essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
db77ad3 | Do you think the world would be a better place if we had driverless cars? I dont think it would, it would cause more problems. Driverless cars can cause many problems if an accident were to happen, you still have to keep your eyes on the road, and there would be new laws to the road.
First off I am against the driverless cars because the first company to make one would get suid many times. If an accident were to occur while the car is in auto pilot the company is the first to blame. Anything can happen such as the car not working properly for being in a bad conditon or someone else on the road could hit you and the car cant react or expects you too in such little time. In the story it says " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer." Exactly this means the company is automatically at fault.
Also no one wants a car that can drive on it own only at certain times. If i am driving a car i would like to not have to worry about anything ever. I should be able to trust my car to take me to my destination. From the story it says "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." NO one wants to wait their turn to drive it defeats the entire purpose of the idea of a driverless car.
we have many laws that requires the human to be in control at all times. If someone has a driverless car and doesnt have his hand on the wheel then why shouldnt someone else do the same. In paragraph 9 it says "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the ony safe car has a human driver in control at all times." So basically you are breaking a law.
I am against driverless cars because they are not street legal and can cause many problems. If one was to break the law he can easily blame it on his driverless car and that isnt fair to any other human without one. Driverless cars can cause many problems if an accident were to happen, you still have to keep your eyes on the road, and there would be new laws to the road. | 3 |
db7ce90 | The Facial Action Coding System is an excellent way to analyze different emotions in people, but should it be used in classrooms to identify students' emotional expressions? I think so. Having technology in a classroom that detects emotions of students can be a new way of learning or can help show how today's technology has advanced.
The Facial Action Coding System can help students learn something new: for example the muscles in their faces. The article states, "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." The author stated, "muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus makes crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius." This technology can be a very helpful learning system in anatomy or specific jobs like a behavior analysist.
During history class, a student might be dozing off or not even paying attention because the topic isn't interesting to him/her, or they don't understand it. Dr. Huang states "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." The Facial Action Coding System can help students learn more effectively, but also make learning fun to them just by the scan of their facial expressions. The text also states, "Imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad. For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." This new technology system can make going to school fun, and can demonstrate where their future has to hold for them.
The Facial Action Coding System can be useful any where such as the FBI. Having this new technology system doesn't always help detect emotional expressions, but it can be a new way of learning or can help show how today's technology has advanced and how it is still advancing. | 4 |
db7fbc9 | Why Luke Thinks You Should Join The
Program
Luke thinks that you should should prticipate in Seagoing Cowboys program. I mean,why wouldn't he,he had a great time there and he thinks that you would to. Just in case you don't believe me I will provide some details from the story to prove it.
For instance,in the story he even says that he knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. Now tell me that doesn't sound like he knew it was going to be great experence for him and it could be a great experence for you.
Another example is in the last paragraph when he said that he was gretful for the opportunity to be a Seagoiong Cowboy. Now i'm just stating the facts to to you that he is trying to convience people to be a Seagoing Cowboy and if your not agreeing with me yet then I guess there's no way of convincing you.
I have another piece of evidence since you still don't believe me. He also says that Luke also had fun on board. This piece of evidence just proves that he had a good time just being on the boat.
In conclusion, I truly think that in this passage he was trying to convince others to participate in the Seagoing Cowboy program and Ithink that you should believe that to. I gave you my evidence and my reasoning why I think this and if you read my evidence you should to. | 2 |
db7fcab | Venus is sometimes called "Evening Star" which is a misleading nick name. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author suggest studying Venus because it's similar to Earth. It's has been called as Earth's "twin". It's the second planet by the sun.
Venus atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. It's temperatures average is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. By astronomers it was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. It stated the "the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains and carters". This proves that it's atmosphere is similar to Earth.
In conclusion not only it's similar but not many study it. Since it was studied by far from photography and videography which means it's not studied compeletly. It stated that "researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else". It's also not an easy conditions, but survivable for humans. The author suggest studying Venus because the author thinks that "travels on Earth and beyond should not be limeted by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet he very edges of imaginations and innovation". | 2 |
db84c1b | Driverless cars are a thing of the future.
They are said to hanndle conditions under a twenty five mile per hour speed.
Also they give the wheel to the driver to make sure that the driver can be in complete control over the situation.
Should driverless cars enter the development stage?
Driverless cars should not be in development for the follow reasons: malifunction error of the system or programming and not enough regulations for driverless cars.
Automakers have been battling with the lack of regulations for a long time.
Most automobile laws are focussed on keeping the passangers and others safe from harm.
But what laws are inforcing driverless cars?
Today, laws are in place under the assumption that there is a human driver always behind the wheel.
In fact, it has become illegal to test the driverless cars in California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia.
The lawmakers would have to put new laws regulating driverless cars in case of an accident.
Automakers are still working on the self-driving car thinking that the problems will be solved ahead.
Will the government actually buy into the idea?
Driverless cars rely heavily on the technology built within them.
What if that was a problem? What if the technology within the car was to mallifunction?
Automakers rely heavily on the sensors arround the car.
The sensors arround the car are there to insure the safety of the passangers and others arround the car.
In the article, it didn't hint to the performance of these cars in extreme wheather.
If the system were to mallifunction would it give the driver complete controll and shut down the systems, or would it lose control causing an accident?
Humans have relied on technology for a long time, after a while the technology starts to decrease in performance.
What would be the cost to replace parts of the system of driverless cars?
There is also the problem of convincing others to buy the car if it starts to sell.
Would every American want to buy the car, or would they stick with driving the car themselve?
Humans driving cars are not a thing of the future.
In fact, the very first car to sell always had someone driving the car.
Human drivin cars have been arround for a long time and the introduction of self driving cars have been arround for roughly fifteen years.
Driveless cars should not start development for the following reasons: malifunction error of the system or programming and not enough regulations for driverless cars.
Until automakers insure one hundred percent liability, then develpoment of the cars will be taken into consideration. | 4 |
db8b63b | The face the newset discovery by NASA a huge rock formation that looks very simllar to humans face and is one of the biggest thing NASA seen yet. This face has been causeing a big argument about life on mars and that alien made the face but im here to prove it wrong. This argument is just crazy alien life haha impossible and im here to tell you why their no alien life on mars and that just a rock formation. Now here are my three facts that will surely bring you to resaon noththing but shadows, no aliens found, all clear these will prove im right
The rock fomation know as the face on mars is nothing its just shadow turning the rock to a face when you look or take a photo from far away. This face is just a rock the only reason its look like a face because of shadows from far away the may seem like a face because the shadow give features like eyes, noes, and a mouth. This would maake any one that not looking very close think it looks like a face
On april,5,1998 michael malin and the mars ordbiter camera went to to cydoia to slove this problem once and for all. When he arrived he took the camera and document his time their makeing sure he got pictures of everywhere he went. when he csme back they took the photos and reseach them and found no traces of alien life forms. With this info they were able to show to the media that their aliens makeing rock faces on mars.
It was about about a couple mouths untill the media wanted more info to really prove that it was just a rock formation. So NASA inhase their ordbiter camera and took it back to cydoia. as they took more pictures with a better camera with maximum resoluiton to get a better shot of the planet they can fanliiy prove 100% that their are no alien or sturuces on mars
With this NASA was able to prove it's just rock formation like any rock formation on earth. Now i hope you can understand why its just that a bunch of rocks that was given human features because of the shadows. that not only once but twice they took pictures showing that their are no aliens on mars or anywhere. Hopefully you could really see why and still say they could have miss it you are sadly mistaken they gave a clean sweep around the plant showing no structes or life forms | 4 |
db8c22e | Many people might think that the face on Mars was created by aliens and many others might think that it is just a natural landform.
There is no proof for any of the rumors.
People have had clues about them.
Some say that it looks like an Egypitan Pharaoph, others say it looks like a river from Idaho.
The face has become so popular that it was starred in movies, magazines, books and talk shows.
It was so popular because it was unusual.
NASA knew once they showed the public the picture they would attract more attention to the planet Mars.
The Mars Orbiter Camera team flew over Cydonia and took a picture that came out more clear than the first picture that NASA took.
To get the picture was hard work.
They usually do not pass over Cydonia very often.
There is a spacecraft that will fly over the location and scan it like a fax machine.
The picture of the face may mean different things to people and some may have different opinions about it.
One person said it looked like a mesa formed by lava.
If NASA done more research about the face in Cydonia they might be able to figure out what it is and what caused it.
Unitl someone says what it really is, it will just be a big mystery.
You can spot the head shaped figure from two miles away.
Photographing the landform became important to NASA and the Mars Global Surveyor.
They also felt that it was important for taxpayers.
No matter how cloudy or hard it was to see and capture the face, they still made it work.
The crew in the Mars Global Surveyor said there were alien markings that were hidden.
When Malin's team tried again to find another photo they went on a cloudless day and used the maximum resolution and got another picture.
When they used the maximum resolution you could see things that were even on the ground such as planes or pyramids.
They also stated that the landform was almost the same as a butte.
The landorms were common around the American West. | 1 |
db8d3d5 | Hellow, my name is Luke Bomberger and I would like too share with you the experience I had as being a Seagoing Cowboy. Do you like helping people,visiting sites,and caring for animals? Then this might be that right job for you. When a first heard about it I was interested in becoming one of many Seagoing cowboys. As a Seagoing Cowboy you have a lot of responsibilates. One responsibilate is you will be a member of the UNRRA. You will also get to visit a lot of contries on you way there and you will get to see there land marks. Then as a Seagoing Cowboy you will also have to take care of the animal that you wil be shipping overseas to there destination.
At first it sound wierd to be called a Seagoing Cowboy but if you like site seeing and going to places you have never been before then this job is just right for you. When I went I sall the Acropolis in Greece and I also rode on a Gondola in Venice,Italy throgh the street water. If these place sound good imagen all the places you could visit if you become a Seagoing Cowboy.
In addition to going to places you have never been before you also get the chance of helping people that's homes are in ruins due to World War 2. There is and organization called the United Nation Relief and Rehabilitation Administration which is also known as (UNRRA). This organization helps contries recover animals,food suplies and more. 44 nation join together to help these contries in need. So if you want to help these contries than becoming a Seagoing Cowboy is the right jod for you.
Also if you like animal this is the right place for you to be. Me and my friend help animal by getting young cows or mules shipped overseas. One day we had to boared 355 horses and enough food to feed then all to get there. We helped by returning them to a place that they can live in that is not in ruins. In addition to visiting place you will also be able to take care of animal as you ship them overseas.
Now that you now that Seagoing Cowboys Visit marvoluse places and in addition they also help the UNRRA and help take care of them and relocate animals by shipping them overseas. I hope that however is reading this,and if you get the chance,will sign up to become a Seagoing Cowboy. I also hope that if you do become a Seaging Cowboy that you injoy your experience, I now that I sure did. | 4 |
db90b66 | I think using technology to scan someones facial expressions would be a great way for people to interact more with the internet and social media . Even though, many people will disaprove of it saying how it evades there child's privacy. Even though this may happen, there could be some good side effects from this new technology. One good side affect was pointed out by Dr. Huang, "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." Dr. Huang also noted how most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. He then goe's to say how these new computers need to learn how to pick up these emotions and understand them, too. I myself feel that by useing this technology we will be able to help students study more, and concentrate more on there homwork assighnments sence they'll be more engaged in the subject because it peaks there interest. From this I feel like the new technology would be varry valuable not just to students but to teachers as well giveing them the opertunity to get to know the students better and to get to know what there students are interested in wheather it's sports or school work. | 3 |
db9492b | Do students have to express there feelings to a teacher? Have all teenagers exprees their emotions to there parents? Have you ever pretended to be happy but was angry inside? Did you watch horror movies and get emotional when the main character died?
Would emotional expressions of students in a classroom be valuble. No it wouldn't be valuble students have personal issues and wouldn't be comfortable showing its emotional expression. For instance in the text it says," Using imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements-in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa,"(Para4). If a person trying to cover there expressions from people why is the technology trying to read there expression?
Next, A person that looks happy on the outside, most likely sad in the inside. In the text it says," Eckman has classified six basics emotions- happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness-and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles,"(Para3). Sometimes it's good that the technology have invented things to make the students speak up about what's going in there lives. Text says," A classroom computer could recognize when a students is becoming confused or bored,"(para6). That sentence tells a lot because the technology is trying to keep students on track knowing if there slacking on there work or getting bored on important lessons.
Lastly, Don't judge a book, by it's cover. A student can look bored but really want to lean what's going in the classroom. According to the text," The facial expressions for each emotion are universal," obsereves Dr. Huang, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expressions,"(para4). The expreesions for the emotion are not going to be One Hundred percent right but it will have signs if you are angry or happy. The technology will have a lot errors, to it getting emotions incorrect, making students intimidated.
In conclusion, the article wants to express to the audience that they want students to be comfortable in the classroom. | 3 |
db966ad | The advantages of limiting car usage is less accidents,different types of transportation(lots of traffic),less chemicals in the atmosphere,less fines,tickets,etc. You'll have to worry about,There are lots of different types of transportation that can keep you from driving.
First of all,if there was less car usage there would be less car accidents going on in the world. Over 1000 people die from car accidents. Drunk driving,speeding,texting and driving,etc. That is the number one reason why limiting car usage is important. Lifes wouldn't be endanger of loosing their lifes and putting other peoples life endanger.
Second of all,"CHEMICALS!" There are alot of chemicals from different types of cars flowing throught the air. Making people sick ,killing things,causing people to go to the hospital,diiferent types of types of things go on when chemicals are polluted into the air. Coming from trucks,cars,trucks,different types of vehicles produces types of chemicals out of their cars.
Next,"FINES,TICKETS,ETC.!" Everybody hates getting tickets and fines,having to go to court. They have to go to court by certain days pay the tickets off by this day nobody likes that at all. You wouldn't have to pay for parking.
To the conclusion,there are lots of different types of transportation. Buses,taxi's,plane's,train's. There are lots of different things you can get on when you need to go go somewhere. Some are free,and some are not you have to pay to get where you wanna go. Depending on where your going and at what time. So you wouldn't have to drive anywhere. | 2 |
db9c634 | Dear Florida State Senator,
I personally believe that the electoral college should be abolished. It can be unfair to the people. At most, there could be a tie between the electoral votes, causing the people to wonder and worry who will become president. Lastly, the candidates of the electoral college simply do not spend any time in the state that they know have no chance of winning. Three reasons that I believe the electoral college should be abolished are the following: the idea of having the electoral college is simply unfair to the people, many people worry that there will be a tie in the vote, and candidates do not spend any time in the state that they know will not win.
The electoral college is simply unfair to the people. Over sixty percent of voters would rather have a direct election. Instead of getting to vote for president, you have to vote for the electors who get to vote directly for you. To make it even worse, the senator's vote could change at any time. This often leaves people not wanting to vote again.
Another major problem with this idea is that there could possibly be a tie. Then, the election would be given to the House of Representatives. Now, state delegations would have to vote. Because of all the complications that this would leave, the people may not not get who they vote for. The election can always change with just a few votes.
Lastly, the candidates that the people vote for do not spend any time in the states that know will not win. The candidates only focus on the ones that they think will. During one election in 2000, seventeen states were not visited by the candidates. Even some of the states with the largest media markets did not see their candidates.
In conclusion, I believe that the electoreal college should be abolished. It is simply unfair to to the people. It can cause problems such as there being a tie in the vote. Lastly, the candidates do spend any time whatsoever in the states with no chance of winning. The three reasonds why I believe the electoral vote should be abolished are the folowing: it is unfair to the people, it can cause problems in the vote, and the candidates spend no time in the states with no chance of winning. | 3 |
dba50d5 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming' It tell bith postive and negative facts about driverless cars. I believe that there should be drtiverless cars this is where I stand. Driverless cars have been worked on for a while now. So far they have developed software to help the advancedment of driverless cars. I think that driverless cars will provide more of a positive impact on the world than a negative one.
Driverless cars have been worked on for a while now. Its been since the 1980's the used sensors attached to the wheels of cars of antilock brakes. Within 10 years, they are more advanced with better response times than ever when indanger and all around. In the late 1950's, receivers to capture radio signals th guide the car on a special track.
So far they have develped software to help the advancedment of driverless cars .In 2013, There was a develpment called "Trafic Jam Assistant"announced by BMW.This helps steer,accelerate, and break themselves. however they notify the driver when it doesn't have the skills to drive it in a certin situation. It can function up to 25 mph. There are also vibrations in the drivers seat to notify of an emergancy. This can mean that the driver still needs to stay concentrated on the road when the sitiuations occur. There have beeen ideas considering useing flashlights lighs on the mwindsheilkd and other heads up display just in case.
Driverless carts really aren't driverless now. Most of the software for the car still needs someone to drive the car. The software hasn't really advanced so much the needs to be no one conentrating on the road ahead. These are just to help progress the advancement for driverless cars and increases safety. So even if the sofware fails the car still has the driver attention on the road. All they can do now is help the driver and other become more afe when driving incase anything happens.
In concluion, the driverless cars now aren't completely driverless and needs the drivers skills so that means it can provide more safety than less. If it can continue in success the driverless cars will be much more safe than now. Driverless cars can use half the fuel of today's cars and can offer more felxiblity when driving. The cars can have better response times than humans can in the future. Driverless cars will provide more of an increase in safety then what we have now in the future. | 3 |
dba5c50 | So i am going to tell you about my adventures. I was super excited when Don asked me to go with him. I was almost like a cowboy pirate. The first time i went on the cattle boat we went to Greece. We got all of the 335 horses in the gargo along with all the hay and oats to feed them. It took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China.
I turned 18 before arriving in Greece, which meant he could be drafted for military service. “When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service.” By the time he was discharged in 1947, I had made nine trips—the most of any Seagoing Cowboy.
“The cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy,” he says. “Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,” he says. “So was taking a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water.” Luke also toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China. | 2 |
dba8941 | In the story A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves,is about a person who just graduated highschool. He had already been working two part-time jobs. Then his friend Don invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. He couldn't say no. Luke knew it was an opportuity of a lifetime. When they got their,Lke and Don signed up to take care of animals. In 1945 of August, they received their orders to go to New Orleans. They didn't arrive until August 14th.
When they arrived Luke and Don got their seaman papers and boarded the SS Charles W.Wooster, then headed forn greece. This opportunity was good for Luke because he had just graduated highschool. As they headed over sea, they had a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them. Before arriving Greece, Luke had turned 18 which ment he could be drafted for military service. By the time Luke was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips
the most of any Seagoing Cowboy. Luke's carrer was getting farther and farther. He
was happy for his self. | 1 |
dba96f3 | Hello my name is Ben I am a scientist at NASA, I have been discussing the face on mars with someone who believes it was created by aliens. I have read the Article "Unmasking the Face on Mars", and I have gathered some information and in my opinion I think the face was created by natural causes and is a natural landform. Here are some of my reasons.
My first reason why i think it is a natural land form is because as stated in paragraph three of "Unmasking the Face on Mars" "huge rock formatiom . . . which resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose and mouth.'' By saying this they say that the face is meerly an angle with odd shadows making the illusion of a human face.
My second reason is in paragraph 5 which states "Some people think the face is bona fide evidence of life on mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." By saying that the conspiracy theorists are completely controdicted and the NASA supporters are agreeing with them and saying yeah it would be good if there were actuallty life on mars and making it possative on their part.
My third reason is in Paragraph 7 which states that "Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time." The team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. And the photos revealed a natural land form, and there was no alien monument after all. This shows that at the time the lack of high-tech cameras and technology made the landform resemble a human face. But not everyone was satisfied.
Some may argue and say "The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze. But NASA went back and took another look at Cydonia on a "cloudless summer day" with their absolute maximum resolution camera and captured an extraordinary photo. But the photo contained no alien life forms as stated in paragraph 11 "So, if there were objects in the picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyamids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"
In conclusion the face on mars is really just a natural landform, and stated in paragraph 12 "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or messa--landforms common around the American West." "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain in Idaho." said Garvin. Those are all of the reasons why i think the "Face on Mars" is actually just a natural landform. | 4 |
dbad79f | Cars are one of the most iconic things about American culture. America "is the birthplace of the Model T; the home of Detroit; the place where Wilson Pickett immortalized "Mustang Sally..." (source 4) From Mustangs to trucks America has it all and we, as a people, think of cars as a necessity in life and we see them all around us everyday. So what if our car usage was limited? It mght not be as bad as you think. Reducing our usage of cars has advantages such as bettering the environment and improving the structure of a city.
Reducing our use of the car would have numerous positive effects on the state of the environment around us. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gs emisions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." (source 1) The pollution has gotten so bad in cities like Paris that they have even gone so far as to "...enforce[d] a partial driving ban to clear the air..." (Source 4) The havy car usage that we are accustomed to increases the amount of these harmful gases in the environment. "...emisions from an increasing number of private cars owned by the burgeoning middle class are choking cities." (source 1) Reducing our usage, or even completely eliminating it, would improve our environment drastically and help maintain and lower the amount of pollution in the air.
There have been pioneering cities who have already started banning cars, even for just a day, like Vauban, Germany and Bogota, Colombia. The residents of Vauban, Germany have done something no one before them has, they have given up their cars. 70 percent of the residents there don't even own a car anymore and have said that they are much happier this way. While some may say that the elimination of cars might be detrimental to car comapnies, there have been companies, like Ford, who have "partner[ed] with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which 'pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and oublic transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emisions,a nd improve safety'" (source 4) In this town of Vauban, Germany public transportation has been made more accessible eliminating the need for a car, and in turn has made places like shopping malls more accessible on main roads. In Bogota, Colombia there has been a car-free day where people find other means of transportation like biking, walking, or buses to get around for the day. "The goal is to promot ealternative transportation and reduce smog." (source 3) Other Colombian cities, Cali and Valledupar, have joined Bogota in this event, also having a car-free day. This day has made changes throughout the city improving sidewalks, reducing traffic, openingv new shooping districts, and even constructing 118 miles of bicycle path. The effects of the reduction and elimination of car usage can be seen in these citys' sturctures and the improvements that have been made.
The limiting of car usage has been shown to be helpful to the environment and helps to better the structure of a city and like Bogota, Valledupar, and even Paris we should all take into consideration the positive effects that limited car usage would have on us. | 3 |
dbad9f3 | Some might thing cars are essential to life, but other might think they don't need them at all. Limiting car use is a good thing because it limits the amount of fog, it reduces traffic jams and crashes, and people seem to be more family oriented. i believe that limiting car usage is a very helpful thing and a great idea.
We all know how badly cars gases are are and that without those harmful gasses there wouldn't be much fog. now imagine if this happened here in America. In Paris they band driving due to the near record pollution. They did this so they could have a day where the air would clear out and there wouldn't be that much fog. Some might think this is an excellent idea, but some might say its a very lousiness idea. Limiting car usage actually helps because your limiting how much of those harmful gases you put in the air. They tried this for a certain amount of time in Paris and that do you know! The smog cleared up enough for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for driving your cars. Now this is just one of the many great things limiting car usage has on our planet.
Something else similar to what they did in Paris happened in Colombia. They limited the car usage for one day to free up some of the congestion that they had in the capital (Bogota). This is also a great idea because people don't have to worry about crash crashing, people getting ran over, or kids getting hit by cars. People don't have to worry about a lot of harsh things, so they live a somewhat stress less life. In Bogota they are also making new parks for people because without cars you don't need to drive to parks you can just walk. People when they walk tend to have conversations with the people around them so they tend to have a more social and all in all better lifestyle. This could also help in places like New York or other very congested cities. Without all those cars filling up the roads with all there horrible gases, New York would have a very clean breathable air. Another thing is that they wouldn't have many traffic jams and/or many people getting in car crashes.
One of the most important reasons why limiting car usage is an advantage is because people are more family oriented. Studies have shown that when people don't have cars they fell like they don't have and debts and fell somewhat free. This will make a person more loving and more interested in family time. Also people tend to walk more and carpool, so this causes them to car pool or walk in groups and they do all of that with their own family. In Germany the citizens say life without a car is great. One citizen said how his life was so tense when he had a car and now without a car he is mush happier. Also America the percentage of drives have gone down by a lot. This is because people are unemployed, they don't have money to buy a car, or they simply don't want to be tense and have a car.
Limiting car usage is a great ting and i believe people should at least try to make it happen. It helps reunite family's, clear the amount of fog, and it reduces car jams and accidents. Some people might think its not a very good idea but some might think it is. So people should at least try to see what happens. | 4 |
dbb2296 | Families should have their homes with their cars under their garage. Car ownerships is allowed, but there are only two places to park. When i had a car i was always tense. But passenger cars they are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe. Up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the united states. Its basic precepts are being adapted around the world in attempts to make surburbs more accessible to public transportation. Automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs , where middle-class families from chicago to Shanghai tend to make their homes. They shouldnt even limit cars.
It will be harder for parents to do what they have to do. Especially if you have a family and walking a distance when your car could be at your house with you. Its not right to have car owner space along with a home because some people cant afford to pay all that money. If people give up their cars just to move. While there have have been efforts in the past two decades to make cities denser, and better for walking ,planners are now taking concepts to the suburbs. Vauban may be the nost advanced experiment in low-car suburban life. I dont think stores should be placed a walk way on a main street rather than in malls along some distant highway. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill be approved. Street parking,driveways and home garages should be forbidden in this experimental new district . | 2 |
dbb5b58 | I believe that there are some ups and some downs to the development of making these computerized cars, because Like the article saysif there was an accident, then whose fault would it be. The article also says that why would anyone want a driveless car, but they still have to drive. This makes no sense because if you have a driveless car, then you shouldn't have to still drive.
Having a driveless car, should mean that no matter what all you should have to do is sit the the car, and just be driven where it is that you want to go. Even though the assist is very helpful, having a driveless car is a little to much. It seems as though you would have to put more time into worrying about if your going to have to drive now, or in the next five minutes. That's a lot of stress. Having a driveless car would use more fuel than just calling a taxi cab.
It doesn't make sense that the drive should have to drive half of the way and then the car just takes over. There are some perks to having a car that can drive itself, but then again say you just got off of work, your tired ok yes, you
can let the car drive, but what if the car doesn't want to drive anymore, then you have to come out of your comfortable spot and drive. This is not right, we should just keep the cars that we have now. It seems like they are a lot less trouble, and they get you where you need to go in the time that you need to be there in. There was really no point in making the driveless car, if you still have to do everything that you have to do, when your just
driving yourself.
Driveless cars are very dangerous, because you don't know when you might get into an accident, and then you have a car driving you. You never know when the car's parts might stop working, and it doesn't tell you that you have roadblock up ahead, or that you may have to come to a sudden stop. The idea of having a driveless car, is a good idea, even you though you may have to do everything that you would have to do if
you are driving the car.
I believe that having a driveless car is very dangerous, it's not alwayts going to be reliable, and you can hurt yourself with this car. It's assist can stop working. It may give up on you one day. The down fall about having
a selfdriving car too, is that no matter if you have an accident or not, it still may
become said to be your fault. | 3 |
dbbaa3b | One of the highest paying movie catagories is Science fiction, but it's just that fiction, it's fake. When you watch these movies about aliens you can never take them as one hundred percent fact. The CGI can look amazing and the props outstanding, but it's not real. Now NASA has photographed an image of what liiks like a face created by aliens, but that is not a face, and it can be proven with facts.
There is a point in the article that says, it was just a messa, only this one had unusall shadows. That right there tells us that it is not anything created by aliens, but in fact just something that we even have on earth, the only difrence is that mars had lots of cloudes, wich gave it shadows, wich made the rock look like a face. The face on mars is just another hoax, another what if statment, another theroy, one that has been disproved by evidence. MYTH BUSTED. Now of course scientest didn't stop there, and they kept researching the face, trying to prove that it's alien, but they never did, because it's not alien, just another rock.
Aliens have been part of our world for a long time now, but the aliens we have grown acustom too are fake, just coustumes. That is one of the reasons they have become so famous, because they're not real. yoou cant take everything you see in movies or on tv as one hundred percent fact, you need to know whare fake ends and relaty begins. The famous Face on Mars, is not created by aliens, but by clouds. | 2 |
dbbc08b | I like the idea of driverless cars but I dont think its something we should bring into the world. It isnt one hundered percent safe and I feel it would be to expensive.
First off, safety. Safety is probobly one of my main concerns. We all know that electronic devises bug out all the time. Lets say you have a very important meeting and your alarm on your phone doesnt go off. What does that cost you? Maybe your job or punisment for missing that meeting. Now imagion that instead of you phone its your car. Now instead of your job your life.
Secondly, money. Are economy isnt the best. So where would we get all this money for something that isnt completely nessasary. The writer states that not only would it take money for the sensors and the cars but also road. These "Smart Road" would need to be installed before any cars are even released. That takes time and money we dont have.
Is this really a good idea? The passage says, "Television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves." I was aware that you arnt suppost to do things you see on t. v. Is this really what America is developing in its free time? We could be improving society. Cancer is something we have been working on for years and now there going to put time and money into something that we dont need.
What is the price range of these new cars? Will these new "Smartcars" be the same as a regular car? When they format the road will regular cars not use the roads? Will the poor and middle class be able to even drive if they cant affored a new Smartcar? These are questions that need anwsers if this idea will ever come into affect.
This is my take on these "Smartcars". It sounds like a good idea but is raises to many questions and doesnt answer enough. All of these reasons are why I think Smartcars should stay in the movies. | 3 |
dbbc5e5 | Sometimes you need to go somewhere but just don't feel like driving. Or maybe you are going on a vacation but don't like to fly so instead you drive. Driving for hours at a time is no fun at all. That's why they've come up with the solution to that problem, driverless cars! You may only need to drive when the roads get bad, there is roadwork going on, or when you have came across an accident. This makes life much easier! Now you can relax, and not worry about the road near as much as you would be if you were driving the whole way.
Another problem with the cars we have today is the gas mileage. Most of the cars we have today have terrible gas mileage. With gas prices being around $2 or more you want to use the least amount of gas that you can. WIth driverless cars you may only use half of the gas that you've been using. Can you imagine that? If you get 20 miles to the gallon you may now get up to 40 miles per gallon! The article says," The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's...". If you're the person that doesn't like to fly but wants to go on vacation this car may be the best thing to take for the drive. Because you wouldn't use near as much gas as you originally would. And as I said before with gas prices how they are today, you want to save as much as you can!
Maybe you aren't going on a vacation but you choose not to drive and take the bus to work instead. If you work morning shift trying to load a bus with hundreds of other people around 4 or 5 in the morning is not fun. Not to mention there usually aren't enough seats so you may be left standing the whole ride to work. That doesn't make a very good start to your day. The owners of the bus(es) could have some driverless cars as well. Driverless cars would have way more flexibility than a bus or even a taxi. They may also even have more flexibility than most cars that we use today. The articles says," Offer far more flexibility...". This shows that driverless cars offer more flexibility than a regular car, bus or taxi. That means, that you day may not be ruined because you had to stand the whole ride to your job.
Another great thing about these driverless cars is that they don't take on more then they can handle. They alert the driver before they need to take over the wheel. Because, of course driverless cars can't do everything that us humans can do. So if you come across some roadwork or an accident your car may alert you that you need to take over until you get passed that. This isn't such a bad thing though. It's much better to have to take over the wheel then it is to crash because the car took on more then it could handle. The article says," They still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues...". So the only time you'd have to drive is when your car feels its better for your safety if you take over the wheel.
The last great thing I'm going to tell you about driverless cars is that they give you plenty of warnings before you have to drive. Some people are saying that it would be boring to just sit there and wait for your turn to drive. But they are working on putting systems in the cars to where they can entertain you. However, the entertainment will shut off as soon as its your turn to drive again. The article says," Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be shut off instantly when the driver needs to take over-something not available to a driver trying to text with a cell phone. So, you can be entertained but you can also be warned before you have to drive that way everyone is still safe!
In conclusion, driverless cars can be a great thing for us! They use half of the fuel that today's cars use. They have way more flexibility the today's buses, taxis, and even some cars. They don't take on more they can handle, instead they tell the driver to take over. Lastly, they entertain you but shut the entertainment off when it's your turn to drive so everyone is safe. So, driverless cars can be a great thing for us! | 5 |
dbc3874 | Be Prepared for Driverless Cars
As the years go by, multiple more people are getting in car accidents. The creation of driverless cars can help prevent more accidents. The safety of the human driver is a very important topic in the world. This topic needs to be taken very seriously. With the creation of these cars, more human will be safe.
In paragraph 8, it states that "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over- something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone." This could save copious teenage lives because teenagers are more at risk at getting in car accidents because of texting while driving. Subsequently, It explains that "In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern.", so the more driverless cars available, the less amount of teenagers die.
Also, in paragraph 7, there is an excerpt that says "In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. 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.", this portrays that these cars are intelligent enough to warn the human driver of safety hazards and when they need to really pay attention to what they're doing. However, the human driver must be ready to take over when the situation requires.
Furthermore, another excerpt in paragraph 7, states that, "Manufacturers are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver." This shows that if cameras are put in these cars, it can make the human drivers stay focused on driving. Having cameras in these cars could also create better human drivers.
In conclusion, driverless cars can prevent more accidents and deaths in the world. They can get people to be more focused on driving. Also, these cars may be able to watch the human driver while they are drving. The driverless cars can warn the human drivers about future accidents occuring. All in all, driverless cars would help the world in copious ways. | 4 |
dbc67ae | My claim for, "Making Mona Lisa Smile," would go against what the author is trying to say. The reason is, because anybody can say that they made a Facial Action Coding System computers. Also the Author says that the Facial Action Coding System computers can Deteced when you are happy or when you are sad.
In Paragraph 4 it says that each expression is compared against a neutral face showing no emotion. Also it says that it can scan movements in a real face or in the the painted face of Mona Lisa. Plus it can be used for a video as well that show a new emotion with the software.
If somebody did make a computer like that then why did nobody put it in a Newspaper or even a magazine. If you are reading this then you would understand what I am trying to say or try to tell you. I think also if they did come put with the computer then people would like to be able to hear what the computer is capable of. If you understand then you would agree with me that the people should know what it does and what it can not do. If it can stop fight's then it should be brought to the people's attention, but if it can not stop fight's then it should not be brought to the people's attention. What if you the reader are using this and it tells you that you are mad then keep it. Then on the other hand you got to realize that if it says that you are mad but you are happy, then give it back to the company that you bought the item from and get your money back. So that is why my claim is going to be against what the author is trying to say.
The reason why that is my claim is because you can never trust if the item will work or not. If a real person is reading this then you will understand what I am trying to tell you. Also if you were wise as well then you can understand what I am trying say by, "you can never trust if the item will work or not." So this is why my claim is what it is. | 2 |
dbcb8e2 | There are a variety of perspectives and opinions related to the Face on Mars. Many say that it's simply a lava dome, or that it could just be a strange rock molded in such a way where it may appear to be a face. However one of the most popular arguments is that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. Although this is a very well-known opinion, it is false.
This is not the first time that such a conspiracy has been made in different cases, therefore something like this isn't as frazzling to the experts. On May 24, 2001 when sight of the Face on Mars was first made the scientists at NASA simply thought it to be another Martian Messa which was not the first sight of it making this something not taken to drastic measures. They thought of many different possibilities to why this was formed in a way that reminded us of an Egyptian Pharaoh such as the possibility of the camera's angle, the shadows covering it. Basically we thought of everything minus the chance that it may have been the works of such "aliens".
Aliens have been the illogical reasoning to many things we find on the various assortments of planets so hearing that this recent discovery was blamed on aliens isn't very shocking. We spent a few days deciding whether or not to show the images captured to the public, but in the end we decided to do so. The Face on Mars instantly became a well-known subject all over the world things such as movies, magazines, and even radio and tv talk shows all spoke of the mysterious Face on Mars. Many considered this discovery as the new pop icon. During this there were many conspiracy theorists who began to state that the Face on Mars was the work of aliens. However that's the thing, there are no statistical facts simply a load of different conspiracies made from people who strongly believe in such things! Considering there is lack of proof on even the stance that aliens are real the "case" was never thoroughly thought through.
There can be various reasonings and opinions about the Face on Mars and though they may be very amusing or interesting to hear, the reality of it is really that it is simply an isolated lava dome. This isn't the first time that natural landforms have represented such things as faces or even common artifacts. There is still research going on about what's casuing these strange formations, but you can be sure that it's not the work of aliens. | 3 |
dbcd1d3 | The advantages of limiting car usages is a suggestion idea about car-free cities. Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to separate suburban life from auto use, as a component of movement called "smart planning.'' The reazon why they are trying to expand this plan is because the use of car in the cities is growing every day like five times more than the usual. Cities are full of of car and you dont have to read these to see that. I know that these is a period of time in which tecnology is what take the first place in are life, and am talking about those new model of car. In one part of the view we can see that those care are very atractive and they dont cause any risk to society. But in the other side I will like to show you what especialist people think the cities full of cars. Experts say, is a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emission from tailpipes. Passenger cars are resposible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emision in Europe and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States.
Let see these in other point of view. Think about your son or your little brother or sisster or just tink about any little baby that is born in those cities full of cars . The greenhouse gas emission is reduced by 50 percent so the other 50 percent that those kids are breathing is just toxic air. Taths why the hospitals are full of people whit pulmonary cancers and asthma. While there have been efforts in the past two decades to make cities denser, and better for walking, planners are now taking the concept to the suburbs. But its basic precepts are being adopted aroun the worl in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, whith les space for parking. In this new approach, stores are placed a walk away, on a main steet, rather than in malls along some distant highway.
Something that also affect the society is the obesity. People depend a lot on their cars and forgot about to walk. It is a simple example but it had cause a lot of death and heart attac in the past two decades. ''All of our develpment since World War II has been centered on car, and that will have to change,'' said David Goldberg. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoring ''car reduced'' communities, and legislators are starting to act.
It was just an informative essay to let the people know about the adventages of limiting car usages. I hope this essay help you to understand and realized about all risk that cars can cause includind cars accident. The limit car usage will help every body starting with those who accept the Environmental Protection Agency promotion ''car reduced''. You can be part of taking care about the environment, and remember ''How much you drive is as important as whether you have a hybrid. (David Goldberg) | 2 |
dbcda24 | Many car companies are working on driverless cars. There are many pros and cons of driverless cars. Driverless cars is a very debatable topic. Some believe they can change the world with these cars.
I believe that this idea is completely unnecessary. The money could be put to much better use than having driverless cars. In the 1950s GM created a car that ran on a special test track. The track had special roads that worked with special cars. To make this work they would have to upgrade roads. Though the idea worked well, the idea was too expensive to fund.
The driver assists, like special breaks and motion sensors are a good idea, but not driveless cars. Some pros of having driverless cars are, people wouldn't have to pay attention to the road and do what they want while in the car. Sure it would make life easier. Think about when a teenager first gets their license. Most don't know their way around everywhere. With a regular car, I think it would be better for them to drive around and get familiar with their environment. If they had a driverless car, they wouldn't really pay attention to where they're going. So if the car was to malfunction, they wouldn't know where they're going. Also if an accident were to occur, it would be hard to tell who is at fault.
I think driverless cars are a bad idea, because they're unnecessary. It will be another product for rich people. Also i think it will be a safely hazard. | 3 |
dbcdee0 | The world has come so far in tachnology since the 1980s.People have made phones, tv, and so much more nad have improved it ever since.Imagine a world that doesn't really use cars anymore. There would be a world that have driverless cars instead of regular cars. The driverless cars should become more popular in the future because of safety, they're enjoybale, and it benefits people.
Some people might say that what might they do in the mean while that the car is driving. Well there is a solution, people could play games and fun with their children. Another argument that people might argue about is that the driverless cars arent as safe as if people are driving. They are becasue the driverless cars aren't fully driverless. They require people to pull out of a drive way and drive around work zones.
There are so many reasons why driverless cars should become more popular in the future. One reason is that it could be safer than when humans acually drive. For an example, many humans get injured when they are in a car crash. They could get drunk or they could be texting. By using driverless cars it could reduce that amount by so much.
Another reason why driverless cars should become popular in the future is because it could become more enjoyable. When the car is driving on its own, people could have some fun by playing something with their children and interact with them. Today, parents don't really interact with their children because their children are on their phone and spend so much time on it that they don't even pay attetion to their surroundings. If there is driverless cars, parents could interact with their children more often.
The last reason why driverless cars should become more popular in the future is because it could benefit people. It could benefit them because they wouldn't have to worry about crashings as much as if people were driving. There would also be less deaths so people wouldn't have to be stressed out as much if they lost their loved ones. They would also be more phocused on their job if they din;t lose their loved one. If people were more phocused on their job their boss might give them a raise so the person would feel happy.
In the end, the driverless cars should become more popular in the future because of safety,they're enjoybale, and it benefits people. The world would become a much better place without car crashes and people wouldn't really have to worry about that as much. People might say that they aren't as safe but they are. | 4 |
dbcfa50 | In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars", there is information showing that the Face is a natural landform, and was not created by aliens. I have to agree, and say that the Face is a natural landform. Reasons to back up my thought would include, that the Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped quite a few pictures showing that it wasn't a real face, they have never seen anything like this before, and more scientists believed it was a rock formation rather than an alien.
The Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped quite a few pictures to get closer looks on the formation, to see if it could be a real face or not. In paragraph 7 it stated, "...Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos." Malin and his team took sharper pictures to prove to other people that they were right about it being a natural landform. Scientists also haven't seen anything like this before. In paragraph 9 it mentioned, "We just dont pass over the Face very often." If it really was an alien you would see more things like this because there wouldn't be just one alien, there would way more, causing there to be more faces. More scientists also believed that the Face was a natural landform, while only a few believed it could have been an alien feature. Within paragraph 8 it stated, "But not everyone was satisfied... Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." By the article saying this, they showed that some people disagreed with the other scientists, and actually thought it was some sort of alien marking.
Although, most of the scientists say that this is a natural landform, there will always be someone who wants to disagree with them. No matter how many people would say that something is right, there will always be that one person who has to be different then everyone else. In the article, there are more facts saying that the rock is a natural landform, even though that leading it to be bias. There would be a better argument, if you had one story saying it was natural, and one story saying it's because of an alien. | 3 |
dbd027f | To prove to my fellow collegues about the "Face on Mars" thing was naturally made, not by alien lifeforms, i have decided to write this paper. This face has shodows and yes it does make it look like it has eyes, nose, and mouth, but that just really what we want to see if you were told it was a face you would've beleived it.
The article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" has a lot of suspense and it does indeed pull the reader in, and towards the end they break down the scientific facts. They use examples of here on earth and they talk about the showdows. They even talk about how the resolution of photos could change the perspective of those photos.
This face shaped mound on mars has just thrown all the theories out and has caused a big worry in the world. Personally I did not see the face until i had read through the article pretty much pin-pointing all of the features, so i went back to the picture of the face and that when i did see it. One persons theory has caused problems for everything from t. v. to conversations.
The fact of the matter is that when you look at this mound and you are told its a face you are most likely gonna beleive that concept until you get the scientific facts and you read them and you probably still wont beleive it, because as humans there has always got to be something that drives you to be excited. Its in our genetics and our concept is just going to be stuck with until there is an actual reasoning that can be proven.
In this paper i have mostly talked about my beleifs, but everyone has their own beleifs and I know that we can not fully prove there is life on other planets, but whatever makes you strive fo answers be my guest. I am not here to judge you or shoot down your answers. I am here to give you once again another concept. | 2 |
dbd114e | The use of the Facial Action Coding System that is used to read emotional expressions of students in classrooms is valuable. The use of this technology is valuable because students would have a better work ethic. The students would want to strive and would want to do their work.
This technology could help make a better work ethic in students because the computer would know how to keep their attention. For example, say that a student is doing a work activity on the computer but starts lacking interest in the activity. The computer could read the students emotional expressions and make the activity more interesting, like using more colors, or even adding more to the activity that is fun. The computer could do something that excited the student or even made the student want more of something, such as information about a topic they read about.
In the article, the author states that the professor, Dr. Huang, tested the emotion software on the famous Mona Lisa painting. The software collected data that Mona Lisa was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. With that information being collected from this software I believe that its use could be valuable with classroom computers. The teachers would value the work of the software to know how to help the students when the lack work ethic and to know how to keep the childs attention to the work. This software could even help the teachers work ethic by getting to know how their students learn.
The Facial Action Coding System could be the future to a new software in all computers when it comes to all types of schooling systems, no matter if its medical school or even high school. The way that the software calculates emotions is very interesting to me. This software was a great project to complete. In my opinion, this could be very valuable to schools all over. This could also be valuable to the students and teachers using it to work.
Its amazing how a software program can track facial movements to decet emotions. The software uses video imagery, which then tracks the facial movements of a person, which then detects the emotions of the person. This somewhat mimics the way that humans can detect emotions. For example, say you were with a friend but you could tell that something was wrong with them. You knew this by their facial expression, which is how the software also works. | 3 |
dbd15ac | Well what do you think? Aliens on Mars are as likey as th moon being made out of cheese meaning, that is not possible. The idea of of that can be struct down by facts. It is simply a natural landform because it looks to much like a human face and if aliens made it how would they know what we look like. Also, there are no signs of life on the planet, and lastly it is just a bunch of creators on a mountian.
Lets look at some of the facts, while there is possible life on there it looks to much like a human face. If this was proof of aliens how would they know what we look like. It would have to many similarities to us. If it were an alien structure, they would have to be here living among us and they would stick out a little bit.
Another fact to shutdown the theory is Mars is not inhabitable. While still being about the same size of Earth, it is not possible to live on it. Mars is not able to produce oxegen because it does not have any trees, and while you would probably say aliens woud not needed oxegen, but I say every living thing needs oxegen.
Lasty, when you first look at it can be hard to see it is just a mountain. When you look at it, it does look it has a mouth, nose, eyes, and freckles. Though when you look at it closely, you can see the freckles are just creators. The mouth it is simply a dips between two mountains, the eyes are also just large creators. Also when you look at the nose, you can see an extention of one of the mountains.
It can be hard to see the diffrences and think t is an actual face, with fact that is not possible for it to be a sign of alien life. It can not be a sign f aliens on Mars beccause, it looks to much like a human face, The planet is inhabitable, and it is just creators on a mountain. | 3 |
dbd5d3c | "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." Three reasons right there on why we should switch over to election by popular vote. Unfair, outdated, and irrational. Let's help you better understand;
"At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-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." stated in
What's wrong with the electoral college
(source 2). The electoral college is also unfair because there's always one person, in this case candidates, trying harder than the other person. Also stated in source 2
"During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't 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." Which is completely unfair, foolish even.
Way past outdated, "In 1968," decades ago. There is no reason as to why we still actually have this around, many people stopped voting, maybe not because of how old this act is, but definetly because we need a new way. Election by popular vote could be one of those new ways. This electoral college has to have an experation date on it someday.
Irrational. Irrational because it doesn't make sense, if you think about it, it's basically an easy way to get out of cheating, and no one likes cheaters. If we were to change the election by popular vote, think about how much more worth it would be, think about how there wouldn't be as many problems if people voted for the right candidate. What if they actually won? What about all the world changes?
It just makes more sense, it's more reasonable. There could be so many things different today if we changed the way election worked years ago. It's never too late, we still have time. Time to stop the unfair, outdated, and irrational ways. All's you need is a little motivation. | 3 |
dbd6b54 | Imagine a world where we didn't have to drive ourselves anywhere. All we had to do is tell the car where to go and it would take us there with little or no worries. Would that be a world you would like to live in?
The idea of the so called "driverless car" would not be the greatest thing in the world because even though people have tested it and still are testing it and saying there would be little or no accidents is still a risk to take. Even so the car are not completely driverless you still have to have hands on the wheel and be ready to take over if there was to be some sort of accident or back up.
Even if the driverless car were to come to the world there would have to be a whole set of new problems, laws and safety needs to bring our way. It is said that "the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times". So to have a computer driving you somewhere would increase the chance of being at risk of an accident.
So the idea of the "driverless car" wouldn't be the best thing for the world because it would be too much of a risk, they still have many flaws that people have to mess with and simply the peson in the driver's seat is the best man for the job. | 3 |
dbd8769 | Has the face on mars been put there by alien? Well statments say that aliens have came and put this face on mars. Dont believe this because its slightly untrue because if you believe that aliens are real then of course your going to believe that aliens have came and put this face on mars. In my opinion aliens arent real and they didnt put this face on mars why cant people do research just to figure out if aliens are capable of doing these things. I honestly dont think that aliens would do this. just because i actually dont believe that they are real. So thats why im here to change anyones opinion about this face on mars. If it were aliens couldnt there have been some type of markings somewhere some how because if you think about it aliens can leave tracks too so if there wernt any trackings on the seen then aliens couldnt have done it. So with that being siad there were no aliens there to put this face on mars i mean for you to think that it was aliens wouldnt you have to have proof that it was aliens or some evidence. Anything to prove that it was aliens but for now we can only say that it wasnt aliens who do this because no one has no proof. That it was aliens no signs no tracks no nothing. So it couldnt have been aliens. This is how you know that it wasnt aliens who did this it is a natrual landform that is just there not one put it there. Has the face on mars been put there by alien? Well statments say that aliens have came and put this face on mars. Dont believe this because its slightly untrue because if you believe that aliens are real then of course your going to believe that aliens have came and put this face on mars. In my opinion aliens arent real and they didnt put this face on mars why cant people do research just to figure out if aliens are capable of doing these things. I honestly dont think that aliens would do this. just because i actually dont believe that they are real. So thats why im here to change anyones opinion about this face on mars. If it were aliens couldnt there have been some type of markings somewhere some how because if you think about it aliens can leave tracks too so if there wernt any trackings on the seen then aliens couldnt have done it. So with that being siad there were no aliens there to put this face on mars i mean for you to think that it was aliens wouldnt you have to have proof that it was aliens or some evidence. Anything to prove that it was aliens but for now we can only say that it wasnt aliens who do this because no one has no proof. That it was aliens no signs no tracks no nothing. So it couldnt have been aliens. This is how you know that it wasnt aliens who did this it is a natrual landform that is just there not one put it there. | 2 |
dbdaa1c | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers it presents. Venus is an interesting planet to learn about. The author states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because its Earth-like." However, Venus has a thicker atmosphere than earth. The fahrenheit of Venus is extremely hot. It's possible that any NASA person could visit this planet and understand Venus.
Scientists will figure out a way to travel to Venus and get more information than they already have. For example, somebody from NASA could reach the planet and get to know so much such as; what it looks like and the temperature. They would report back to the boss with every piece of information they've received. The temperature could affect the traveler because its possible to have a heat stroke if they are not careful enough.
The scientists and NASA are being limited by the dangerous travel to Venus. A life could be lost so they are being doubted. Reseachers are not able to research any minerals from Venus unless the rocks, or what not, are brought back to earth by a traveler. Studying Venus is a worthyy pursuit despite the dangers that might come with. | 2 |
dbe00b1 | The future car
Wouldn't it be cool to sleep while you drive, or even do your hair while you drive? How would you like to just lean back and let your car drive itself? Maybe deal with your kids while on the way to see grandma. How would you like to call an old relative from out of state will going to pick up your kids from school without having to drive? If you don't want to deal with traffic or you just can't drive. If you said yes to any of these listen up.
Google thinks they can come up with a self driven car. It is safe and easy to use. You don't have to do anything, but do we have the tech for a self driven car? Google made a toyota, but it is not self driven. The car stops and drives itself.
There is a problem when needed help it warns driver to take over. Traffic, road work, and Traffic problems. The car also needs driver to pull in and out of the driverway. Other car companies are tring to develope the self driven car. No one has succeded yet.
The tech has came a long way from 1980. The concept were first introduced in Tv shows and movies. Lots of people thing we should drive ourselfs. They have thier reasons to not have self driven cars. Others have different ideas.
Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to havecars that drive themselves by 2020. People doubt they would have done it. The futrue is near. The self driven cars will be the greastest thing to happen. The car will be amung us. You can use the time you driven to change dippers, or anything you want. | 3 |
dbe3115 | Luke's point of view might be that it was fun but i just can't be the only thing that ido in life. By the time he was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips themost of any Seagoing Cowboy. He was proud to break a record but he was alsovery mad because of him being 18 and still doing the trips on being a SegoingCowboy. He was also working two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldnt say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. But luke thought of it that way and not by how many trips he was going to make or the number of places he was going to go. He knew that it was going to be a opportunity of a lifetime because you hardly ever get a opportunity of a lifetime when you are working to part time jobs and trying to raise moeny for your own self to live life. And when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldnt say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. But luke thought of it that way and not by how many trips he was going to make or the number of places he was going to go. He knew that it was going to be a opportunity of a lifetime because you hardly ever get a opportunity of a lifetime when you are working to part time jobs and trying to raise moeny for your own self to live life. Also when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat trip if luke would have said no then his friend Don Reist that invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat trip would have tought or asked why do you not want to go because because you wil get to go a lot of places that you would not be able to go also because you would get to havea full boat ride there and a emty boat ride back. Plus i will be there with you the whole time that you are there so you do not have to be scaryed if that is why you don't want to go. Also because you will be able to go and see part of the wolrd that you may never agin get the chance to go and see agin so we don't leave for anouther 2 days so that will give you a chance to think about the trip we are really hopeing you can make it but if you can't then we understand why because it is your chose so just please just think about it because it would mean alot to me and the other guys if you came. So he got Luke to say yes but he was only going to be there for a little bit because he has other things to do like get a house and also get a better job then the ones he already has so only for one year. But after that one year he had made it clear that he wanted to stay longer because he had stared to think that this was his job and after a while one of the boys came to him and asked him what would you think if you could stay here because our captian says that you got a job working with us if thats what you want to do is work with us but you do not have to if you don't then we have to take you back because we can't just let you stay like work for us. So Luke sid of couse i will work with you guys but we have to stop so i can get the rest of my stuff plusemy colth and i can just keep it in my bedroom right of couse you can. But no break able stuff is allowed on the ship oun less you don't have any where else to put it then we have a little bit of room were we can put it where it will be safe. | 1 |
dbe4221 | My position on the driverless cars after reading this article is that I am against them. I am against them for many reasons. The first one being that if the driver is not ready to take over the wheel at any one point and time they could end up crashing the car or something else bad happening. My second reason is that why have a driverless car if it doesn't know how to navigate through road work or accidents on the road. After I am done telling you my side I will then tell you the reason I think the driverless cars can be a good thing and then finish it off with a conclusion.
My first reason for being against the driverless cars is that if the driver in the car isn't ready at all times to take over the wheel he or she could end up getting hurt or hurting someone else and it wouldn't even be thier fault. I think if it's a driverless car it should be a driverless car the person in the car should be able to be doing whatever they wawnt inside the car while the car drivers for them. "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requres." The human driver shouldn't have to be ready and any point and time i think the car should be able to handle everything road work, accidents anything.
My second reason is why have the driverless car if it doesn't know how to go through the road work or accidents. I think it should know how to go thru the road work, accidents, and all the traffic around the town or on the highways. "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 car should know how to do this stuff on it's own or it's not really a driverless car. You still always have to be ready "just in case". So what if you need to do seomthing on the way to where ever your going and you cant do it because you have to be ready in case you need to take over the wheel.
But on the other side being for the driverless cars there are a lot of very good things that can come from using the driverless cars. One good thing about the car is that they have a lot of sensors and cameras on them. They also thought of a good way to make sure that the human driver in the car is prepared to take over. " The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." There are also other options " Other options under consideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up display." People were also thinking about a camera that watches the human driver watching the road so that they are remaining focused on the road at alll times.
In conclusion I have told you that I am against the driverless cars as of right now. I am against them because if the human driver in the driverless car is not ready to take over the wheel at anytime things could go wrong. Alsomy second reason is i think they should be able to steer through traffic, road work and accidents. But the cars heads-up stuff and doing the things to make sure the driver knows when they need to take over the wheel is good thing, also all the sensors and cameras are a very good thing to be on the car. | 4 |
dbe4ae8 | Personally, I think that "driverless" cars are and would be extremely dangerous. They can't react to quick events as fast as a human can. They aren't even fully "driverless" to begin with, a person in the car would still have to be ready at all times in the occasion that something happens. The company or companies technology operating the car to drive automatically could malfunction and or crash at any given time while a person or people are in the vehicle. The main reasons why I don't support driverless cars are because they create an unsafe area and passengers could get too disracted on phones or devices.
The first reason why I don't support driverless cars are because they create an unsafe area for people. I say this because if Google or another company was supporting that over a car, if wouldn't be able to adapt to an area if an accident or something of that nature happpened. Weather might play an important factor on why this system may not be at it's best performance level.
The final reason why I don't support driverless cars is because passengers may become distracted on their phones or devices. There might be a situation that require them to take over and they might be on their phone, thus causing an accident. There might also be other features in the car that require the passenger to take over and they will still be on their phone or device, which could cause a traffic jam.
As you can see, driverless cars are not all that safe, they could be the cause of major deaths and other things. They might be too costly and the wheather might play a huge role on how good these products work. Even though they are considered "driverless", there are going to be a lot of times where the passenger has to take over. | 2 |
dbe526f | The author in the story "The Challenge of Exploring Venus"
has many reasons why studying venus is worthy pusuit despite of dangers. One of the many reasons why studying venus is worth it is that as in paragraph 2 "it's earths twin and it is occasionally the closest in distance too."
Another reason why we should go to Venus is that there are still things yet to be discoverd. As the excerpt says in paragraph 4 "Long ago, Venus was probably coverd largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life". It would be worth studying venus to find out if there really is signs of water because if there was water that means that more than likely organisms living in the water and that means there would be life on Venus.
Venus is also very dangerous as in paragraph 3 Venus has "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide", "The planets surface, tempetures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on out own planet."
Although Venus is a dangerous 800 degree Faherenheit, 97 percent carbon dioxide planet it still may have had water and life at one point and time long long time ago. | 2 |
dbf00cf | The face on Mars could never be created by aliens if it had then NASA would
have seen an alien by now this proves that the face had to be a natural cause. Jim Garvin head cheif of science for NASA Mars Exploration Program explained that even he thought it was a natural cause like the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
The landform he is talking about is a lava dome that is an isolated mesa that has about the same length as the Face on Mars. Jim and his workers have made some success in getting some good photos the first time they tried it, it was winter time on Earth so Mars had been covered with wispy clouds that covered some of the face up. The scientists have worked hard but stopped taking photos after two years on April 8, 200l it was summer time so Mars had been the clearest it could have been.
They took the photos with a camera of absolute maximum resolution the pixels comparedto the 43 meters in 1976, they were 1.56 meters in 2001. The truth is, is that the Face on Mars is a natural cause on April 5,1998 was the first photos that the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia. Michael Malin's team took photos ten times sharper then the original Viking photos to prove a natural cause. From 1976 to 2001 the new photos prove with the help of there new 3D altimetry NASA's Mars Global Survey spacecraft revealed the Face on Mars was really a mesa. | 2 |
dbf756e | I think that the "Facial Action Coding System" may actually be valuable. The machine detects emotions from using a picture and that can help with knowing how a person feels. The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect your emotions, it calulates all emotions found, and has most of the common emotions so the FACS has a very good chance of being accurate and valuable.
The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect emotions. This is useful because different muscles makes different emotions, In the article the athour explained how the machine can tell if someone was happy or not. "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." That explains that even if the person tries to change their emotion the real one will still be seen because of the muscles that they are using.
The "Facial Action Coding System" calulates all the emotions found in the persons face. Since the machine can calulate all the emotions it has a better chance if getting the right exact emotion the person is feeling and get all the emotions. This machine would be about to detect how any person is feeling and can show up at 6 emotions.
With the machine being able to caluate your emotions its able to detect up to 6 different emotions that people use everyday. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. That was a discription of the Mona Lisa painting that the FACS gave. This shows how many differnt emotions she had and the machine was able to pick them all up.
The Facial Action Coding System is usefully when it comes to trying to figure out someone elses emotions. The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect your emotions, it calulates all emotions found, and has most of the common emotions so the FACS has a very good chance of being accurate and valuable. I personally think this device is a good idea and that it may be really accurate in finding emotions. | 3 |
dbf7e1e | Hi I am Luke and I want you to become a Sea Going Cowboy. Yes I know what you are thinking, what is a Sea Going Cowboy. Well let me tell you a little bit about it and lets see if you are interested.
A Sea Going Cowboy works for the UNRRA ( the United Nations Relif and Rehababilitation Administration). What I do is I take care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shiped over seas.
Some of the benifits of my job is that if you are drafted into the army you can use this job for your service credit. One other benifit of my job is that I had the oppourtunity to see Europe, and China. But seeing the Acropolis of Greece was the best. So was taking a gondola ride in Venice,Italy, a city with streets of water. I also was able have a tour of the great castle in Crete. Plus I was astounted at the Panama Canal on my way to China.
Other benifits you might like if you like agriculture would be getting to feed the horses, clean the stalles. and pulling bales of hay and bags of oats from the lower parts of the ships. I definitly liked this part of the job because I grew up helping out on aunt Katie's farm and loved every minute of it.
Plus on your way home with out any responsibility to take care of the animals. you can play games like, basebal,volyball,table tennis,fencing,boxing,reading. and willting. These games also helped pass time on the way back from your journey across the seas.
But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than just a adventure for me. This experince made me relize how grateful I am. It also made me aware of people of other countris and their needs. It also opened my eyes up to the world to relize not everything is about me and my little small town, and that there are other peolpe in the world besides me who need help. And that awarenes I was talking about has stayed with me through my whole life. Leading to my family to host a numbe of international students and exchange vistors for many years now. All thanks to my freind Don for persuadeing me to become Seagoing Cowboy. | 3 |
dbfb38b | to my opinion i think that we should not be practiceing to find out a eay if we could use a computure to read our emotional expressions. to my point of view as a student i woldnt like if s computure would look at me nd say oh shes feeling happy. because computers does not have a soul do when i hear that they should have computures to se if they can read emotions well i think thats is redundunt. now as they said in the story paragraph 3 sentence one, they can begin the process when the computure constructs a 3-D computure model f the face; all 44 major musclesin the modela must move like a human muscles. now in other words make a robot that looks exactly like a human and can do human things. i think that why are we trying to make robots to be like human do we serously want another thing on this planet that might ruin it even more. now some people believe that we should have robots to help us etc. but they also say what if they become evil and they go against us and take over the world and kill us all. i think that if they ever make robots and that were to happen then it was all planned because this bings me back to my point. robots dont have souls which means that they cant procces haterate in them. unless they were programed to feel hate but they are sensative so if they actually learn how scientist wants them to learn then i believe that they still wouldnt take over the world unless they were programed to. i think that if a student actually thinks that it would be nice to have the computure read your emotions and you could talk to it and stuff then i feel lik that would seperte our world even moe ut this time is seperate from eachother from our closest friends and family because they would become our friends and they will become our family. i think if you want to end bulling and family problems etc. then is still not a good idea. like i said this still leads to segragation within ourseleves. so if ou ask me do you think that we should make robots to read our emotions. i would just simply say no its to complicated and learn to comunicate with people to fix problems and dont try to be the ruler of evrything cause you will fail and if the world ends ill blame it on you. | 2 |
dc02c32 | Thomas Huang has created an software that can recongnize your emotions from an computer and I dont think its a good or bad idea. Here are some why its not valuable.
People shouldnt always know how others feel. They shouldnt have to be worried about if a computer knows there sad or not. Most students come to class to get away from there emotions so why would you bring them back up?
Although this computer could be valuable in some ways like helping your friend feel happy. As they said in the passage " it could recognize when a student is becoming confused and bored" which would get them back on track. It also modifies the lesson for you. Making it easier on the person that is on the computer.
So is the emtional expressions of students in a classroom valuable? I would have to save thats all up to you. Some people would like others knowing if they are sad or not. Personally I woud not like them knowing I was sad all the time. | 2 |
dc05f10 | Can you imagine taking many oversea trips taking care of animals?! That is just what the participants in the amazing program of Seagoing Cowboys do. Three reasons for joining the Seagoing Cowboys are that the Seagoing Cowboys help people affected by wars, the Seagoing Cowboys get to see many amazing places, and the Seagoing Cowboys have much fun on their journeys.
Most importantly, the Seagoing Cowboys save lives. The "Cowboys" take trips with many animals, and all of the supplies to take care of these animals. When the animals arrive at their destination, they are given away to hungry families. The text reads, "UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys"to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas."
Equally important,Seagoing Cowboys got to see amazing places on their journeys. The Cowboys travel all over the world and went sightseeing evrywhere they went. When they went to Greece, they saw the Parthenon and a excavated castle in Crete. They got to see many differnt sight in China. The text states, "' So was taking a Gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water.'"
Lastly, the Seagoing Cowboys had a ton of fun on their boat rides, despite the fact that they had to take care of animals. They played volley ball in emty stalls. They also had table tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling. The text reads, " Luke also found time fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded."
In conclusion, you should become a Seagoing Cowboy because you help others, get to see amazing places, and get to have tons of fun on the journeys. It sounds like tons of fun to be a Seagoing Cowboy! | 3 |
dc06527 | Imagine someone sitting in class on the computer doing work that is just is not getting their attention. Now imagine a comuter that is aware of this and changes the lession up to catch their attention all based off of one's facial expressions. Interesting right? A new technology, called the Facial Action Coding System, can identify someones facial expressions based on how the muscles in their face are. This type of technology can be very useful in classrooms all around the world, and even benefit kids learning. The computers can tell when someone is getting confused or bored, It could modify the lessions to capture more attention and benefit the instructors.
The computer can tell when someone is getting confused or bored.
The technology could modify the lessions to get more attention.
The system can help benefit the instrutors.
There can and will be concerns out there about the new coding system and how it will affect the children in a negative way, however this type of new technology can help students grow and adapt to the technology of the world. That being said it can also be just as effective in the classrooms as well. Dr. Huang, the inventer of the coding system, notes that most human communucation is nonverbal, including emotion communication, so computers need to understand that to. This states that computers are learning from our emotions so it can improve to our standards and the standards of the children. | 2 |
dc07e0c | Dear state Senator,
I am in full favor of the Electoral College process. I think that this process is a great way to elect president because we rely on the electors vote. By relying on the electors vote, we don't have to worry about the popular votes messing up the election. I say messing up because a lot of people aren't paying attention to the election, so they vote out of a random pick. This could influence the presidential outcome of who becomes president.
Also, the Electoral College process goes to a series of elections. This is better because when we vote for the president, we are actually voting for the electors. After that election, the electors vote for the president on a more serious note. The electors take charge of your your state, and vote for the most reasonable president. They discuss the bad and good qualities protraying to each president. Based on thier dussicion, America will have the best president there is.
To add on, the election process by popular voting can be easily screwed up. This process can be messed up by none serious voters who choose the worse president. This election process can be messed up by people choosing a president and not even paying attention to the qualities that the president has. The president that they pick could have some awful characteristics, along with the presidents decisions.
To conclude, we should keep the Electoral College process and not even think about the popular vote process. The Electoral College process, we rely on the electors to make the right decision for America. We don't want a bad president by going with the popular voting process. This is why we should keep the Electoral College process.
From, concerning High School student | 3 |
dc0a3e8 | Dear State Senator,
After much research, I have decided that the electoral college should not be kept. It is not completley fair, because the citizens think they're voting for their prefered candidate when really, they're voting for that candidate's electors. That means that if a candidate wins the votes of the citizens, he might not win the electoral college votes. This also means that he was not the president that the U.S. citizens wanted, but what the electoral voters wanted. In the article "The Indefensible Electoral College" they ask the question, "Can voters sometimes controll whom their electors vote for?" and they answer, "Not always." This proves that the electoral college is not fair. Also, the electoral college shouldn't be kept because some electors will, "refuse to vote for their party's candidate and cast a vote for whomever they please," says "The Indifensible Electoral College".
"Over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." says "The Indefensible Electoral College." That is more than half of the United States population, therefore we should get rid of it. I believe that we should abolish it along with that 60 percent, thatway when voting, it will be much more fair. Also, it will make choosing the president of the U.S. up to the people.
Some may think that keeping the electoral college is good because, If there is a tie in the election, the electoral college can break it with their votes. Although this does help, it has only happened once, therefore proving to not be needed. Other reasons are because it gives certainty of an outcome, helps big states, and avoids run-off elections, but are also not that important.
In conclusion I, along with 60 percent of the U.S. populaton, believe that the electoral college should not be kept due to its unfairness.
-PROPER_NAME | 3 |
dc0bb2e | The Electoral College is a controversial topic in the US. This is the system used to elect the president of the United States, but most people (60% of Americans, according to source 1) believe that we shouldn't use this particular system and that we should go with the popular vote instead, while all others are strong in their stance that we should continue its use. Under the Electoral College, it is entirely possible for a Presidential Candidate to win presidency, even with the majority of voters voting for the oposing candidate. We should discard the Electoral College in favor of the popular vote.
The Electoral College is a system that allots a certain amount of electoral votes to each state. Each state is given 2 electoral votes plus another amount of votes which depends on that state's population. The amount of votes ranges from 3 to 55 (source 3). A candidate must recieve 270 out of 538 possible votes. The candidate the electoral votes of a state go to is decided by the majority vote of each individual state. In all states but Maine and Nebraska give a candidate the entirety of their votes if the majority of its citizen votes for them (source 1). Some people don't even bother voting due to the fact that their vote will not contribute to their favored candidate's election. This happens often when a democratic voter lives in a republican state, and vice versa (source 3)
Many people stand by the Electoral College as the best course of action. They argue that the certainty of the winner is better, a candidate can't win the election due to regional favor, and this system unsures that there will still be a clear winner even when each candidate recieves the same percentage of votes.
We began using the Electoral College in order to ensure that states with low populations weren't ignored by presidential campaigns. However, it fails to do just that. Presidential candidates focus their attention to swing states, in order to win their electoral votes. Candidates have little to no need to campaign in states that have a majority of one party, because their vote is either a lost cause or all but garunteed. If this system does not do the job that it was originally intended for, then why do we continue to use it?
In conclusion, the electoral college is ineffective and outdated. we should no longer use this as a system of defining our president. Even though a winner is often more clear, there is still a possibility of a tie between candidates. People who support the Electoral College also argue that its a good thing due to swing states having more attention payed to them and therefore being more careful in their decision. However, this reasoning is flawed in that it assumes that citizens of a state are more likely to inform theirselves thouroughly simply because their vote holds more value, in a sense. Also, candidates would no longer pay special attention to swing states if the electoral college weren't in place so the votes of these citizens wouldn't be held above the rest. Increased value of votes is not a good thing, which this argument also assume. It is the best decision to abolish the Electoral College. | 4 |
dc0c0e4 | The aouthor idea might sound or be a little bit carzy. The author however is not wrong, because Venus was once like the earth, still has features like the earth, and it is the nearst option for planetary visit. So let me explain and make the aouthor's idea a little bit less crazy.
Even thought Venus has a thicker atmosphere and is almost 97 percent corbond dioxide blackets according to paragraph 3. It was once earth like. it was proably coverd in large oceans. venus also might of supported various forms of life just like earth like is says in paragraph 4. Maybe one day it will be like earth again.
Venus might have the "hottest surface temperture of any plant in our solar system" (paragraph 3), erupting volcanoes and powerful earthquakes. But it still has features like earth. venus has rocky sediment. It also has mountains and craters like it states in paragraph 4. The might be the reason why they call it earth's "twin" like it says in paragraph 2.
"Venus is the closest planet to eartyh in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too". This might be an advantage for NASA. It might be productive but ithas to be safe too. NASA discribe this trip like "blimp-like"(paragraph 5). NASA is already studying and planing for the trip. It they trip might be short comparec to other planets but NASA want to make it as safe as possible.
In conculsion, the authors idea might sound a bit bazzar, but it is not a bad idea. Since the planet a while ago was like earth, still looks like earth, and it is the closest to earth. So maybe in a couple of years NASA might finale make a plantery vist. | 3 |
dc10eb8 | In the article the author wrote positives and negatives about self driving cars I am going to write about the positives of the slef driving cars bcause in my opinion self driving cars would be a great thing to have.
In this prompt im going to write about self driving cars. I think self driving cars would be a good thing to have because if you have a baby in the car and their bottle fell on the floor you could turn around and get it because you would have a self driving car and you wouldnt have to worry about getting in a wreck because the self driving cars like the prius have sensors that make a three D model of evrything around it so it can drive like a normal human did. I think that everyone should have a self driving car because they seem to be a safer car if the driver gets distracted easily. I also think they would be safer because googles self driving cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. Google cars are not truly drivless the car alerts the driver when its pulling in or out of a driveway, dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents. An example about the Toyota prius being safe " spinning sensor on the roof, dubbed lidar , it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the cars surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel.
Sensors on the self driving cars have started in the 1980's automakers made speed sensors for the antilock brakes. Within 10 years the sensors had become more advanced to detect and respondto the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine , allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone. All the improvments to computer software and hardware is making driving safer and leading to cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their own.
Everything in those two paragraphs are telling about how safe the self driving cars are and how they operate and in the last paragrach they talk about how they are becoming better with all of the computer software and hardware improving. All of this information is why I believe having a self driving car would be safe and a good idea. | 3 |
dc13e1b | People think that driveless cars are dangerous and technology is taking over our society.
Driveless cars are the next big creation for our society and believe it or not the cars have more than one one positve of the car being driveless.
The driveless cars are more safe then other cars, allow more technology, and assists the driver.
Starting with television and movies have been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves, and today companies like Google are trying to make that possible.
Having a driveless car is safe than a regular car because their are because they have taken advantage of the technology they have been given.
Google has modified the Toyota Prius by using the postion-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel that can help drivers see where their backing into and prevent the accident of hitting another car or anything.Most of the features are being tested to make it as safe as possible for the car and the driver behind the wheel.
Driveless cars are very advanced in technology, and is getting better over time. The first question after the option of amrter roads became more too expensive to be practical was, "how much smarter did the cars have to be?"
The first conclusion was that the car needed alot of sensors inside and out of the car.
They began by placing estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, four automotive radar sensors, and a inertial motion sensor.
The purpose of all the sensors are to pu the driver and the car in the safest position at all times.
The car also includes a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror to be able see the surrounds when they are backing up.
Futhermore the must have such as the GPS keeping America from getting lost.
The combination of all theses aspects is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel with technology.
Another question about the driverless car "is it driving or assisting the person behind the wheel?"
The driverless car is assisting the drivers because they is no way the car could be able to drive under every circumstance with out assists.
Aspects such as the antilock breaks assist people throughout their eveyday life.
In 2013, BMW announced the developement of the "Traffic Jam Assistant."
The Traffic Jam Assistant can assist with driving functions at a speed up to 25 mph.
The GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vechile is in danger assistting preventing acciedents to happen.
The driverless car is the future in the technology of cars and will help benfit use greatly.
The driveless car just has to improve and finalize that the car is safe then the car will be on the road in no time. The driverless cars are more safe then other cars, allow more tchnology, and assist the driver. | 2 |
dc1426e | I disagree, this machine is not valueable in a students classroom. You don't need a machine to tell if a student is sad or happy or mad. You can just ask them "What's the matter?" You don't need million dollar tech to do simple reading. That type of tech should be used against terrorist or enemy threats. Not classroms full of harmless studetns.
You don't need a machine to tell a students' emotions. In paragraph 5 it says "You can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." You don't need that type of technology to look a person face and tell them what they are feeling. You could make more friends just by going up and speaking and finding out instead scanning their face with a machine.
You should be able to just talk to them and ask them what is the matter if they are feeling some type of way. Putting this type of technology in a classrom takes away from the socializing in all schools. It takes away from kids or teens from speaking to one another.
Using this technology for student in a classroom is a overall bad idea. The things you can do with this million dollar tool shouldn't be used for educational purpose. it should be used to help in government purposes. This type of technology is not meant to be in the hands of careless teens and children so many would be broke in probably the next few months and it would be wasted money down the trash. | 3 |
dc2143b | Throught the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. The developement for these cars would not be such a great idea to make. Producing vehicles with such improvements can cause many bad problems to surface in court and society as a whole. The reasoning behind these improvements being negative is safety of people. Peoole should to look at the things that might go wrong before they support something that sounds good.
Technology is a major factor in todays society and we use it everyday in life, but if the technology we have sold to us has issues then it should not be sold to the people until the issue is completely resolved. If the driverless cars are manufactured and sold to people and there is a problem within the cars which causes them to make mistakes and have technical issues. The manufacturers are not just putting the people riding the car at risk, they are putting the lives innocent pedestrians at risk also. There is a point made in the article where it states, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or manufacture?". The point being made from this specific sentence is that if the cars are opperating by themselves and if something happens to anyone the only person to blame is the creator of the vehicle, the manufacturer. In most states it is illegal to test computer driven cars because of the dangers that are most likely to occur. In the article we are introduce to a statement which says,"Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human in control at all times". This statement is saying that if a human has control then everything should be fine. These are overall reasonings and explinations for why driverless cars should not be manufactured.
Manufacturing driverless cars would not be a great idea to make for peoples overall safety. The cars would be unsafe to people as a whole and cause major issues in court as for lawsuits. As of making new and better improvements to vehicles would be a good idea. People should just stick to driving themselves places its the safest way to get there. | 3 |
dc225ea | I am for the development of these cars because they can change how so many things can be done today in society. The cars could be able to take packages or important items or documents for miles. The driverless cars can be escorts or help people that don't know how to drive get around much faster than they usually do.
The cars can help get an accurate position in parallel parking so people don't get harmed or damage other vehicles in the process. There can still be some downside to the whole process though,the cars could have a misfunction and go out in the middle of traffic or wreck into another car or pedestrian on the sidewalk. The could stop functioning while delivering something and the receiver will never get what they're supposed to.
Many people would agree and disagree on this concept,but most of them wouldn't experience it for themsleves so they wouldn't know what its capable of. People could stll be in the vehicle while they aren't controlling it,so while that happens,they can be texting,eating,talking,or possibly sleeping. The idea of driverless cars could be horrifying or magnificent if the way you think of it makes it. People will have their own opinions but once they experience it their opinions could change at a moments notice. | 2 |
dc22ef5 | It is not a face. As you can tell in the picture, it clearly resembles a face, but there are a lot of facts to show that it is not. First, they have updated images showing it is a rock formation, just like here on Earth. Second, if it could prove aliens once lived, or currently live on Mars, then NASA would not hesitate to publish it. The Mars face is only a natural rock formation.
There are newer images proving it is a rock. With our growing technology we sent spacecrafts close to Cydonia, and they show rock formations. This rock formation is much like what we have on Earth. The shadows cast upon the rock, giving it facial features. On a different day, those shadows are not there.
Why would NASA keep this a secret? NASA would thrive from finding alien lifeforms. Why would they keep that private. As the story states, " Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." They want that, because their budget would increase and they could do better projects if they had published it.
Nerws articles claimed it was a rock formation long before any conspiracy theories were out. Soon, after the second shot of it, scientists proved it was just another rock formation that resembles many we have here on Earth today.
Even though the photos look like they have facial features, and could be the remains of an ancient alien civilization, it is not. Some facts to back it up are that NASA would not hide something this benefitual to them from the public, scientists have proven it was made naturally by rock, and better resolution photos prove that it is just a rock formation with shadows showing facial features. In Mars' revolution the sun does not always cast a shadow on it, and that is why the features do not always show up, proving that the Mars face is just another face in conspiracy history. | 4 |
dc29de3 | Acording to the artical, the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because the software can actually recognize about every emotion. Dr. Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate.
In paragraph 2, the question asks "How can a computer recognize the subtle facial movement we humans use to express how we feel?" Paragraph 3 then goes on to explain the answer to that question. They said that the process begins when the computer contructs a 3-D computer model of the face. All 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Then Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologists such as Dr. Eckman. This doctor classified 6 different basic emotions.
According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only express emotions, but may also even help producd them. From my perspective, The use of this technology to read emotional expressions of students in a classroom is very indead valuable. | 2 |
dc2a8df | Venus the closest planet to Earth. Literally.. distance and characterisitics wise as well. Both planets are about the same size, density, and ocasionally closest the sun, at least in different speeds. Venus is a very interesting planet due to it's location and characteristics being shared with the Earth. Although there is one big difference, we don't live in Venus, or know much about it really. There is a whole other planet that we lack knowledge of due not pursuing the idea of it. Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers it presents because, it's the Earth's "twin", there could be potential life in Venus, and it could improve soceity's point of view on innovation.
The Earth's "twin"
Venus is considered to be the Earth's twin because of the characteristics they share. Both planets are similar in size, density, and distance from the sun. They're very similar in some ways except for that fact that we live on Earth and not on Venus. If there are so many similarities why don't we live on Venus? Venus is the closes planet to Earth for it's traits. "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for a good reason since no spacecraft survivied the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue expalins why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades" states in the article. That sentence from the text shows that we haven't visited Venus, and certainly not recently, which means we don't know if we could for sure not use Venus as a "second Earth".
Potential life on Venus
There could be potential life form in Venus. I know this because in the text it states"Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" that sentence shows that potential living forms could be or have existed in Venus due to it's oceans. Looking into the idea of Venus potentially having some type of life form is one step closer to making it the Earth's "twin".
Improving our innovation due to Venus
We could use Venus for our advantages and disect its intergrety. There could be potential life forms on Venus and it's much more than just a planet. "Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray" that sentence shows that Venus is a planet that would allow scientists to think outside the box, in a more innovative way of thinking. The text also states "Not esay conditions, but survivable for humans" this sentence shows that there would be some challenges along the way but it would be a whole different way of thinking that could lead to a new innovative world.
In conclusion
Venus is a planet worthy to pursuit despite the dangers it presents. I say this because Venus is considered Earth's twin, due to the size and locations. There could be potential life on Venus, maybe we could potentially end up living there. Venus would help us, soceity, scientists, etc, to think in whole different way than we're used to. To innovate ideas, to maybe compare things on how they would on Earth verus in Venus. Venus is worthy of pursuing due to all the amazing factors it comes with, and could be a major step for Earth and humans. | 4 |
dc2f034 | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit even with the dangers on the planet. Venus is the sister planet to Earth but the surface of Venus presents a challange to any living thing. Venus is also called the "Evening Star" despite it being a planet.
Venus is a planet that the most like Earth but we bearly studied it because we'll have to get on the planet to do so. Venus has around the same density and size as the Earth but Venus' surface is 800 degrees fahrenheit. Venus' Atmosphere is dangrous as well with 97% of it being carbon dioxide and the clouds made out of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. Many people may be wondering " If our sister planet is so in hospitable, why are scientists even thinking about any further visits? Astronomers are really fascinated by our sister planet because how close to Earth it really is, Venus even has valleys, mountains, and craters just like our Earth.
For future visits NASA has came up with an idea to has hover crafth that floats 30 or so miles so we wouldn't have to step on the boiling planet. Venus is a worthy pursuit because the more we know about our sister planet the more things we get to do with it. | 1 |
dc31c99 | Within the past decade, humans have watched in awe as technology has improved exponentially, and learned to take on tasks once thought only humans could accomplish. Technology has been taught to communicate, entertain, solve problems, along with many other functions, and now it may be able to teach as well. Though we have made use of every technological advancement in the past, this may be one that we should not capitalize on. Before taking this enourmous step in technological advancement, humans must consider the flaws within this newly developed system, and whether we are ready to replace teachers with computers.
Though this new system is an astonishing feat in technology, people muct recognize the flaws within this system as well. As described in paragraph 6, a students facial expression has the power to change a lesson. If this is true, could a student not simply fake an emotion to get out of assignments or slack off by acting confused. The article claims that the software can pick up on fake smiles, but can it detect false expressions for other emotions as well? Another flaw within this system is the emotions the technology is capable of percieving, paragraph 6 disscusses the modification of a lesson based on boredom or confusion detected by the computer, however, neither of these two feelings are listed in the 6 emotions that the software is capable of detecting (paragraph 3). These two major flaws within the software lead to only one conclusion, the technology is simply not advanced enough to take on the role of a teacher.
Humans must also consider this issue from an ethical standpoint, are we ready to take away the role of teachers and replace them with software? Though machines have already taken away menial jobs, such as factory work, teaching is a career which requires a four year college degree and a license. Countless people aspire to become teachers, are we ready to take that away? Even if teachers were to work hand in hand with this technology there would still be flaws. Having a computer read the emotions of a student rather than a teacher would sever immportant student teacher ties, and cheat that student of the oppurtunity of a mentor relasionship. Because people are already capable of reading emotions, it would be foolish to replace that for a less precise piece of equipment. Because of the immportant role of teachers in the lives of students, the push for emotion detecting software in the classroom should be stopped.
Because of the major systematic flaws, and the ethical dilemas accompaniing this issue, it is clear that at least for the time being, the efforts to integrate emotion detecting software into the the cassroom should be put on hold. Though this is an astonishing advancement in technology, there is much to consider before pursuing this movement. | 5 |
dc36026 | The authour feels venus could be alot like earth wich means extra resources that could expand our life. " Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." There are also things being done to help be safe while gaining information on venus. " 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 out of their way. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." All of this has shown that there are still chances to get to venus, there are reasons to want to go there, and there are things you can do for saftey there. So i agree that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 2 |
dc3add1 | Do you think the face on Mars was created by aliens?
How can you believe that the face on Mars was aliens? it is obviously just another landform of Mars'. Here, i'll go through some evidence that it is just a landform.
First of all, landforms like that are common in Cydonia. Also, keep in mind that appearances can be decieving. You can even see a similar landform right by the "face". And plus, there is no scientific evidence of life on another planet, let alone Mars. Simply stating that a haze could've hid the "alien" markings is hardly a compelling argument.
Second off, The photo they took in 2001 proves even further that it just a normal martian messa. and accourding to the article that have read, "you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." if you want to check this article out, you can find that information in paragraph 11. so if there were any alien objects, you could both see what they were and even know what they were.
I think i have proven my point. so don't even try to argue that, you will not succeed. i know that you might say, well NASA is just lying. My response is that if you had the money to afford a satellite and you sent there, with the current high grade cameras, you would find that you were wrong all along. so yes I win this argument, and that the "face" on Mars is just a messa. | 3 |
dc3d2fe | It happens once every four years, when everyone goes to the polls and votes for whomever feels just right for them. What people dont know is that your vote doesnt matter as much as you think it does. What matters is the electoral colleges votes. Hearing that I take a firm standpoint on abolishing the electoral college.
The reason i believe to take out the electoral college is because when you go to vote your not only voting for the prestdent your voting for his electoral college. In some case's if the person you voted for won then all of his electors get voted into congress as well, so your basically voting for 34 other people to make the right decision for you.
Another problem with the electoral college was the catastrophe of 2000 when Gore and Bush went up against each other at the election. The problem was that Gore recieved more votes than Bush, but Gore recieved less electoral votes,so Bush won the presidency that term.
I believe that is an unfair way to do the election i believe that whomever recieves the most indevidual votes should win, and everyones vote should matter not having an electoral colege decide for you. The electoral college is unfair, old, and not proper, we should change the way a new president is elected.
In conclusion, the electoral colege should be taken out, and a new alternative method should be establishesd. Lets change this winner take all system. People lets do something to change the way we vote! | 3 |
dc3eff7 | Hello, my name is Capri. I will be arguing against the use of Driverless cars. In the passage it talks alot about how the new smart cars/ driverless cars have been here since 2009. I think that it is a smart and useful invention. But I really dont think we are quite ready for it right now, especially since it comes with a few flaws. Our normal cars are even getting call backs so
imagine what what would happen if you weren't fully in control of our vehicles. It says in the passage that it isnt fully driverless which to me signifies that we shouldnt be using something that isnt living up to the invention purpose.
Its going to be electrical so what if there is a bug or virus in the system that cant handle driving or wont let us drive at all. This could result in
serious accident or injury. Yes I think that this is a brilliant invention I just think that it shouldnt be displayed or used until we are 110% that is comepletely safe and ready to be driven.
For example what if I, Capri, was married to John and we had a son. we could be driving in a driverless car and it could flash for one of us to take over and steer, but the vehicle is malfunctioning and not letting us drive. We crash, have to pay fees, insurance ect... What if they saw us as we were the cause of the accident but it all was because of a faulty system that wasnt ready to be used.
So i say no we should not use driverless cars, it is hazardous, just like a regular car. We should be inventing something that is safer than a car not equal or less safe. | 2 |
dc436b2 | Studying venus is a worthy pursuit becaue it is a well known planet , venus is the closet planet to earth and also has the hottest surface temperatue of any planet in our solar system . '' astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been the most earth-like planet in our solar system '' this shows that venus is a likely planet. There are numerous factors contribute to venus's reputation as a challenging planet for human to study , However NASA is working on other ways to study venus . ''Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to out knowledge of venus '' this shows that its alot to learn about venus ."striving to meet the meet the challenge presented by venus has vaulse , not only because of insight to be gained on the planet itself , but also because of human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. this shows that venus is challeging despite the dangers | 1 |
dc4b765 | Technology has advanced vastly in the last few years. Most companies and people would say that they think driverless cars would be a good idea. That they would helpful in many ways. Yes driverless cars would help in numerous ways but they also have negaive aspects.
Driverless cars are going to be very expensive. In the article it was mentioned that other companies have tried numerous ways to make a driverless car but they had to make adjustments to other surroundings not just the car itself. They built a new high technocal rode, if you would call it that. The car would drive driverless, but you would have to have sensors in the rode directing/helping the car while it was driving. In the article it was talking about how much money radars would cost. They would cost two hundred million dollars. That is just for radar that goes ontop of a hill. Think about how much money it would cost to rebuild the roads to put in the new sensors for the car to work. If you wouldnt go with the new rode idea and wanted to focus more on the details of the car that would cost more money. Your building a new car with many new adjustments to it. In the article it was mentioned about all of the different things you would put into the car. A video camera mounted near the review mirror, sensors in the wheels, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS reciever, and inertial motion sensor are just some examples of new adjustments made to the cars that were metnion in the article.
Driverless cars are more dangerous. In the article it was mentioned that the drivers would still have to be allert during driving becuase the driver would have to take over the car during accidents or road emergencies. If the driver wasnt alert enough or was distracted by something else and the car need the driver to manual drive there would be an accident. The car would have to put something in the car to alret the driver fast enough before anything serious happened.
Compianes are all for driverless cars and are still advasing technology to try and recieve a car so magnificent as a driverless car but they need to stop and think about all of the possible things right and wrong with a driverless car. The money and accidents are just a few examples of the flaws of the car. | 4 |
dc4d6bd | In this passage the author supports his/ her idea by explaining that there are so many risks that will be taken if you land on Venus unprepared. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers by saying, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent cardon dioxide blankets Venus", which means that Venus is covered in a dangerous acid that basically covers the whole entire planet.
In the text i chose this quote because it explains one of the many dangers to going to the planet Venus ans why it is very dangerous and risky because lives could be on the line.
In summary you should not go to Venus because the author has made a great point about how dangerous it is and he is trying to persaude you not to go but not only that but he is also trying to expalin to you in detail the pro's and con's of going to Venus. | 2 |
dc50ee0 | Many have wondered when and if the day of automatic cars would come. At this day and age, it certainly seems like the technology has updated to a point of these driverless cars could be possible. Now we have to argue a new question. Should driverless cars become a reality? Will they do more harm than good? Driverless cars should stay a fantasy due to saftey, expense, and laziness.
Human operated cars have already caused a tremendous number fatal accidents. Who is to say that these machine run cars will do any better? We have learned that machines are not always consistent in their actions. What would happen if these driverless cars malfunctioned and caused an accident? If they hit a person? What were to happen if a driver falls asleep at the wheel, and the cars fails to alert them? Who would be at fault? These driverless cause would cause the government to make revisions to our laws. Driverless cars are not a guaruntee to public saftey.
Driverless cars require much more technology than non-driverless cars do. This would raise the price of cars tremedously. Not only would one have and expensive car, but one would have to dish even more money out to fill it with gas. As the article "Driverless Cars Are Comming," states, sensors, GPS receivers, and 3-D modeling and much more would be put into the car. This technology would make the car safer but would also increasde it's price. The article also states that some manufacturures have built special roads that would keep the car on course. It goes on to state that this would be an expensive update to preexisiting roads everywhere. There just is not enough money for these cars to be placed on the market.
Driverless cars would add the pile of laziness that has built up over the years. As technology advances, humans use it to create items to make life easier. Cars themselves were invented to make travel easier. Human no longer want to have to work for anything. We want to be able to snap our fingers and get what we want. If these driverless cars were to be produced, they would decrease physical activity even more than before. Now all the driver would have to do is sit back and relax. Driverless cars would cause humans to be even more unhealthy than before.
Driverless cars should stay a fantasy due to saftey, expense, and laziness. They would cause us to revise laws incase of an accident. They would cost more than they're worth. They would make humans even more lazy. Driverless cars should stay in movies becuase somethings are better a fantasy than a reality. | 3 |
dc5279a | In my opinion i really believe that its a great idea to have driverless cars because they are more safer then an original car. In the text it says that these cars have driven more than half million miles without a crash. And yes they are expensive but still yo can save up om money or even get a good job to buy one im sure you can get it from somewhere cheaper. These computer driven cars are also great for people that have injuries such as a broken leg or even people who cant drive. You can drink and dont have to worry about getting into a car crash.
In the text it asked why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Well thats not the case. either way it goes you will need someone to ride in the car because how do you exspect to go to your location? if you needed to go to the docter and you didnt feel like driving then here your driverless car that will drive you there for you. Get it now?
So yes i beileve that this driverless car is worth it for the people who dont like to drive but always busy or people who cant drive or even people who are injured. im not saying everyone dont like to drive but i know people who dont like do drive. I even heard people say that they wished they had someone who can drive them places for them. Im not even driving yet and i beilve that this driverless car is something important that people should buy. | 2 |
dc53609 | Venus is one of the planet in our solar system.The most closet to planet to
located beside earth.And it's so close to earth that we can see it's with our own naked eyes.The earth and Venus has a long history since the damn of the human civilzation, throught out the human history.It's an instercting place to study,since it's similar to earth.But there are some difficulites,when it comes to explore Venus, which wolud be a great challanging.
One of the proble with the Venus is,it's has a thick astmosphere fill with carbon,highly acidic cloud and burning temperature to melt metal.And it's a extreme condition to form a life.On the other hand,Venus once use to form ocean and organism.It's have a similar geographic structure to earth.Because of those dengrous risk,there are some concern to sent space craft to sent to Venus.However scientist
still have a plan to sent
to observe Venus furthermore,to explore from a safe distance.According to passage,some of the space craft can only survive up to 3 week.There are an alternative to use some of the design material from a useful old computer from 19centuries if it's require to study Venus if it's in emergency.A material from old computer can be helpful,which could be capable to stand agaist extreme physical force,unlike the new modern computer.It's will be worth it to study Veneus,despite it's rick:there will be alot of benefical when it come to studying Venus.Look no furthermore,even the author approve that some of the information from the result
of studying Venus would be helpful to scientist.And some of the thing from venus,such as rock and soil could be use as an evidence to study the venus and the abilities of human capablities of doing imposible thing from scartch.Venus could be a great place to visit at some poin if the technologies are well developed.It's could be build into a gigantics space travel station at some point.
In conclusion,doing a mission to Venus is difficult and challinging.But there are some hope to for the human to over come that challanging.And just like the space has no boundries,our capablitie of effort will have no limit as long as we keep trying.We will keep expandind our space discoveries beyond the imigination.There is no way of going back! | 4 |
dc54514 | Google has made a new improved car that does not require a driver. I am against the project that Google came up with recently. Google cofounder Sergey Brin beleives that the future can have a transportation system without a human driver. So far, Google cars aren't truly driverless because they still alert the driver to take over when dealing with complicated traffic issues. This makes me think that I am not safe when I'm in the car.
The development of these cars require many sensors that can be really expensive. Google made a Toyota Prius that used a sensor on the left rear wheel, a sensor on the roof, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. This is a total of eight different types of sensors including other important technology for only one vehicle. They combined many necessary inputs for the driverless car "to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel." These driverless cars still need assistance of a human. No type of technology can mimic the skill of a human.
Some people ask why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver ? Manufacturers are hoping to bring an "in-car entertainment" system. This is a safetly concern because many accidents happen on the road and a driver shouldn't be anymore distracted especially knowing that they are not personally driving. The passengers in the car and pedestrians surrounding the car should be more careful as well especially when the driverless car can not handle a complicated traffic issue.
The lawmakers know that safety is achieved when the driver is alert. The driving laws focus on keeping the drivers and passengers safe. In most states it is illegal to test a computer driven car because they do not rely on the safetyness of the driverless car. Even if the driverless cars were to be approved and legal that only means that new laws will be needed. If technology were to fail and an accident happened it will be complicated to blame the driver or the manufacturer. Automakers can continue with their projects with these cars but I personally think that technology can not mimic the skills of a human. | 4 |
dc5d479 | Driverless cars is a big step in the future. It could have many positive effects on society. The car would save time and money for people every where. I am for the development of these unique cars. It will change the world.
The development of driverless cars could potentially benefit the average persons' daily life. For example,texting while driving. To illustrate my point texting while driving has caused many deaths in the past. Driverless cars could drastically change that by allowing the driver text as it continues driving itself. The "The Traffic Jam Assistant" is good with going faster,breaking,and steering. Special sensors are used to alert the driver when certain situations come about. That is when the driver will have control. Driverless cars also has a better response and control than humans alone. According to the text it states how the Dubbed LIDAR uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings. This input is important for the car to imitate a human's skill at the wheel. Driving would be very easy.
Driveless cars is a big step in the future. There will be many benefits if peoplewould consider using these fascinating vehicles. Not only it is a safety feature,but it saves time and possibly money. It can affect the society in many ways and possibly change the world today. That is why I am for the development of driverless cars. | 3 |
dc5e967 | Yes, many people do think that the "Face on Mars" was a monument created by aliens, possibly creating a sign of some sort. However, this is not true. What you think is the "face" is actually a natural landform. This natural landform may appear to look like a face, but why?
The landform looks like a face becuase of the shadows that hit the landform in certain areas. "... this... had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh (2)." It makes it look somewhat like a face. "...a huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth (3)." Another reason why the landform looks like a face is becuase our eyes, that play tricks on us, may make it seem real that it is a face. Such as illusion that make it appear that the landform looks like a face that is staring up at the camera on Mars. Many poeple, however will still ask for more evidence that the landform is not alien artifact.
"...Mars Oribiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the origional... photos... when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform. There was no monument at all (7)." "What the picture actually shows in the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American West... That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars (12)." So the landforms that you are seeing are actually common along the American West. They don't just pop up out of nowhere. They have been seen before. It's not like it is a first thing that scientists are just discovering.
This evidence proves that there is no alien monument on Mars, it may appear to look like it. But scientists have proved that it is only a natural landform, created naturally, on Mars. Not an alien monument that was created as a sign by aliens on Mars. | 3 |
dc60914 | You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program.
It was a great opportunity, and I got to do so many things that an average small town boy would normally never do.
I met new friends, helped out people and their countries, and got to visit so many amazing places.
I loved that I got to see all the sites.
I took a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, saw the Acropolis in Greece, toured an excavated castle in Crete, and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China.
It was so unbelievably marvolous that I made nine whole trips of exploring and being a Seagoing Cowboy.
I crossed the Atlantic Ocean sixteen times, and the Pacific Ocean twice.
If you become a Seagoing Cowboy, you will be able to do everything that I did, maybe even much more.
If you aren't already convinced, with getting to explore and tour many parts of the world, then you should know this.
With joining the Seagoing Cowboys, you get to help people and their countries' needs.
After World War 2 there is a lot to recover from in Europe and many parts of the world.
By joining us and working for the UNRRA you would be helping by taking care of the horses, young cows, and mules being shipped overseas to the needy countries.
If you like animals and don't get sea sick too easy, I say you join the Seagoing Cowboys.
Going on this journey made me more aware of people of their countries and their needs.
It changed me in a wonderful way, and it will do the same to you.
The new friends, exploration, sites to see, and people to take care of is just a few of the reasons to consider joining the Seagoing Cowboys.
You would be not only helping the needy, but you'd also be helping yourself become a better person.
Joining the Seagoing Cowboys program is an eye-opening experience, and I strongly encourage you to take part in the journey. | 4 |
dc6ca51 | Lukes point of vew is that Luke is trying to get people to partisapatein the seagoing cowboys program. it would be a good thing because people get to see the sea. And geting to be able to see the sea is a one in a life time chance because you may not be able to get anouther chance to go in the sea on a boat. anouther thing that would be cool to see is the world war ll just got over and you could see the boats and all the debre that the world war left behind.
Some people may get scared because they are in the middel of the sea and they lile to be with there famielys at night so the familys can keep them safe.
some people might think that when you are in the middel of the sea you are risking your life and you should not risk your life to go at sea.
The trip is much more than just any adernarry trip the trip will open up the world to you or any person that might go on this wonder full trip to go see what the sea looks like.
Anouther thinn is that all the money that you spend to go on the trip goes to the people that need the money the most will reseve the money. | 2 |
dc6cc6d | The era of personal mobile transportation may be coming to an end. Many cities all over the world have taken part in a "car-free day". Residents of an experimental suburb in Vauban, Germany have given up their cars to participate in a movement called "smart planning", a developing trend in Europe. The goal is to reduce greenhouse gases.
With countries all over the world taking part in the percentage of greenhouse gases in the air, it is vital we all unite to clear up the air for our future generations.
In Bogota, Columbia, people are ending their car-dependent lives and participating in events such as the "Day Without Cars". The goal of this event is to "promote alternative transportation and reduce smog," according to Andrew Selsky's article in the
Seattle Times.
Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza stated: "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,".
So what are the advantages of limiting car usage? According to Selsky's article, the city of Bogota, Columbia have replaced "uneven, pitted sidewalks" with "broad, smooth sidewalks"; "rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic"; "and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up". But what exactly does that mean for the world and our everyday lives?
"When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," according to Heidrun Walter from Vauban, Germany, featured in an article by Elisabeth Rosenthal in the
New York Times.
Citizens like Heidrun Walter may feel less tense and happier. Also, smog and traffic will be cut drastically if citizens gave up their car-dependent lives.
In a way our lives may be more simple and healthy if we walked, rode a bike, or even rollerbladed to school/work. The smog would clear up and our everyday lives would be greater than before. | 3 |
dc6dfac | Men are like ants. We are always in a rush and always desperate to arrive on time. The easiest way to arrive on time in any place, is by car. Cars, however, tend to do a lot more bad then they do good. Cars release large amounts of pollution and can raise smog and noise levels in areas where there is a lot of driving. Smog and pollution isn't very good for anybody, so some areas have taken preventative steps to keep Earth healthy and to keep people healthy as well. The shocking part is, the cars get cut out.
In some areas, like the experimental Vauban in Germany, cars are not allowed at all. No honking is heard when the sun rises, and streets are oddly empty. Shops are lined up withen walking distance, and few buses run to allow for people to travel a little bit quicker. In fact, 70% of Vauban's population do not own cars, and many sold their cars for a chance to live in Vauban. The streets are safer, and people seem to be a lot less tense about things, 'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun, an occupant of Vauban. Vauban has proved that removing the car entirely can help to calm people, and even redesign the way cities and homes work; to provide safer, cleaner areas for man to live in.
Cars can need to be removed for more negative reason as well. Paris, France, had sever issues with the amount of smog in the city. Smog can be incredibly dangerous, making large chances of acid rain and possible issues with breathing. France has had one of the largest amounts of smog when compared to many other cities, usually only beat by Beijing, which in one of the most polluted areas. France knew, however, that the city could not possibly handle having every car taken away in a night, so they attempted to cut a half off for each day. For a week, fines were placed on cars with license plates that ended in either an even or odd number, the taxes applied more specifically to which license plates would be tagged, odd on one day, even the next. The large fines did not persuade everyone, however, and 4,000 driviers were still fined. The week of cutting down cars, however, proved to work very well and cut down on the amount of smog quickly and carefully so that everyone would have a safer and cleaner Paris.
In Bogota, Columbia, the removal of cars is celebrated as if it were a holiday. Each year on one day everyone will refrain from driving to skateboard, bike, walk, hike, or any number of modes of transportation; to prevent the usage of cars. The city does this not only as a fun way to promote an eco-friendly Bogota, but to cut down on it's own smog issues. Like any capital of any country, there's a lot of movement, and with movement comes cars, and with cars: smog. Their event has even inpired many other cities and countries to do the same thing, continuously aiding in the fight against global warning.
Even America, the gas-guzzling, NASCAR approving, road-rage warriors of the world, try to cut down on car usage. The issue has even reached the President. America has found that slowly but surely that men and women are slowly moving away from the car as a mode of transportation. Since 2005, car usage has dropped tremoendously in favour of public transportation like trams and buses. | 4 |
dc712c0 | Have you ever wonder how it would feel to know how a person felt in a picture, painting or any other thing or even if they hide their emotions? I feel like that would be such a great thing to have a piece of technology. I believe that this technology is valuable because so many people might have courosity to know what a person felt in a pictures, painting, ect. In this essay I will be arguing, why I feel this piece of technology is valuble, and what differnce would it make to society.
Technology is a major part of our lives, but having a piece of technology that can read a persons emotion is a pretty impressive on how we have advanced in technology. The Beckman Institute for Advanced science at the University of Illinois was capable to make a software that can read people's emotions. the author states," at least according to some new computer software that can recognize emotions". This proves that now theres something that can study a persons emotions.
Technology has made a big differnce between the years and to have a software that can read a persons emotions is such a huge expanced on what we know. Now that we have a software that reads a persons emotion can really make a really big differnce of society. The author states, " the facial expression for each emotion are universal, usinf video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software can even identify mixed emotions".
This proves that the new software is going to make such a huge differnce to our society.
To conclude, Technology is such a valuble pesesion we have in our lives. By having a software that can read emotions is a big step on making this world big. Many won't believe the same but most people in this world are involved with technology and this is going to change throughout the decades. Do you believe that this technology is valuble? | 2 |
dc76991 | The face that was found on Mars may be made by natural causes. There are many reasons why this odd shaped figure would be made by natural causes, like gust of wind throwing rocks around could make that human like face. Or something that can pick up big boulders and can move them into place. There are many reasons why this face showed up, but aliens are not one of them.
What might have caused rocks to move into place to create this human like face is large gust of wind. Or something that is really strong. Or it could have been a big pile of rock and just formed over the years into a face. In the story "Unmasking the Face on Mars", there is more then one lump of rock there is two. The second is just not shaped like a face. There are spots everywhere on this planet with lumps of rock. Most of them are formed by erosion. Erosion is the process of being broken down. There could be parts of the lump of rock that wasn't strong enough to hold it's self up. They may have fell in to make the eye shape. The nose could have been another small pile of rock that made it look like a nose. This is from up high it may look different down low. It may look like a big piece of rock. There are different views or angles you can look at it.
Other people may think that aliens did this. But there was no traces or marks left behind that can detect an alien. In the story it says, "There was no alien monument after all." Now in the story it says that all the traces of the alien that did this were covered in haze. In paragraph 12 it says, "
What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American West."
They strongly agree that this is just natural causes. Now they are probably still doing some testing or research about this face. But they strongly agree that it is just a natural cause. Formed by erosion,or gust of winds,or even soft spots.
They shape is another crazy thing added on the list of things that NASA sees on different planets. This is just another figure made by the planets natural causes. Thats why NASA believes it was made by natural causes and nothing like aliens. This is just another cool object found on a planet. | 3 |
dc77aca | I am against that the technology doesn't have the support to make her smile because, it says "His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code" in the text.
I claim that the technology doesn't do anything with the Mona Lisa because, she is smiling in the painting because, it says " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becomine confused or bores" in the text. While looking in a mirror, you see your own reflection of yourself because, it says "Raise your lips at the corners of your mouth bacause, technology can't do that. Then squint your eyes slightly, to produce wrinkling ("crow's-feet") at the corners of your eyes. Holding that, raise the outer parts of your cheeks up, toward your eyes" in the text.
I conclude that the technology can't support the smiles of people's faces because, there are muscles, tissues, and cartlige in the humans head. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. In the real smile, the zygomatic major (muscles that begin at your cheek bones) lift the corner of your mouth. (That's our instruction #1).
Them Mona Lisa is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. | 1 |
dc77ef3 | Dear Senator my name is PROPER_NAME. Im a 9 grader at SCHOOL_NAME, and i believe that in the furter i want to vote for a president that will repsent our courty and us as a unit. Furthermore I want someone to fight for the freedom we been waiting for all along. I think that the electoral college should stay open becasue our fourth fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by vote in congress and election of the president by a popular vote qualified citizens. There for the electoral college consists of 538 electors. the 23rd Amendment of the constitution, the district of columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purpose of the electoral college. what have Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO, in their time. they all agree on the electoral college. If those peopl | 1 |
dc7bb46 | Dear Senator, i am writing this letter in regaurds to the way we citizens vote. I feel as though we should vote using the popular vote. There are many different reasons i feel so strongly about this. So i will start telling you why i feel so strongly about this.
First,i think that the President and Vice President should be choose by our votes. The reason being is becasue we know what we want for our country. we look for the good and things like that in our president. I think it is only fair that we use the voting tecnique most votes because that means everyone gets a say on who runs our country.
Another reason i think we should go that route is beacuse people sometimes feel left out in all the things that have to do with our country. People want a president that keeps his/her word and one that can be the right person for the job. They want someone who knows who to be a leader because the person who gets chosen has this job for 4 years. I think that people have a right to vote for who they want to vote for not who the electors pick . I have no idea if this is aking any type of sense but i am writing this the best way i understand it.
That is how i feel about this whole thing i think people should have equal rights. I also think that people should be able to pick who they want to be their leader. They should be able to view thier opitions and see what is best for not only the country but aslo their familes and themselfs. That is all i have to say about this whole thing. | 3 |
dc81c67 | Natrual land forms are all over earth some looking like common things or objects they of course happen natrualy. So that means other planets have natrual landforms that look like a thing or object such as a face. Nasa has taken scans and pictures using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Meaning they have gotten a full survey of the whole area looking if there was any sign of life that could have created the Mars face. But none were found meaning there is no alien civilization on Mars. It doesn't have to be created by aliens and it probably wasn't but its not wrong to imagine how it was created. But to just know the truth that it is a natrual landform intead of an alien monument. If it was an old alien monument Nasa wouldn't try to cover it up. They would be trying to get funds for taking more trips to actually find more stuff about the mars face instead of taking differnt scans and pictures. This does now say that there are no aliens or any civilization on mars or we would know by now about them. | 2 |
dc84e92 | Luke's point of view is he has 2 part time jobs in p1 they are a grocery store and a bank.
He also saw many countries in ruins.
There were 44 notions that joined together to help in p2.
He had to help take care of all the horses in p2.
Luke diddnt know his life would change so fast that he got a job in p1.
He had 2 part time jobs and his friend invited him to go to Europe but Luke knew he cuoldn't say no.
There were many countries in ruins in p2.
That diddn't have food supplies, and more in p2.
The countries that were left in ruins were in Europe and the month and year was August 1945 in p2.
It took 44 nations to help the countries get food supplies, and more back iin p2.
The nations formed the UNRRA (the United Nations Releif and Rehabilitation) in p2.
UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys to take care of all the horses in p2.
A Seagoing Cowboy was much than an adventure for Luke Bomberger in p9.
Being one opened the world to him in p9.
It made him more aware of people of other countries and their needs in p9.
Leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years in p9. | 1 |
dc86d27 | In the article the author greatly supports the idea of studying Venus and that it will be worthy despite the dangers. In paragraph 8 the author says that striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself. Another example is that in paragragh 4 it says that astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most-earth like planet in our solar system. There are also many dangers that come when visiting Venus and they are that a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide covers Venus. Something that is even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere.
On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. NASA is working on other approaches to studying venus. One example is using old technology called mechanical computers. Human curiosity wil likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.
It is probably good to at least try our best and give it all we got to achieve what we want. | 2 |
dc8b110 | How is the election of the president of the U.S.? The election is base on two parts, the first one is the Electoral College and the second one is the popular vote or the vote of the people. Changing to the election by popular vote would be a great idea because the president of the U.S. would be loved and accepted for most of the of the people in United States and it less complicated than the Electoral vote that can create a big mess.
According to the beginning of the U.S. Constitution ,''We the people of the United States of America...", it shows that the people have the right to change the government. When we select someone to be our leader we are selecting someone according to their values and to their actions before being the leader, but we are not selecting someone according to his political view-democrat or republican-. In the Electoral college what they basically due is vote for the president who have the same political view as they have and if that person is going to help them in the future as president. So the Electoral College means business, while the popular vote select the president according to what is he going to do with the country. Also the 358 electors cannot represent the whole population of the United States, so basically they are not having a democratic system where everyone have a right. For example in 2000 when the elction between Bush and Gore, Gore won the popular vote while Bush won the Electoral vote letting Bush won the precidency. After Bush won the precidency, he began sending soldiers to Afghanistan and Irac separating millions of U.S families, so the meaning is that people were right that Brush was not going to be a good president since the beginning, but at the end it was the fault of the Electoral College. Sometimes the Electoral College make a well political decision and could problaby help more the government, while the people were just selecting someone that was going to destroy the government.
The popular vote is less complicated than the Electoral college where they have sometimes ties and controversies. Ther Electoral College sometimes is unfair against the popular, for example in Florida have 29 electoral votes while Wyoming have only 3 electoral votes is not fair to compare the two of them. The popular vote is easier, must of the times there are no ties so it woukld make it easy to select the president. In the other hand the popular vote would get really tie and one of the person that is running for president would ask for a recount of the vote, so it would take longer to select the president. Aslo if is there a tie in the Electoral College the election would be thrown at the House of Representative and giving the Senate the opportunity to select the president, leading to more complexity for choosing a president.
At the end the popular vote means the people's vote and a fair election. Voting for the president of the United States is not an easy way, but as you read in the eassay you would see that the popular vote get the highest point for being the easiest one. Having a country that select their own president means that the countruy would accept anything that the precident is doing. | 4 |
dc8e9f9 | The author best supports his idea because he states that "Venus still has some features tha are analogous to those in Earth." He also states that "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit." These are all reasons of why Venus is worth studying despite the danger which relly supports it.
I believe that the author is right that Venus is worth the studying despite the danger because despite the warm weather once we understand/study Venus all people should be use to the conditions or would be prepared.The author stated that "Many researchers are working on innovations that wuld allow our machines to last longer in Venus." I think now that they are studying this it would help us in understanding of how to live in those conditions.
Therefor I believe that Venus is worth the risk and believe that scientists should keep studying so in the future we can make our first visit. | 2 |
dc8f531 | Driverless cars
Driverless care are a great idea for people who cant drive on their own and would like to get some wher, but has not yet came out. I think it would be a great idea if this was made legal, but its important that when will it be perfected and also we'd like to know what's keeping us from crashing.
So when will it be legal? Didn't google already start putting cars out there to driven? Well yes and no, its uncomfirmed on when will it be comfirmed that it will be legal, the governmet is manly concered about the passengers, pedestrians and lawmakers safe base off of paragragh nine. Isn't it already out ? yes it is but only had to had permission of the state and people who wanted to test it, but this is not a garranted of your safty so when will it be perfected?
In paragraph ten it is predicted that it will be near to perfect to have this proble solve in the year 2020, top of the line on most modern vechical started to join in with google on their self diving cars such as Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have their cars on the road on the year of 2020.
So what will it be that we're putting lives in such trust? Is it more trust worth then us are selfs? In the sense of actually yes it is. it communicate with a gps sattilte that tracks all the movement and its location in this sense its never lost, not to mention it has the beautie of motion sensers that dectect anything that lies ahead will be notice right away. keeping you away from harm based off of pragraph six.
Google is to be awatied at the year of 2020 when they release their self driving vechical and big brand names to release in the open world. the self driving car will be legal when proven to be safe to the open , and whats behind all this magic? A gps sattilte and motion sensors that dectects bizzar movent to keep us safe. We all await a better future. | 2 |
dc91256 | As a NASA scientist, I believe that the face on Mars was formed by aliens. Me as well as other scientists believe this because, we still don't know for sure that there's any life on Mars. As well of the fact that a face can't be made randomly on a planet, there had to be something that made it. When you think about it you see nothing Earth or human like on any other planet.
Well we still don't know for sure if there is any other planet with a sign from aliens but, every planet has a special feature to it. For instance Earth has weather elements such as;rain, snow, hail, and mist. Mecury is the nearest to the sun. Venus is made mostly out of gas. And Saturn as well as Uranus has rings. Neptune is the cold icy planet. Then Jupiter is the biggest planet.
Although few scientists believed the face was an alien artcraft, photograpghing Cldonia became a prority for NASA when Mars Global Surbeyor arrived at the Red Planet in Sept. 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking mission ended. "We felt this was important for taxpayers,"explained Jim Garvin. These are the facts to lead me to believe that aliens created the face on Mars. | 2 |
dc927cf | This idea dosnt seem like a very good one because of the fact that some people dont really want other people to know how they feel emotionaly. It's a way of invating there privacey. If someone would want to do it that would work but most probably dont want people to know how they feel. If it was you and you are very upset or down would you want people too see how upset you are. Probably not because thats your privacey. It's like opening someones diary. It can be rude and difficult to deal with because when people ask questions on why your so down it can get anoying.
It depends on who you are, if you would do the test then thats great, but if you didnt want to then you dont have to its a very understandable aproch. There are some pros and cons of this. For example, a pro about this is, you could see how you feel and then think about what it says. If it doesn't really match what your feeing then the computer doesn't really work that well. Another example of this idea is that if its in a class room and the teacher basicly makes you take the test without your say so then that means you have to deal with the embaressment from the fellow class mates. It seems like a big deal because of the fact that it would be cool to see how people feel but, it would beeven better to see how sme people in paintings feel. Like Mona Lissa, how did they have known how she fett if it wasn't for this device.
If we did this with all of the paintings we come acrossed it would be amazing. Some teachers that are in art class are very confused and lost when it comes to pintings and pictrues. So when they do an assignment for the kids they go off of what they think the person in the painting feels. It can be very difficult for people to interpret what someone is feeling when they look at the painting or picture so why not use if for thoes things and not actual people, unless you valentier. It does seem fun and all but it would be best to use it on a day you were like reeally happy and excited. Some people would really enjoy having that, but it seems very costly. If you used it on people you would have to do alot of steps to get the correct results.
It would be good to use for all paintings pictires and people. You would just have to use them wiseley and carefully. It is all a very good idean but sometimes it can also be a very bad idea. Think about the kids at school who dont want to be known as the one that sad or upset. They want to be known as them nothing more or less. Using them for paintings would be such a great idea for projects too. Just somehting for people to do and then they can explain how it works and what there thought of it is. | 3 |
dc978d4 | About 25 years ago, NASA saw a "face" like figure on Mars. It was obvious that it was a large rock formation with shadow-like features. On April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time and it caught a picture ten times sharper than the first. It revealed a natural landfom. But, because this was taken a cloudy day people believed it was an alien haze. Therefore on April 8, 2001, they took another picture on a cloudless day in Cydonia.
The spacecraft took a picture on m aximum resolution, which was far batter and clearer than the 1976 Viking photo. If any pyramids, shacks, or lifeforms were there we would have seen it, that's how pixelated the camera was. The photo shows that the "face" is the Martian equivalent to a mesa or butte rock formation. They compared it to the one in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
Also, hollywood films, magazines, and radio talk shows aren't always reliable. Why would you believe a story based on something, with no actual facts to back it up? The actual pictures and evidence are a more reliable source rather than conspiracy theories, movies, or magazine articles. People have too much trust i the media that they don't rely on facts from NASA or other imporatnt officials anymore. After the clearer pictures were released people continued to believe there was aliens, or that NASA was hiding something. The pictures, facts, and even the example of the Idaho mesa give more proven details on this particular subject of the "face"
In conclusion, I believe the "face" on Mars is simply a mesa or rock formation, because rock formations aren't uncommon on this planet and they have more evidence to prove it such as pictures, examples of mesas, and basic information. Those who believe the conspiracy theories, or in aliens do not have enough information to back up their story. Therefore, the "face" is only a mesa. | 3 |
dc9afd1 | At one point, I believed the electoral college was a bad idea. Although, after reading this, my view on the matter as changed dramatically. The electoral college keeps a balance in a country, a balance very much needed. I agree with it one hundred percent.
The electoral college was established as a compromise between election of the President by congress, and election of the President by popular citizen vote. The founding fathers felt it would given congress too much power if it elected the President all by itself. They also felt if citizens chose the seat by themsleves there wouod be chaos. They decided on a nice in between; they both choose, well sort of. What many citizens do not know is that when they cast their vote, they are not voting for the president, but for a slate of electors who in turn elect the President.
I myself feel this method is great. It leaves room for very few mistakes. The problem with citizens voting diectly for the president can be broken into two categories: uncertinty and underqualification. If the vote were solely based on citizen votes, the statisitcal outcome of the event would be crazy. With the majority of the electoral college applying the winner take all approach, it cuts those numbers down incredibly. It is allot easier to confirm a winner out of 538 votes then it is to confirm one out of hundreds of millions of votes now isn,t it?
Another thing that makes it hard for citizens to directlly vote for their president is being underqualified. Many people think for themselves and only themselves. They are not qualified to make choices for the sake of the whole country, that is where the electors come in. These are people chosen by state conventions, state party committees, and sometimes candidates themselves. They hear the ideas of the people and manage them so that they are able to help everyone. They are pro politicians whose job in life is to preserve our country
Counterclaim
The electoral college is not of a democracy, but of a dictatorship. The U.S government lets people choose these electors so they feel important in the choices our country makes. We take time to study our favorite candidates, and if the electoral college does not agree with them, they are pushed to the side. What happens to the people who did not vote for the, "right" candidate? They are forever unheard. Sentenced to live in a community where they are silcenced. I do not agree with the electoral college because agree with our fore father Abraham Lincoln. He said this was supposed to be a country of the people, by the people, and for the people.
You are wrong in so many levels sir. the electoral college does not exclude democracy, it promotes it! Every citizen of legal age uses their god given right to express their political preference in the hopes of improving our country. The electoral college prevents regional rulership over areas that prefer one political side. It re-elects every four years to let everyone know, though your thoughts may not have been used in these past times, know that they have surely been heard. Things like the electoral college make me proud to live in the United States of America, the greatest country in the world. | 5 |
dc9c919 | It is a landform not a Civilization!
In the atricle NASA has comfirmed that the ''Face on Mars'' was just an landform also called a Martian mesa. The image was found in area in mars that is called Cydonia. The shaped like face looked like a real human face, but it was just shaped that way. Others think that it is a ancient alien civilization that used to be on mars but now there is nothing on mars and it seems like the Alien civilizaton has left things behind when they disappered.
When NASA first saw the face they didn't know what to belive so they too pictures in 1976,1998, and 2001.
Why it is a landform and that it is not a alien civilization because Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera crew snapped a photo
of the face ten times. Web surfers were waiting for results and it came out as a landform so there for it was never a alien artifact.
Reasons why people would think that the face could have been a face from a alien civilzaion because the face really looked like a actually face and that it could have been from an acually civilization. Some people believe that we are not the only ones in the universe and some other people think that we are the only ones in the universe and when this these images was sent it made people believe at the time that when there was no answer to what the face ment to people.
But when NASA comfirmed that the image was just a landform people most likely still believed that it is still an alien civlization because to some people they ask where did the artifact get there? Is there any other artifacts that are on mars or in another area? After movies, blogs, and books lots are considering these things and some people might be afraid of what else might be out there. NASA might be trying to answer some of these questions but for right now it is just a landform.
NASA has found more space like things that couldn't have been explained but maybe in the future they could find more things on mars than just a landform or try to find more things on other planets than mars. There is a whole solar system for us we could find a least one thing in the universe that is not just landforms. | 3 |
dc9d5eb | Driverless Cars Are Coming
"Can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars because no one needs them anymore?" "Google cofounder Sergey Brin can. He envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleets pf driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." Would you be for or against the idea of " Driveless Cars"
I am against "Driveless Cars." The reason I am against "Driveless Cars" is first, the amount of money you would have to spend to get a "Driveless Car". Second, the person wanting a "Driveless Car" will still have to do the amount of work you would do driving a regualar car. Thrid, if an accident occours , as if the technogly fails you would get blammed for the accident not the manufacturer because you caused it. The reason I am against "Driveless Cars"is because first, the amount of money you would have to spend to get a "Driveless Car." Second, the person wanting a "Drivless Car" will still have to do the amount of work you would do driving a regular car. Third, if an accident occours, as if the technogly fails you would get blammed for the accident not the manufactuerer because you caused it not the.
The first reason I am against "Driving Cars" is because the amount of money you would have to spend to get a "Drivless Car." If you think about it, the "Driveless Car" includes a "sensors, computers, maps, video cameras, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor." The amount of money for all those qualties listed above will be extremley expensive. You would have to pay more because of all the techinuqes, and of all the objects they conclude, then buying a regular basic car. Youre spedning more money then what you think you are. The company buliding these "Driveless Cars" are spending about "two hundred million dolars." You're going to have to give in, in some of that money that the company is spending to make "Driveless Cars". This is my first reason on why I am against "Driveless Cars."
The second reason I am against "Driveless Cars" is because the person wanting a "Driveless Car" will still have to do the amount of work you would do drving a regular car. In paragraph seven the author states that " This means the human driver must remain alret and be ready to take over when the situation requires." The situation would requrie - steering, acelerating, and braking themselve. Also you would still need a driver. wouldn"t you get bored? You may be prepare to take over if something occoured. You would still have to flash your lights if you wanted to turn. This is my second reason on why I am agianst "Drivless Cars."
The thrid reason I am against "Driveless Cars" is if an acciden occours, as if the technogly fails you would get blammed for thre accident no the manufacturer because you caused it not them. In paragraph eight the author states"Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers,passangers, and pedestrains safe, and lawmakers know that saftey is best acheved with alret drivers." Most states its illeal to test drive "computer-driver cars." If the "Drivless Cars" stoped working at an instant or if the technogly messed up and you hit someone it would be your fault. The reason it would be yoir fault is because you caused it, you hit whatver you hit. Not the manufacturer. So then again you would be paying more money to repair what you hit.
This concludes my argument for or aginast the develoment of "Driveless Cars" I am against "Driveless Cars" because first, the amount of money you would spend to get a "Driveless Cars" Second, the person wanting a "Driveless Car" will be still be doing the amount of work driving a reguar car. My thrid reason, is if an accident occours, as if the technolgy fails it would be your fault not the manufacturer because you caused it not the maufacturer. These are the reason on why I am against "Driving Cars." Now " Can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars because no one needs them anymore?" | 3 |
dca00b7 | Hello my name is Jordan and this is my eassy. He had a very well writen "essay" that really makes you think of what venus really had on the surface of its extrem and harsh envierment. The fact that they are thinking of send people to that planet is relly mind blowing to me. He also did an amazing job at discribing the dangers of the planet and all of the extrem caonditions on the surface like the volcanos and earthquakes as mention in paragraph three.
Also how he mentioned how many veachals have been sent to the planet and how they didnt survived the harsh weather for more than a copple hours. It is very intresting how he discribes the way NASA is trying to deal with the challenges.
the way they have made some progress. such as the silicone carbide electronics that can survive in a simulated or replecated venus up tp 3 weeks are mentioned in paragraph 6. My question is would'nt the silicon melt with the heat on venus that is hotter than mars that is closer to the sun. It is very intresting how they have ideas of how they can have people on venus with the hover crafts that the resurchers would stay on and collect information.
Oneday this earth is going to be imposible to live on and we woill have to move to anoher planet or just die off and honestly we have lived for way to long longer than any other type of animal that has ever lived on this earth. we have survived so many things and eras. Many wars have been foght and many men have dies on this eath just fot the sake of defending there country and having the will honor to die with respect. Other animals have gone we have done too much damage to the earth and taken to many animals to extiton and the oceans are extremly poluted many fish are just dying off and peolpe cant seem to know why but the harsh truth is that the wrold is ending and there is no going back now.
Humans hve changed climet pattens and know evey year it seems like the storms are getig stronger and the summers are geting hotter. The winters are taking longer to arive. and longer to leave volcano eruptions are almost common now evry year ut seems like a volcano want to erupt and sometimes it dose other times its just the ash that kills peolpe. What im trying to get at is that we really should'nt be exporing other planets when we dont even know what 98% of our oceans havent even been expored we need to learn how to take care of this planet before we even think about moving on to another planet or we will do the samething. The goverments dont seem to care much about the subject and act like its not happening. In conclution its amazing that we are trying to send men to other planets but not we really shoud'nt no matter how safe or dangeruse it is we need to fix the problems here on earth first. | 2 |
dca96ef | Some people thought robots would take over the world someday.
This might be the start.
A new technology, Facial Action Coding System, allows a computer to read a humans emotions bassed on their facial expression.
The inventor thinks that this technology should be used in schools.
It would not valuable to have technology be able to read emotions of students in the classroom.
It would be helpful for students when they are confused, but that's the teachers job.
Teachers are there to help the students learn.
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author quotes "Then it could modify it's lesson, like an effective human instructor".
This quote shows that with the new technology, teachers won't be needed.
Why would we need the computer to change the lesson when students can just ask for help from the teacher.
This technology should be used somewhere else more effective like at an airport.
In an airport, the video camera could see if the people are confused and then the computer could tell an employer to go help them.
That would much more valuable and then robots still won't have the power to put people out of jobs.
To have technology be able to read students emotions in a classroom would not be valuable.
There is already someone who helps students in the classroom so schools don't need another.
This technology could be used somewhere else where it would be more efficent.
Robots/computers should always be helped by humans, not humans getting help from robots. | 3 |
dcb2321 | The face on Mars is just a natural landform. The reason why I am convinced that it is a natural ladform is because the Viking 2 saw a shadowy likeness of a human face. They saw an enormous head nearly two miles from end to end that seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia.
Another reason why you should believe that the face on Mars is real is because the Jet Propulsion Lab saw the face on their motor. The said it looked like an Egyptian Pharoah.
NASA unveiled the image for people to see. The people were fascinated. That's when they really thought it was a natural landform. When they looked at it, they saw a human head. It was the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth.
The "Face on Mars" has become popular. It is now in films, magazines, books, talk shows, and haunted grocery stores. The face on Mars is a natural landform. Many people have experienced the face that appears on the planet of Mars.
In conclusion, the story about the face on Mars being a natural landform is true. The face was created on it's own. Take the wonderful trip to see the face on Mars. Enjoy! | 2 |
Subsets and Splits