once those teachers understand how emotions work they wont have to rely on a technology that isn't flawless.
The Facial Action Coding System has so many flaws in it that prevent it from being useful. The article states that this technology can recognize when a student is confused or bored. The problem with that is the fact that a person can fake emotions. If the students wanted to try to be funny they could mess with the system and change something that was working. In the article, Dr. Huang said, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective teacher." An effective teacher wouldn't change something just because a couple people ar bored or confused. This system also doesn't factor in the chances of someone having a bad day. If someone is having a bad day confused emotions could already be happening before the lesson. This would mess everything up.
I understand that some people aren't natural psychologists, and don't know how to read emotions. These people can just take there time and teach themselves how to read them. Even though not all teachers have the knowledge learned through psychology, they all should. People naturally believe that technology can help. It can help, and thats why it is understandable to want the Facial Action Coding System to be used by school. There are better alternatives to this system. The author stated, "we can write down simple instructions the "encode" different emotions." If people can do that then, why aren't they doing it?
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System should not be used in school. It has no value to learning. The better alternative is to make teachers do things themselves. Teachers should learn how to read emotions. They also need to learn that you can't always rely on a system that is not flawless. A teachers job is to teach and not to sit and let technology run their classroom. So if schools want a type of technology that isn't valuable, they can use it all they want, but if they want something that has value they should teach their teachers how to read emotions. | 5 |
14a193b | "Venus, something called the Evening Star" is one of the brightest points is the night sky," from this article woudl they make you vistit Venus even though it's extremely dangerous. In the article " The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author express hsi feeling toward the topic should we vistit Venus, and the author answered yes. I will be explaining why I believe we should vistit Mars and why i agree with the author so much.
My first point I want to bring up is that Venus is often called Earth's "twin", since it has identical density and size compared to Earth. Also fun facts are that siencitists has also shared that Venus has supported life long ago and this is proven by the planet having volcanoes, craters, and weather patterns. These reasons can also help us live on Venus.
And now are some reasons why we shouldn't vistit Venus. Number one is that it has the hottest surface tempurature in the entire solar system this would be difficult to live on. Antoher reason would be that the atmosphere is 97% carbon dioxide this would be a major issus becuase human need oxygen to live and with little oxygen in the atmosphere this would just simply kill us. And my final reason it that weather would be an issuse becuase of high pessure and heat of the atmosphere, erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and lgihting which strike land; none of these would be great to live on Venus.
In conculion what I believe is that we should explore Venus because of it simlarites to Earth and that we could possible live here and expand human life. | 3 |
14a6a23 | In 1976, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft captured a photo of what seemed to be a face on the surface of Mars. The Face on Mars caused speculation of alien life on Mars. However, the Face on Mars is a natural landform.
One of the reasons that the Face on Mars looks like a face is because of shadows that cause the illusion of facial features. A few days after the Face on Mars was discovered, NASA released the image to the public. On the image was a caption, which stated that the Face was just a "huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." These shadows that were noted in the caption can easily create the illusion of a human head.
Adding to this, the Viking 1's camera quality was low compared to what we have today. So, the picture isn't all too clear. Every pixel in the clearest picture captured by the Viking 1 covers 43 meters. That's a low resolution compared to other spacecrafts that have photographed the face. One of these spacecrafts is the Mars Global Surveyor. The Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time in April 5, 1998. When the spacecraft flew over Cydonia, Michael Malin and the Mars Orbiter Camera team took a picture ten times clearer than that of the Viking 1 picture. When the picture was released to the public, it revealed a natural landform. The Face on Mars was nothing more than a rock formation.
Although the pictures were clear, many people say that the pictures taken by the Mars Global Surveyor are unreliable due to them being taken in 1998. The reason for this is that, in 1998, it was winter where the Face was located, which caused a cloudy atmosphere. The Mars Global Surveyor had to peer through the clouds in order to see the Face. This led to many people not being satisfied with the pictures taken. Many skeptics said that the alien markings were hidden by the clouds. The claims that the skeptics made were refuted, however.
On April 8, 2001, the Mars Global Surveyor came close enough to take a second look, and pictures were taken. On that day, there weren't any clouds due the season being summer in Cydonia. On top of there being no obstacles to obscure the vision of the camera, the picture's resolution was at the maximum it could be. Each pixel spanned only 1.56 meters, compared to the Viking 1's picture. The picture revealed the Face to be a landform, just like the other pictures that were taken after the Viking 1 picture. The landform turned out just to be the equivalent of a butte or mesa, which are common in the American West. These landforms happen to be very common in Cydonia, which is why scientists came to the conclusion that it was a mesa before they had even taken more photos. The only difference between this mesa and another one is the shadows it casts, which causes the mesa to look like a face.
In short, the Face on Mars isn't a sign of alien life. Although it looked like a human head, it's really just a mesa. The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. | 5 |
14a8933 | Most people disagreee on the idea of taking away cars or creating fuel effeicent cars. One idea that can possibly top all those is a limited car usage society. Natiosn worldwide have vbegun starting a new trend/ orsmartplanning which limits cars usage due to the ecomony ,pollution it creates.
To begin with, limiting cars is becoming a new fad, people in VAUBAN,Germany(Dorchland) say it saves alot of time and money. Now you can just have your house in the suburbs and just stick to foot traffic youdont have to worry about car insurance or garages or keeping drive ways clean. No more dirty streets clean and motor sound free walking. With this new smart planning going on its harder for people to take there kids around and get to work. What goes along with this effect it saves people more money.
Lastly, Limiting usage of cars is going to help better the enviorment. Recently paris was under an enforced ban due to to a cloud of smog pollution. The use of cars releases toxi and bad gases into the atomosphere destroying are enviorment and causing effects on the polar ice caps. The limit use of cars cuts traffic down and time. another effect use we could use is a car free day were we could take buses , bicycles , and even skateboards. one major thing we should replace with our cars is public transports.
Inconclusion
Limiting cars usage is helpful and becoming more popular globally it can help the economy and also help slow down pollution. | 2 |
14afb00 | Dear Senator,
The electoral college is a big, serious, huge problem. It's super complicated, I mean, we vote for someone, and someone else gets to vote for the person we originally voted. What sense does that make? What's so wrong with a direct campaign? There are 538 electors. There's space for an even vote. Then we'd have to thrown the decision over to the house of representatives. Then what? Those old fashioned group of people get to decide our future? Please. They're living in the 70's! I don't find it fair to the people.
This election is suppose to be "voted by the people, for the people" not "voted by the people, for the electoral college to decide, and then for there to have a possibility of a tie so they have to let the house of representatives decide" it's ridiculous! Doesn't the sound of "an election for the people, and only the people to decide" sound so much better? If the electoral college wants to vote so bad, then they can go to their local polls themselves and vote like everyone else. Since we have a winner-take-all system in each state candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, they solely focus on swing states.
In 2000, 17 states never saw the candidates, voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't see not one campaign ad. State legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and these electors can always defy the will of the people. This country is built on a democratic ground. This country is meant to be of the free, for the free. The electoral college is an anachronism, because when you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors. I personally don't want to vote for a slate of electors, especially when I vote for the candidate of my choice.
Not to long ago, in 2000, Al Gore had the popular vote, but why didn't he get the presidential placement? Because the electoral college perferred Bush. Now look at the country. It's completely biased, unfair, irrational, and down-right wrong. We're wasting so much time trying to figure out who even gets to be president, voting day is the Tuesday after the first Monday in November (don't even get me started on that one) and we don't even get to figure out who the new president is until January. I'm telling you, the system is corrupt. Do your best to fix this, I know you will, thank you Mr. Senator. | 3 |
14b1d67 | The Face on Mar's is just a natural landform because, there is no living organism on Mar's . scientist figurged it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shawdo9ws that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Some scientist believed the Face was an alien artifact. So as you read you might think there is something living on Mar's but the Face on Mar's is acually is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa---landforms it is common around the American West. A lava dome is the form of the Face on Mar's, " the lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mar's. To Conclusion, A lava dome is the creation of the Face because Mar's is not a place where you are abl;e to live because if you are not able to plant how would you have food to live and temp. get as high as 100 degrees in the morning and as low as 0 degrees at night also there are very bay storms so i do not know if anyone would be able to live on Mar's. | 2 |
14b3ac5 | Driverless Cars sounds like a good idea, or is it a safe idea? Something that you can just sit in and the car will let you relax but you nedd to watch out for accidemts and traffic situations. Is that really neccesary? How much money are you wasting? I am aganist the development of these cars because there's no point for them.
First of all, I am against the development of these cars because there's no differences between a driverless car and a manual car. Both car's still can cause accidents to people, either driving and not. Not only that, the driver still have to be alert to the road either way too like paragraph 8 says, " Safety is a big concern." If driveless cars get into accidents, just like maual-driven cars, then there's no reason for these cars if we're just gonna get hurt driving them like regular cars now.
Also, It is also a really whole lot of money. I mean, It cost more than the regular-driven cars, especially the sensors and radars on the driveless vehicle. Paragraph 8 in the article says, "It cost $200 million for a radar device on a hilltop," and no telling how much is it for a car with sensors, a radar, and it can drive by itself. I mean, some people might be able to afford that, like the rich people, but what about the poor? Are they lefted with the regular driven cars, or are they gonna make the price of the driveless cars as much of a regular car?
Don't get the wrong idea though, it's a great idea. Letting a car drive by itself with the driver on the wheel, and also, the car can find Its way to the driver's destination, or place, It's a perfect idea. Although, there not safe, and there expensive. Before the creators put the driveless vehicles on sale on the car sale businesses, like Nissan, or Ford, they should add more safety features, and make it more cheaper so most people with a driver lincense can have one.
In conclusion, I am against Driveless vehicles because there's no difference in the driveless cars and a manual car, and they are a waste of money. Driveless vehicles need to be all the way safe to drive in and don't cost a lot either. The maker's of these cars need to be sure that everything about the car is ok too. It's not a bad idea either, its a perfect one. Just make sure it's not a waste of money or time. | 3 |
14b486e | Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents. Exploring Venus could be challenging because of it's geology and critical living conditions but study of scientists and astronomers are fascinating it similar as the planet we live in which could be a worthy pursuit despite the danger.
Venus is the closet planet to the Earth and it is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. Venus is a chllenging place to examine. Venus's temparature and atmospheric pressure is more than the Earth it could be a risky place for a human being to survive or live at but besides danger on this planet, Venus once maybe was one of the planet that is most likely Earth a long time ago. In the articles "The Challenge of Exploring Venuse" it states that "On the planet's surface temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure sis 90 times greter than what we experiene on our own planet." this concludes that Venus is a dangerous place to survive at because it's near to the sun too. In the article "Venus has the hottest temperature of any planet in our solar system, Even though Murcery is closer to sun." this defenses the claim of danger on Venus is. It also causes erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes as well. Besides all danger Venus is somehow a worth pursuit, " The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and carters. Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a plantery visit," this tells that it also have so many features as like Earth. Venus has to get up close and personal despite the risks for making the misson safely for scientist to product. As like many scientist are working on thier mission for Venus through the specific devices they've made to approch for studying Venus. NASA also has been working on it for a while.
Venus is a worthy prusuit despite the dangers it presents and tells us about in the article. Exploring Venus and challenges that might explorers would face through the exploraion. A human could accomplish any thing while living on Earth easily traveling from one corner to the other corner of the planet. On Venus human has dangerous living conditions but scientists study might worths more than the danger and in future there are easy and safe ways for explorers to aknowledge about the "Evening Star". | 3 |
14b54d0 | Despite the dangers, the author believes that studying Venus is worth pursuing because it can help us understand more and know what the planet Venus was like years ago. On paragraph 2 of the article "The Challenges of Exploring Venus", the author states that Venus is often reffered to as Earth's "twin" since it is the closest (aside from Mars) looking to Earth when is comes to desity and size. The author feels Astronomers may find existing life forms since most of Venus was probably covered in large oceans and Venus still, has some look-alike features to Earth such as; Valleys, moutains and craters. Since Venus is the nearest planet to Earth, many Astronomers also believe Venus could be our option for planetary visit, the planet is safe for humans to survive in anyway. On paragraph 8, the author states "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet istelf, but also becuase human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally endeavors." meaning, traveling to Venus could have some good surprises waiting. The author also states in that very paragraph, "Our travels on Earth and beyong should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." Meaning he is all for dangers as long as he is able to meet the "very edges of imagination and innovation" as he quotes. | 2 |
14b8fbb | Dear state senator,
The electoral college is an unfair and irrational, and should be abolished immediately. The fact that the race for president can end in a tie is completely absurd. Also the fact that popular vote can mean basically nothing is dumbfoundidng. In a country of democracy popular vote seems like a it would be standard. popular vote seems like the best idea when it comes to a country for the people.
The electoral college is highly unfair to voters. Presidential candidates dont even have to visit all of the states to win the elections. The representation that the smaller states get is unfair. Presidential canidates will only visit states with a high number electoral college representatives because the states are known as "swing states". Swing states greatly influence the outcome of the election because they can hold the most power. If a state such as texas with 34 electoral votes was to have the same amount of power as a state with a much smaller population than the electoral college would seem much more viable.
The electoral college state representatives do not have to vote with that states popular vote. Al Gore, in the 2000 presidential election, won the popular vote but still lost the election(Plumer 9). The fact that a canidate can win the vote of the people but still lose the election is horrifying. How can you trust a system that works against what the United States of America is about. It completely takes away the right of people to decide what goes on in there goverment. The fact that the electoral college state representatives do not have to vote with people is highly unfair.
There is one crucial flaw in the electoral college, the election can end in a tie. In 1976 a tie would have occured if just 5,559 voters in Ohio and 3,687 voters in hawaii had voted the other way(Plumer 12). If we were to switch to a system were all states including the District of Columbia get one vote then the election could never end in a tie. Although this still seems highly unfair to the voters because the representative could go either with or against the popular vote the election could still never end in a tie solving the amjor flaw. What was to happen if we did have a tie? It has not yet been desided because it never has happened and that is a major problem.
The electoral college is highly unfair and should be disposed of immediately. The electoral college is biased towards the larger states,has major flaws that can only be fixed by getting rid of the system and does not give a fair view of what the people want. The system was poorly thought out and needs to be replaced.
sincerely,
Jordan P. | 4 |
14b9c3f | Hi my names Kaigen and I am against the idea of self driving vehicles. I honestly think it would cause more mayham. Just think about it, what if a deer runs out in front of your car. I know you are probably thinking they have some fool proof plan to avoid these incidents, but take out that word deer and replace it with a child. Yeah that changes things up a little huh. No matter how fool proof they claim their "self driving" cars are it a bad idea. Things happen, technology fails. Its a part of life.
The story even says 'the driver has to take control entering or leaving a driveway', or "if theres road work it needs the driver to take over". This is not ok. What happens when you are going through an intersection and the light turns red? Is the car going to speed up, or stop in the middle of the road. What if you are going through a school zone? Hows the car going to know any different? They also said in the article "for this to work it would be espensive". In my opinion the last thing we need is to go even further in debt. Yes I can see good in this idea, but i beleive the bad over rules the good in this instinse. Just imagine what would happen if a car pulled out in front of you, sure these machines will probably have a pretty good reaction time. But it can not be anywhere close to the reaction time of a frightened parent. Child saftey is the number one thing car manufactures need to be worried about. If they get the "okay" and come out with these i would want to see these flaws adressed before anyone puts a child in the vehicle. I am not saying its a bad idea, heck I even seee a time in the future where a car is driving me around. I just dont think they have everything figured out yet and i dont think they will have anytime soon. Its reasonable for these to come out on the market, they just need to meet all of the saftey regulations. I also beleive that if they are going to do the track cars, where they run on tracks like a train, that they would have to rip up every highway, every back road, and evey interstate. This would take a ridiculous amount of time and money. We are talking billions and billions of dollars and possible two or three decades. I am kaigen, and this is why I'm against a vehicle that can "drive itself". Plain and simple they are not safe and would cost far too much to make safe and reasonable.
Sincerly
-Kaigen | 3 |
14bc18a | Driverless cars were once a thing that only seemed possible in dreams. But as the future unfolds and the present becomes the past dreams are catching up to reality. It only seems logical that driverless cars be developed. Airplanes were once a great fantasy and now look where we have gotten them. So why not make an adcancement to cars?
With technology people have been able to create things that seemed impossible only a couple decades ago. As technology advances so should our everyday lives. We have the technology to do so, so why not do it? We should take advantage of our assets because we never know what we could accomplish with them. It may open up many more possibilites.
Driverless cars would provide many benefits not just to humans but also to our planet. They would use half of the fuel of today's cars. They would also cost less money for the average taxi user, because you wouldnt have to give the driver a tip since you are the driver. In theory, they would reduce car crashes since all the bad or inexperienced drivers would not be driving for the most part. Driverless cars would have the safety of a computer and a human watching the road which should reduce accidents.
They could potentially help solve crimes too. With the computers and other smart technology in the smart cars police could use those equipment to directly track a stolen car or a car that has been registered to a criminal. The cameras on the cars could also be used to decide what actually happened in a crash or a nearby crime that happened. With added sensors on the car they could pick up the speed limit in certain areas or realize that the car is in a school zone so the computer will not go above a certain speed.
When it comes to driverless cars the pros far outweigh the cons. Humans have the oportunity to bring the future closer and make dreams a reality. Yes, driverless cars will be alot of work to put on the roads and ensure safety but what great invention doesnt require work? In the end it will be worth it. | 4 |
14bec6e | People think that driverless cars are in our near future. I think they are not going to be because people still have to drive them, they are not safe, and they will cost a lot of money. I think that driverless cars are pointless.
People will still have to drive the so called "driverless car." According to the text, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." The cars will not be totally driverless because if there is a work zone, an accident, when pulling in and out of driveways, or dealing with complicated traffic the person in the driver seat will have to take over the car. This means the driver will have to stay alert at all times.
If you get in a car accident with a driverless car, you will not know who is to blame-the driver or the manufacturer. The text states, "Still, even if traffic laws change, 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?" No one will want to buy a driverless car because they do not want to get in an accident. The driver's of the car will say it's the manufacturers fault, but the manufacturer will says it is the driver's fault.
Driverless cars are going to be so expensive. No one will want to buy them except for rich people. The text also states, "Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars. It wasn't something you could buy at Radio Shack." This shows that it cost a lot of money to build driverless cars, so the selling price is going to be even higher because they have to make a profit from them.
On the other hand, some people believe that the driverless car is the next best thing. An example is, "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bring in-cer entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instanly when the driver needs to take over-something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone. In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern." Some people like this idea because they will not be bored when they are waiting to drive.
In conclusion, I think that driverless cars are pointless. They are not even "driverless cars" because people will still have to drive, it is not very safe, and it is going to cost a lot of money. There will lots of accidents and then people will stop buying them and trying to return the ones they have bought. | 4 |
14c37b2 | What is the real benefit of having a automatically operated car? How would you train an everyday person to operate such a brilliant vehicle? Not doubting that it's such terrible idea, i just think there is no way to wrinkle what cant be ironed out in one big shot. What about car enthusiast? If we keep making automated cars, there will not be a car that is going to be worth it later, car shows would die off, car auctions would die off, the idea of car collection would die off. Cars would not go down in history.
The technology involved is fascinating. It's truely out of this world. As the passage said, there are alot of wireless technologies that go into a automated vehicle. Laser systems. Carmers. Not including the wifi it will need to communicate with other cars. As the wireless systems come online, so do the hacker modified computers that hack your mercedes-benz, or your nissan. If hackers could take over your car, think about the crime rate that would slowely accelerate. Robbery would go up because of all the cars they could just steal. That now incooperates new firewall systems that im sure will add to that total price you want to pay for your car. Plus keeping your car updated, expect to peeling open your wallet.
I know this passage is based more toward the personal car industry, but what about the high class trucking industry we have. Most of everything you have has probably came from a truck at one point in time. You can not let the automation of cars take off without caring about the equipment used to get your car parts to the plant your vehicles are going to be made. That part of the automation has to kick start too. They can not be left behind. There is another problem.
Lastly, making this a everyday ritual is not going to be easy. I do not think the roads will be filled with auto operated cars anytime soon. I do indeed think that technology in our cars will keep becoming more advanced surely, but the idea of a fully operated car does not appeal anytime soon. The fun of driving is still too strong. As more and more people are living on this planet, i think it will be neccessary eventually, but for as of right now, its not a issue. As a last question to leave you on, how would you incooperate full proof systems that apply to every financial class and is available to anyone wanting to buy Nissans or mercedes benz vehicles? | 4 |
14c4255 | How would you feel if their was a computer watching you as do your work? Do you think that would be weird and maybe even uncomfortable? Well, that is what would be happening if their were computers that read your expressions. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" Dr. Huang and Dr Eckman have developed a system that does so. The use of this technoogly to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is not valuable.
First of all, the article states that "Eckman has six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger disgust fear and sadness...". If a computer was to detect any of these emotions from a student while he or she is working there wouldn't be an easy way of knowing whether the student is struggling or if the student is doing just fine. This quote from "Making Mona Lisa Smile" shows how FACS (the Facial Action Coding System) won't necessarily be valuable to students when they are in their classrooms working.
Secondly, from
"Making Mona Lisa Smile" states "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile". The computers students use at home could be the same as the computers they do there work on during class. By saying this there is a possibility that FACS won't even work for styudents when there at school doing work. The quote used above shows that you cant count on FACS to be available for the use of students in class.
Lastly, from the article "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them". If a student had FACS on there computer and they were doing there work in class and they smile because another student did something nice for them, and FACS detected them smiling and then modified their work that could be a bad thing. It could be a bad thing if the student was doing their work and they actually didnt understand what they were doing and now that FACS detected them smiling they are now doing harder work which is a detriment to the student. This quote shows that having FACS on a students computer while they are working in class could be bad.
In conclusion, having the FACS technolgy on a students computer while they are working at school in their classroom is not valuable. The article does not give any examples or ocurrances of the technology to read a students emotions of having any good outcomes. The use of FACS could incorectly detect wether a student is having trouble or not, it only detects basic emotions, and it may not even be available to the use of students depending on the type of computer they use in their classroom. | 4 |
14c579b | Should we give up our cars in order to live a better life?
That's the question on everyones mind right now , but it's a no brainer! Places all over the world have done this as an experiment and it seems as if they like the results. Here are a few key points from passages that will help persuade you into joining the idea of getting rid of cars.
Vauban, Germany has given up their cars for a better and healther life. So many families in Vauban have given up their cars that 70 percent of them don't even own a car! The reason why Vauban did this is because they realized that passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and more than triple that amount in car-intensive areas in the United States. Looking on the bright side of this since there is less space for parking stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway. If you want to drive a car you can always buy a small area for $40,000 that also comes with a house where you can park the car which would have to be a hybrid.
Paris did the same thing that Vauban did but in a different way. On Monday mototrist with even- numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine. The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day. Of course there were people who didn't obey the new law and where fined and some even had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine; however, congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog. The only exceptions were plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers since they didn't really affect the pollution as much as cars that use up a lot more gas. Doing this cleared the smog for some time in Paris, in fact, so much of the smog cleared that the French party was actually able to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday.
Instead of making a law
BOGOTA, Colombia , created a program called car-free day where millions of Colobians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work or to do whatever they had to do. The goal of this program was obvious, to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog (Violators faced $25 fines). For the first time, two other Colombian cities, Cali and Valledupar, joined the event of having no cars except for taxis and busses. By Bogota doing this the parks and sports centers have seen and highly approved of this idea and have turned uneven, pitted sidewalks into broad, smooth sidewalks. Along with the new improvements, new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have appeared.
In conclusion, getting rid of cars permitly or even just for a day or a week seems like a good idea. Lots of the people mentioned above highly approve of this and say that it actually makes them a lot happier and stress free. Of course the people who don't approve of this idea are the ones who were fined for driving on a no drive zone. All in all i still recommend this idea if things in Florida start to get out of hand and we must resort to something. | 3 |
14c87c2 | New cars, that can control themselves ,are being manufactured in the United states. The driverless cars have censors that can tell the vehicle when to move forward or stop moving . In the passage it says "Google has had cars that could drive independently since 2009" and the cars are still being worked on to this day. A human must still be presant so they can take over and drive if the car needs to park or is having trouble in traffic. This new driverless car is still rather new and I think it puts people in danger.
Imagine if this self moving car has a mess up or is a little damaged and it goes out of control. The human inside the car might not be paying enough attention to realize the car needs help. I believe that if you were to allow people to have a self driving car they would eventually lose the feeling of responsibility . Although the car is able to drive to certain places, due to its computer programming, people might over look that they still must be focased and ready to drive.
The new cars will notify you if it needs you to take over. This is helpful but still a large risk . Censors do have the ability to mess up and cause crashes. I dont see why they are trusted. In the article "driverless cars are coming" it states "if technology fails and somone is injured , who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer." this only adds to my point of lack of saftey. How is one sipposed to know if it was their fault or the manufacturers .
I think it is not safe to have cars attempt to control themselves . There are so many times when they could glitch and kill people. I am against the idea of driverless cars. | 2 |
14cb817 | The thing about the face is, everyone was hoping for a Martian. Thats why so many people were still not saticefied when they saw the second. It isn'tg easy, you know. They all have to do extremely hard work to just get a glimpse at the "Face." We have done multiple photos of the face and around the face. If we were trying to hide something, why would we show it to everyone? Those are the crazy things I'm talking about. Un-needed sceptics and conspiracy theorists to question the goals of NASA as a whole, just because we found this and shared it with the world.
There are forms like this all over the world. You can find formations like this anywhere, like in deserts, on rocks, theres no end to it! You can find unusual formations all over the world. However, when its another world, its a completely different story? No. Mars is a desert, and why cant formations like this be found there? The truth is they can. This just seemed interesting so we wanted to share your possible discovery with the world. NASA would have loved to find out that it was a Martian, but that wasn't the case.
The article states people who have seen things like that in the desert. There are multiple whitnesses of that. So in the conclusion of my arguement, I'd like to state, that I believe, and you should to, that the "Face" on Mars, Is just a natural formation on the planets amazing surface. | 2 |
14ce186 | The use of this technology is an extremely valuable thing. A computer can tell how you are feeling just by your facial expressions. A computer can know how to change what you are seeing if it detects that you are not interested, confused, or unhappy with what you see on the screen.
Knowing how to keep someone interested with what they are doing is a huge challenge. Sometimes people get bored with what they are doing and don't want to do it anymore. The computer could tell that you are getting bored and will try a variety of things until they find one that you are interested in. For example " If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad wil be different" (Paragraph 6).
A computer can also tell when a person is becoming confused with what they are learning. The computer can detect the confusion and change the lesson to make it easier to understand. 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 instructor" (Paragraph 6). Not only does it make it easier for that student to better understand the lesson, but it makes it easier for the teacher too. The teacher wouldn't be able to detect exactly how the student is feeling with what they have, and ocasionally the students don't feel comfortable enough to let the teachers know.
Computers may have a code that help identify the facial expressions, but some humans don't really show much facial expression on how they are feeling. For example, "" Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," notes Dr. Huang. "So computers need to understand that, too" (Paragraph 6). However, humans who do not show a great amount of facial expressions can still show a slight amount, which would be enough for the computer to detect. It can also detect when you are showing false facial expressions because they are more strained than genuine. For example, " It's all about those muscular action units. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. In the real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at you cheek bones) lift the corners of your mouth" (Paragraph 7). It can also figure out if it's a genuine smile by looking for crow's-feet, which are wrinkles around the corners of your eyes.
The important message here is that computers being able to identify the facial expressions on a human face is an extremely valuable thing to have in classrooms. It can detect boredom, confusion, and unhappiness. There may still be things that need working on with recognizing the emotions because there are stoic people, but overall it could be a great help to a student and teacher in a classroom. | 4 |
14cfa29 | Dear Florida senator,
I strongly agree of keeping the Electoral College for the use of the congress' approval for the newly President of 2016. The Electoral College has a lengthy process, but can come in good use of determining the new President. Citizens vote for the electors and the electors decide who's best for the country. Even though, there are claims about the Electoral College not being fair for the people, I still defend it because it has it's good factors, like Run-off Elections,the requirement that a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal for the people, and the resoring weight of the eletoral number by population.
As so you know, the Electoral College is a process of the selction of the electors, then the gathering of electors to vote for the president and vice president. Finally, the electoral votes by the Congress. When the electors pick the president, they look at their background, such as, what school they attend, what they studied, where they were born, etc. They pick someone they trust to do the job. When there is a Run-off Election, the House Of Representatives picks the president. I personally think this is a good thing because they picked the person who would do best in the job by gathering everyone's vote to decide it. Because no country could have two presidents with two vice presidents. Some may say it's unjustice or not fair because the House Of Representatives decides the whole election. There is also the fact that when determining the winner, they both look at the popular votes and the electoral votes, and they see who got the most electoral votes and they win the election.
The Electoral College puts it simple, because they choose someone with a region where they most likely get the most electoral votes. For example, Romney was in the South region, and he knows he wouldn't have to do much there because of that was where he was currently from. Now lets compare that to someone that was in the area around North Dakota. He would most likely not win that many votes since it's only three electoral numbers. So the Electoral College gives a chance for the president they chose to win because of where they used to be located in order to get the most popular and electoral votes.
The Electoral College restores and reduces some of the weight of the electoral by its population. Smalls states aren't widely noticed by the president because they feel like they should concentrated in the big states because of there electoral votes. Still, small states tend to make it easier for them because they look at if the state was either Republican or Democrac during the past years and they take note of that. They know they'll win in those states, even though they are small numbers, every inch of it counts to help them win the title of President.
Therefore, Mister Sentor, I agree in keeping the Electoral Vote because of it's reasonable factors that can help the president win. Popular vote doesn't tell anything because the people would know nothing about the president or what he accomplished. It should be kept because it has been used for many years now and has been useful for every president to win.
To Whom I Name,
V. | 3 |
14d000b | In the story, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author talks about what Venus is like and what NASA needs to do to get a machine on Venus so they can study it despite Venus's harsh conditions. Venus has a surface temperature of 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atomspheric pressure is 90 times greater then earth. That being said, the goal to get to Venus is still highly influenced because their are so many upsides. The author did a excellent job explaining how this trip is a worthy pursuit.
One upside to this trip if it works, is Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size, occasionally the closest in distance too. A example the author used on why its a worthy pursuit is, "Venus is the most earth-like planet n are solar system. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Eath." The author is saying that we need to keep exploring no matter how hard it may be. Venus is the closest thing to eath that their is. Maybe one day people can live on this planet.
In conclusion, making a trip to Venus, whether flying above it or landing on it is going to be a major challenge. NASA is already making incredible strides in making a machine that can withold Venus's conditions. As of right now all NASA wants to do is land on Venus or fly above it and grab a few samples off of Venus and go test it. The author did a great job of explaining why it is so important to pursue going to Venus. The author gave many advantages of the trip and disadvantges of the trip. | 3 |
14d1bfc | So the other day I was working at NASA just like everyday and something was brought up that I had never heard before. What was brought up was that back in the 70's, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling the planet snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2, it spotted a shadowy likeness of a human face. An enormous head nearly two miles away from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a top region of the Red Planet called Cydonia. The person who said this out loud said it was just formations called butte or mesa's which are very common around the American West. What happened was pretty normal at NASA. One of my co workers blurted out it was probably created by aliens. More people started agreeing with him because how else could a human looking face get on a planet that nobody ever talked about. It started to have me thinking about space and all the crazy things that happen, so I decided to do some research when I got home. I looked around the internet, and went to the public library to look for some books about rock formatons on different planets. Once I got those, I finally began research and what I found was shocking. I believe that the face on Mars is not and ancient alein artifact because rock formations form on every planet, pictures can be deceving, and there is no scientific proof that aliens have ever existed.
I believe that the face found on Mars is not an ancient alien artifact because rock formations form on every planet. research has shown that the face found on Mars looksv like lanforms common around the American West. As far as people know, that face could have just gotten there from some sort of sand storm on the big red planet back in the 70's. Another thing that people shold know is that pictures can be deceving.
I believe that the face found on Mars was not an ancient alien artifact because pictures can be deciving. What scientist knew back then, and what they know now is a lot different. There is much more technological advances now then there were back then, so the picture quality from space wasn't very good. It was very pixelated, not clear, and didn't give very much information. It is understandable that people thought it was an alien head but thats just not the truth. The picture quality now is at the highest its ever been so people can see pictures a lot more clearly. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. That proves that the image was very deceving and not many people could figure out what it most likely looked like. One more thing that people should really know is that there is no scientific proof that aliens ever existed.
I believe that the face on Mars was not an anciet alien artifact because there is no scientific proof that aliens ever existed. Back in the 70's people thought that aliens were real because the technology wasn't very good, and people olny believed what they were told. In the latest years though, Scientists have no evidence that aliens are real. This proves that there couldn't have been an anciet cicilization of aliens.
Because of these facts, I believe that the face found on Mars was not an ancient alien artifact becaue rock formations can be found on every planet, pictures can be deceving, and there is no scientific proof that aliens ever existed. | 5 |
14d573e | Having a car can get you places much faster than walking or riding a bike. But there's a price you pay either on gas or the co2 emisions coming from the muffler. It is extreamly bad for the planet and we need to take action. Reducing car usage will releive you and you wont be as stressed. In some countries they have a car-free day where millions of people ride the bus, hike or walk. Thats in BOGOTA, Columbia it is smart of them but its going to take a lot more to make a change for the best. (source 3:Car-free day in spinning into a big hit in Bogota)
Conjested cities are known to have smog and that is nothing but air polution. And all of that polution isnt going anywhere. it stacks up causing a greenhouse effect and harming the air we breathe. But theres always going to be people driving cars unsless stricked rules are made up. we need to enforce that we only have one earth and everytime someone steps inside a car we are harming it. There are other means for transportation and we need to stop being lazy and carpool or take a taxi or bus and limit the emitions or else we are bound to doom ourselves in a co2 filled planet. (Source 1: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars)
But banning car driving can harm the economy greatly causing the unemployment rate to skyrocket because the car companies couldnt sell anything. And transportation keeps everything running throughout America and the world. So the greatest idea would be to create a car that doesnt burn up emitions and sends them out into the atomosphere. We couldnt just get rid or all cars because our world is dependent on them. but we should use them smarter and drive durng sertain times.
so all in all we should just keep on driving and do the best we can to stop all the air polution and try to make the world better for future genorations. and we just need to get smarter | 3 |
14df8e2 | This article is going to change the world toady as we know. If we allow our computers to identify human emotions, its a whole new way to look at life. People will be able to get what the want when they want because their computer will know when they are happy or mad at something. For instance, if you are online shopping and your face seems disgusted by a bright yellow shirt, the computer will see your expression and change the shirt to a blue one. By having that change be done for you, people will instantly become happier and have what they want right in front of them.
In my opinion, this new use of technolgy could be very helpful for many people. In the essay, it states the percent of emotions that the painting of Mona Lisa is. No one could ever be that spot on, so with the Facial Action Coding System, we now have the precise percents of what Mona Lisa's emotions are. By having these percents, we now have a blast to the past to think about what Leonardo da Vinci was thinking while painting this portrait. Maybe the reason she was mostly happy is because he was a genuinely happy person. It opens up a whole new door to what we can study and research. Since no one from back then is still alive today, this is our way of finding out not only what he was doing, but better yet what he was thinking! There is not a single machine that can do that today, so having this device would be a game changer.
Although the Facial Action Coding System would be an amazing new technology to have, many people could disagree with the system. Since having this system means that something, or even someone, is always watching you, people could feel that it is an invasion of personal space. They would alwasy feel like someone is there, even though no one is. It could lead to mental problems, such as thinking you are not alone and that people are watching your every move. Because of this, the system could be a bad call and lead to a bigger failure then they hoped. Today we are already facing problems with hackers hacking into our webcams and recording what we do without knowing it. This system is doing the exact same thing, but without the trouble of hacking. Unfortunately, it is already there with us knowing exactly what it is doing.
Although the Facial Action Coding System could have some problems, the success could be even bigger than the possible failure. Nothing like this has ever been made before, so the reaction to something like this could be endless. All in all, I believe that this new system is one that could change the world for good! | 3 |
14e0d1b | Schools are places where kids end up spending the majority of their childhood in. Most kids end up disliking school for one reason or another, while others might love school. To have the ability to know how a child is feeling and map their patters can become useful in more ways than one. The use of reading a students emotions is valuable in many ways like helping with possible depression, enhancing the material, and creating a better enviroment.
School can be a stressful time for many students and also a time of growth. Especially in high school and even middle school, the childs body is going through puberty. This chemical change in the body can lead to mood swings and other issues especially when school stress is added on top. This technology is capable of indicating "...the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one"(paragraph 7). With the aid of this technology the school can help students before they develope mental illnesses like depression that often go unseen due to hiding true emotion.
Also, in many schools students usually find the learning material to be sub par or boring in many cases. However with the aid of this technology "a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" (paragraph 6). If a teacher was able to pin point when exactly a lesson becomes boring it would majorly help with being able to reconstruct it as well. For difficult classes being able to know when the students are lost would help significantly in increasing the understanding of the material as teachers will be able to know exactly what the students dont understand, and thus be able to help them achieve better grades.
Being able to understand students emotions in a learning enviroment can also help with improving the school overall. SInce the technology would be able to understand the basic emotions like "...happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness" (paragraph 3), this can give a school tons of feedback on how to improve. For example, with negative emotions, a school would be able to improve its cafeteria food quality from knowing what foods are highly unpopular, and as a result save food from wasting. Or during school events, even though the event might be a success knowing how each of the students felt about the event would help with improving it for next year. The addition of this technology would allow a school to be the best the possibly could.
The addition of this facial technology can be quite revolutionary in a school setting. As students often dont share their true feelings, issues can be confronted and the students mentality can be improved. Also a better, and positive learning enviroment can be created. The ability to remove student confusion and make learning interesting would go a long way in helping not only the students grow and move forward positivly, but also the school as a whole. | 5 |
14eaf97 | Limiting car usage can be a good idea because. You can use public transportation, have less space for parking, it can improve safety and save time.
Car-pool with friends thats a way to save on gas. So on school days you guys can switch turns and it can also work with your job. Also you can live somewhere that your job and school is close by so you want have to waste gas. But if your school and job is far away another way is you can ride you bike or catch the public transportation bus. There are van services for gettting to work.
Limiting car usage would be beneficial implication for carbon emissions and the enviroment. Greenhouse gas emission would reduce to 12. Car free day everyone should have a car free day including in america everywhere. Car free day is when you hike,biked,skateboard or just take the bus to work. Car free day is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Limiting car usage lower air pollution. Cold nights and warm days cause the warmer layer of air to trap car emisssions.
Did you know that Beijing,China is know as one of the most polluted cities in the world. But as you can see driving cars is bad for our planet. It puts pollution into the air which is bad. we can have more accidents now that teenagers are getting their license.
Having teenagers driving cars now makes it even more dangerous, Even for the people crossing the street bicyclist and runners. there are even more car accidents happening now then it wasd before. When kids get into car accidents it makes their parents insurance go up even more higher then it was in the first place. Teenagers really dont pay attention to the rode. one of the most ways most teenagers get into accidents is when they are texting and driving at the same time. Or another way is they can have they're music up too high and not aware of whats going on around them.
Inconclusion, limiting car usage can be a good idea because it can reduce air pollution, and greenhouse gas and make it more safety. | 3 |
14f5af7 | In this passage we see Luke's experience as a Seagoing Cowboy.
Luke shows us how being a Seagoing Cowboy gave him awareness for other people. He also shows us the many impotant things to learn from this job.
First, while being a Seagoing Cowboy Luke learned to take care of many of the animals.
He fed them and gave them water.
These actions, in turn, helped many people that were suffering.
Second, caring for the animals taught Luke to be responsible and to be a hard worker.
In the passage Luke said he had to make sure he fed the animals, give them water every day, and clean the stalls.
He also said ha had to be a night guard and check on the animals every hour to make sure everything was okay.
Next, other than taking care of the animals and doing different work, Luke also got to see new things and have fun.
He said he saw China, Europe, the Acropolis in Greece, an excavated castle in Crete,and the Panama Canal.
He also went on a gondola ride in Venice, Italy.
Even on the boat Luke had fun.
He and the other cowboys played baseball and volleyball games, had tournaments, and did other enjoyable things.
Finally, Luke saw people that were hurting and that needed his help.
Luke said '' I'm grateful for the opportunity,'' and that '' It made me more aware of people...''
Because of the Seagoing Cowboys program, Luke helped many others, even after he was discharged from the program.
The Seagoing Cowboys program was a eye opening adventure for Luke.
It can also be a life changing experience for other people too.
They can learn lessons and help people just like Luke did.
It may also change their outlook on life. They may want to do more to help others in need, rather than just helping themselves. | 3 |
14f90b2 | Limiting car usage would bring a ridiculous amount of advantages, even happiness as stated by Heidrun Walter who is briefly mentioned in the first article titled "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars". Automobiles such as cars, planes, even ships, are responsible for a whole lot of greenhouse gas emissions, about 12 percent in all of Europe and up to 50 in areas of the United States where the use of cars is excessive. Vauban is an upscale community where the majority of people have given up their cars. In the United States there have been agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency have been promoting for more car reduced communities just like Vauban. Unfortunately according to this same article and word by David Goldburg states, "experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill" apparently the bill is to be approved of this year. In previous bills 80 percent of appropritions have by law gone to highways, only 20 percent has gone to actual transport. As any normal person knows, construction work causes a whole lot of polution.
In the second article I used titiled "Paris bans driving due to smog" Paris (the city) had no choice but to enforce a partial driving ban due to the fact that there was so much smog. The smog was so intense that it even rivaled Beijing, China, which is definitely one of the most polluted cities in the world. Those with even-numbered license plates were required to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine (about $31). This nasty smog lasted about five long days, but at least public transit was free. The French blamed Diesel fuel for the pollution since 67% of the vehicles on France run on diesel due to a tax policy. The third article I used is called "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota". Bogota is located in Colombia and for three straight years cars have been banned for the Day Without Cars (excluding buses and taxis). Those who violate this day face $25 fines. Not even the occasional gray clouds and rain has stopped people from participating, after all umbrellas do exist. Do to this parks and sports centers bloomed throughout the city, rush-hour restrictions had gotten rid of a whole lot of traffic, new shopping districts and restaurants have popped up, It's amazing how vehicles, or none at all, can affect lives.
The fourth and last article is called "The End Of Car Culture". According to the article, "studies claim that Americans are buying less cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each yeah goes by." according to an analysis by Doug Short of Advisor Perspectives, which is an investment research company, the number of miles driven in America had reached it's peak in 2005 but slowly has gone down. We Americans drive as much as we did in 1995 which would be amazing if the reason for this would not be the recession causing less people to afford cars. If we do change for the better and own less vehicles then unfortunately companies like Honda, Mustang, etc, will most likely have to go out of business; it's unfortunate for them at least. Companies like Ford and Mercedes now have a wider range of products besides personal vehicles. There's also been a large drop in the percentage of people who decide to get a license between the ages of 16 to 39 according to a research study by Micheal Sivak. A study last year found that the amount of yound people driving also decresed 23 percent between 2001 and 2009.
Even people like Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company laid out a business plan for a world where personal vehicle ownership is impractical or even undesirable. He'd even work with the telecommunications industry to make cities where "pedestrian, bicycle, privated cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." I love how he mentions that this will improve safety and almost none of the other articles do, they mostly mention getting rid of pollution (which is also always great). In a place like Miami, where I live, there are a whole lot of reckless drivers, getting rid of some cars would do an exciting place like this a whole lot of good to the community. I know myself that cutting down on vehicles seems like a very hard job to do, and it is, but check out all of these benefits human lives will get. People would argue that an idea like this is ridiculous, and at first it might sound like it, but the moment you realize we aren't getting rid of all vehicles everywhere things start getting easier for you to understand. | 3 |
1509b39 | Let's imagine for a second that every student across the country has a computer that could recognize if a student was confused or bored with a lesson. This technology, known as the Facial Action Coding System, could then modify the lesson to either make it less confusing or more interesting to the student. Not only would this benefit students, but it would also benefit teachers, schools, and the overall learning of everyone in the country as well.
First the benefits would start with the students. Lessons would make sense and be engaging for all students. Classes would start to be more enjoyable to attend since everyone would understand the content. Less students would be likely to miss classes with such engaging lessons. The less classes the students miss, the more they understand and learn. Eventually grades and test scores would improve as well, making schoolwork less stressful. In general students would be learning more content in an easier way which would make them happier about school and learning in general.
Teachers would be next in line to benefit from the new technology. A teacher's success is based on the student's success. With the students learning more, doing well on tests, and being happier overall, a lot of the strain put on teachers would get taken away. Teachers are able to relax more and maybe even get paid more from the success of their students. Parents wouldn't have to blame teachers for not giving their children a chance to succeed either. With students and teachers benefiting from the Facial Action Coding System, schools would benefit as well.
Happy students and teachers means happy schools. With grades and tests improving, schools would become well known for making students successful. This means schools could get more funding to make sure they are able to keep everything running smoothly. Schools across the country would be able to make sure all students are being educated to the fullest extent that they can be. The overall learning of this new generation of students would greatly increase the overall learning of the country as well.
In short, everyone would benefit from the Facial Action Coding System. Students would learn more and be happier, teachers would be less stressed, and schools would then be more successful as well. If every student across the country had access to this technology, then the overall learning and happiness of everyone would greatly increase. | 4 |
150d3d6 | I believe that the idea of Driverless Cars are a form of laziness. Although they have benefits to all drivers that have a tendancy to veer their attention away from the road, there major downsides and upsides to this new technology. "Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. Their cars have been driven more than half a millions miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing wiht complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through road work or accidents."(Driverless Cars Are Coming).
There are several perks to having a driverless car. "BMW announced the development of 'Traffic Jam Assistant',The car can handle driving funtions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel. In
fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. They can steer, acceerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. this means the human driver must stay alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires. This neccesittates the car being ready to quickly get the drivers attention whenever a problem occurs." (Driverless Cars Are Coming). There are several downsides to having driverless cars. "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and padestrians safe, and lawmakers know that saftey is best achieved with alert drivers. Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumptionthat the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer driven cars...If Technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" ( Driverless Cars Are Coming).
Driverless Cars are inveitably well on their way between now and the future.Although they may seem like a great idea, there are several downsides tat have to be taken into consideration. For example; if the technology of the car fails and you are injured or your children are injured who is to blame, you, for not keeping your eye son the road at all times no matter the situation, or the manufacturer who guaranteed you that the computer driver will take over when you need to take your eyes off of the road for just a second? Think about all of the outcomes of every situation before you do it. | 3 |
150d761 | Despite the dangers of exploring Venus , there are many valid reasons to enocourage us to continue to investigate our sister planet. In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author explains why the pursuit to learn more about Venus is worth it. In the article the author explains the conditions that make Venus so dangerous to us, and the motive for NASA to continute exploration.
Venus is the sister planet to Earth. This is becuase Venus is the closest planet to Earths density, size, and ocassionally the closest in distance depending on the orbit. Since the planets are so similar you'd think the conditions would be as well. In the article the author describes the conditions as, " far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth." The other then goes on to explain that the thick atmosphere of Venus is almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide. To make things more understandable he also adds the challenge of the highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the planets atmosphere. Not only this, but the temperatures average is over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than on Earth. As you can see the conditions of Venus are very extreme based off of the information in the text. These conditions make it very hard to study Venus due to the fact that it's conditions are too extreme for us to get close enough too.
Now that the readers have been given a description of the conditions on Venus, and faced with the challenge of it's exploration it is time to ask why try to explore Earth's "twin" planet. According to the author, " Astronomers are facinated by Venus becuase it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet inn our solar system." After the author says this he then explains that a long time ago Venus was most likely covered largely with oceans, and could have supported various forms of life. Although today the planet still has some physical features similar to Earth such as valleys, mountains, rocks, and craters. Thus making Venus NASA's nearest option for a planetary visit. Although the conditions are to harsh for us to travel too.
The motive for exploring Venus is very encouraging. The only thing holdong astronomers is the condition, and complications with the deails of proximity. On the up side the author talks about how NASA has a idea for sending humans to study the planet. The author says, " NASA's possiblesolution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." Basically the author is saying that NASA plans to send a blimp-like vechicle hovering 30 or so miles above the rolling Venusian landscape. The author further explains this by comparing this solution to what jet airplanes do to avoid storms,which is travel at a higher altitude. By doing this we can have a clear understanding to what astronomers are doing to solve the issue of proximity , and accesibility. With this solution the exploration of Venus, and it's many rewards can hopefully be reached.
In the article,"The challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author did a very good job at explaining the situation, and presenting the readers with facts, and evidence. The author supported his claims with knolege about the planet, and motives of NASA. Not only this, but gave a solution to the issue. The author did a good job of supporting the idea that the pursuit to explore Venus is worth the risks. | 4 |
151a2ea | Alien's have been a question many astronauts and people from all around the world have been wondering about for ages. But do they actually exsit? A few years ago NASA discovered what seemed to look like a face on Mar's surface. Many think that the so called "Face" was created by alien's. But others think it was just created by natural causes just like how some landforms are created on Earth. How do you think that the formation was created?
So far NASA hasn't discovered any alien markings or any other form of life on other planets. This is one of the reasons why the formation was created by natural causes and not by alien's. Just like on Earth we discover something new every day, such as new landforms and new natural resources. The formation couldn't of been formed by alien's because where did they get the tools to make it? If aliens exsited, i think we would have more evidence.
Alien's don't exsit becuase we would have found some evidence of diffrent life on diffrent planet's by now. If their are no aliens then their are no alien made objects on Mars. Alien's probably would have found a better communication rought then sending us weird landforms that dont have much meaning at all.
Why of all things would the aliens create a face? Even if aliens did exsit i don't think it is their goal in their life to scare us humans. They would probably make something more reasonable, like a house or something like a shelter.
Along with the formation there are also many landforms on earth that are similar. Such as the Grand Cannon and things like that. Think if the humans lived on Mars and we came to Earth and saw the Grand Cannon we would automatically think that there must be life here since there is no other way this could have been formed. Just as we believe there is life on Mars we would assume their is life here. Untill their is more evidence about alien's we should not believe that they exsit.
As it says in the artical "What the picture actually shows is the Maritian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This landform represents many of the already discovered landforms on earth such as the Grand Cannon and their is no official evidence that aliens exsit this is obviously a naturally formed landform and not created by aliens. | 3 |
151a470 | Do you ever wonder if the face on mars is just a landform? I've thought about it and I have read this story called "Unmasking The Face on Mars" this story really showed me that the face on mars is just a landform. First, it was just a shadow that caught NASA's eye. Second, it was shown has a huge rock formation. Finally, they thought it was a alien markings.
When NASA first saw this they thought it looked like a face. A few days after that it says in the caption "...the illusion of eyes nose, and mouth." (3) But as it say it is a illision which means it plays tricks on your mind to make you think that's what you saw. This "face" appeared on the Viking 1 spacecraft.
Next the illision of the face was really just a rock formation. Qouted from the passage it says "huge rock formation... which resembles a human head..." (3) This proves that it's just a rock in the shape of a human's face/ head. It also says in that same passage "It would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars." Therefor this shows this it really was just a illision and that people really just wanted attention for mars.
Finally, the main thought of as a alien momument. This was proved wrong by the Mars Global Surveyor when it flew over Cydonia snappining a picture. These pictures were ten times sharper than the Viking 1 photos shot twenty five years ago. In the passage it states that "the MOC team snapped a picture and it was 10x sharper than the first taken by the Viking 1 photos."(7) This states that the Viking photos weren't good enough because it didn't show as much. After these pictures were taken they were then posted on the JPL web site that revealed it was just a natural landform.
After all of this you can conclude that the 'Face of Mars" is just a landform. I've given you facts and statistics showing that this is true. Therefore with this proof it is a landform not a face or a alien monument after all. | 4 |
152258f | The Facial Action Coding System takes science to a whole new level. Once people are able to read facial expressions, communication becomes much easier. Humans communicate mostly by thier own faces. We humans have come to know that reading a persons face can tell a lot about them. Having facial recognition in
schools will help the students.
Going to school is a new experience everday. Seeing new people in the halls to trying to figure out a new lesson in class. Each student has their own way of learning. Communicating with peers. With all the same boring lessons everyday, school can become a boring learning enviroment.
Facial recognition would change how students think of thier learning enviroments. In the article Dr. Huang predicts that if FACS is used in a learning enviroment the lessons would be changed by looking at the students facial expressions. The computer could see if the sudents were becoimg bored or confused. The computer then would change the lesson to make the students become more engaged. This would help the students focus more and understand the lesson. Maximizing the lesson to the best of its ablility to help the students.
This technology would help the students feel like the lesson isn't boring. The facial features of every person are different. The classroom is filled with twenty to thirty faces every class. With the new FACS system would help the teachers and students become more active with thier lesson. By reading the faces of the students the FACS changes the lesson. Thus making the lesson more enjoyable for everyone.
In conclusion, having a learning enviroment that functions for youself and with others is the greatest possible outcome. The FACS in the classroom would maximize everyone's lerning ablility. If you get the maximum learning ablity out of a lesson, the lesson shoulnd't have to be retaught. Intern, students are getting the most out of the lesson everyday and not being bored by learning the same lessons. | 3 |
152609d | The electoral college is a process not a place. Why would you want to get reid of it if the founding fathers established it. It helps people with an education of like law schools and stuff like that. It helps people in the long run so they no more about the president and the history.
Over 60 persent of citzens want to have a electoral college so we can start having to vote for more stuff than to just let it be up to the president and people with a hier power. They say that the electoral college vote was was one of the biggest election crisis in a while it all happened in 2000. Wouldnt you want the right to pick who your presedent is to lead your country for the next 4 to 8 year.
Wouldnt you like to help call the shots in your state and in your country so your state does turn to crap. So are country stays the stongest to. | 1 |
152c2e4 | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile"
a computer softaware program called the Facial Action Coding System or FACS which allows computers to identify human emotions is said to be able to help the educational atmoshphere of the classroom. However the use of this software to read the emotional expressions of students is not all that valuable to the classroom.
The use of compters in most schoold is limited at best, and not all schools have access to computers at all, so the use of the FACS program would not impact many students or classrooms. The best way to use the program would simply as a way to sell products to the general public not as a way to make learning more inclusive. A comercial use would best suit this program, and allow it to reach more people for example in the text it states " if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen, a similair ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different". The use of this program in electronic or online lessons would also be detremental towards the social skills that a classroom is meant to nurture. It would remove the human element that young minds need to grow.
Now one might say that the use of this program in schools would better the learning environment and make the lessons easier fro students to understand.
This is the stance the inventor of this technology believes when he said "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "then it coud modify the lesson, like an effective instructor". However this would be inneffective in classrooms and schools that do not have the resources that are needed for this application. There are also very few schools that actively use electronics inside of the classroom while they have the needed resources.
This technology has other ways that it could be used, that would be of more use in todays society besides in the classroom. There is very little need for such a thing to be used in a learning environment. The use of this program would have almost no use in the development of young minds, and would prove inneffective in the classroom setting. | 3 |
15318de | Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. One advantage people would have of limiting car usage is keep people from getting tickets out there on the road. On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffers a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day. (Excerpt from "Paris bans driving due to smog"/ Robert Duffer, from the
Chicago Tribune
)
.
Almost 4,000 drivers were fined, accorfding to Reuters.. [Twenty-seven] people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog... [The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world. (Excerpt from "Paris bans driving due to smog"/ Robert Duffer, from
Chicago Tribune
)
.
Fellow citizens will have the advantage of limiting car usage because it will save you plenty of money, on gas, car note, car insurance, and etc. Diesel fuel was blamed,since France has ... [a] tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France., compared to 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, according ro Reuters. (Excerpt from "Paris bans driving due to smog"/ Robert Duffer, from the
Chicago Tribune
)
.
President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissiond, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in American behavior: recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. (Excerpt from "The End of Car Culture"/ Elizabeth Rosenthal, from the
New York Times)
.
A study last year found driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009.... Whether members of the millennial generation will start buying more cars once they have kids to take to soccer practice and school plays remains an open question. But such projections have important business implications, even if car buyers are merely older or buying fewer cars in a lifetime rather than rejecting car culture outright. (Excerpt from "The End of Car Culture"/ Elizabeth Rosenthal, from
New York Times). | 2 |
1534fbf | Driverless cars are and should be the future. We wouldn't have to worry about that one guy driving red lights and aciddently smashing into another person. But what if I told you that people could still crash even without doing that and the driver would still be blamed. Cars are easlily hacked nowadays. In early 2010's someone was able to get into a car that had some computer stuff built into it. He was able to change the tire pressure and how much the car think it had of gas. Some reports say he was able to drive the car without even being in the car. Imagine what people will do when full on computers are able to get into cars. They would be able to lock you in the car and smash into someone, delete the tracks that he messed with the car then the driver had to blamed. The police wouldn't know what to do and then the cars would be outlawed or something. So I am all for the driverless cars but I believe that better protection from hackers is alot more safe than the angry birds app in my car. | 2 |
15365fa | Venus is the second planet from the sun and the closest planet to Earth, in terms of density and size. Studying Venus would be a worthy pursuit despite the dangers beacuse if anything would happen to Earth it would be the nearest option for a planetary visit, we would learn more about Venus and the planet's harsh conditions, and Venus is like Earth in multiple ways like being able to support life.
If anything would ever happen to Earth, Venus would be our closet option for a planetary visit. In paragraph two the text states,"Earth, Venus,and Mars, our other planetary neighbor, orbit the sun at different speeds. These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus." This piece of text from the passage shows that if anything were to happen to Earth, Venus would be our closet option for a planetary visit because Venus is one of our planetary neighbors and closet to Earth at times.
Secondly, we should continue studying Venus because it will allow us to learn more about Venus and the planet's harsh conditions. In paragraph three the text illustrates,"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." This piece of text from paragraph three shows that we should continue studying Venus because it will allow us to learn more about the plant's harsh conditions and we would be able to see what materials could or couldn't work in such extreme heat.
Finally, Venus is the planet that is most like Earth and use to have to ability to support life. In paragraph four the passage states,"Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." This piece of text from paragraph four shows that Venus is the planet most like Earth and had the ability to support life because it use to be covered in oceans.
In summary, we should continue studying the planet Venus despite the dangers because if anything were to happen to our planet, Earth, Venus would be the closest planet we could go to, we could learn more about Venus and the planet's harsh conditions, and because Venus is most like Earth and had the ability to support life. Furthering our research on Venus can only benefit us, so lets stop worrying about the dangers and get out and explore our planetary neighbor. | 4 |
153aa37 | Well first if i go back to paragraph 3 Nasa states that they thought from sending the pictures to the pubic it be a good way to atract public attention to fund mar's missions.
"The face" became very popular when Nasa first sent it to the public. Also on paragraph 7 the author states that when the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia ,they found out that "the face" was just a regular natural landform. In the year of 2001 the Mars Global Surveyor was able to snap a picture of the landform, as said by Garvin
"the picture actually showed the Martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa- landforms common around the American West". I don't think the landform is an ancient artifact or any alian artifact i just think its a normal landform that happens to look like a human or alian face. Even if Nasa was lying to us the landform benefits Nasa. When they first snapped the photograph and shared it with the public it received alot of public attention. Many people funded the missions to snap more photographs of the landform to get a better look at it. It was basically was a waste of time and money because it ended up being just a regular landform and not an alian artifact as the world believed it was at the time. | 2 |
153e8fe | I believe that driverless cars are silly. I believe this because there are many ways this idea could go wrong, for example what happens if there is an accident who's to blame? I think that the idea of driverless cars is great. But i feel as if there are to many kinks to work out for it to work the way we want it to. The idea of driverless cars definetly has its pro's and con's, but in reality is has many more con's.
In the article it says that the current driverless vehicles we have now still require a person to take control of the car and guide it. Isnt the point of having driverless cars not to drive at all? Another reason i disagree with having these types of vehicles is what happens if the vehicle has a total monfunction and the car goes wherever it wants or doesnt stop or what happens if you get in a crash that you couldnt even control and it wasnt your fault.
The world and roads are just fine without driverless cars. Although sometimes it would be nice not to have to worry about driving it is even better having full control of what you're doing on the road and if you were to get in an accident not having to have to blame anyone. The idea is phenomanal but there are to many kinks. If the builders could make it 100% safe then i will agree and say lets use these car but until then i think we should just stick to the normal way which is drive yourself. | 2 |
1542a67 | Why do we need driverless cars? They're not worth it, they might seem cool and everything but it could be dangerous. The car might malfunction and crash, it might make the driver get distracted, ect. There are many things that could go wrong so I am against the driverless car.
The reason I am against it is because of three main reasons. To start with the car is not yet ready to be tested in our generation yet, we can barely handle a normal car without crashing, and lastly is the car 100% sure it can handle evrything? The reason I say the car isnt ready for our generation is because the teenagers from this era are always distracted with their smart phones and maybe a cute girl passes by and they try to get a glimpse but the fact is the teenagers of today can't be trusted with a normal car. How are they going to handle a car thats driverless i say itll be more of a trouble because it will have more features in the car like the use of bluetooth and youtube that could be a problem. They'll want to look something up or try to change the song and they'll turn away from the street for one second and next thing you know they crash. Our generation of teenagers just isnt ready for that advanced technology yet so i propose we restrict the cars to only adults even tho thats another argument as well but they're atleast aware of what they're getting themselves into.
The other things are accidents, its not only the driver who is to blame sometimes its the car and the manufacturer who are to blame. yeah, maybe the driver took his eye off the road for a second and didn't see the other car but what if the driver never took his eyes off the road and saw the car and tried to stop but couldn't because the car wasn't responding. Then it would be the companies fault for not assuring that their cars are ready and safe enough. So what if the driverless car sin't safe enough too. They say that the car is ready but there have been many situations where the company assures you its safe and weeks later there are news about the car malfunctioning because the company forgot to check something that could happen with all the driverless cars they might malfunction and kill or injure someone. so I would rather wait utnil everythung is safe and sucure and that the company can assure us a 99.99% assurance that it will work.
To conclude my argument is the car ready for any situation or anything at all? like is it safe enough to have a baby in it can it even have a baby in it. Can it handle weather, can it handle accidents ahead? there are many things that can occur and we don't know if the car is ready. Plus the repairs for it would be expensive I don't think anyone would want to pay a lot for that car too much money. Do they meet with the safety standards, are they approved by all the states? There are just so many things that I could say to go against the driverless car i can't finish today but this is a little of what i think about the driverless car. | 4 |
1545f83 | My position to driverless cars is on the negative side. The reason i say negative is that i know nothing about it and it just doesnt seem safe to let a car, something with no brain, something that cant even think for itself drivea car for you. Technology is driving the car for you but wouldnt people get nervous because they dont know if the technolody would stop working or not thats kinda scarey. But i will explain why i am more on the negative side.
I think smart cars is a really good idea but i dont think its a good i dea to not drive the car and let the car drive itself. What happens if the car runs out of fuel or stops workin all of a sudden what are you supposed to do because alot of people know absolutely nothing about technology or even cars. What if the technology starst going out of control and theres no way to stop it, things can get really bad for the passenger and the company the car came from. They said in a driverless car some thing that is not available is texting while the car is driving, if the car is driverless it should be able to handle itself thats why it says driverless. They also said its 90% driver less so basically the car can run on its own for a long period of time without the drivers assistants and they never explained how far the car can go, the distance of the car can travel. They also didnt explain how many years the car can last without it causing any problems. In the passage said automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved but what about the near future what if the problems accur again how would you solve them ?
Smart cars isnt a bad thing but i dont think their safe and thats just my opinion. I dont think its safe for people to drive in an autopilot car and have no worries at all. I wonder if the cars stop working how many people are going to be without transportation or how many people are going to be broke just because they spent every last dollar into a car they knew nothing about, it was jsut interesting to them. I wonder how many people would think about their choice then. But in the end people are still going to but these cars. And another thing if its a driverless car than will you need a drivers liscense? | 3 |
154607a | The claim that the author supports the idea that studing Venus is worth pursuit despite the dangers because they maybe the issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decade. The dangers and pursuit are higly high risks for people and NASA.It is dangers because Venus is the secound planet from our sun and the atmosphere in Venus is almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets. Even more challenging is that the clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphere. On the plant surface,temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on earth. The despite to go Venus is that they are hoping to look for something their because the plant has surface rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains,and craters. Somethings that we some how have they call Venus Earths sister. That why I think it so despite that NASA wants to see what else Venus got that the plants sister does not have.
An explanation of the article that supports my claims are when the author says this "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value,not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself,but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Also when they said "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."Venus is also dangers for people because it has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system,even though Mercury is closer to our sun."Beyond high pressure and heat,Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes,and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
My conclusion to the authors writting is that they will not end up sending people to Venus because its to risky. They will end up sending newer technoligi up their so that they could see what the sister of Earth got. Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth -like planet in our solar system. Venus is most likely the most compared planet to Earth. Is to dangers for people because its the secound planet hottest then the Sun. | 1 |
15479c1 | Dear State Senator,
I favor on changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. It is time for change to our voting system. When you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors. five reasons for retaining the electoral college is, the certainty of the outcome, anyones president, swing states, huge states, and avoidment of run-off elections. The first reason is, in 2012's election, Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vot when romney only got 51.3 percent. the peoples popular vote wanted romney to win. I beleive it isnt fair that the electoral vote has the final say, there is more of the U.S citizens than the electoral college. The second reason is, the electoral college requires a presidential candidate to have trnasreginal appeal. residents of other regions are likely to feel disenfranchised- to feel that their votes do not count, that the new president will have no regard for their interests, that he really isnt thir president. The third reason is, swing states. voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay attention to the campaign, so the most thoughtful voters should be the ones who decides the election. The fourth reason is big states get more attention from from presidential candidates in a campaign than a smaller state which isnt fair or equal. the electoral college favorites of of bigger states. the fifth and last reason is that the electoral college avoids the problemof elections. The electoral college method of selecting the president, may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope for carrying there state. voters in the U.S presidential election are people who are exspressing a political preferance rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election. | 2 |
15487ff | Dear, Mr. senator
Febuary,3 ,2015
Electoral colleges,what do they do for us? How is this system useful? It's not, the electoral system we use today is mind boggling. Why do we evan use it? Sir the only good outcome is that we do not have to count as much. If we were to use a regular system it would make the people feel as if they were in charge. So many people all think that we should do away with the electoral colleges.
The electoral colleges would be good but what if there is a tie? Should we run another election? I mean who cares right you think of how likely that sounds but if 9,246 pople in Ohio and Hawaii voted the oppisite we would of tied. There are 538 electoral colleges and to tie you would get 269.60 percent of votes would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now.
To win a election you have to have 270 electoral colleges. The voters sometimes get confused on the electors and vote for the wrong candidate. Some electors follow the winner takes all so they dont evan bother with some of the states. The electors that have magority becomes either republican or democrate. Each canididate running for president is either a republican or a democrate.
Sir the electoral colleges are bad because we can have a tie, the people can get confused, and the system does not work for the people . People want to pick there own president. Also the electoral college only helps us were we don't have to do alot of math. These are the reasons i feel that the electoral gollege is no good.
Thank you for hearing my opinion, sincerly ~ PROPER_NAME. | 2 |
1549de8 | Senator of the State of Florida,
The Electoral College has been a part of our country since is was established in the Constitution by our founding fathers. Although it has been used for so long and some what effectivley, I believe that the act of changing the process to election by popular vote would benefiet the country and the residents more. Many poeple do think that the Electoral College is more fair and is better because of its certain outcome and other good aspects. My belief about the Elecotral College differs. I believe it is unfair and outdated, and I am not alone on that opinion.
An argument against the Electoral college is the disaster factor, information from the passage
The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradford Plumer. In 2000, the biggest election crisis took place in a century. In 1960, segregationists almost had success in replacing electors with people who would benefiet them. Along with that, some electors may not be truthful and defy those who they are electing for and elect the opposer. All these examples come with fault in the system.
Another example from the same article claims that the idea of a tie is the most unsettling. The election would be put into the hands of the House of Representatives. An argument for the Electoral College claims the chance of a tie is very unlikely, but it has come close before. In 1968 and in 1976, a small shift would've cost the election. On the other hand, it would be much more difficult to tie a popular vote, seeing that there are far more citizens than electors for the college.
There are claims that the Electoral College is both fair and unfair for different reasons. People claim that it is fair because no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president, when a popular vote might, from the article
In Defense of the the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner. However, the process is unfair as well. In result of a winner-take-all system in the states, the presidental candidates don't spend time in states they know they don't have a chance in. This is unfair to voters because not all states get to see the candidates at all. Swing states have all the focus on them. These states are more likely to pay attention to campaigns. This is not fair because those running for the position will focus more on those states. With a popular vote, the candidates will want to contact each state to make sure those who reside there have paid attention to them and will hopefully vote for those people.
The process of the Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and risky. There are so many opportuntities for disaster and a lot of unfairness all around. With people relying on the fact that the chances are slim or disaster is unlikely to happen is just not smart and there are things we can do about it. With a popular vote, a fair count is given and the president who more people choose will take office. Our country is a whole, and we treat the process of election like it isn't. Let the population decide and it's a fair trial; let a few electors decide and it could lead to disaster. Thank you. | 5 |
154f5c1 | My claim will be going against this because nobody knows how a person is feeling. Anyone can put a smile on their face just to get through the day and be feeling so much or simply going through alot but only someone whom is close to that person can probably detect their emotions and by their facial expressions on how theyre feeling. So when in the passage it stated faces dont lie these muscle clues are sometimes used when spotted when a smiling politician or celebrity isnt being truthful I disagreed. How would they know that if they just met them and are simply having a conversation maybe even if the celebrity or politician is or isnt being honest the subject may have made them feel uncomfortable or upset them but to say theyre not being truthful isnt the case because you dont know them enough to say how their feeling, or if their being dishonest based on the other peoples faces you've" studied". Since everyone is different we act differently we look differently we react differently so to say something like studies have shown that if the corners of your lips arent going upward when talking to someone theyre being dishonest is obsered. This isnt meant to offend the experts in faciacl mucles just my beliefs | 2 |
1574cc3 | Driverless cars are a bad idea it is better to stick with smart cars because smart cars are alot more helpful they can help the driver alot more. Driverless cars require massive upgrades to alread existing roads which cost alot of money. Smart cars can help the driver know when he has to be more carefull or when the roads are bad in the area he is driving and he could do what ever it takes to prevent and accident. GM smart cars have vibrating seats to warn the driver when its going to hit and object when its driving in reverse. Smart cars could handle trying up tp 25 mph but the sensors make sure that the driver keeps hand on the wheel. Manufactors are considering putting cameras to see when the driver loses focus on the road. Driverless cars are alot more dangerous because the driver won't have control over the wheel so if anything happens and the driver can get injured he is hoping that nothing wrong goes with the sensors. Driverless cars are a bad idea and smart cars are a better idea because all they have to do is add more things to smart cars and the smart car will be better. | 2 |
1575077 | Driverless Cars Are Coming is an artical about cars being driven by machine or computers. While it maybe realist in the future they are many negaitves and positives about these products. Many companies and people are looking towards the future, they belive in that furture there will be the drivelss cars. I believe that the devoploment of driverless cars is a innovative idea, but I am against it as indidvidual.One reason is the road in which they will be drive on, two is the positon people will have when ridding in these vehicles.Three is the safety of the driver and others.
I against the driverless cars becasue, while it may seem relaistic there has to be some practicality. For one, what about the roads in which they will be driven on, in the reading it says, "Originally, many furturists belived the key to devolpoing self-driving cars someday wasn't so much smarter as smarter roads". Its true that to have a smart car you have to have a smart raod, Google is making up for that by having position-estimating sensors, but does this still make up for the road,Is it still safe to drive. Can cameras and other sensors on cars make up for a smart road during roadblocks,shortcuts, and even accidents.
My second reason, is the postion that people will have when ridding these driverless cars.The cars still needed assisance,in the passage it says, "They can steer,accelerate, and brake thesleves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill,such as navingating through work zones and around accidents." Is it really a driverless car if it needs assitance? I don't think thats the idea behind the car. The car should be able to take car of itself if put into a tricky postion. Cars now have a more fundamental idea and it's alot more fun and safe.
My third rason is safety, how can you be safe if your driving a driveless car, who's fault is it if your in an accident.In the passage it says,"Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passangers, and pedestrains safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best acived with alert drivers." This is to support people without driverless cars. what about the ones that do have driverless cars?, in the passage it says, "Presently, trafic laws are written with all the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all time". They are corrcet,safety is important for everyone especially on the road, can driverless cars be trusted on roads and conditins they have never experineced? Ther are conditions in which they may not be ready for such as windy,icy or slushy,toradao weather, hurricane weather like conditions. There are can be mutiple factors or situations that these driverless cars aren't ready for.
Driverless cars maybe in the future, I have disagreed or am against the devoplement of these cars. I disagree in the devolopment of driverless cars, one of my reasons is the road they will be driving. My reason two is the posistion of the people ridding these cars. My postion three is the safety of everyone wether ridding a car or a person passing by. The car maybe a futurist product but can it be relied on by the people, that make or use these machines. I cars have a place in the future, but I also beliive they have a long way to go before being anything safe and trust worthy. | 4 |
1576626 | I am for the development of driverless cars. In the article, more good than harm comes from these cars. It can make driving safer and easier on the people. There are few problems, and the problems that exist can be fixed with the advancement of technology. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author uses deatil to describe why smart cars, or cars that don't necessitate a driver, are a good thing.
If driver less cars become a thing then the earth becomes cleaner. In paragraph one the author states, "The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxi system." Making smart cars the smarter option for more reasons than just transportation. Also in paragraph 8 the author tells the reader that BMW is trying to make driving fun. The author explains, "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringin in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads up displays." This means that driving wouldn't become boring, but actually more enjoyable than it already is. Driverless cars are just the way to go.
In pargraphs 9 and 10 the author discusses the traffic laws that may need to be put in place, if these cars become a popular thing. And yes, with the development of these cars there does come some problems and situations, but the advantages truly do outway the negatives. If driverless car do become a thing, and their technology truly is advanced, then multiple car related incidents would stop happening. Drunk driving would cease, because the cars either wouldn't let the driver drive, or the driver wouldn't have to and the car would do it for them. Also car crashes may slow down. If cars run by themsleves then when with other cars they'll become unifomr and not run into eachother. Driverless cars are safer and more reliable than normal cars.
Smart/Driverless cars are safer and more reliable than regular cars. They provide less chance of human error like car accidents and drunkness. Plus they would be more entertaining than normal cars. n the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author uses deatil to describe why smart cars, or cars that don't necessitate a driver, are a good thing. That is why the development of smart cars is a good thing. | 4 |
1578371 | Venus is a very dangerous planet and has harsh storms, earthquakes, and a bad atmosphere. But despite all that, the studying of venus is more important than worrying about the dangers that lurk there. In the article "The Challenge of
Exploring Venus" the author also supports this claim pretty well.
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. He explains that Venus has very harsh conditions that you couldn't live there or even land there without surviving for only a few hours. It has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 % Carbon Dioxide, there are clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere, and the planet's surface temperatures average over 800 degrees. They even say such conditions could crush a submarine or melt any metal.
However despite all that information I just gave you, the author still thanks it's important that we study Venus in the future. He goes on to say " why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?", and then explains that astronomers are facinated by venus because it may well once have been the Earth-like planet in our solar system. The author suggests that Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. He even states " Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth.
The author gose on to say, "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." "Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?".
He begins to say that NASA has an idea for sending Humans to study Venus. It would allow scientist to float above the scorching ground and just hover in the air.
Finally in the last paragraph of this article really shows how much he thinks that studying venus is more than important than worrying about the dangers of the planet. The author states " striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavours. Out 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".
In conclusion the author supports his opinion on studying Venus is more important than worrying about dangers. He supports this opinion by stating that venus is a crazy planet but still says why we should explore. He even says Venus could've been most Earh-like planet out there, and earth still has similar features. | 3 |
1579cb7 | Dear, state Senator
Electoral College should be abolished because the electors may help ruin the president election and large states are not vistied or spoken to from the president other than small states. Sources from source 2: The Indefensible Electoral college: why even the best - laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradford Plumet. Reason 1 explains that many electors could ruin the president campaign and Reason 2 states many elector go for big states to cast in more votes other than small states.
Many may not realize but when they vote they're not voting for the president, they're voting for state electors, for example "each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee" although each party chooses a trusted elector many can betray the party and select the other party. Also the betray can cost the presdient election dearly for instance Bradford stated " back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. kennedy.(So that a popular vote for kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy)". In other words the electors can ruin the president campaign and may cost most of the states problems.
The electors want to cast in more votes from big states other than small states. Source 2 quoted " Because of the -take- all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. Even though you would like to vote for your campaign the electors may not even visit other sates because they may think the other campaign has a better shot at getting more votes, but they do not know that maybe spoken words for the president may get more votes. also many may not even see any ad for the campaign, for example " During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didnt see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad." The author explains that many electors don't even see most staes because they are small states and they may not get as much votes compared to larger states.
Electoral College should be abolished because the electors may help ruin the president election and large states are not vistied or spoken to from the president other than small states. Electoral college may seem an unfair disadvantage for most voters many of their campaign that they want to win can be rather at a disadvantage or advantage depending on their electors, many electors may betray their campaign because they're not pubilicly held in office. Lastly the disadvantage is that many voters want to see what and how they are going to change or improve their well being, but most electors and campaigns do not visit the states that want view and know the candidates better. The electoral College should be abolished for the matter of the voter and the United States of America. In my opinion we should be allowed to vote on our own, for example instead of voting for an elector we should just vote on the type of campagin whose better and meet our daily bases needs. | 4 |
157c8cb | The Face that appeared on Mars was something that all of us would never forget. We didn't know how it appeared or why it appeared, but we were going to figure it out. Some scientist including me think it was just a natural landform. Other scientist think it was created by aliens,but I highly doubt it was.
I'm here working with one of the other scientist, and we're talking about the Face that appeared on Mars. The scientist thinks that the face was madeby aliens but I think it wasn't that it's just a natural landform.
It was a natural landform because the caption that we put for people to see was " huge rock formation..... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." The face was just a rock formation that gave the illusion of the eyes, nose, and mouth becuse it was just a shadow that we were seeing.
However the scientist doesn't think that. He thinks that the face was made by aliens. He says that there is no way it was just a natural landform that aliens made this as a sign for something.
He believes that it was a sign for something that the aliens were going to end up doing. But I told him that it was a natural landform because when we waited to get the best picture in 1998 all we saw was a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
But of course not everyone was satisfied.
It was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze.
I think even though some people still may think it was made by aliens, we all know that it is just a natural landform and it wasn't made by aliens.
I after all did convince the scientist that I was working with, that the Face was just a natural landform and it wasn't made by aliens . But all we have to do now is to convince everyone else that it was just a natural landform. I believe that the Face is just a landform because of so many reasons. So what do you think?
Do you think it was just a natural landform or it was made by aliens? | 3 |
1580723 | As in my opionion I feel as they shouldn't have these cars because they are diverless cars and can cause many accidients.Why invent something that may cause harm to our society? They should just have regular cars that are controlled by our own feet. That we are controlling. They are bascially having a robot car because the car can do pretty much everything like a robot. It computer controlled and that can be really bad. It can be really bad because what if it senses something is there and there really isn't? That can cause a horrible accident or even cause someones life.
All though some people may argue with my statement because they think it'll be easier for the car was to be
gernerated controlled than for them driving it themselves, but I believe that is dangerous. They think that all they can just get in the car and just sit there and let the car drive but really they should do it by theirselfs.
I rather drive a car thats not so new and not have probelms while driving on the street than to get a whole new car thats impensive and anything can happen while driving on the street around other people.
I have stated my opinion and have to support it. I rather be safe than be in a situation I don't wanna end up being in. | 2 |
1582312 | There is an advantage of limiting car usage, it prevents pollution and smog. It makes your life better in Vauban, Germany a residents of this upscale community aew suburban pioneers, where people have given up their cars. Automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs, where middle-class families from chicago to Shanghai tend to make their homes.
The residents are trying to make cities denser, and better for walking for the past two decades, so Vauban, home to 4,400 residents within a rectangularsquare mile, may be the most advanced experiment in low-car suburban life. In United States, the Environmental protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously.
Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. It is either leave your cars at home or suffer with a fine of 22-euro on mondays with even-numbered license plates and the same with the odd-numbered plates the following day. Because Paris typically has more smog than other European, delivery companies complained of lost revenue, while exceptions were made for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying 3 or more passengers.
A lot of Americans are buying less cars, a study last year found out that driving by young people decresed 23 percent betweeen 2001-2009. Executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, laid out a business plan for a world in which personal vehicle ownership is impractical. | 1 |
1585281 | Driverless cars are one of the stupidest things I've ever heard! How can anyone feel comfortable leaving there life and lives of loved one in the hands of nothing. Robots can't put there arm out and grab your child if the brakes are stammed one of them could be hurt and you just had to watch.
Yes the modifications made to cars we have now are actually very wonderful and make driving safer for everyone but the fact is a robot, your car special designed to drive doesn't feel the emotions when theres a crash and loved ones are hurt. They also say that these kind of cars could prevent accident when no ones seems to realize that not everyone will have acess to them for money reasons, most people today still have cars without all the fancy safey add ons because there to much money.
The cars of the future have me worried about how life will be in the future, people have vaccums that will clean by themselves and food that makes its self. Its taking away the human par of life and making it fake, turning the world into lazy slubs. Yes some things are very good, making manfucturing with less polutin in the air and stopping deforstation but alot of other things could impact everyone, theyjust need to look at the bigger picture and in it we shouldn't be ran by a machine. | 2 |
158d50f | I believe the author article can be supported with his/her study and details. In my option I think that trying to explore further into the idea of entering Venus's atmosphere might be dangerous; however, it could lead to a whole new story and new exploration. Taking the time to figure a way to land on Venus safely will take time, the technology and spaceship that would be used to enter Venus atmosphere will need to be excellant, and it might take risk on peoples lives trying to enter and explore a whole new planet.
Scientist often referr Earth's "Twin" as Venus because it is the closest plalnet to Earth in terms of density and size, quoted in paragraph 2. If Venus is very similar to Earth, it could mean that life could live on Venus such as how life lives on Earth to this day. "Long ago, Venus was probably cover largely wit oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" (Paragraph 4). This shows that scientist have perdicted theories over Venus and are still currently trying to solve and prove their theory. Finding a way to get to Venus is the problem we have here on Earth. In the text it states "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours" (paragraph 2). This shows that Venus is very different than the Planet we live on and it will take time to create a space shuttle that is well fit to enter Venus's atmospere.
The technology and spaceshuttles have not been made or designed to enter an atmosphere so powerful yet. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus" (paragraph 3). The information that scientists are finding on Venus is amazing and will help other scientist find ways to design a spaceshuttle to get through the blanket of Venus. Venus has a very hot surface level of 90 times greater than the surface level than the Earth. We need to discover a way to allow our spaceships to under go the high pressure that it would have to go through to enter Venus.
NASA has one issue that they struggle on besides buildling the spaceships that they would want to send to Venus. That struggle is sending a human to Venus, and not knowing what will happen on the trip there. Is it worth risking a life to explore or not sending anyone and forget about this whole experiment? If I had to pick, my answer would be Yes. I believe that finding a new Planet that life could live on just like Earth could continue the species of mankind. No man has under gone more pressure than the Earth's atmosphere, and Venus atmosphere could destroy anything that we create that enters its atmosphere including a human if we sent them.
In conclusin, I believe it is worth continuing to study and figure a way to have a spaceshuttle land in the planet of Venus. Eventually when it is safe and we have solved how to create a safe space shuttle that a human can survive and enter Venus. Being able to explore Venus and find ways to live on the planet could start a new way of life for mankind. | 4 |
158ddca | The author of this passage has supported his claim that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers extremely well. The reasons he supports himself well is by stating how Venus was probably the most Earth-like planet in our solar system and how it would be a good challenge for scientists to accept.
In paragraph four, the author asks this question, "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?" The author answers the question by saying how Venus might have been like Earth. This statement sparked curiosity among the scientists, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." With this statement, scientists are eager to find out if this is true, and if it is, what happened to the life forms? The author proves that Venus being similar to Earth is worth the dangers. Knowing what happened to the life forms on Venus may help prevent the same disaster happening on Earth.
The main dangers of visiting Venus is the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the extreme surface temperature, and the unbelivable atomospheric pressure. To continue research on Venus, scientists would have to get up close. The author uses the word "challenge" instead of "risk." This describes how pursuing Venus would be innovational to mankind. The author supports this claim by talking about how researchers are testing new technology to continue work on Venus. "Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." When scientists achieve this goal and do research on Venus, who knows what is next in space exploration. Venus being a challenge to study is worth the dangers because if scientists conquer this, they will be able to conquer anything.
In conclusion, the author supported their idea extremely well with concrete evidence that exploring Venus is worth the risk. With the satement that Venus could have held life forms and water shows that studying this planet is neccessary. Also, when we study Venus, it will prove that humanity can face any challenge that comes its way. | 5 |
158f25e | Of the many planets in our solar system, Venus would be the worst to travel to. This planet is highly dangerous. The conditions are horrendous, and some people are thinking of traveling there. The cost of building a ship capable of withstanding Venus's conditions would be crazily high. The fact that the author would want to travel to, and support the idea of, Venus is outrageous. Even then, they did not support their claim too well in their article.
Venus is the second planet from the sun. Accoring to the text, the surface temperature is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. Also, the planet has many earthquakes, erupting volcanoes, and often has many lightning strikes that take down probes that wish to know the secrets of the surface. Pressure levels are also off the charts and could crush the ship anyone was travelling in.
The author of the text was not too convincing of their claim to explore Venus. The title itself does not help the claim either This planet, as said by the author, is very dangerous. Traveling to Venus and making sure conditions are suitable for people, is not very achieveable. The author seems to want to travel there and supports the idea, but they do not support their claim very much. Most of the article talks about how perilous the planet is for people to travel to. They could have supported themselves better if they talked about the benefits instead of only the dangers.
All in all, travelling to Venus would be a waste of time and money. If NASA risks the lives of people by sending them, then the trip would be for nothing. With the dangrous conditions to consider, the contemplation of whether or not to travel there is out of the question. The answer is no. It's too unsafe to put peoples' lives on the line only because scientists are curious about a dangerous planet. | 3 |
158f63a | have you ever wondered whats lives beyond earth if we are able to explore beyond this planet we would know whats to come and could prepare for the moment this information gets broken to us.
Even though it might be dangerous it might not be such a bad idea to study it more if we learn more about this planet and gather enough information we might be able to make or gather the equipment to even explore this planet and who know what we can find we might find new minerals,materials,or even a different species.
It might be a bad idea to explore these planets that we haven't explore yet, but there are probably stuff that are on these planets that can help worldwide problems like cure diseases make better material or better technology, they may be our key to advancing but if we don't try to advance we might be stuck here facing worlwide problems.
Last,the author might not have a bad idea but it might be dangerous but its a risk we might have to take exploring these undiscovered planets that might be harmful but these planet might have the needs we are looking for to advance forward, to help us with our problems that are occuring today. | 2 |
1591b94 | Hi! Have you ever wanted to find a way to help people and animals when they think they have nothing to live for when they actually do? Do you want to give people food and shelter? Well we got just the right group for you to join! Join the Seagoing Cowboys program so you can help people in need!
We think that you would be perfect for the program! Here are some reasons why you should join!
- You can help people and animals when needed. Trust us there might be a lot of people who need it.
- You would also see great places like China, Greece, and other places in Europe! You might get to see the Great Wall of China, too! Wouldn't that be amazing!
- You might save lives and meet great people who are talented and smart and would also need you.
- You get to travel on seas! The Alantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and others! You might get seasick, but we have some ginger for you that might help.
So those are the reasons why we think you should join the program. If you like the idea of all the things that are listed feel free to join! Thank you, and we hope to see you there! | 2 |
1594f2b | Yes, I agree The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because you can read someone's emotions by the look on their face when they walk to the classroom. In the article,It refers "you can probably tell how a friend is feeling by the look on her face". An example in the article is refering "A classroom computer could recongize when a student is becoming confused or bored". Another example,"The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgey. This is how the technology is vaulable to read someone's emotions.
You can read a friend's emotions to tell how they are feeling. If you have a friend is forcing herself to smile, you can tell she is feeling sad, depressed, or angry. I know you can't read someone's mind to tell how are they feeling. Only you can read someone's emotion is by the computer knownig your are sad or happy. An example in the article, "if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen,a similar ad might follow. But If you frown,the next ad will be different". This is how computer tell emotions on that person.
If your a teacher,when you see all the students in the classroom, they get tired,bored,confused,or excited. You see different emotions from students when they got to school this moring. Some of the students stay up to late and they woke up early this moring. half of the students in the classroom they might get bored and do not want to learn anything today.
The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgey. In this modern technology,kids love to have their phone to play on their games like Iphones,samsungs,lg's phone,or more phones I can think about right now. There are alot of games(Apps) you can play on your smartphone like video games. There is a list of video games kids are so excited about like subway surfers, Archey,Basketball games and etc. This how kids in classrooms's love to have technology with them.
This usefulness this technology to read someone's expressions of the students in a classroom is valuable. You can tell someone's feelings simply by the look on her face. In a classroom you can tell the students how they feel like confused or bored. the technology can be fun like playing games or looking at videos. This how you tell the technology is valuable inside in a clasroom. | 3 |
15992f4 | What would the world be like if we could just type in your wanted destination and just go withoug needing a driver, how would the world react for such a thing?
Could the car just think on it's own? How would everything even work on the car?
In my opinion, we shouldn't have driverless cars untill we can get them to be fully driverless without taking away so many taxi jobs, wrecks, and confusion during them wrecks.
I don't think that we should have driverless cars, because taxi companies would loose all their emploies, it would save the company money but, also what about that families? How are they going to get their next meal on the table without a job? Driverless cares would leave people hungry and jobless, then their kids would be taken by DCS and them the ' family ' would be seperated. Meaning driverless cars are bad for the people because it can cause poverty among the people.
Also, driverless cars could cause many wrecks by not having exact measurment of when to stop. And much of the driving laws include a person to be driving. How would the car get it's licentce ? Would it have a liceence? When driving you use your brain a car doesnt have a brain aso it wouldn't work out for them. In other words, you need a person , a driver, still to have a driverless car ; so would it really be considered a driverless car? No.
Then, theres the part when they do get into a wreck, who's fault would it be because there isn't a driver to blame? who do they sue? how wouold insurence be on a driverless care?
The company who manerfaactured the car would be the one to blame because they should have prepared for the situation, also they would be the ones the be sued. It's just a bad idea all together because the company will go bankruped.
So, think again, how would the world be if there was a such thing as driverless cars? would it be good or would it be bad? we already know that its gonna be a bad idea so why am i even asking you ? It's bad because iit takes jobs from hardworking drivers, causes wreacks, and confustion. So, driverless cars for all is a NO GO. | 3 |
15a3795 | A claim for against the value of using technology to raed your emotion. Yes people are with this idea. But some are not ok with with it. And some just dont know.
People are with the idea of technology reading the emotion expresion of student. It would develpoing better ways for humans and computer to communicate. But caculating emotions is like math homework. the prossess being when a computer constructs a 3-D computer modle of the face, all 44 major muscles in the modle must move like human musles. Movements of one or more muscles is called an action unit. then this is classified six basic emotion-happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness. In fact we humans perform ths same inpressive caculation every day. For instance you can probably tell hpow a freind is feeling simply by the look on their face.
While looking in the mirror. Dose your face expression in the mirror suggest an emotion? in fact these are the instructions for a face that lookis happy. Its all about thouse muscular action units. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a force on. By the way making a happy face in this experiment also make you feel slightly happy. According to the faicial feedback theory of emotion, moving your facal muscles not only expresses emotion, but also may even produse them.
A claim for against the value of using technology to raed your emotion.Yes people are with this idea. But some are not ok with with it. And some just dont know. but at the end i support the idea. | 1 |
15a4102 | An alien spieces exist on Mars? The "Face" is an object believed to be created by aliens. Some believe this, and some do not. The Face is not created by aliens.
The Face is a natural landform which is supported by evidence. In 1976, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft flew by and saw a object that looked like a face on Mars. However, in 1976, the cameras weren't that high-resolution, so it would make things seem different. In 1998, NASA went back to check it out and found out it was just a mesa. In 1998, NASA had better equipment to take pictures of and had better definition. For example, the text states, "And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform." The text also cites, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa--landforms common around the American West."
Others may say that the Face is created by aliens because of many reasons. The people who believe in the theory of the Face being created by aliens may say that the NASA just hides the proof. The story quotes, "...evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists." In 1998, NASA took a picture and revealed a landform, however some were not shaken of their beliefs. Others say that NASA didn't take it at the correct latitude and season. In the text, it says, "The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees noth martian latitude where it was winter in April '98--a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet." Some believed it was hidden by clouds. An example of this in the story is "The camera board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze."
The Face is a natural landform, and aliens didn't create it. Does an alien species live on Mars? The "Face" is believed to be made by aliens. Some believe this, and some don't. | 3 |
15a509c | Imagine a world were a every student can go to school feeling safe and excited to learn. Most schools do not have the right fundings to provide the best education for our students. A lot of students are afriad to go to school fearful of other students. A new software that has been developed can detect the emotions of others. This technology should be brougth into classrooms to read students' emotional expressions because it can detect when a student is sad or in need of help.
Although we want our schools to be the saftest place for our students, in some cases it is not. Some students experience bullying and are too afriad to tell an adult. Instead of telling an adult, that student "puts on a happy face" so that no one gets suspicious. In paragraph 8, the author states, "Faces dont lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a 'smiling' politician or celebrity isn't being truthful." If the FACS can detect a fake smile in a lying politician then it can detect a fake smile in sadden child who is being bullied in school. With this, we can reach out to the student and offer help so that the bullying does not continue.
Another advantage to the FACS is how it can improve a students learning enviroment. Every student learns differently. Some understand things more than others. Dr, Huang states that, "A classrom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored so it could modify the lesson." Most teachers do not recognize when a student is struggling. With this, a student can get the right materials they need inorder to understand everything better and improve their eduction.
Therefore the FACS should be introduced into classrooms to read students' emotional expressions so it can detect when a student is in need of help in any way. This technoloy is very beneficial for students and can help improve their learning enviroment. The FACS can make our schools safer and more educational for our students and thats all we should ever want. | 4 |
15a5d60 | Dear Mr. Senator,
Around my community, there has been a lot of talk about how the president should be elected into office. Whether it is from the electorial college or by popular vote. This is a very important matter to me because it can change how our country is. In my opinion, it should be by the electorial college. I'm not saying the elctorial college is the right way but I would really like if you can look into it.
My question to you Mr. senator is why you wouldnt want to take the process of the electorial college to pick a president? All of the pieces seem to fall into place. So isnt it the obvious choice? See, the person who gets the most ammount of votes gets to be the president. Thats as simple as it can get. And in my opinion, it is as fair as it gets. It is also not a democratic method of selecting the next person in office.
So Mr. Senator, all i want you to do is look into the elctoral college. It is obviously the right choice. So please, make the whole community happier and use the better way. Be fair to our country and make us happy to live in the best country in then world. The United States of America. | 2 |
15b1360 | Can you imagine a time in the future when no one will have any money because of "Driverless Cars". Yes, you may think driverless cars is a good idea but its not. We already have "Driverless Cars", they are taxis and buses. They say it would use half the fuel of today's taxis and are more flexible than a bus. But how much would they cost? Are they going to be cheaper than a taxi? Are they going to be bigger than a bus?
Buses and taxis are probaly the cheapest forms of transport, and don't get me started on Ubers.
They say that Google has already made some "Driverless Cars", but they are not really driverless. Driverless means no one behind the wheel. "They alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." If it can't drive through traffic or back out of driveways then what's the point. What's the point of having a "Driverless Car" if it's not really driverless. Isn't the whole point of having a driverless car to relax and let it drive on it's own, not to be alerted when it can't even pull up into your driveway.
"Originally, many futurists believed the key to developing self-driving cars someday wasn't so much smarter cars as smarter roads." So what you're telling me is that you want to make the roads smarter too? No, you need to make humans smarter not cars or roads. If we weren't so lazy we wouldn't need "Driverless Cars". "The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel." Want if the "human at the wheel" sucks at driving?
Then we are going to have some issues.
The sensors are what the should be adding to cars. The sensors "Can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better respone and control than a human driver could manage alone."
See that is what we need in cars, they are so many car accidents because of speeding and drunk driving.
Ok back to why "Driverless Cars" souldn"t be made. Driverless cabs? They already driverless cabs, you, yourself are not driving the cab. Unless you are a cab driver you are not driving the cab, and it's going to take so many jobs away from cab drivers. "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to driver?" Their turn to drive? So you take turns driving your brand new driverless car? But don't worry they have a in-car-entertaimnet and information system to make sure you don't fall asleep at the wheel. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault the driver or the manufacturer?" I thought it was a driverless car why would the driver be at fault?
I can talk about this "Driverless Cars" idea for hours but I only have fifty-five minutes to talk about this. So i'm just going to wrap this up with my last thought. Driverless cars sould not be made.
LIL BOAT | 5 |
15b2b88 | Getting to see China, Europe, Greece, and Italy, were one of the best parts. But that's not the only good thing about the program, once you drop off the animals, the crew members play baseball and volleyball, table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games to pass the time on the way to our next destination.
Before you get to have all the fun and free time, you have to take care of the animals. That means feeding and watering them, but there are some risks. On my second trip, I was put on duty as a night watchman, and one rainy night, after making my hourly report to the captain, I slipped on a wet step and fell down the ladder on my backside. My heart was beating faster than ever as I shot towards an opening on the side of the ship. Luckily, there was a small strip of metal along the edge that stopped me from plunging into the Atlantic, but I had cracked my ribs, disabling me to do work for a few days.
But the fun and travel is worth the hard labor and pain. | 2 |
15b7ad2 | Cars are changing now more than ever before. Some of the changes that cars are going through are good while some of them aren't so good. We need cars to get places. In the first paragraph it says "He envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleetd of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." Not everyone is comfortable with that and not all people want a public transportation stayem to use. What if they like being alone and away from all the people? Will there still be cars that aren't driverless? Or will the population of cars that need to be driven not exist anymore?
Going against this is better thasn being for it. Most people spent a lot of time and money getting there license and taking classes to learn how to drive and then that all just gets taken away by driverless cars or transportation syatems. It's not the best idea to do that. What if the driverless items don't get used? It would cost lots of money and people would lose there jobs because of this like taxi drivers, bus drivers, and people that teach drivers ed; but it's good that cars do have the "Traffic Jam Assistant" or other things in their car that help prevent accidents and other things of that sort. We need things like the Traffic Jam Assistant because it helps people out for example in paragraph seven it says that The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." That means that it could save a persons life. By just having a sensor in your car can help save your life that's the kind of thing that we need in cars today.
So instead of having driverless cars why don't we put systems like the Traffic Jam Assistant in cars to help people out. It;s really pointless to go out of your way and spend so much money to create something that we don't even know will work yet last. So what if the power went out in the city and then the "back up" generator kicked in then it got shut down by the big storm. What would happen to the people that have to go get their kids of are already out doing things and need to get home to see if their families are okay. What do you do then if there are no regular cars and the power doesnt work nothing does? That's why we don't need driverless cars and or transpotation systems. | 4 |
15bcc7b | In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author states some different negative and positive aspects of the driverless cars. My thoughts on driverless cars are good. [Myself] thoughts are that I like these driverless cars. "Can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars becuase no one needs them anymore?" Now, people now days can go out and buy a driverless car, and go anywhere they would like to go without driving. [Myself] personal thought on this is it would be a great idea to purchase one of these driverless cars.
Good thoughts on these driverless cars are, they would use a lot less on gas, you could watch movies and television in your car also. Many people text and drive now days even with self driven cars. If you had a driverless car, you would be able to text and drive. "These cars have been driven more than half a million miles without a crash." People have bought these cars and not had a crash and [Myself] thinks that it would bea good idea to get one of these driverless cars in my opinion.
Driverless cars have antilock brake systems and driver assistance. Google that has designed these driverless cars have dreamed about making one for the longest time. "There was no way, before 2000, to make something interesting." Google wanted to make something that has never been created before. Driverless cars have all kinds of different systems and sensors that we have never thought of building a car with. These cars have "rotating sensors on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor." Driverless cars have so much technology now that they will eventually and some now that will drive themselves.
People that were looking into buying these driverless cars didn't want to be behind the wheel when driving. "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?" Why they still need to be behind the wheel is incase of traffic incidents or accidents on the roads for example. Some drivers still think to [Themselves] that they would get bored when not being able to drive and have to wait their turn. Some displays in the driverless cars can be shut off manually. These cars have "Traffic Jam Assistance," which will alert you when driving and when you run into traffic. These cars also have alert systems when driving also. It would be a good and safe choice to purchase one of these driverless cars.
"Can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars becuase no one needs them anymore?" Now that we have driverless cars no one would really need the cars that need a driver behind the wheel controlling the wheel, acceleration, and other systems in the car. More and more car manufactures are planning out and creating driverless cars. My position on the driverless cars is that I think that it would be a great idea to purchase one. They are safe, can take you anywhere you would need to go without driving, and would just be a wonderful idea to get one of these driverless cars. | 4 |
15c0b38 | Even though different technology can do many things, reading emotional expressions using technology can be valuable. It is valuable because this kind of technology can seek if your happy, sad, excited, surprised, etc. Many people don't express their emotions the same way.
This technology we're talking about is called the Facial Acting Coding System and it enables humans emotions. This technology is however valuable because it can clarify how others are feeling even if they're hiding their emotions. It can also let someone know which emotion your showing because sometimes diiferent emotions can be showed with the same facial expression.
When showing expressions, many of your muscles are being used. Computers can recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel by constructing 3-D computer model of the face and the 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. "For example, your frontalis pars lateralis muscle (above your eyes) raises your eyebrows when you're surprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger." When you show any type of facial expression, your using at least one or more muscles. This is called action | 2 |
15c487f | Making Mona Lisa smile people are feeling even when they are trying to hide their emotions. The new software has developed that improves accury in the perceiving the emotins of others. This means that people are hiding their emotion so that people can't tell how they are feeling inside their hearts. Accoriding to some new computer software that can help to recognize emotion inside aperson. This can help people to know what they are going throw in there emotions.
I agree with what they are making for new software that recognize emotions. We can actully calcute emotions like math. To recognize the subtle fical movement because we humans use to express how we feel. The mojor for the process is to know how you can track these facial movement. This can help you to understand that emotion is rate of how your feeling are. This mean That you can hide your feeling from your friends but how your phisical can show how by the look on your face that you are happy ,sad or worried of something.
Dr. Huang observes that artists such as da Vinci studied human anatony to help them paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotions. Thia means that da Vinci helped people to paint different look of emotion and feeling on the paint that they had made. The new software store simlar to rate the informations. To bring smile to your fae, while it's show just how much this computer can do. This mean the image on computer can make you happy,sad,smile and anger. It appers on your screen a similar ad might follow.
Using new techonology it can help student in calss to undersstand how world is bringing new things that can help millinons of people to recognize their emotions. It can make huge change for people who had problems of knowing their feelong or emotions. BY the way making a happy face in expriment also make you feel slightly happy. It may happen because we unconsiously imitate another person's ficial expressions. Making happy face caould reveal so much about the since of emotions.
This explain how people can know how new software works. The software rate your feeling which can bring change in the real life from children and alduts. In fact these instructions for face that looks happy. It's all bout those muscular action. That can indicate the different between a genuine smile and force one. | 3 |
15c5d00 | I do not believe we should use this on any students because for the fact it reads all of our emotions, which we don't always like to show now. This is one of thr reasons I wouldn't have it, "The process begins when the computer costructs a 3-D computer model of the face," to me that just sounds like something may go wrong for the fact we have the same kind of camrea for the Iphone and people have trouble with that. Another problem for his idea is, "That facial expressions for each emotion are universal," I really don't know about the meaning of this but it doesn't sound good to me either. These to me are just some of the reasons I wouldn't want this arounds school and lastly I would want them in schools because then I believe it will make schools have more bullies if someone had one and they used it. Plus they say that technology is going to take over the world, this just might be another reason for this to may be happen. | 2 |
15c7911 | When people think about that future they think about new phones, watches, tv systems, internet, hover boards, and all that exciting stuff. But have you ever thought about a driverless car?
Most people think that the postion of a driverless car would be amazing. They think that it would make life a lot easier. Would it really make driving easier? Ive been asked about my postion on a driverless cars. My position on a driverless car is that we shouldnt rely on technology for everything we do. In todays society people rely on technology for directions, phone numbers, social media, and sometimes even for school projects. This has led to people using less phone books, maps, books, and even less people meeting in public. This is why we shouldnt rely on technology; which leads to diverless cars. It could lead to unsafe relying on everything.
When it comes to the safety of people how would driverless cars help? Would they actually make it safer? In the article google founder states that the car would alert you if human assistance is needed. What if the system didnt work? The car would automatically shut down and we wouldnt know what to do. Why rely on techonolgy such as driverless cars to hold the safety of us and our family? If we were to get hurt in an accident where the cars system didnt work who would we blame? This safety hazard that is still not completely trustworthy should not be used on the roads.
When it comes to driverless cars it shouldnt be allowed. It is unsafe and not yet completely reliable. Why put us, our family, and other in risk when we dont know that exact outcome of how the car will operate in a dangerous zone or on a daily basis. When it comes to safety and reliabiltiy, we think big on this subject just like we do on trustworthiness. This has led to my conclusion on my position on driverless cars and how they shouldnt be allowed due to unsafe realiablilty. | 3 |
15c7e62 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" I disagree that driverless cars should be invented. Having those types of cars could put everyone in danger on the road.
Under "Sensing the World" it states that the cars would have many sensors around them and a GPS receiver. The sensors could stop working one day and the driver would not even know it. Most of the time GPS would stop working, lose your location, or have a glitch in them and take a wrong turn. Why would you trust something like that with taking you where you need to be. The sensors on the car could sense something small in the road like a stick and curve off to the side of the road, or come to a complete stop causing other cars to stop immediately.
In the passage "Driving or Assisting" it implies that "Traffic Jam Assistant" helps with traffic and only goes 25 mph. In paragraph 7 it says, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves." If I were in one of those cars I would not trust them with my life. The car could accelerate and the car in front could immediately stop then my car could bump the back of theirs. In paragraph 8 is states, "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays." I believe the driver should always have their eyes on the road ready for anything that is coming their way. Looking away for a quick second is even dangerous because another car can come from a different direction and hit you.
In the passage "Waiting on the Law" it believes that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. I agree with that statement one-hundred percent. I would rather drive myself somewhere then to have a computerized car take me somewhere.
In conclusion, I believe having driverless cars are not safe. There are a lot of unsafe drivers out in the world but having a computerized car is even worse. Computers always mess up or glitch in any way. I would rather stick to the old-fashioned human way of driving. | 4 |
15cf6e5 | It was the year 1976, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was searching for a suitable landing site on a region in Mars called Cydonia for a twin spacecraft, Viking 2. While doing so a strange face appeared, (yes I said face) on Mars mission controllers at the Jet Propulsion Lab had their jaws dropped in the image being displayed in front of them, but the excitment was short lived until scientist quickly pointed out it was just another Martian mesa of which was pretty common in the area.
Then a couple days after NASA reveiled the face on Mars hoping to spark up some attention toward the Red Planet. Did they get quick results! The face was admired by many, but this started theories that aliens on Mars created the wierd sensation.
When the Viking took the picture it wasn't as clear so on April 5, 1998 a Mars Global Surveyor went to Cydonia to take a sharper picture to display towards anxious web surfers, once taken the image appeared on the web site revealing unfortunantly a natural landform. Any conspirest in the audience can solemly agree there wasn't a alien monument after all. | 2 |
15d638e | If driveless cars are comming in the future I dont know how i will feel about it. Growing up i never seen or even thougth abut driveless cars untill i was a teenager, i just thought about the cars now and days and is these the only cars that we will see in the future. I can't imagine it calling for a taxi if im far away and just getting in a car with no one in there, it would just be wierd, but it will be something that it will just be someting that i have to get used to. When i started to get older i did used to think about driveless cars because i started to see them in television shows and movies, and i also thought how it would change the world forever.
Some part i wouldnt trust it, if you really think about it self driving cars it sounds alittle dangerous. You have to really do alot of things while your driving, you have to use everything in your environment i just think if you made a driveless car you shouldnt have to worry about crashing or even tinking about it. If they did made a driveless car it should be able to drive whenever and wherever and more than just half a million miles without crashing i think you should be able to drive how long as you want.
Then details say that half a million miles without a crash, so does that mean that every half a million miles you are going to crash. I just dont know i think it will look very cool but the only thing that matters is that does it drive well is it really safe its alot of things that can happen. I do like that the detals in the passage say that if you want to take over the wheel you can take over whenever you wanted. Like i was saying you have to really pay attention when your driving from the cuts and turns and also the bad
traffic and then a driveless car, a car doesnt even have a brain it a vehicle not a living thing but one thing i do like is
all of the alerts and sensors that the car have to protect you.
Yes a drivless have good things but also could have some very bad things. Thats just like in a few states like California, Nevada, Florida and Columbia all of those states dont really allow you to use semi-autonomous cars they care about your safety. They just dont think it is safe because you are not driving the car, the car is driving by itself, there many good and bad things about this were just going to see what it is going to be like when it happens. Just like it say in the passage says if someone gets injured whos fault is the driver or the manufacturer. | 4 |
15da71c | My position on driverless cars is that its negative because of you wreck your car it can sometimes be the cars fault and not yours but who knows besides you and the car. Many police may think that the wreck is your fault and charge you money for the wereckage and lets not forget about insurance.
The paragraph states that many peoplke will take their hands off the wheel and they will think that the car is going to drive its self but ut wont because of manufracturing problems so obviously we shouldnt have driverless cars because lots of things could go wrong and it wouldnt even be your fault.
My final conclusion is that we shouldnt have driverless cars unti they are absolutky positive and they have had many yest drives before letting anyone use it because 1 little thing could go wrong and that could be the end of
someone's life.
Driverless cars are dangerous because in paragraph
9 the laws are that the people should still focus on the road because the car sometimes might switch to manual with out you knowing and if your not paying attention you could crash and become badly injured and will sue the car company. | 2 |
15dc62e | Emotions can be expressed everyday, wether you are happy, surprized, angry, disgust, feard, and, sad, you still show some emotion. Now technology is improving and they now know the facial expression that the Mona Lisa is making. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry" (Paragraph 1). The technology that was used to find it out was a technology called Facial Action Coding System or FACS. The technology should be used more in the future and it's a great technology that has been made in the years.
Technology changes everytime, but facial recognition could be very usefull. Many people could use it to find people facial expression if they don't know their expression. With this technolog, you could find the students expression on something and could possibly help them with them. The technology can be very usefull.
Students have sometimes trouble in class, but sometimes they are afraid to ask. The person who is using the technology could help them and know their feeling. They could easily get help from a person.
The teacher could also play a big role when they use the technology. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" (Paragraph 6). What Dr. Huang said was that with this technology, teachers could change the lesson to be not boring. If the lesson is boring, the student who is bored would pay less attention to that class and probably fail, but if it was a class and he was more happy about it, he could memorize it and could not forget it and learn what he did in class.
Another thing it can do is help from the confussion of the student. If the student is confused in class, the teacher could change and modify it for a simpler explanation. Then the student would understand it more and they would learn from it more easier.
The FACS technology is very helpful and could help a lot of students. It even found the emocion expression of a famous art work draw by Leonardo da Vinci, the Mona Lisa. It solved something that is very old and knew it's expressions.
Who wants their students to fail in a class? There is a simple fix, the FACS technology which could help the student pay more attention in class and get little or no borem at all. | 4 |
15dc957 | I believe this could be valuable in classrooms because now in days students use a lot of computers for work. The possiblities this could open up are huge, like making learning more fun for each student and making them enjoy learning. It could also take away advantages and give each student an equal oppertunity to learn and succed.
Lets face the fact, teachers can't make learning fun for every student. But this computer software can. It can use the information about whether your bored or not as stated in the article "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." This could adjust to a students particuler need and make learning more effective and fun for students. By molding to each students particuler way of learning and interests, it could make learning easy.
How this could make learning more fun exactly is it can read your emotion and change how it approaches teaching you, untill it finds your not as confused or bored as stated in the article "if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." Eventually it could make it to where each student is enjoying how it is teaching them and they can become more interested and interactive with there learning and studing. If every student had this they could all enjoy learning and studing and it could give each student equal oppertunities to learn and be as smart as possible, one day maybe ending people not graduating.
In conclusion if we had this in school today we would see a giant difference in the amount of students at school and the test scores would blow our current scores out of the water. Why, simply because it would make learning fun for every student not just a handfull, it could make things fair for each student and making learning less a chore rather a hobby. | 4 |
15dd182 | Do you remember the space trip to Mars? Well, another debate is brewing: Should we go to Venus or not? There are two perspectives on this issue. They are the people that want travel Venus (the author), and the people that don't want travel to Venus. There are two inherant issues too. They are the need for futher space exploration, and safety. The author has provided enough information on both sides of the argument, but he thinks that studying Venus is a "worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents."
This first inherant issue, according the author, is crutial. The people wanting to travel to space believe that we need to go to Venus because it is the planet closest to Earth, in characteristics and in distance. There have been attempts to go the Venus, but everytime the spaceship lands it only survives for a few hours. They believe that we need to get up on Venus and study it. There is only so much we can do from Earth, and right now it's not enough. The author has a lot of evidence supporting the need for space exploration such as "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." (paragraph 8) The author beleive that all of the risks he list in the article doesn't matter becayse we need to take risks sometimes.
The first inherant issue, according to people who don't want to explore Venus, is also a vital part of the arguement. They believe that we have already tried going to Venus, it failed, and why try again. They believe that we have enough information from what we can do on Earth, why do we need to know everything in the universe? They believe that we have already found enough information that we need to know.
The second issue is safety. According to NASA, they have a solution for getting a spaceship to Venus carefully and safely. "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 by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." (paragraph 5). NASA has a soultion for the safety issue that was recently brought to their attention. The people who want to go and explore Venus now believe that this is one of the final steps toward actually getting off of the ground. If NASA trains astronauts well enough, tries to simulate the conditions on Venus, and everything works well; there is noting holding them back. The author expresses his support for the innovation NASA invented. The author thinks that this the object of the future.
The second issue, according to the people who want to stay grounded on Earth, is important for both sides to recognize. The people in the second perspective say it is not safe to go to Venus. We have tried it unmanned, and the unmanned spaceship counldn't live there for longer than a few hours, so it is too dangerous. "On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth..." (Paragraph 3). This quote helps support the second perspective for wanting NASA to kept its space ships from going to Venus. As the quote says, Venus is a very dangerous planet.
In conclusion, the arguement is still ongoing, and doesn't seem to have a clear answer. I believe the stasis lies between finding a need for going to Venus, that isn't just the need for exploration, and a proven safe way to get and stay on Venus. The two perspectives are the author and the people opposing the author. The two issues are is there a need for exploaration and the safety of going to Venus. Therefore, with all the evidence provided to you, you can make a clear decision about if you want NASA going to Venus, or if you want NASA to stay grounded, but the author believes that you should side with him in support of Venus exploration. | 4 |
15de5b1 | Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. this planet is called the "Evening Star" because this planet shines so bright in the night sky making it simple to spot. But dont let the name mislead you, but venus is a very difficult place to examine up close. Its referred to as Earth’s “twin,” Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too. And Humans have sent numurous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world.
Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a fewhours.
The issue explains not a single spacecraft has touched down on Venus in more than three decades, and Numerous factors contribute to Venus’s reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study,despite its proximity to us. Venus atmosphere is thick and is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. It's even more difficult like the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus’s atmosphere.Temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.This challening planet environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus.
Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. But, Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans. | 2 |
15dede4 | According to the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," there is a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) that enables computers to identify human emotions. This technology is relatively brand new. It creates a 3-D computer model of all fourty-four major muscles in the face that move like human muscles as well. Then, psychologists have classified six basic emotions that are associated with different movements in the facial mucles. This new technology could result in many benefits in our community as well as all around the world. The use of the Facial Action Coding System to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because it would allow teachers to know when students become confused, are being dishonest, or are depressed and possibly having problems at home.
In the classroom, it is common for students to tend to get confused while being taught a lesson. It is also common for students to get bored and become uninterested in the lesson at hand. With the Facial Action Coding System, teachers can make sure that their students are acquiring the best education possible and absorbing all of the material. Teachers can adapt their teaching style according to how students respond to the lesson being taught. This way, both the students and teachers can be on the same page, making education easier for students and teachers. The article states,"'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,'" (D'Alto). In this quote, Dr. Huang is telling the reader how this new technology could possibly develop into something much bigger where it can modify the lesson for students who become bored or confused, making it an easier and better experience for the student.
School behavior is a big part of a students education. If a student is constantly acting out and misbehaving it could affect his or her education pretty badly. Although, that is why Facial Action Coding Systems could also be very useful in a classroom environment. The technology could be able to detect if a student is being dishonest, which could prove very handy when dealing with situations with delinquents and trouble-makers. In the excerpt, the author writes, "To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling politician or celebrity isn't being truthful," (D'Alto). In this quote, the author tells the reader about some facial muscle clues that allow experts to tell if a famous figure is being dishonest. These are some of the same facial clues the FACS looks for.
Finally, The FACS could help find if students are depressed or having problems at home. The machine can detect six different emotions, including sadness. This could prove useful when dealing with distressed students. "Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness-and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles" (D'Alto). This quotes tells the reader about the emotions the machine can read.
The use of the FACS to read the emotional | 5 |
15e8c3a | When it comes to alien life forms, people on Earth have found very few signs that they exisit. With the signs we have found, our technology now a days has proved the aritifacts to be just conspiracies. One of the great conspiracies of aliens started with a picture in 1976. The picture was from a part of Mars that wasn't explored very often. Since people have been curious about aliens for years, they blew the picture out of proportion which started a chain reaction of people thinking that aliens were among us.
One of the many reason that prove this landform wasn't made by aliens is that the technology wasn't very advanced when the picture was first taken. This first picture of the Face was taken in 1976. Viking 1 was taking pictures of Mars when the camera took a very hazy and blurred picture of a really big rock. Since the technology wasn't very advanced at the time, scientists couldn't see if the rock was shaped like a face or just shadows reflecting off of the rock to make it look like a face. No one was very certain what it was.
Since no one knew exactly what the rock was, the public took the opportunity to make a really big deal about it. Back in the 70's and 80's aliens were a big deal. People wanted to believe that aliens were among us. Because the rock looked like a face, people wanted to know if the Face was made by aliens or if it was just another landform. To get the public stirring, there were movies, books, magazines, and radio talks shows about it to give consumers what they wanted, a real life alien colony.
In 2001, NASA decided to get another picture of the Face. When the picture was sent out to the public, all of the rave about the Face was snuffed out because the picture looked exactly like a landform. Scientists then closed all exploration on the Face because the picture didn't look anything like a Face. It just looked like a plain, old, boring mesa. Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Program even said that it reminded him of the Middle Butte in Idaho. Since the picture was so exact, if there was any life in the picture, the scientists could've seen it in the picture.
Aliens are still being researched today, but back in 1976, the rave of the Face created by aliens was all fake. Since the picture taken in 1976 in so blurry, we can't see exactly if it's a face or not. Then when the new picture was taken in 2001, we could easily see that the Face that was made by aliens was actually just a mesa or butte. All of the publicity that the Face got was just because at the time people wanted to know if there were actually aliens out there. The public have started some crazy conspiracies, but this one about the alien Face will always be remembered as one of the craziest conspiracies in space exploration history. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits