essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
e937d8f | The Electoral College should be removed as a way of depicting who the President should be. The idea of the Electoral College is almost great but its just not the way the President should be elected. The popular vote is simple, and it makes the presedential campaigns almost mean something. The Electoral College is still a system that is effective, however, the United States government gets its power from the people, so the popular vote would be logical thing to use in depicting who the US President should be.
In source two it tells us that Al Gore had won more than 60 percent of the populkar vote, but still lost the presidency because of the flaws in the Electoral system. From the knowledge that I have gained through all three of these articles, it makes no logical sense that Al Gore won the popular vote with 60 percent and still lost the presidency. All of these sources include something along the lines of, "popular vote elects slate electors to choose president". And with that being said, it proves a flaw in the system we use to elect the most powerful man in the world.
Now, yes, there is a good thing or two about the Electoral College way of doing things. For instance, as stated in source three, "Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both ahd a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes." In a situation like this, it doesn't even matter what the popular vote results are becasue the College still gets their unique say in the presidency. However, if we got rid of the Electoral College it wouldn't matter if there was a tie in the popular votes because it could just be disputed in Congress, the same way it would be handled if there were to be a tie in the current Electoral College.
In conclusion, I would just like to say that the articles given did not give me enough information for me to form an educated opinion on the prompt. However, I did my best with the articles given. I would like to also say that it would be best for the nation if the Electoral College was either revised and edited, or removed completely and replaced with popular vote in determining our nation's future leaders. | 3 |
e939170 | "Facial Action Coding System" is a good thing for classrooms. FACS can help students understand what their encountering at school. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," thats how most kids are in a classroom. To find out how to better yourself by technology is a step forward. FACS can modify lessons like a human instructor.
FACS has six basic emotions-happiness, surprised, angery, disgusted, fear, and sadness. Its associated each with characteristic movements of he facial muscles.
Movement of one or more muscles is calloed an "action unit." Your frontails pars lateralis muscle (above your eys) raises your eyebrows when you're surprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger.
The Mona Lisa description was to indicate a smile to your face, as it shows how much the computer can do. The computer knows whens your happy or sad, the FACS can make computer-animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery. Each expression is compared against a neutral face. | 2 |
e93b8c1 | I think that what they are saying is true becuase they are stating from both minds. They are talking in both ways and they are decribeing it in the both ways.they also have said that the future will be full of new cars and better techonlogy for our generation. Cars are really good and they have helped us through a lot of the rough trobles of being inside of an car. Lots of people get into accidents and they hurt themsleves a lot like what they are stating in the passage.
Some cars dont really work as well asd most of them they seem to stop a lot or have problems which really is the reason why we get into accidents. It would help if they could fix these cars. Finally, i think that what they say is abolustlely true and that they should bring this up to the car people so they can fix the cars and make them better for people to use and so we can feel safer in our communities. They should build more sturdier things for us so we can prevent all of it. They did a really good job stating this and i think that they should write more. | 1 |
e941b58 | I am against the development of the driverless cars. Studies have shown that the safest cars have alert drivers, also that driverless cars still need a driver, and the car could watch you as you watch the road.
These cars are not safe without humans driving. "In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and is a big concern." "This necessitates the car being ready to quickly get the driver's attention whenever a problem occurs." These cars are cannot do what we can do. Its not safe for you to not be driving and for the car to try to notify you if it needs help. A driverless car should not need help.
What is the point of driverless cars that cannot complete actions by themselves? "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." How can they be so called driverless, when they cannot complete basic actions by themselves?
Would you want someone watching you in your own car, shouldn't that be private? "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 should not be necessary considering the car is considered driverless.
With all the evidence shown to you in the story you should know that driverless cars are unsafe without us, they cannot do basic driving actions without us and it watches us. I do not think that driverless cars should be developed and released to the public, I think humans have been doing a fine job driving themselves. | 4 |
e941ff8 | There are rumors that aliens have made the face looking lanform on Mars, but they don't really know. Aliens did not make the face on Mars, we have no proof that even aliens exist. The landform could've been foemed when the planet was formed. The face is just a illusion from shadows, from how the planet is tilted towards the sun. NASA took photos of the supposibly face with a high-definition camera, that was more powerful then the one Viking 1 had. The face is just a lava dome that takes the form of a landform. If there was a airplane, hut, or a Egyptian-style pyramid we would be able to see it with no problem, and be able to make out what it is. NASA does wish that there was a ancient object on mars, so they can get information to find out how it was made, how long ago it was created, who made it, is anything living on Mars, and what was it made out of. | 2 |
e94eabb | Venus, the second planet closest to the sun; scientists speculate it have once had life just like our planet earth. The author supports the idea to pursuit studying the planet Venus despite all the dangers. If we decide to study Venus we can find out what type of life the planet once had, solar power would be valuable to use and we could even find a way to live on the planet.
Venus, earth's sister planet is currently inhospitable for humans. but in paragraph 6 it says, "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." Venus would have at one point in time had life living on it. That is why Astronomers are interested in studying it to learn what type of life lived on Venus and why they are gone. The author is intrigued by his imagination to know what type of creatures or plants that once belonged to this planet but are now gone due to the extreme weather conditions.
The hot fiery climate on Venus can also be incredibly useful. Using it for solar power could change the way we use energy completly. Venus being the hottest planet in the solar system paragraph 3 it states, "On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit." using solar power on venus would be important for Earth since its a renewable source and Earth runs on mostly unrenewable sources which will one day disappear off the face of the earth.
In paragraph 5, the author states that NASA has an idea for sending humans to study Venus. Using a vehicle similar to a blimp it would hover the planet 30 miles above the surface. With this idea temperatures would drop drastically toa a whopping 170 degrees fahrenheit. Air pressure and radiation levels would be similar to earth conditions making it survivable for humans. The author includes this because he wants to make it clesr that exploration on venus is possible. Innovation is key to exploring new places outside of our reach.
The author supports his claim on exploring Venus despite the risks it could cause. He does so by stating positive effects of exploration throughout the text. Exploration of our sister planet Venus is vital to human survival. With global warming, extinction, and unrenewable resources we need to find a suitable planet to get materials and maybe even call home. | 4 |
e950fce | Luke's claim was that when his friend Don invited him to a trip to Europe on a cattle boat and Luke knew right away he had to say yes because it was a once
in a lifetime opportunity. Also that he got to travel and exploer many diffrent
places! Another one of Lukes claim was that he was greatful for the opportunity he got to have by being a seagoing cowboy.
A few reasons to join the club it that you get to go places you probobly never been before. Also that you get to travel all over the world and explore diffrent places and see many diffrent things from many diffrent paces, just like Luke!
It may have taken him two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to china but, it may have been worth it because Luke got to see many diffrent things and explore unique stuff! Luke would normally be caring for the animals and so it kept him busy for a long time.The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games so, if you like those games you might want to join them! Being a seagoing cowboy was much more fun than an adventure, it opened the world to Luke. Luke said he was greatful for the opportunity.
" I had the side benifit of seeing Europe and China. " That is what Luke said because he enjoyed being a seagoing cowboy and going on all the adventures that Luke got to do! Maybe one day if you become a seagoing cowboy you will be able to adventure all the things Luke got to do. There may
be some rough time like what Luke had when he couldn't work for a few days, for an example,
when he was a watchman and it was a rainy night Luke sliped
and fell and he had a few broken ribs but he was saved by a small strip of metal
along the edge so it stopped Luke from sliding. Luke aws happy to be alive
though! Luckly for Luke he recovered in a few days. Luke was happy to be a cowboy and you might too!
So now maybe you can consider about being a saegoign cowboy. | 2 |
e9513d5 | If technology, that can read and tell your emotions is put into a classroom, then many students wouldnt be focused on schoolwork theyll be focused on a dumb app or piece of technology that can read your emotions. With this advanced technology students will just keep changing if there smiling, if their mad, sad, glad, etc. and checking if the technology can actually do its job. Teachers would probably be doing the same and would not be focused on teaching instead focused on a laptop or computer that can read emotions. Emotions are shown everywhere whether your sad or happy anyone can tell by the way your acting or the way you look. We dont need technology to tell us how we feel or how were supposed to feel. What if the technology tells you a wrong emotion, like what if your happy but it says your mad. Then that'll be the people that made it mad. If we could actually have technology that does that like when a add pops up and you get mad then another one pops up and your happy then another one could pop up and it could be innapropiate. This technology would probably even be far to expensive because its "advanced" and how cool schools afford it then. Schools should not even try to afford this technology it will be really expensive. | 2 |
e9529d2 | Twent five years ago a spacecraft was taking photos of Mars, while it was circiling they caught a picture of a face on Mars. The photo went viral and people had their own explination. Some people thought it was aliens, some people thought it was natural.
Since there is no sign of life on Mars, it had to be something natural. There are things called Martian Mesa. A Martian Mesa is very common, it's shadows around Cydonia, but this shadow happen to like like a face. People started to believe that there was life on Mars but that wasn't what was going on. If there was life on Mars there would be signs other than a shadow, we've done pictures of Mars before, why would something show up now?
There were no aliens or life on Mars. NASA took a picture of the face again with a camera that was ten times sharper than the original, which reveales that there is no aliens on Mars, it was just a natural landform. People disagree but Cydonia is hard to target, it's hard work. And Cydonia is very common, it's natural shadowing on Mars and most likely other places too. Some people still have their disbelief, but research has shown it to be a natural landform that is very common around Cydonia. | 3 |
e9538f2 | Many of people would like to own cars, but they're are policies in different countries, which many cant own. In paris; about 4,000 drivers were fined due to stricted rules. Not only in paris,but in columbia;they had their own rules where cars had been banned for over three years straight. The president had goals to change the u. s. and have a green house emissions. lets start protecting the world with new srticted rules to have better life style.
During when cars were banned in columbia;their goal was to promote alternitive transportation and to reduce smog. This seem's unfair for others to be treated this way, but more uneffective for the population to decrease.
presidents have wanting to change the world, especially the u. s. the change we seek for. in new york bike sharing program and its skyroketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorities.
Many people who are in paris had issues when many drivers had been fined. There is also a poorly counrty were vaubans in germany had families had no cars, but others had sold there car for them to stay in vaubans.
We need to save the communities and start adding more safer oppertunties for we can have a change. | 2 |
e955a4d | This is why you should join the seagoing cowboys,you get to travel over seas like the atlantic ocean, its also a great way to travel to new contries and see how they live and see there needs to,its also a great way to get out a see the world you get to see cool stuff and experince cool stuff to it said in the story that by the time luck was 18 he had traveld more then anyother seagoing cowboy thats really cool.
Hes still young and hes traveld alot being a seagoing cowboy is awsome and if you try it you will probably love it beacuse for luck being a sea cowboy was much more than an adventure it opened up a whole new world for him he said im grateful for the oppertunitys i have had it made me more awar of the contries and people all around me and those peoples awarness stayed with him leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years.
If you become a seagoing cowboy can sometimes lead to bad things like when luck slide on the ship and almost fell of the boat but then was caught by a rope that caught his fall so he was happy to still be alive and happy that he didnt go in to the atlantic ocean and when your on board its sometimes really fun especially on return trips when the animals got unloaded the cowboys play baseball and volley ball games in the empty place that the animals ounce were tabel tenniss,fencing,boxing,reading,whittling and games helped pass the time when the animals were gone.
So that is why i think that you should sighn up to be a seagoing cowboy becuse its fun and u get to see things you might never get a chance to ever see again and you get to see animals and play games and have fun hope you join. | 3 |
e957d67 | How many people do you know show that they are upset or hurting? Most of the time people hide their feelings or emotions from others. They could be your best friend but you may not be able to tell when they are not okay. Maybe you are the same way. Maybe you walk into class one day and it is just not your day. Let's say the teacher doesn't know you are upset and upsets you by picking on you. You never showed him you were upset...how would he know? Imagine being able to have the technology to calculate someones emotions!
A lot of students have stuff going on at home. Maybe their parents got into an arguement, maybe they got in trouble, or they lost a loved one. Whatever the case may be, some people don't like to show others they are hurting. So they put up a "fake emotion", as I like to call it. A "fake emotion" is when someone hids their true emotions with a fake one, like being happy when they are really sad.
Things would go so much easier and smoother if teachers could tell when someone is upset. They could help them by talking to them about it and maybe giving them some advice or recommend them someone to talk to. Luckily with the help of a "Facial Action Coding System", which was invented by Dr. Paul Eckman, teachers could see what students are actually feeling. I know crazy right? But just imagine being able to see someones hidden emotions.
Dr. Eckman classified six basic emotions- happiness, anger, sadness, fear, disgust, and surprise. Based on one's facial muscle movements his invention can detect what one's emotions truly are. Dr Huang stated that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored or confused". This could help teachers know that they need to change their lesson to make it more entertaining for the student or make the lesson a little easier or more in depth.
Those students who get bored stop paying attention and stop learning. Those students who get confused fall behind. This affects their education. Students falling behind and not learning won't pertain knowledge and succeed. Some teachers don't notice a student who is falling behind. With the help of this invention, they could spot the students and get them the help they need. This invention can be very helpful for students and teachers. | 4 |
e95a2a6 | Technology is extremely helpful in our everyday lives and is a great way to interact with people. We use it to gather information and learn, as well as overall communicating with people all over the world. But do we really need it to guide us on human emotion? Emotional technology could actually keep us from understanding people on our own, and could make us too dependent on electronics.
Do you have a friend or family member who always knows how you're feeling even if you're trying to hide it? Analyzing other people's emotions is a good way for people to understand eachother and to grow close with one another. But technology takes away our ability to do that on our own. The author of "Making Mona Lisa Smile" states, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive 'calculation' every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face". This is clearly a way to show how humans minds naturally can do the same job as the Facial Action Coding System. If humans rely on computers and technology to tell us how we or other people are feeling, we don't need to figure it out on our own. And if we are always relying on technology and not using our own experiences and analytical skills, then we will eventually lose our abilities to understand others on our own. People in the modern day are already very dependent on technology, we can not let it tear down our social skills. Having an emotion generator can slowly tear at people's social skills and will make us less able to relate to people. Identifying other's feelings can give people a sense of closeness, understanding, and relation to that other person, and if we constantly rely on technology to do those things for us, it would seem as though we are losing connection from person to person, and are making it a connection from person to technology.
Some people believe that technology is keeping us from the simple things in life, and we are more engaged in our cell phones than engaging with people or nature or any of our surroundings. So in that particular case, would using technology to read people make us to connected with electronics, or would it allow us to further connect with people? The answer is fairly simple. Nobody knows you better than you know yourself, and that means that nobody knows people better than people themselves. We have been able to read people's faces and emotions since the beginning of time, and are still currently able to. No technology can read the psychology of humans as well as humans likely can. So why would we add the element of technology to interfere with person to person contact? It is important that people are able to associate with other people without depending on other resources, and including technology to help us would in the long run actually hinder us. A person had to understand humans enough to create this kind of technology, so instead of making everyone dependent on technology, why don't we allow people to understand humans more on their own?
In conclusion, although technology can be useful, technology determining emotions could effect our generation in a negative way. Humans were born being able to understand basic human emotion, and we should not take away that skill from others through relying on technology. | 4 |
e960524 | Whoever thought that a machine could read a person's emotions? To our surpise, a highly advanced technology called the "Facial Action Coding System" is capable of reading one's emotion by calculating the movement of our face muscles. Some may say that this technology has no value and should be abandoned. However, it is clear that this technology has a great amount of value because it helps us better understand the muscles in our face, it improves communication between people, and can improve the quality of faces in computers.
First of all, the experts of the software are constantly experimenting on different parts of the muscles in our face. By doing so, the experts are better understanding the part's of the muscles. On paragraph 3, the author cleary states that, "all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. This shows that the experts have noticed these odd movements of the muscles. The muscles function similarly to legs. Also, on paragraph 4, the author talks about how this new technology can even detect ones mixed emotions. The evidence that he uses is the painting of Mona Lisa. The painting was filled with different types of emotions such as 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry.
Next, the technology has played a major role in improving our communication between people. On paragraph 6, the author shows us that most communications between people is through nonverbal. The technology can help ones understanding of emotional communications, thus improving their nonverbal communication. The technology can tell when someone is zoned out or just completely bored. On paragraph 6, the author states that "A classroom computer recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored". This machine could better the communication between teachers and students.
Not only does this machine improve communications, this machine can improve facial expressions in our games and our technology. At the middle of paragraph 6, the author states that "The same technology can make computer-anmated faces more expressive". This will improve the quality of our video-games. Video games will become more vivd and realistic. Also, in the medical field, this improves the video surgery. With a better video surgey, more lives will be saved.
Lastly, the facial technology will and has played a major role in our lives. This machinery is a huge technological discovery and should be continued. This is because the technology has helped us better understand our facial muscles, has improved nonverbal communications between people, and has improved the quality of our computer-animated faces. This technology can play roles in almost every thing we do. From video games to hospitals, this machine does it all. | 4 |
e962f04 | I am writing this paragraph about a argumentive essay and to say that the face that was found on Mars was not a alien it's a natural born landform.
The face that was found on Mars was not a alien, I think that because it had the shape on a human face and a human face does not look anything like a alien face, they are two different types of faces.
The reason is on May 24, 2001 when the face was spotted it even says " When it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face", it does not say anything about it looking like a alien face.
Then, the NASA opened up the image for everyone to see this caption had a huge rock resemble they said, " which resembles a human head formed by shadows giving a illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth". This little sentence that was stated when they took a good look at the picture pretty much states that they is a possiblity that it could be a alien head but a very low chance, so most likely this head is a human head (90%). This little sitiuation attracted a nice amout of attension to Mars.
Also, on April 5, 1998 Michael Malin and his camera got 10 good pictures of the face the pictures were better than the vikings pictures so now they can really look into the picture. Then the pictures that were taken a lot of people were waiting on them, and finally they first appered on a JPL web site, the picture that first appered on JPL's web site revealed a natural landform. They said, " There was no alien monument after all ", so that means that the head was into a human head and it was not a alien head. So they were planning a date to take more pictures just so they can look at it and make sure that there evidence is not wrong and they said everything right.
In Conclusion, I wrote this argumentative essay to explain how the head that was found on Mars is a human head not a alien head. It so happend to be that it was a human head and it had thne natural landform to even show that it was a human head. After all it takes alot of research to get things done and have them done the right way in science, but it was a human head. | 3 |
e964d63 | In the article, facial recognition software called the Facial Action Coding System allows for computers to better understand and identify human emotions. The software was created by Dr. Paul Eckman, who is a psychologist. The FACS technology is used to analyze several muscles upon the face to determine the current emotion of the person or people who are using the software. Many feel like this technology could possibly be used to change up the education system by analyzing the faces of students who appear bored or uninterested in the cirriculum that is being covered. But, the cost to run and maintain the systems that are needed to run the FACS within schools and other facilities may create an issue because it is costly, and not everyone is going to have the funding to put into such a system.
In a classroom, every student is taught the same lesson and given the same lecture in the same exact manner as every student sitting around them. Their faces, just like any other human being, can determine their current emotions towards the subject they are learning or the topic that they are covering. FACS has the ability to analyze all 44 major muscles in the human face, which are responsible for showing emotion every single day. Dr Paul Eckman, a psychologist, created FACS to analyze the facial muscles on the human face and determine the current emotion of someone behind a computer screen. Along with Dr. Eckman, Dr Huang explains how facial exprssions play a role in human emotion, "The facial expressions for each human emotion are universal",oberserves Dr. Huang, "even though individuals show varying degrees of expression" (like not smiling broadly). With the invention of this technology, some feel that it could change the educational system by analyzing the emotions of a student towards the subject they are learning.
In the article, Dr. Huang explains how a classroom computer could analyze the emotions of a student during a lesson or lecture, "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." And while this may seem like a good idea, the technology used for FACS cannot be run on a home PC due to the complex algorithims that it uses, and the results may be the same for school computers, which run on similar or less capable software than that of a home PC. This is mentioned in paragraph 7, where it explains the same reasoning why the software cannot be used on a home computer. Another possible issue could come when schools do not have the funding, nor the room for computers in every classroom to adjust the education system. While the technology may be an innovative way to change how students learn, the cost to update compuers, install software, and manage it would be very costly for a school system to continue with doing.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding system is a great way to enable computers to communicate more clearly with humans, but may not neccessarily be ready for common use within schools or other places just yet. The algorithms used in the sofrware are too complex for most operating systems used within homes and schools, and may need further development before it is released to the public for common use. In addition, the idea is good for the future, and may change the way the education system works for generations of students to come. | 4 |
e965607 | The Face on Mars was not created by aliens and we know this because if there was life on Mars we would have seen more evidence of it then just the Face, and there are many Martian mesas in the area where we found the Face so it is most likely to be another mesa with shadows that make it look like a human face. Like the many types of different natural landmarks we have on Earth.
We have taken more pictures of the Face on Mars that don't show any evidence of alien life on Mars. The most recent being the one we took on April 8, 2001 on a camera that takes pictures with better resolution that helps us see more then just the Face but also anything else that could be around the Face, like, pyramids, airplanes, and small shacks. The picture showed something that looked more like the landforms that are common here around the American West. And the picture was take on a cloudless day in Cydonia so it is more clearly seen in the photo.
The Face on Mars is just another landmark like the ones we have on Earth and was not created by aliens because we have more evidence that proves so. Like how if there was alien life on Mars we would have to have seen something that shows that anything could be living there on Mars. The Face on Mars looks more like it has shadows that have made it have the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth. | 3 |
e96aaaf | The revolutionary end to car culture could be creeping upon us more rapidly than we imagine. In the passage, "Car-Free Cities", authored by Elisabeth Rosenthal, Robert Duffer, and Andrew Selsky, they've elaborated a bit more on how cities all around the world are deciding it is time to decrease the use of automobiles, with the exception of hybrid cars and public transportation. The inhabitants of specific cities across the world have taken it into their own hands to reduce the usage of private automobiles in order to slow down pollution. In other places the government are pressing fines or taxes on those who drive their smog-emitting vehicles depending on the day or city. Some people are also commenting that the reduction of car usage has even brought about less stress in their daily lives.
In certain cities across the world, the people are open-mindedly accepting life without personal vehicles. In the first section of the passage, "In German Suburb,Life Goes On Without Cars", Elisabeth Rosenthal shines light on a city in Germany by writing, "Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movement called "smart planning."" This allows for homes to be built without driveways and garages, thus reducing the size of the home, allowing more homes to be built in a suburb. Such houses allow for more people to become a part of a fast growing community with a dream to end pollution from personal car usage.
The governments of select cities are declaring specific days for there to be either a reduced number of vehicles on the roads or no vehicles at all, with the exception of public transportation. In section two of the passage, "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer, it is acknowledged that, "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day." By Paris enforcing these taxes they are acknowledging that someone has to at leats make an effort to reduce the levels of existing pollution.
By doing this people are able to live more stress-free lives. | 3 |
e96d264 | Would the use of this technology be valuable to read students emotions in a classroom? Here is my opinion on why it would be valuable. I'll also be giving you reasons why some people wouldn't approve.
A reason I believe it should be used in a classroom is that it can help the teacher spice things up in class if needed. In paragraoh 6, Dr. Haung says and predicts
"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effectice human instructor." I personally believe that this technology would be very/ extremely useful to make a change on how education should be. Education has been the same for so many years, I believe we finally have a way to make the school systems realize it's time for a change.
People may not agree with this technology because maybe they don't want their r thair childrens emotions read. People believe that emotions shouldn't be read becaus emaybe that's all they have to themselves now. Either way, this technology could help change thousands of jobs and peoples lives.
Saying that, that's why I believe this technology would be valiable in a classroom. | 2 |
e96eb37 | I believe that driverless cars can potentially change how the world operates and that they can completely revolutionize the world of public and even private transportation. Driverless cars, with the right modifications, adequate moderation, and an alert human capable of taking control of the car in the rare event of a technology failure within the vehicle, can be even more safe than humans driving cars.
In the United States alone, there are numerous occasions in which people have been severely injured or even killed in car crashes that were caused by people who have fallen asleep at the wheel, driving while intoxicated, or tending to other needs while driving. With driverless cars, a vast majority of these examples of car crashes could potentially cease to exist.
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states that "Their (Google's) cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash." With the technology that is present in the world, it is possible to develop a car that is truly driverless. Also in the article, it says that "He (Sergey Brin) envisions a future witha public transportation system where fleets of deverless cars form a public-transport taxi system. The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." Although these cars are not available right now, it is, without a doubt, possible for them to be available to the public in only a matter of time.
Driverless cars are truly "the future of transportation." Driverless cars, within a certain number of years, can be available to the population and can be even safer than alert humans driving. Driverless cars truly have the potential to revolutionize the world of transportation. | 3 |
e9701ba | The people have a right to say what they want to happen in their community, state, and even as far as the country they live in. They should be able to decide whether they want a park built in their city or whether they want a specific up and coming President. Yes, popular vote at the moment seems favorable for the people, but it does not mean that the people don't vote in the the process of the Electoral College. They truly do vote for their president, just not in a way that they would like. Nonetheless, they do. That being said, the system of election should be kept to the Electoral College.
To begin with, the Electoral College, in a sense, is not democratic, as seen in modern times but it does not mean that it is not equal. Yes, they are voting for an elector in their state, trusting that they would vote for their chosen candidate. "But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed)...," as shown by Richard A. Posner in "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President". This means that, even though the people are voting for an elector to pass on their message, they are still voting to make sure that the president they want to take the seat will get it. The electors so rarely betray the trust of the voters; it has happened one time in 2000, but again that was the first time since 1888. The most thoughtful voters will listen closely to the campaign, then choose which president they feel is fit. Which again, leads to the voters deciding, in the end. Furthermore, the larger states get more attention than the smaller states making it equal amongst those that have more population. For the most part, the Electoral College is equal.
However, others can argue against the Electoral College in favor of the popular vote. "Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always," said Bradford Plumer in "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong." That being said, sure they can't control that but the elector rarely betrays the trust of the voters, only happening twice in recorded history. The Electoral College is still less likely to cause a problem than popular vote would. If popular vote were to play in hand as a system of choosing the president, then things outside of even politics such as, riots, would get out of hand. "...in the Constitution as comprimise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens,"as said by the Office of the Federal Register in "What Is the Electoral College?" Either way, voters do get popular vote, and vote for their elector to vote for their chosen President. It is a balanced idea of both a government and citizen based vote for the leader of the country.
Overall, the Electoral College by far is a balanced system than popular vote is. It is fair, in the sense, that everybody gets a vote and in total, their votes go to what they think is best for their country. Which in turn, does allow for them to decide. | 5 |
e9712e9 | I am against driverless cars because if you dont want to have the responsibility to drive a car you shouldnt have one. Im also against it because the car could do something you dont want it to. the main point is you shouldnt have a car if you dont want to control it in that case you might as well ride a bus or airplane.
Also it would cost alot of money you would have to buy certain types of streets anfd that would mess up other cars. You would have to upgrade the roads frequently. But most importantly I wouldnt want smart cars because they maybe would cause alot of accidents they could run red lights stop signs. Driverless cars are also not good because you could be on your cellphone and accidently take control and you dont know. It is also bad because that means the people in cars won't wear seatbelts and if they get in a car crash the are going to get hurt. | 1 |
e97a9f5 | "The day that mankind realizes that their creations destroy the true beauty of mother nature it will be too late." This quote by one of our nations greatest political and environmental activists, Irvin Green, directly applies to the topic of reducing pollution. One simple, yet extremly effective way to reduce pollution is limiting the transportation methods we travel by. Limiting car and vehicle usage can reduce pollution, nearly eliminate accidents, and makes the road a safer place.
In many places such as Germany, Paris, and Columbia, many ambitious ideas are being put into play to help battle pollution. In the article, "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", it is stated that in Vauban Germany, 70 percent of families do not own vehicles. The other 30% that do, do not have a place to park them, making them basically useless. Residents in Vauban have stopped their need for transportation, making malls and stores a walk away. In this new approach, pollution has drastically reduced in numbers and has made it a much safer and cleaner place to live.
The usage of vehicles are a double-edged sword. They may get us to where we need to go with plenty of time to spare, but what are we really loosing because of it? What we are loosing is the environment and also our health. In Paris, the pollution rate almost reached a new record high, thus forcing the partial driving pan to clear the air of the global city. In the article, "Paris bans driving due to smog", its evident that cars hurt us in more ways then we realize. Buisnesses are suffering due to the lack of transportaion avaliable to delivery their services as seen in source number two, "Delivery companies complained of lost revenue". "Congestion was down 60% in the capital of france after five-days of intesifying smog..." The smog was so dense that Paris officials created a law making even-numbered license plates to leave there cars at home to reduce pollution. With half of the normal amount of cars driving, it almost elimated the total accident rate, making the road a safer place to be.
Despite the benefits that come along with transportation, there are more disadvanges then advantages. Pollution is the second largest source of America's emissions just behind power plants. Many sociologist have seen these statistics and have also noticed that American transportation usuage has slowly been declining since its peak in 2005. People are slowly but surely helping the cause in their own ways, whether its by delaying getting there license, limit there driving, or even car-pooling with friends. Limiting car and vehicle usage can reduce pollution, nearly eliminate accidents, and makes the road a safer place to be. | 4 |
e97e384 | The driverless cars are a really good idea for many reasons. And the article " Driverless Cars Are Coming" addreses how. One reason why the cars are a good idea is, i think, there would be less crashes. if all the cars are driving the same way as in technic, then there would not be so many crashes. Also how there are motion detectors and such, the car would be able to detect if a car
is too close or anything else and know how to react.A lot of people , when crash, dont know what to do in the situation so that causes the crash.But with these cars, you dont need to worry about it as much.
Another fact stated in the article, is that the cars would not use as much gas, which would help the enviornment dramaticaly. And there wouldnt be any buses using gas either because they wouldnt be necessary.
Also, is that there are so many people getting into accidents from texting while driving and trying to do other things while driving. since the car is drving itself, you can now do all of that because you dont really need to be paying attention until the car needs you to drive through a risky path.
In conclusion, i think the driverless cars are a really good idea because they are good for the enviornment and lower the risks of car crashes. | 3 |
e9831f4 | When limiting car usage the first thing that most everyone thinks of is: "How would I get from Point A to Point B instead of driving myself in my car? Would I walk, ride a bike, take public transportation, or try and find a new creative approach?" Limiting car usage is not the end of the world, it is the beginning of a healthy one. Most cars burn gas which cause smog and pollution which is harmful to the enviorment, some people get lazy and end up being so dependent on a vehicle that they will not even consider walking a few blocks to a friend's house for an afternoon lunch, and our own ancestors have gone without a car for centuries on end. So would it really be that much of a struggle to not use a car any and every where that you go? You do not need to never use your car again, you just need to realize that using your vehicle more than needed is harming not just yourself, but everything and everyone you interact with in life.
In Paris, France a partial driving ban was put into effect just before the 'City of Love and Romance' reached record breaking pollution levels. The ban states that: "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following days."("Paris bans driving due to smog", Robert Duffer). However, just because there is a law put into affect does not mean that everyone will abide by it. According to Reuters, an international news agency in London, almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had their vehicles impounded because of their reaction to the fines. It is a shame that people are so unwilling to follow one rule for one day which would help the planet and reduce the pollution in their city. According to Duffer, Paris ,typically, has more smog than other European capitals. When Duffer's article was published he states, "Last week Paris has 147 micrograms of particulate matter(PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found." Also, in Paris, diesel fuel is used more than gasoline. Diesel engines take more energy to burn the gas which causes more pollution than just normal gasoline. According to Reuters, France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. In France, as a whole, 67 percent of vehicles have diesel engines. In the rest of Western Europe, about 53 percent of vehicles have diesel engines. The smog that is in the air from the burning gas of your vehicle ends up in your lungs. Imgine just sitting in front of the exhaust pipe of your car for a few seconds(do not actually attempt this analogy) it is overwhelming and unbearable. It is harmful to your lungs and the rest of your body. That pollution is coming out of thousands and thousands of other cars and is adding up to the air all around you. You breath that air every day, just like your family and friends as well. In Paris, after the partial driving ban, on Monday the smog cleared up enough for the French party to take away the ban on the odd-numbered plates on Tuesday, according to Duffer. If the smog in one of the biggest cities in the world can clear up just a little bit in one day from limiting car usage, imagine how much smog could be prevented if you limit your car usage every day. What if you only used your vehicle when traveling out of town or when you need to transport a large item? You can change your whole enviorment just by deciding to walk or ride the bus to work instead of turning on your vehicle to drive 10 miles down the road.
The law that was put affect in Paris, France does not state that you can never drive your vehicle again, it is just simply asking the citizens to go one day without their vehicle. "But what if I have to go somewhere such as work, school, or anywhere else that I want?" Paris is a large city, that much is understood, because it is a large city there is more than just one way of getting from Point A to Point B. One way is public transportation from the city and/or local businesses, like a bus or tram. According to the BBC public transit was free of charge from Friday to Monday as well. So, if you did not want to spend extra money than you had to that would not be a probolem. If you do not like public transportation, or do not prefer it, you can get out for a bit of exercise and ride a bike or even walk. Getting up or leaving maybe an hour or two early so that you can get to your desired destination on time is not that heavy of a price to pay. Also, you are getting exercise out of it which benefits your health. Walking or even riding a bike to work can benefit you in so many ways. If you see someone familiar walking towards you, you have the opportunity to start up a conversation and catch up with how their life is going. As well as this, if you see a small shop or stand that sparks your interest you have easier access to explore inside. If you were driving/riding in a vehicle then you would have to cross traffic, find a parking spot, make sure you grabbed everything that you need, and make sure that it is locked. If you are taking a stroll through town, you already have your needed things, you do not need to cross traffic and find a parking spot, and you do not have to risk accidentally leaving your vehicle unlocked and end up possibly getting robbed. A study discovered by Elisabeth Rosenthal found out that driving by youth decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Maybe this is because young people still have the energy and sense of adventure in them to walk or take a bus somewhere(or they just can not afford it, which in the long run saves them money anyway). Maybe you can learn from the young people that decide to ride a bike or skateboard to work instead of driving a car. Maybe taking public transportation is not as crowded and as much of a hassle as the movies make it seem. Taking public transportation can introduce you to new people with different backgrounds as well. You can meet someone that you might not see as a coworker or a family friend that you have an idea already who they are. Some people are always so busy with every day life that they do not have the time to meet new people and learn new names. With public transportation or deciding to walk instead you have a bigger opportunity to meet someone new. Why not give yourself a healthier lifestyle by walking once a week to work instead of driving? The question still remains, why not?
Limiting your vehicle usage does not limit your options and exposure to the outside world. Having a vehicle is not entirely a bad thing either. Some vehicles are 'eco friendly' and are built so they can help protect the enviorment. Sadly, however, most are not built and designed that way. Driving is so stressful for a person. You have to focus on all of your surroundings, check every blind spot, make sure that all of your fluids are not empty, replacing tires, and so much more. Again, driving is not all bad. Some people enjoy to drive, some say that is relaxes them and gives them time to think because driving is the only 'alone time' that they have. Carlos Arturo Plaza says, "It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." The human race has survived countless centuries without motor vehicles, why can we not seem to last just a day? | 6 |
e98482d | The world of Venus is very rough, and there are lots of hazards we must overcome if we plan on visiting the planet. The whole planet is filled with danger around every corner, and we would need alot of protection if we planed to visit this unknown world. It is a planet very close to Earth, but it is also extremely close to the sun, making it 800 degrees fahrenheit on the planets surface. There is also clouds of corrosive sulfuric acid, and powerfull volcanoes. Which makes the idea of actually stepping foot on the planet impossible.
If we founded research to go near the planet, and studied Venus from a blimp like aircraft it would help us with reseach of how the world looked up close, but we will never be able to actually take samples of the world, no ground samples or gass samples because its too risky. The idea of a aircraft hovering 30 miles above the planet sounds amazing, and makes u imagine what it would be like, but there would not be much progress due to not being able to take pictures of the planet. The atmosphere of Venus is so thick that light does not travel through it making prictures and videos completely inefective. Even after we get there and see the planet, what then the gass would not let us continue to explore the planet, and without any photos or evidence the public might not even beleave that it took place.
Nasa is working on many approaches to study and find ways to reach venus. They have tested the material silicon carbon, in a chamber simulating the conditions we may face on the planets surface. The materials lasted three weeks in the condition, but what if the world of Venus is even worse then the chamber Nasa has built, would humans only have a certain amount of time to study the planet before before there ship and them get dissolved by the planet?
The author is very smart and knows his facts, but he does not know how dangerouse the planet will be, Nasa should focas on Mars and not a planet so hard for us to travel and discover. We have sent rovers to mars and they have landed and some still work to this day, but every thing Nasa has sent to venus has failed, this is why we should choose the red planet. | 4 |
e9848b4 | Fellow citizens, cars have become a major role in our daily lives. They have their many excellent uses, however there are advantages of limiting that usage. To name a few are, that it's enviromentally healthier and it's less money you have to spend on them. Now let me explain why it's a smart choice to take advantage of limited usage of cars.
Paris recently (according to source two article "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer) came up with a brilliant idea of partial driving ban to clear the air of the city. They took days were only even or odd liscense plated cars would drive or they would suffer a fine. However public transit was free throughout the week. This promoted less congestion and smog which is much better for the enviorment by lowering the amount of pollution in the ozone layer. As well as a cheaper way to commute. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog...rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world". This shows just how out of hand the smog had gotten but with limiting the amount of cars used they managed to clear over half of it! Making the world greener than before.
Meanwhile in places such as Vauban, Germany, the residents went as far as giving up there cars. (according to source one article "In German Suburb, life goes on without cars" By Elisabeth Rosenthal) About 70% of the residents no longer own cars because it's either too expensive to have one on the edge of town and it's generally forbidden in this experiment in the new distirct. They even go as far as to say that it's better without having one. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" said Heidrun Walter,a resident in Vauban according to the article. People in general, especially the younger generations don't use cars or have liscenes in comparison to older people who are more likely to retain their liscenses as the age was shown in research. People now don't care as much as what cars are driven but are more focused to get from point A to point B, it's simply a means of transportation. (In source 4 article "The end of car culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal).
When it comes down to it, cars are transportation, but there are plenty of other means of transport that are free or cheaper such as buses, trains, bikes or even car pooling. While at the same time creating less pollution and congestion, making it enviromentally healthier. | 4 |
e987a81 | Dear senate,
I think that we should actually keep the electoral college. There are many reasons why should keep it,for one is that that electors choose the president and the vice president and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. Another reason we should keep the electoral college is because it has 538 electors. It also helps the U.S by giving us a president. Those are some of my reasons why we the people should keep the electoral college.
First of all, the reason why we the people should keep the electoral college is because the electors choose the president and the vice president and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. The reason I say this is because we the people need a president and the electoral college helps us get one. The electoral college helps us get a vice president as well because if the president dies or some sort the vice president can take in. The electoral college also helps count the electoral votes by the congress. Those are some ways the electoral college helps us.
Further more,another reason why the electoral college helps the us and the U.S is that we have 538 electors. The reason I say this is because every elector do there job by picking the president that will run for the U.S.It also helps pick out the vice president as well like I said in my first paragraph. That is why we should keep the electoral college. The electors help pick out the president that we need for everyone.
Lastly, the last reason I think we should keep the electoral college is because it helps us by giving us a president that we need. A president can do so much for us like Barack Obama. He did great things to keep this nation secure for the people. Other great president did the same thing back then. Because of the electors from the electoral college. Those electors helped pick a president so we can have one and that is why we need the electoral college.
In Conclusion,so today I talked about why we the people need an electoral college and there are many reasons for it. To sum it all up the reasons we need an electoral college is becasue the electors helps us by picking a president,vice president,and the electoral votes that we need. Another is because we have 538 electors that help pick a president. Last is that they give the U.S a president. So this are some of the reasons why we the people need an electoral college. | 3 |
e989f07 | Dear senator of Florida,
I am writing an argument in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. I feel that you should make it more clear to the people that vote. The people should know who and what they are voting for, which some people get confused. "...sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate? Sometimes..." If people keep voting for the wrong candidate soon they will realize and the senator of Florida will be recieving more than one letter. With the electora doing a "winner-take-all" system then, its not really fair to the people. Every state in the United States should absolutely get a chance to see a single campaign ad. "...seventeen states didnt see the candidates at all,including Rhode Island and South Carolina..." I dont think you should abolish the electoral college, after all its not so bad. You should just do better and get all around the United States not just a couple of states, ALL!!
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
e98f570 | With in this article, there are many arguments regarding the self-driving cars. Many positions for opposing and agreeing with the cars can be seen. I, for one, am supporting the idea for self-driving cars. I believe with enough work, these cars will be safer for the roads, and for their passengers.
"Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids and rollovers." [5] This proves that with enough work, this kind of technology can be improved tenfold.
"In 2013, BMW annonced the developemnt of 'Traffic Jam Assistant.'" [7] This states that the new technology is being invented all the time. We never really stop inventing, improviong, revising, and publishing new things.
With that, self-driving cars will hopefully make for a better commute, with better saftey. It would be a nice advantage to see cars with a function that tests for sobriety, leading to a safer roadway. That, and many other functions that can be implimented into everyday life can make our cars better.
So, would self-driving cars be safer? In my opinion, yes they would. We could possibly have a safer network of roads, and a lesser ammount of accidents, and a lesser amount of fatalities regarding self-driving cars. | 3 |
e98fbee | Dear, State senator I would like to have the chance to tell you my opinion on whether to keep the Electoral College or change to election by popular vote for the president in the United States. I would like to argue the fact that I think the Electoral College should be kept for the way in which we pick our president and vice president. with that being said the Electoral college isnt any regular thing. It is a process in which we elect the two most important people who represent our country. The Electoral College was estalished in the constitution. The way the Electoral College works is that the president and chosen by a vote in congress and a popular vote of qualified citizens.
To commence, the Electoral College has been the way we choose our president and vice president for many years now. There hasnt been any problems with it. So why the need to change it? Many people beliee that the Electoral College is and old thing that its time to come up with something knew. As said in source 3 " The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism". Each state is given a number of electoral votes. The electors are the ones that eect the president not the people. Each candidate running for president in somoenes state his their own group of electors. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is needed to elect the president. In my opinion the Electoral College works perfectly fine so their should be no reason to change the manner in which we elect our president and vice president.
Furthermore, if we were to change to election of pop[ular vote in the United States their will be more diversity and more political issues. Because with champaigning and that candidates electors will make it easier to win. And then it wont be really based on who really deserves to win. They could easily cheat in picking the candidate by popular votes. it shouldnt just be based on who has the popular votes their is more too it. We are talking about the person who will represent our country not someone who's about to gpo pick what dog they want for their family. Our country isn't a joke.
To Conclude, my response is that the Electoral College should be kept is the way we pick our president and vice president. There are many diverse opinions and this is a very critical topic but there is no need to change it now. Its all controlled and handled so well with the Electoral College a popular vote will just bring problems. | 3 |
e9928b5 | Dear. State senator
I think we should banish the Electoral College becuse we the people decide who the president is not Electorals. We should just go back to basics and have a normal vote system. This system is no working for our needs so we need a better and direct voting system. One big example for leting go of the Electoral college is the disater factor and it just unfair to voters.
The electoral college should be cancelled because there are too many things wrong with it. Like one is the winnner-take-all sytyem, by a couple of votes off and one canidate takes all the points in that state. So with that, canidates will use mostly of he's/her's attention on big states to get all the big points there. And little states see little to no campaign ads for any candidates because of the electoral college.
Then swing states help us in the electoral college with dividing the points to the cadidates.
Help with the winner-take-all system, it just the oppisite of it. Also the electors rarely betrayed the voting. Then the are times where the candidate wins the elctoral vote, then loses the national popular vote.
With all of this infomation the Electoral College should be descarded because it is a non-democratic method and it just an anachronism. And when you are voting, you are voting for electors, not the priesident. And which candidate wins the popular vote wins the election. its just unfair to the voters because they dont really vote for the priesident. | 3 |
e99aa60 | In 2000 when Al Gore got more indevidual votes then George W. Bush nationwide he did not win the election. It is because of the corrupt prosses of the Electoral College that he did not gain presidency. It is this among other things we must do away with the Electoral Collegeif we want to run a true democrocy.
There are many people who would argue that the Elecotal College should stay and be apart of how we elect our president. Richard A. Posner author of
Defence of the Electoral College claims the candidate for president must have a trans-rigional appeal (source 3 paragraph 18). This however is not true. According a map that shows the breakdown of the number of electoral votes each state gets he/she could very well just get the votes from two regions and win the election. Yes you could say that two regions are trans-rigional but this idea is based on collection of states from each reagion. Not one or two. Ponser also asserts that, "...the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election"(paragraph 20). Here he is saying that only the Swinging States-such as Ohio Hawaii-would determine who the president is for the whole counrty. How is letting a handful of people decide who the presedent will be a reprsentation of the counrty as a whole? Short answer, its not. It would be foolish to put the choice for president into the hands of few, its like puting all our eggs into one basket and then throwing it off a roof.
There are a numerus amount of things that are not good about the electoral college. Bradford Plumer from the foundation for National Progress and author of
Mother of Jones says that if there was to be a tie everything would be up to the House of Representitves(source two paragraph 12). That means each state gets one vote. One! The reresentitive from Wyoming-who have 500,000 voters-would have the same amount of power as the representitive from California-who has 35 million voters. This is in no way to run a country with fifty people representing about 250 million people. Plumer also states that the vorters can't always pick who their electors are (paragraph 10). While the electors cannot be someone in office, who is to say that they may say one thing about who they will vote for but infact they vote for someone eles? It has happend before. Every one should get one vote and that be that non of this winner takes all stuff.
Finally we get to the part about the District of Columbia or Washington D.C.. The Office of the Federal Register wrote an article on the Electoral College and it says that D.C. is given three electors and treated like a state(source 1 paragraph 4). In one way this could be a good thing but in this casse it is a bad thing. The District of Columia is not a state and holds many goverment officials. Infact many people don't live in D.C. they live in one of the neighboring states. So why are we letting them have as much of a say as Vermount or Alaska or even one of the Dakostas?
To wrap this all up the corrupt system in which we elect a group of people to do what we want is not a very effective way to run a counrty in stage four of the Demographic Transistional Stages. Although president George W. Bush was an adiquate president there is still unfair that Al Gore had not become our president when he hat the popular vote. | 5 |
e99ab9d | The use of the facial action coding system is a must have in class rooms. It will help tell if the students understand the work there doing. It also will help if they see a student unhappy or depressed we can tell there parents that they should get help to see if there ok. Also it can find if the students are understanding the work and so they can help their fellow students with work.
The facial coding system might help know if the students are being bullied to see that they are afraid to go into the classroom and help the student stop the bully from hurting him. this technology could also help to see if there will be any trouble makers if they have a smirk on thier face and see that they will do soming bad.
In conclusion using a facial emotion detector would help the school a more better school to work in. | 2 |
e99ce48 | I dont think that we should keep the electoral college. i think that we should just have it to where it would just be an election by popular vote for the president of the United States. One reason that i feel this way is because you dont always have the power of knowing why you are voting for. Another reason is because sometimes voters get confused about the electors and they vote for the wrong candidate. Did you know that in the year 2000 over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind that we have now.
Another fact is that under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. Just think of it this way state legislatures are trechnically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. For example perhaps most worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case, the election would then be thrown to the House of Respresentatives, where state delegations vote on the president and the senate would choose the vice president. so basically if there were to be a tie in the electoral vote you wouldn't even have a vote in who you're voting for.
Because each state casts only one vote, the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters. Given that many voters vote one party for president and another for congress, the House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people. The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe. At the basic level the electoral college is unfair to voters.
Because of the winner take-all system in each state, the candidates dont spend time in states they know dont have achance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. during the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all. If anyone has a good argument for putting the fate of the presidnecy in the hands of a few swing voters in ohio, they have yet to make it. | 3 |
e99f8d6 | At the beginning Luke bomberger did not know when his life would change sooner or later when he got a little older. Luke had two part time jobs one of them was at the grocery store the second one was at the bank, then his friend Don Reist came and told Luke if he want to come with him in a adventure to go to the Europe on a cattle on a boat. So that is when he said to him self ''this could be the moment I had been waiting for in a long time''. They both needed supplies to have a life time. Finally the Seagoing Cowboys were hired by the UNRRA to take good care of the horse, young cows, and also the mules that all of them were shipped overseas. When he was 18 years old he thought it was a good idea to join the military service. He choose to go to the military service before he came to Greece. But he didn't choose to be in the military service. So they still traveled it took two weeks cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eats cost of united state and it also took about a month to get to China. So when are carrying the animals it is harder to travel. But for Luke was more than a adventure it opened up his world into seeing stuff. He said '' I am grateful for the opportunity that I had''. | 1 |
e9a1fe2 | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" thinks that exploring Venus is worth the risks that are required. Venus is a planet that most people think are a star because of how brightly it shines at night which makes it very noticeable. Not many other things are known about Venus: Not many people think about exploring Venus when they think of space exploration. In the article the author talks about both the problems with exploring Venus, but he also talks about how exploring Venus is something that is a possibility for the future.
The author states that Venus is "often referred to as Earth's 'twin'" because out of all the planets Venus has a similar density and size compared to Earth. The terrain of Venus is also very similar to the terrain of Earth. They both have landmarks that are similar "to familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." This evidence shows how the landscape of Venus has the possibility to be a home for humans. The similarities between Earth and Venus make Venus a valuable place to explore in greater depth.
Although Venus has a similar terrain to Earth, the ground climate is too rough for anyone to safely land in Venus. Venus has a temperature that humans can not survive in, 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Also on Venus the pressure is 90 times what humans experience on Earth. Humans have never experienced conditions as extreme as those on Venus: "Even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of [the] oceans" would be crushed and the high temperatures "would liquefy many metals." Something that was made to be able to go withstand high pressures, like a submarine, would be crushed on Venus, and metals can withstand very high temperatures but on venus they would liqeufy. It is unsafe and humanly impossible for humans to try to explore the land of Venus when some of the best technology can not even withstand the climate of Venus.
As of now there is not enough technology for humans to explore Venus on the surface, but they can explore Venus from above. It is a possibility for scientists to hover 30 miles above Venus. This way the scientists will not have to experience the total wrath of Venus's surface, but they would experince "temperatures that would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, [and] the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth." Humans can live in those conditions, even though they may not be ideal. Scientists would be able to explore Venus without putting them at risk. There is still not technology for the scientists to throughly explore Venus the way they want to. They would only get a glimpse into what Venus is like. New inivations are being worked on that can withstand Venus's tumultous surface, so that scientists can get the full picture of
Venus.
Venus has great potential for exploration, but with that great potential comes great risk. The author of the article talks about the problems with exploring Venus, but he also talks about how exploring Venus is something that is a possibilty for the future. Venus is very similar to Earth in the terrain that they both have, but the surface conditions of Venus are deadly to humans. There is the possibilty of hovering above Venus to be closer to the surface without having to experince the extreme conditions. With the advancements in technology and new innovations scientists are hoping that there is a way for them to get closer to the surface without endangering their lives. | 4 |
e9a2796 | Scientists are debating whether the use of the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) to read the emotional exprestions of students in a classroom is valuable. The use of FACS to read expresions given off by students would be valuable because it is very advanced in technology, can scan a real face or a picture of a face, and can tell if a person is being truthful.
the use of FACS to read expresions given off by students would be valuable because it is very advanced in technology. "For example, your frontalis pars lateralis muscle (above your eyes) raises your eyebrows when you're surprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightens up to show anger." (paragraph 3, lines 27-29). FACS can read the smallest detail produced by the human face and connect that to an emotion. FACS isn't restricted to just natural faces, it can even read expressions off of pictures.
The use of FACS to read expressions given off by students would be valuable because it can scane a real or a picture of a face. " Using video imagery
The use of FACS to read expressions given off by students would be valuable because it can tell if you are lieing or being truthful.
The use of FACS to read expressions given off by students would be valuable because it is very advanced in technology, can scan a real or a pictue of a face, and can tell of you are lieing or being truthful. | 2 |
e9a2fca | Some say that the face found on the surface of Mars is just that, a face. But others would say that the Face is only a mesa with shadows that cause it to appear as though a face were there. But who is correct? I honestly do not believe in aliens so I would have to say that the latter of people are the ones who have their stories straight.
The first pictures of the Face went to NASA in 1976. Most everyone was convinced that this Face was proof of aliens and martian life. Then another picture of the Face came in, in 1998. This picture showed a little bit more of how maybe, just maybe, this was not actually martian life. Then in 2001 when the final picture came in and showed everyone how this Face was simply a mesa.
But still people say that NASA warped this picture and that NASA wants us to no proof of alien life forms. But if NASA had proof of other life forms, they would get more sponsor ship and it would be better for them. NASA would want us to know without a shadow of a doubt that other life forms are out there. It truley would be beneficial for their company and for the future of their company. So, for people out there to say that NASA is lying to us and that the Face is real and that NASA does not want us to know, that is absurd. There is also a people group who would say that because there was a haze in that region of Mars the day that the 2001 picture was taken, that the picture did not capture the whole thing or the complete Face in all that it is. But I think that these people are simply grasping for straws.
There are many theories about the Face on Mars, but there is really no way to know who is correct. The only person who can truley know is God. People today can put stress on one tiny little happening and focus on that. Whether or not the Face is real is a pretty big question with a lot of answers but in the grand scheme of things, this small little detail dos not matter as much as some people seem to think that it does. | 4 |
e9a40fe | Using technology that reads emotions in a student classroom is good because its caculates emotion, recognize subtle facial movements, and can mirror a suggested emotion. According to the text, it states by weighing different units the software can identify mixed emotions. Like they use the Mona Lisa picture to measure mixed emotion and she was 83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful and 2% angry, well at least thats what the computer software says. The software can also recognize subtle facial movements like if you smile when an ads apears they computer will send similar ads and if you frown then they will change the ad. Then it's good for students because the computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored. That means it would modify the lesson like an effective human instructor. If the computer can act like a human bein that would be good because most human communication is nonverbal. Also the computer can mirror a suggested emotion. The computer knows a face that looks happy. The computer knows the muscular action units of the face. Like the article says "you tighten your lips to show anger", that is the same angry face that could be used to a video game. So, yes this type of technology would be great to use in a school because it calculates emotion, recognize facial movements, and could mirror imagery. | 3 |
e9b0d70 | My position on driverless cars is that im against the developing of these car because of what they bring. Things like this would probably cause chaos. More than likely to have accidents and whos fault would it be. Some situations with these driverless cars can also be crutial. Im against it because the laws, what wil happen after a accident, and how these things would actually work.
If the law focuses on how safety works and keeping everyone in the car safe, what if theres a malfunction and theres a accident ? Then who will get the blame for it ? The way it will work is if a human driver is in control right, but then the driverless car looses control or has a breakdown who will be affected ? The developer or the ones in the driverless car. The traffic laws are for someone to be in control of the car so therefore it is safe. Maybe a change in laws can solve this problem and conflict that may possibly happen.
Accidents happen daily, so will the driverless decrease the chances of that happening ? In my opinion is that technology goes wrong here and there not always but it happens. If these cars arent deveoped the proper way where theres accidents daily, who gets the blame. I personally think that the developer and the one who had the idea to make this should take a part in it. Why ? Simply because if you took the time to make something so cool and fun, it should also reach state safety laws. When accidents happen and if its the drivers fault they get blamed for it right ? So if this driverless car where there is no driver who get the blame for a injury, the driver or manufacturer.
How will this driverless car even work or be developed. The car is gonna have a sensor input system to take over when in traffic. Sensors arent really the best thing to have because something can cause it to stpo it from working then what happens there. If you still need to be in the driver seat and paying attention to the road what is the purpose of this developement ? It has its own brakes but you can take turns, but cant you do that in a normal car just takes alittle bit more time. This driverless car isnt a bright idea just because of the way it works and the problems it can cause.
Im against it because the laws, accidents and what can possibly happen, and the way this technology might take place. States are gonna have to change safety laws which in some the car needs to be proven to be safe. The accidents and the way things will be faced and who will be blamed is gonna be insane in most peoples opinion. The way technology might take place is also gonna be a factor because it can go wrong if not built right. Therefore im not so convinced about the developing on this driverless car. | 4 |
e9b151f | Driverless cars are some what useful for us because maybe elder people want to go out and they don't have anyone to take them. The teenagers may get bored of just sitting there and not drive, but the older people wont because they could relax. It could be useful either way, maybe some teens would like it because they enjured something, they wouldn't be able to drive now but they could if we had driverless cars. In the passage "Driverless Cars Are Coming" they said something about putting something in the car to entertain them and making sure they keep their heads up at all times. Just because there is driverless cars coming soon doesn't mean that people can just drive them around whenever they feel like it, its same as being a car when you have control. You still have to watch out and go the speed limit, you can't take it and sleep when it's driving.
Over the past years cars have developed a lot. Now there are cars that you can turn on while you're still in the house, some cars have wifi, you can turn the heat on, and open doors before you get to the car. People want what is new so they can show something off but they don't show off the problems they could have with the car. Now they are making this new thing where a car can drive you around itself without you having to take control? Have they thought about the car accidents that could happen? Or how it could injure someone? This will take more responsibility than what a driver has now.
Would there have to be any test taking for those who want their permit or license? How do you know if they are capable of being in control over those things? Having the cars we have now are good enough. Those who want a driverless cars should still capable of doing the things they do now with a regular car. Senors will still be in the cars, if adding them to the new cars that would make it better for the person and the car.
They want to know who would be responsible for an accident? Well it would be the persons fault. If they aren't looking at the road because they were distracted by something else than that could be bad. They should be able to take control when they see something bad is about to happen.
Now if the driverless cars come with speaking instructions that could make things better because you can tell it what to do. If there is traffic and your vechile is going to fast you should be able to tell it to slow down.
Whether they're or no driverless cars people should always be safe while driving. They should always have their eyes on the road and be able to look to their right and left to make sure it is clear to move over. With this coming out people probably think it will be safer or dangerous. They should put things to entertain them so they can be focused on the road instead of their phones. People should still have to take the driving test with their control. | 3 |
e9b83ee | Venus which is sometimes called an "Evening Star," is one of the brightest point of light in t he night sky. Venus is a member in our solar system. Venus is a Planet. While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it have approved many challenging place to examine more closely. Venus is worthy to pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too. Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner in space many humans have sent numerous spacecraft to this land but th missions are always been unmanned and as a result no spac craft has survived on this land for more than few hours. Not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus for more than three decades. This is not only affecting the waste of money but also losing people's lives.
The thick atmosphere on Venus is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide. The clouds are highly corrosice sulfuric acid in Venus's atomosphere. On the planet's surface the temperature avarages over 800 degress Farenheit, and the atmosphereic pressure is 90 times higher than what we experience on Earth. These temperature are more than enough to harm any human being who tries to go to Venus. After all these results scientists should not discuss further to visit the surfafce of Venus.
Many astronomers are shocked because once Venus used to like Earth. Large areas covered with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a solution for sending humans back on surface on Venus which would allow scientists to float above the fray like imagine a blimp-like vhecile hovering 30 or some miles above the rolling Venusian landscape just like our airplanes. This will avoid the a little less teperatue affects. It is challenging and hard.
Striving to meet this challenge presented by Venus has value. Even thought
NASA is trying to find the best solution to go on Venus still, we can't forget in past many people have lost their lives and the mission has been unsuccesful. Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 3 |
e9bdad6 | I think you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program because it will feel great to help animals in need. From my experience of being a Seagoing Cowboys felt amazing because I was able to go to Greece and had a cargo filled with 335 horses plus hay and oats to feed them. I had to feed and water them three times a day. Even though it takes a long time to get from place to place, keeping the animals healthy made me feel happy for me and everbody who participated. That's why I think you should participate in this program.
First, If you become a Seagoing Cowboy it could be fun from time to time. When we were still on a cattle-boat trip, I was able to see Europe and China on the way. Another thing that was fun was that one time me and the crew played volleyball and baseball games where the animals had been housed. Other times we would have table-tennis, fecing, and boxing tournaments to help pass the time. So that may be a thing to enjoy while you are a Seagoing Cowboy.
Next, When you are a Seagoing Cowboy it may open up the world to you like it did to me. From my experience, it made me more aware of people and their needs. So after the long adventure, I had lead my family to host a number of international students and echange visitors for many years. This program had mad me become a better person so, I can help people and their needs. I hope you will do the same too.
Then, when you are a Seagoing Cowboy sometimes it can be intersting but, other times it can be painful. One time when I was being a watchman, I had to watch the animals every hour to make sure they didn't wake up. When I went to make my hourly report to the captain, I had slipped on my backside when I went down a slippery ladder. That day I was lucky to be alive because a small strip of metal stopped me from going into the dark Altantic but I couldn't work due to my cracked ribs. I hope when you become a Seagoing Cowboy, you would not make the same mistake that I did.
Finally, from this huge experience of my life, I had enjoyed it for the most part. From the beginning, I started out as a a simple man then become a Seagoing Cowboy. This is why I highly encouraged you to become a Seaboy Cowboy becuase of all the experiences and fun you can have if you join. Sometimes you can have good times and sometimes you can have bad times, but the impotant part is that you are helping out every country in need. Also you are making a difference in the world and in your personality. | 3 |
e9be80d | I think people should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program, because you can have a lot of fun. You will have lots of fun and get to do rodeo on some cows yeha. You can ride those big horses and go really fast.
I went to a program kinda like this before and rode big horses and fished and rode boats. I got to playin the mud and it was funny and felt really weird. I went in swamps and saw some gators but nun in bad. I even got to see my uncle John deer is cow out of the farm. Haha it was so funny . You guys do should go to camps like these there very fun.
You have the best food out there too. Fish, crab, spaghetti , gators, rabbits, squarles, and shrimp. That food is the best food in the world. You can eat anywhere you like. Bring your friends family anyone and enjoy that great food.
Oh almost forgot you can bring your sleeping bags, tint, pillows, blanking, or whatever, because you gone be sleepin in cabin. Don't worry though because it be extra warm in there. I enjoyed the last time I slept in a cabin. I slept a few nights and then one night I heard monster creeping on me and I peed down my leg.
I really think you will want to go to that camp with the Cowboys. It will be really great and you get to ride horses and eat amazing food and sleep in a cabin. If you love to camp and go crazy then this is where you need to come. The Seagoing Cowboys. I gerinte you will have fun. There al;so pools and ponds and stuff that you can have fun in. These people travel for long time at time sol you'll be there for awhile. | 3 |
e9c0c71 | In this essay, I will support my idea that the strange "Face of Mars" is just a natural formation. There is not to much evidence leaning either way, but I feel that it leans more twards being natural. We have not landed and investigated it yet. I have some evidence to support my idea. After reading this essay, I am sure that you will understand my point of view.
I belive that the face of mars is natural. First, It is just a large rock formation that could have just occured naturally. Second, There is no other sign of life on mars. Third, It only resembles a face, it is not perfect. It is still controversial because we cannot examin it face to face. We only have the images that the space shuttles took from 1976 through 2001. Just because it is a formation on a different planet, it doesn't mean it was created by aliens.
When God created the universe, did He say that He created little green men to live on the different planet? No. He said that the only intelligent being, with His breath in our lungs, that he created was use. Although, He did say He created the wonders of this universe. I would call the face a wonder, wouldn't you? God created one planet with the perfect design for life, and that planet is our home Earth. This is why I think that the Face of Mars is just a natural landform, and that there is no life on Mars. | 2 |
e9c55a9 | Dear Florida Senator,
As a citizen, i believe that the Electoral College system isn't a very smart idea. If you think about it, it's pretty unfair to us votes. We live in a country where they say that we have the right to vote. But in reality, with the Electoral College system in play, that right is taken away from us.
Basica lly , when we vote, we don't actually vote for the president himself. We are voting for the slate of electors, in hopes that they vote the way we would like them too. Although is is rare that an electors votes against his own party, it isn't unheard of. That right there is a huge reason why we cant trust this system. We cant control who our electors vote for.
In worst case, there is a tie in the electoral vote and the election is thrown to the House of Representatives, where state delegation vote on the President. Because each state only gets one vote, there would be only one person representing the 500,000 voters in Wyoming, and 1 person representing the 35 people that live in California. This is an unbalanced way to represent each state.
Basically, the Electoral College is unf air to voters. Because of the winner-takes-all system, candidates don't spend much times in the smaller states because they don't count for so many votes. They focus on the larger, "swing states" that will count for more. For example, during the 2000 campaign, there were 17 states that didn't even get the chance to see the candidates at all.
In their defense, the Electoral College does avoids run-off elections. For example, in 1968 Nixon had only a 43 percent plurality of popular votes, but won the electoral vote. There is a lot of pressure when no candidate wins the people vote and this stress is reduced, which produces a clear winner.
All in all, the Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and can't be trusted. People who support it, need a reality check. They don't realize that the system completely disregards their voting rights as a citizen. | 4 |
e9c5831 | "Making Mona Lisa Smile" is about a computer hat can tell our emotions.
Today technology is really big and and has gotten better over the years, they made a computer to read peoples emotions by the way their face looks.
If school had this computor in the class rooms to read when people is confused or happy or sad may be helpful to the teacher. Some people don't like expresing there feelings because they see it as an attion graber. If they had this computor the tacher will know when the person doesn't understand something.
I honestly dont know how good it will work becuse some people can fake like if they understnd things and how they are happy but they really dont or aren't. If Dr. Huang and his college experts think it will work i think we should all give it a try and see how it works. If you arent undertsnding something it will change your paragraph so maybe you will understand so i think it will help alot of people out. | 2 |
e9c5ea9 | The state senator should keep the electoral college and not change it to the election by popular vote for the president of the United States.
Therefore, I agree with what the passage is saying because it says ''The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electors votes is required to elect the President. Your state's entitles allotment of electors equals the nu,ber of memebers in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators.... That to me explains it all because the college votes can vote for multiple things then the people who vote for the popular votes. So, to me they gave a good enough reasonings.
Also, Electoral College votes have a better outcome then the popular votes because in the last election that they have for Obama he received 61.7 precent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 precent of the popular vote cast him anf Romeny. So, electoral college voted have more oppurtunies of more things.
Although, popular votes can come in many ways of being helpful because popular votes can help people win by very littler or more. On my opino i don't consiter them to change to poplaur voted becasue to me its nothing i agree to keeping the electoral college votes .
Finally, but not last what ever you do keep the electoral college votes they know what there doing. | 2 |
e9c7523 | Have you guys ever heard of Sergey Brin? Sergey imagines a time in the future when
no one will buy cars, because we wont need them anymore. Sergey envisions a future with a new way of transportiation system. The car Sergey is working on will be pretty cool, because it doesnt take as much fuel as our taxis today do. This will be a good way to drive when your tired.
I think we should get these car, because
it will stop alot of crashs. Sergey should just make them. They should look the way they do in movies. The google perject that Sergey is coming up with will be cool for the world to see. Maybe it will help us stop the drunk driving.
To me this google project is something the world has been waiting on and we can really use. I hope we get to use these driveless cars. For everyones safety. I hope Sergey really does this project. Its going make it easyer on everyone. | 2 |
e9d29ff | Dear Senator,
On the subject of whether we should keep the Electoral College, I would personally say the it should be kept for a variety of reasons, some of which I will list, and then explain in detail. A few of the reasons are that through the Electoral College there is no room for a run-off election, anyone in the Electoral College is part of congress, and also it's still a majority vote.
In paragraph ten Plumer states that voters sometimes get confused on the elector and who the elector is voting for when making their decision to vote. Now this is not a problem caused by the Electoral College but by people being misinformed whether by ads or through misinterpretation. The nominee that a person wants can still be voted for through a majority vote just through the states representative. Also in paragraph twelve Plumer worries about a tie vote in the electoral college and claims it is his biggest fear. A fear that has never been seen before in our country. There have been a few elctions where the difference was down to only 3-5 thousand but theses are still not ties.
Through the Electoral College candidates who get the electoral vote often have the popular, only the electoral vote exceeds the popular. In the most recent election in 2012 President Obama had a very slight popular vote of 51.3 percent and his electoral vote was 61.7 percent placing him above all other candidates (Paragraph 18). Arguments against the Electoral College about unfair numbers because a smaller state like Wyoming gets 3 whole votes! While Florida only gets 29. The larger states still have more votes than small one just not numbers based in the thousands or millions.
Based on the amount of eligible voters in the U.S that voted -roughly 1/2- those who vote for an elector are voting for the elector of that most represents how they feel the election should go. Finally the Electoral College avoids the dispute when neither of the top candidates recieve a popular vote, such as Nixon and Clinton in 1968 and 1992. (Paragraph 22) Both of them only received a 43 persent vote but still won through 301 and 370 electoral votes.
In conclusion I, as stated before, do not believe that the Electoral College should be removed or altered, though I can see why some may feel that way.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
e9d46e3 | Driverless cars are not in the best interest for humans. People like to be in control. Men and women won't want to give up their freedom of driving their own vehicles. The feeling of being proud to drive yourself around will over power the easiness of having a car, just drive you.
Driverless cars are not even close to being ready, some can only go up to 25 mph. With highways and freeways a 25 mph car serves no purpose. The article states, "... but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel. If you have to hold on to the wheel, then you might as well drive yourself.
Now, with the popularity of driverless cars growning, some states have outloud the driverless cars. "In most states it is illegal to even test computer-driven cars." Being able to drive from state to state is a great privilage in the United States. Having a driverless car would only be good for a state that aloud it. Vacations across the Us would become much more difficult, if you weren't even aloud to "drive" your own car.
Finally, Computers have been gettign hacked sense the first one was invented. A hacker hacks it, the computer malfunctions and all files are erased or it acts on terms that you can not control. Driverless vechicles run on a computer based system. It only takes one terrorist or criminal to figure out how to hack it and crashes could occur within a push of a button. But, these cars could be useful to get a good nap in, or rest so someone isn't tired and driving. They could also help out with drunk driving. The only problem is, that there are to many difficulties that come with these new products and they will never be in the peoples good interest if they are not solved.
Driverless cars are the things of the FUTURE. Right now in present time they are to difficult to make, and dangers within their processing are not correctly set up. Driverless cars would cause a negative impact in our society. | 4 |
e9d4e22 | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author is suggesting that, despite its dangers, the planet Venus is worth putting time and resources towards learning more about the planet itself.
The auothor brings up many points on why it is so difficult to explore the planet. As the author stated in paragraph two, "no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours". This can already be discouraging to some people, but others might think something is wrong with the technology we put there. In paragraph three we really start to see why the planet is so dangerous, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we eperience on our own planet. [...] Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface". At this point it sounds impossible to even be able to study Venus. Really, why would we want to study Venus? In paragraph four the author explains this, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. [...] The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters".
So we know that the surface of the planet has some of the harshest conditions and that the atmosphere is filled with acid, but the planet is similar to earth in structure. How would we be able to get to it and study it? In paragraph five the author begins to explain some ideas NASA has for being able to study Venus, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. [...] At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans". The important thing about this quote is that humans could survive in this blimp-like vehicle. However, if this were to happen scientists still would not be able to collect samples from Venus, they would just be able to observe it. The author also explains some electronics and machines NASA is looking into in paragraph seven, "some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. [...] mechanical computers [...] these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all." These two ideas could be very useful for learning about Venus. The first one made of silicon carbide has already been able to survive for three weeks in similar conditions to Venus, and could be very important for landing on Venus. The author also brought up mechanical computers. The computers don't require electronics, as they said, and can much less fragile than modern computers. These could allow for some intersting ways to learn about Venus.
The author explained the dangers of Venus and why no mission has been very succesful. They also explained ideas for future missions that could possibly involves sending humans. I like the ideas they have, but I do not think the solutions are quite ready for humans to go to Venus. I am very excited to see where this goes and what new ideas scientists come up with. | 5 |
e9d79df | Think back to the day you got your license. The thrill of being able to drive and knowing how much more independce you would have. You want your kids to enjoy that experience too, right? Well what if that all went away because of driverless cars. I am against driverless cars because, driving helps you learn responsibility, the technology could fail or malfunction, and liablity arguments would arise.
When teens learn to drive they are given the rules and regualations. Remembering these rules and following them is their responsibility. With driverless cars the drivers or people in the drivers seat would have less responsibilty because they do not have to do as much work. In the article it says that the driverless cars can steer, accelerate, and break themselves. Since the driver has to do less they may not always pay attention becuase they would think it is the cars job to handle the driving. Carless drivers would make people more lacidazicle about driving. Driving teaches people to be responsible, without this how will we instill responsiblity into the people on our roads?
In todays society new technologies come out everyday. However, we know how frusterating technology can be if it doesn't work. If our Iphone or laptop glitches it usually isn't a big deal. It can be fixed in an instant, maybe even by yourself. But what could the consequences be if a driverless car glitches? While you are driving you don't really have a minute to google how to fix your car like you can do with an Ipad. Just like any new technology a driverless car could have malfunctions, but these malfunctions could but peoples lifes at risks. People may say that even today with people driving cars that there can be glitches in cars. However, since real people are driving the cars they can evaluate the situation and control the car.
If the driverless car does fail whose fault is it? The "driver" or the manufacturer? This question will definetly come up if driverless cars come into our society. If you get in a crash, but weren't in control of the car, how can you be blamed? This problem could to lead to new laws, many court cases, and law suits.
Driving is a right of passage for teens today. Driverless cars, while could make life easier, would just bring more problems and arguments into our already technology filled lives. Driverless cars should not be legal because driving teaches responsibilty, the technology could fail, and cause arguments over liability. | 5 |
e9dc2b4 | Driverless cars are more of a reality than we think. With all of the new technologies advances in cars, driverless cars aren't just a dream anymore. Although driverless cars can be beneficial, there are just too many risks and consequences for them to be assist with everyday life in a positive way.
Technology is one of the greatest risks with driverless cars. Once driverless cars are available to the public, there are many things that could go wrong. Fluxes in weather could cause major issues within the driverless cars that would have very expensive repairs. Remodeling streets to incorporate driverless cars would be "simply too expensive to be practical" [3]. Car thiefs now only have to hack into cars to steal them. If the technology within the car fails, are all of the passengers stranded? Malfunctions can also cause accidents killing passengers and pedestrians nearby.
The next question is, "if technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver of the manufacturer?" [9]. There will be countless driverless car court cases to decide if the passengers were at fault, or if the technology was to blame. There are more serious court cases to deal with than a surplus of citizens verus technology. Also with their steady supply of resources such as good lawyers, companies have a solid chance at winning majority of these cases and not having to own up to their mistakes. As a result of this, innocent citizens now have to pay these have fees that could ruin their lives.
On paper, driverless cars seem like a great idea, but in reality they could cause many horrible effects. Technology advances on cars that will help with safety are always beneficial, but having a car driver by itself could be harmful. | 4 |
e9e1f6a | The Facial Action Coding System would have value if used in a classroom. Not only would it benifit the teachers, but it would also benifit the students as well. The Facial Action Coding System in a classroom would have positive effects.
Applications of the FACS within a classroom are varied and vast. Just one use of FACS would be a survey. The student or teacher could be shown a video of controversial topics while the FACS would scan them. You would already know their thoughts about it without even asking them. If you wanted to perform a group survey, you could see the difference in their emotions when surrounded by friends and when not. And if the FACS wasn't fully tested, you could survey people and then compare the answers of the FACS and of the person. And even if none of the FACS surveys worked, there is still a chance that the survey subjects could learn more about human emotion. Even the world as a whole could gain from the FACS and learn more about human emotions.
The Facial Action Coding System could also be used on a much broader term. It could be used for online internet use as well. Virtual Reality could be integrated with FACS to create a more accurate representation of a person's face. Not only would that be amazing by itself, but it could also get humanity closer to full-body VR.
The FACS could help students and teachers realize their own emotions better about simple things like homework, or even eachother. A student could be playing an educational game to learn a new language. The student is trying his best, but the question is too hard for him. The camera would see this in his face, and change the difficulty of the question.
Although there are potential flaws with using the FACS technology, the positives completely outweigh the negatives. One potential flaw is that we could end up relying too much on the FACS tech and eventually won't be able to see human emotion by ourselves. This isn't a problem though. If we don't use the technology out of laziness, we will retain our social abilities, like empathy.
If we could have FACS technology integrated into classrooms, the positive possibilities that could open up would be so benificial for mankind, the internet, other students, parents, and even teachers. | 4 |
e9ed658 | Driverless cars in my opinion wouldn't with the people I know in my community. This is because it would take away from the the experience of being behind the wheel of a vehical. Yes driverless cars might be safer but why should they be forced to lose something that is enjoyedable to most individuals. If states just worked as hard on enforcing and finding new ways on keeping the roads safe we could avoid the dangers of human driven cars and they could still have their experience.
Personally, I could see driverless cars as a great oppurtunity to look into because it can keep the roads safe and the person behind the wheel can do whatever they would like. Therefore they should be ready to take over at anytime. I also like this idea because the passage stated that driverless cars would take half the fuel of today's taxis. There are many positives to this but I question how well the car would be able to keep the driver awake. The passage said that the car would be watching the driver to make sure they're aware but I'm afraid that some people may fall asleep not be easily awaken. Another concern I would be afraid to get into a car that relies on so much more technology. Any of the sensors cameras could mess up or even the warning displays could go wrong. This would be a big issue for me. With those concerns i also have plenty of positives with this new idea.
The passage says that they'll have to interpret the driving fun in a new way. I think that is a wonderful thought and could possibly keep someone aware if they're into the process of being in a driverless car. Most people today love to text and multitask in the car and that can be a problem in cars which are driven only by humans. But in this case of a intergrated process would give them that option of being on devices and doing other activities becuase it would help them stay awake and could be able to take over quickly. If they find a way to make it fun and find a way to make it a enjoyable experince i think most people will be into the safer and more effiecent taxi. Overall I think this is a great idea and could possiblly be the key to keeping people safe on the roads. | 3 |
e9f6b71 | Movies have been fascinated by the idea of cars that drive themselves. We are now closer to making this dream a reality. Google is working on a self driving car as well as other comanies. Self driving cars have many benefits not only to us but to the environment.
Google in 2009 made a car that could drive by itself, but only specific conditions. In the ariticle "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it says that "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far Google cars aren't truly driverless." Although these cars can drive more than half a million miles
; it can't pull in or out of driveways or deal with taffic issues. It alerts the driver when the driver should take control of the car.
These cars would not only drive themselves and make our safety better, but it also brings benefits for the environment and budget. In paragraph two in the article it says that " The car he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus. He believes such cars would fundamentally change the world." If the car uses half the fuel a taxi does then that would be less fuel being burned and damaging our environment. Not only does it help the environment but also our budget. We would not have to pay as much money for fuel as we do for cars we have now.
Although these cars sound amazing there are negative aspects to these cars. These cars can't drive through complicated traffic issues. The car would not be able to deal with traffic issues, go through roadwork or accidents. The car would give the person in the car the control of the car and if that person is not paying attencion then an accident could happen. Some states believe that the only save car is the car driven by a human. A driverless car is a new form of technology and like all technology this could have a maufunction.
Cars that drive themselves sound great and could be really useful in the future, but we must not forget that not everything is perfect. The car provides many benefits like less fuel or engine power. This new car could be a great inovation but also a danger to out safety. | 3 |
e9fd355 | The development for these cars would not be worth it. When Sergey Brin envisioned the driverless car, transportation around the world would change dramatically, if the driverless cars even work. The development for these cars are terrible for the world. Some reasons that the driverless car would not be worth the money to make include safety, why need a driver and a fault for the accidents.
The text states, "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" This text states that drivers would not want to just sit in the driver's seat while the car is driving for them. This also states that the driverless car can not be safe without a driver at hand.
Another reason why driverless cars would not be good would be, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." This text concludes that driverless cars are not safe at all because it needs a human driver at all times. This also states that safety is a big concern for these driverless cars and in most states, test driving computer-driven cars is illegal.
Another reason why driverless cars are terrible would be, "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 though work zones and around accidents." This text reveals that the driverless cars can be useful until it is not. What is the whole purpose of a driverless car if the car still needs a human to drive? The driverless car is pointless when the car is called a "driverless" car yet it can not do things by itself and needs a human who can just drive the car themselves.
Finally, the last reason for driverless cars being a bad idea would be, "Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" This text shows that even if the world changes to driverless cars, new laws would have to be produced. It also shows questions regarding when and if the driverless car gets into an accident, who is to blame: the person in the car, the car or the people who make the car?
Reasons against the development of these cars are what are the use of driver's license if people will not get to drive, the safety issues of the driverless cars and having to be in the car to only watch the road. No one is going to need to get driver's license if the driverless cars are coming because the people will not need to know how to drive. The safety issues of the driverless cars are questionable because the humans in the car can not control what happens with the car. People will not enjoy sitting in the car to watch out for roadblocks on the road because the people would get tired of it.
The driverless cars would cause tons of problems. When the driverless car gets into an accident, who is to blame for it? These reasons should make people believe that they should not be the person to blame because it was not their fault. The human driver did not create a faulty product. The conclusion is driverless cars are a waste of money since it will still need a human to help drive. | 4 |
e9fd6d0 | Although we rely on cars as a primary means of transportation for our busy lives there are many advantages to not using as much or even having them at all. Now driving in a car is very useful. It gets us where we want to go much faster than just biking or walking there. But there are many benefits and advantages to a world without cars. One advantage is that there will be less polution in the world. Another is that people will be just a little less lazy. And even more is that the world may be just a little quieter and safer with the lack of cars.
Thousands and thousands of people today are either driving a car or some other motorized means of transportation. And though yes they do provide a fasts way to get around, they give off so much exhaust into our relativly clean air and pollute it that its almost toxic to breathe in some places. In the article "Paris bans driving due to smog" it says that "After days or near-record polution, Paris enforced a patial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Cars polluted the air so badly that in some places people completly banned them all together just to rid their air of the filth that the cars had created.
Many people in the world today have gotten lazier and cars have helped them get this way. Rather than ride a bike to their destination or even walk people decide to be lazy. They drive their car there or take a bus or taxi. But if people have to get up and walk to their destination rather than just walk to their cars it will make the world just a little bit better of a place to live. There may even be less stress in the world. No waiting in traffic and no yelling at others when they cut you off or drive too slow. The only problem or stress you may have to worry about is the crowd of people you may be walking with.
Now yet another advantage to a life without cars is that it will be quieter and safer. There won't be any honking of horns in your ears. There will not be any more roars of engines. No more yelling at other drivers for their "lack of skill" at driving. The world will be safer as well. No more people getting hit by cars while walking and no more car accidents. No more police car chases that put innocent civilians in danger of getting hit.
There are many advantages in life with no cars. A world without cars is less polluted. A world without cars is less stressfull. and it makes the world quieter and much safer. Cars are a basic part of life and we have grown used to them but the world may be a little better if they were no longer here. | 4 |
ea0d62c | There are many challenges stated in the article about exploring Venus. In the next paragraph I will write a claim on how well the author supports the idea of studying Venus being a worthy pursuit despite the dangers and an explanation of the evidence to my claim.
In my opinion, I think that the author didn't do a very good job on explaining the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because the author didn't give much evidence that it is about the pursuit being worthy. In the article the author explains a lot about the challenges of exploring Venus like the extremely hot temperatures and the "thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide," but doesn't explain very much about it being a worthy pursuit. The most that is talked about it being a worthy pursuit is getting insight on the planet like getting samples of the sediment on the surface of Venus and possibly getting the history of the Earth-like planet that is in our solar system.
In conclusion, I think that the author did not have very many good explanations for studying Venus on being worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 2 |
ea134d7 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the author prevents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I believe in my own opinion that there should be driverless cars. There are many ways that these cars can help us people in our daily lifes. Here are three things that I think these cars can help us for talking/texting while driving, falling a sleep while dirivng, and preventing less car accidents while driving. Having these cars would be a huge help for people.
Firstly, we should driverless cars for talking/texting. With this car people can take all the time to check there phone when they need to. Most people while driving text or talk on their phone for either because something has happened to somebody close to them or because they have seen somthing that has gotten their attention. For example while someboddy is driving if somebody is texting and they're at a stop sign and someone is behind them the car could move itsself so that the driver behinfd them woudn't have to be waiting for long. This could also help prevent less accidents.
Secondly, we should have drverless cars for falling sleep. Many people fall asleep while driving a lot. This cause of this happening for people who don't get enough sleep at night. Or possibly someone could be on a roadtrip driving and this driver could have been driving for many hours this drverless car could come in handy for this situation. Letting the driverget some rest and letting the car driver for he or she. Falling asleep while driving is very common for accidents. Also, this is very scary for the driver who is driving and for those other drivers who are also on the road.
Lastly, we should have this driverless car so that he could help lower the death rate of preventing car accidents. With this car it could help save many lives. Having a car that can drive for you if your eating or even doing something that you probably shouldn't be doing is helpful. Having a car that could help you you with getting around things that you think you can't do is a help. What I mean by that is saying that you have to pull in or pull out out of a parking space.
In conclusion, we should really consider having a driverless vehicle. Having this as an option is very cool like can you imagine having your car drive on its own? If I were to get a car I would for sure get a driverless car just so I could text on my phone. With this car it could help people with their life, their everyday life, and for the community. I believe and think that everyone should consider getting a driverless car or even at least think about having one in the near future. | 4 |
ea14ad6 | Why do I think that the Face on Mars was not created by aliens? I think that ,because on April 5, 1998 Mars Orbiter Camera team took a picture of the Face on Mars ten times sharper than the orginal picture in 1976 by the Viking. My second reason why I don't believe that aliens created the Face on Mars, is becase on April 8, 2001 Malin's team took a picture of the Face on Mars. Not only is believing that the Face on Mars was created by aliens is illogical, but many pictures have been taken, there is still not a single sign of aliens.
My first reason why I don't think the aliens created the Face on Mars is because the MOC team snapped a photo of the Face on Mars ten times sharper, so you could see more clearly. You could see clearer than the orginal Viking photos. When the web surfers saw the picture, all they could see was a natural landform. Not any sign of aliens. My piont is that the clearer the pictue gets, the less it reveals that aliens created the Face on Mars.
According to the article ''Unmasking the Face on Mars'', "Malins team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution.'' Garvin told them. Compared to the 1976 photo taken by the Viking, the newer camera spans 1.56 meters for each pixel. This camera allows you to discern objects in a digital image three times bigger than the pixel size. Garvin told the author of ''Unmasking the Face on Mars.'' People who believe that aliens created the Face on Mars can not argue that it was cloudy in that picture for it was taken in the summer, unlike the previous picture. The picture that Malin's team took had no signs of aliens.
My last reason as why not aliens did not create the Face on Mars is because it's illogical. Using common sense you should be abe to see in all of these pictures that there is no sign of aliens. Photo after Phote prove that aliens did not create the Face on Mars.
All three of these reasons are why I don't think aliens created the Face on Mars. I believe that it's just natural landform. | 4 |
ea158b1 | A classroom with the use of this technology would be a classroom of supieriority. This new techonology could greatly improve students´ abilities to learn. Often students are protrayed as being happy or content during a lesson, but really, they are confused. The FACS, Facial Action Cosing System, is an advanced piece technology that can help students with their school work and can be very valuable in the classroom.
The FACS is a computer coding system that allows computers to be able to read the facial expressions of humans. According to the passage, the process in which the computer recognizes the feelings of a human begins when the computer constructs a 3-D model of the face. Each and every muscle movement of the face can detect the exact emotions of any person. For example, the zygomatic major, a muscle that begins at the cheek bones, lift the corners of the mouth when someone is genuinly happy. The FACS system is incredible at calculating any person's emotions and can cause the computer to adapt to anyone's liking.
It is not unusual for a student to "fake" their way through a lesson just to make it seem like they are "okay" when really they are misunderstanding everything that is being taught. According to the passage, this new techonology system is able to recognize the facial expressions of students as they work through an assignment on the computer. It interprets if the student is understanding the material or not. Through a slight frowny face or a confused face, the computer can tell that the student is not able to comprehend what is going on. In return, the computer program may change the lesson to make it slightly easier on the student until it detects a content face. This face will trigger the computer so that it is able to recognize that the student is now understanding the lesson. The program can act as an individual instructor for each student in order for the student to meet their needs.
From this technology, the student will not only have an advantage, but the teacher will as well. Instead of individually tying to speak to kids if they need help, the computer can do it for them. Sometimes, it can get tough and frustrating for a teacher to try to meet the needs of each unique student. With the help of the technology, students can obtain their specific needs on their own. This will relieve a great deal of stress that teachers may carry on their shoulders, and would be very beneficial towards them.
The FACS is a valuable piece of technology that can assist many in the classroom. Lessons will be adapted to meet the students needs when they are confused, becasue the facial recognition program will pick up on their moods. Also, teachers will no longer need to try to teach the lesson several different ways for each different student to understand it. This program greatly advances the students´ learning and acts as a helping hand for teachers. | 5 |
ea16a1a | Why they invent Facial Action Coding System? Well in my personal opinion this is a good experiment for student, family, etc, because sometimes people do not want show they emotions or feeling, for example: If a girl of school that has depression or personal problems and she do not want talk abaut that with her teacher or consuler and this girl is thinking in kill herself, if the school have the Facial Action Coding System the professor can save her life, that a great experiment, but one thing is all school can't have it because are expense so this experiment can't help to all students or families that need.
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto, the Dr. Huang says "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal" he is trying to said that they experiment is not just for people, he is says that is universal so that mean is for all that have face or that the Facial Action Cording System can read emotions for example:The Facial Action can read the Renaissance painting, Mona Lisa.
In conclusion the
Facial Action Coding System is a veryy good option for school they can saves lifes, and evit masacres of students with that Facial Action and be a major country. | 2 |
ea1734a | The Face in the picture was not created by aliens but just a natural landform. Tons of people believe it was created by aliens. In some ways I guess it could look like it was created by them. But in the end it was just a natural landform. A great deal of scientists strongly believe that it was not an alien.
An enormous head nearly two miles end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia. Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa when they saw the photo. But common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Even though few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact, capturing Cydonia in pictures became a priority for NASA when Mars Global Surveyor arrived at the Red Planet. Oodles of people started paying more attention to this story once it got out there.
Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. What the picture really shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. There are so many facts and details to show it actually was just a face and not aliens. My conclusion is that I believe it was just a natural landform rather then aliens. | 2 |
ea18a54 | Many have claimed that the human face found on Mars is an alien artifact, but how certain are they. According to NASA, the Face on Mars is just a rock formation that resembles the face of a human, but others may disagree. I believe that the Face found on Mars is just a natural landform. To further investiate this topic, we will begin by analyzing how the Face was formed and how it compares to lanforms on Earth, where it was located, and what causes others to believe that it is an alien artifact.
Some might believe that the so called "alien artifact" was lefted behind by aliens, but NASA unveiled an image of the Face and this is what they came up with. According to the caption of the image, it noted a "huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, annd mouth." This image was even compared to natural landforms found on Earth. According to the passage, the picture portrays the "Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American West. The passage also claims that the image reminds him of the "Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," and that the Face on Mars is about he same height of an isolated mesa- which is a landform.
The Face on Mars was located at 41 degress north martian latitude during the winter of April 1998. This time of the year was also considered to be the cloudiest time of year on the Red Planet. The fact that this image was found during the cloudiest time of year on Mars can affect the turn out of this theory. A few scientists believed that the Face was an alien artifact, and photographing the Cydonia became one of the biggest priorities for NASA. As soon as the Viking mission was ended, the chief scientist of NASA's Mars Exploration Program stated that they "photographed the Face as soon as they could get a good shot at it." I believe they did this to clarify their foundings.
As stated before, many people, including scientists, believe that the Face on Mars is an alien artifact and here are their reasons why. As the photo of the Face on Mars was being taken, it was claimed that the "camera on board MGS had to peer through the wispy clouds to see the Face," and according to skeptics, "alien markings were hidden by haze." This did not stop mission controllers, and they prepared to look again. Garvin states that " It's not easy to target Cydonia," and that its hardwork. Conspiracy theorists believe that the Face is "bona-fide evidence of life on Mars- evidence that NASA would rather hide." Now this may all sound convincing, but it was also added that you can discern things in digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size, causing false illusions.
In conlusion, after analyizing the data and research given, I believe that the Face on Mars is just a natural landform. Others may disagree, but it is all about your interprutation on the topic, and hopefully the evidence used to support my claims did just that. | 4 |
ea1b3ad | Have you ever wondered what life today would be like if insted of driving a car you walked or took transits? So People believe that if people in citys drove cars less and walked or biked more that it would drasticly lower the amount of greenhouse gases in the air.
Some citys are setting examples of less use of cars and more walking have lowered polution. Paris, France for example had issued a new lay stating that on certain day people with even-numbered licence plates were not permited to drive a car and vic versa. Studys have shown that The smog levels in the city (which are usualy high) was lower than usual. Some people were angry whit this law and drove anyways, but anyone caught had to pay a 22-euro fine ($31). Some people also said that it's not the regular gasoline cars that were causing all the smog, it was the big diesel trucks. 67 percent of vehicles in france do use diesel fuel, but the normal gasoline car still contribute enought to be put off the streets.
Another city that is also trying to get cars off the street is BOGOTA, Colombia. They started an new event called They days without cars campaign. The reason for this was to lower the amount of smog and occational dark grey clouds that droped acid rain. The effect of this campaign has spread to nearby citys in the region. The campaign has been in effect since the 1990s. parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city and rush-hour restrictions have dramaticly cut traffic.
President Obama abitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emmissions have been set, but americans are lowering the use of car by themselves. Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as the year goes by. Most studys have show one of the main reasons for this decline is because cashed-strapped Americans cant affored new car, and the unemplyed were't going to work anyway.
These are just a few ways people are lowering the use of fossile fuels. By setting up these campaigns, the use of fossile fuels will be greatly reduced | 2 |
ea1e99d | Driverless cars are in theory is a good idea, but when put to the test with real humans inside of them they are far too dangerours and not practical. With no one driving the car, only relying on senors, there is way too many possiblities to injury wether it is the riders or pedestrians. The smart cars would be too expensive for the average american and just not realistic.
In the article, Driverless Cars Are Coming it states that "Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009" What are the specific conditions? Certainly not in a hard rain or heavy snowfall. In real life situations no one watching the road is a huge risk, anything could happen that a senor could not detect. People should not trust a senor to carry their family to their destination, wether it is ten mintues away or an hour.
Who would be at fault if in an accident a driverless car hit another cart that did have a driver in it? With a driverless car the driver would get bored, doze off or spend time on his/her cell phone. With a distracted driver the likelihood of an accident increases dramaticly. The driver presuming that no accidetns will occur would look away from the road, but when a car B pulls out unexpectidly infront of it whose fault would it be? The manufacturer? The driver in the driverless car? Or the driver in car B?
Puting ones' self or ones' family in that kinda of danger is really testing their luck. Smart cars that can drive themselves would be extremly expensive. Brands like Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan are already in the hundrend-thousand dollar range. A car like is is not practical to the everyday person.
Those who ride in driverless car are put in more danger than those who ride along with a driver. Driverless cars are likely to cause more accident, especially because the car is not seeing what is going on infront of it. The car will not be able to notice black ice, a heavily trafficed area, road construction or know exactly when to use the brake if an accident were to occur infront of it. These types of cars are way too expensive, not realistic and not as safe as they seem to be. | 3 |
ea2449f | Dear State Senator,
The one word used throughout this whole article ; catastrophic, which is whats best used to describe the electoral college. The United States of America, born and based off of popular soverignty, should be just that ; decided by the people. The electoral college has only been a hindrance since its arrival, confusing American Citizens left and right, becoming an issue to voters/interested future voters, and disallowing a fair chance of a voters vote to be of importance in their state, and to their country. The electoral college should be disbanded and reiterized by popular vote because of TWO main reasons:it does
NOT
allow for a simple method of voting, and it does
NOT
allow for every vote, and voice to be heard in the United States presidency election, tarnishing this countrys' right of democracy, causing outrages all over the country.
To initialize this one-sided argument, lets begin with an important factor that the electoral college cannot be trusted on achieving, the fact that every vote counts. With over 300 million people now in the United States, under a unified country that promotes and exemplifies democracy, we have not been democratic in the sense that peoples vote doesnt even go to their president, only to another mind that can cast you away as if you were not important. As stated in Par. 7 Source 1 an article by the Office of the Federal Register "Most states have a winner-take-all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate." These are the minds that are sometimes chosen at random, or by other factors to represent you, a choice you werent allowed to make. The winner takes all method only takes away from states like Texas and California who know their vote doesnt matter because these people will always agree on democratic or republican, and what is currently used in our society. This damages thousands of voices, thousands of votes that could have matter, but seemingly don't. Just like how schools have implemented the 'No Child Left Behind' policy, we should transcribe this to leaving no american citizen without a voice, only dependant on what state their in.
Theories on how a single vote doesn't matter have been given, as stated in Par. 23 Source 3 by Richard A. posner "Voters in the presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election.", who also comes to contradict themselves originally with "Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43% Percent plurality". In that instance, that one vote could've made a HUGE difference on our future. On top of that, so many voices in states that arent swing states (States that could go democratic or republican, and aren't fixated on only 1 party) that have been silenced could add up to be a tremendous amount of 'single votes', changing this nations history drastically.
Furthermore onto this argument ; one thing is known as a world wide factor that applies to almost everything that we do. Simpler, is better. If you take your precious time and read all Par. 1-8 in Source 1, what you will gather, is that an extremely over-afflictionated method is used when determining our next president. Step by step instructions on selecting, choosing, voting, controling, and nevermind the problems it has already caused from the confusion of all these instructions. Something that can be fixed easily by one thing: overriding, fixing, and changing our way to popular vote. This would furthermore simplify our country way of voting, attracting more voters, and overall satisfying many people.
Some have also stated that this is necessary to providing a more organized form of voting. Key knowledge that must be analyzed is that: just because a service is organized, does NOT mean its correct. Referencing to Par. 11 Source 2 Bradford Plumer describes on how "The American People should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election in a century; the system allows for much worse." and "that those elctors could always defy the will of the people." in Par. 9 "according to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after Al-Gore-Thanks to the quirks of the electoral college-won the popular vote but lost the presidency." Many problems that would not ocurr if our way of voting were to be simplified into popular vote.
To summarize, and simplify (what should be done with our voting ways) this letter to you, we should remove the electoral college overall and implement the popular voting, to which our country is based off of. This is the most profound way of fixing the problems that we face: the unsimplicity known as our current voting ways, and the restablishment of our original, and hopefully still true government of Democracy, and Popular Soveriegnty. | 5 |
ea25116 | Venus is worth pursuiting despite the dangers it can present. Venus is the closets planet to earth in idensity and size and occasionally the closest in distance too.
First, some people often referre Venus as Earth's twin."Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth."(paragraph 4). NASA and scientist would want to pursuit Venus. Venus could have been like Earth long ago.
Second, Venus has some appereances like Earth."The planet has surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters."(paragraph 4). Venus could become like Earth again in the future.
Lastly, Venus has the same elements but higher."A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere."(paragraph 3). Having the same elements would want scientist and NASA to explore Venus
Venus is worth pursiuting despite the dangers. If Venus is similar to Earth, Scientist and NASA would do anything and come up with something to try and be able to explore Venus. | 2 |
ea25d94 | In Making Mona Lisa Smile, the author describes a new way technology could identify human emotions. This new technology is called the Facial Action Coding System, it can tell what emotions people have by scanning their faces. In this article he states that this could be applied to classrooms. I do not think this is a good idea in the sense that they are spying on kids and adjusting to how they feel.
One of the main reasons I do not think this is a good idea is because it would not make any sense. You would spend a bunch of money on something that would not really help kids out that much. We have programs for kids like that who are slower at learning than others. When he says that kids are going to get bored and it will change the lesson, but he does not know that kids are going to get bored of school no matter what.
I think that it would be wrong to have this in classrooms because they would be in-effective. I think that it would be in-effective because they would not care about it in the first place, or they would wait for something they know and could use to their advantage. Some kids would wait for it to change if they do not know the answer or do not know the lesson, so they would be able to get it done.
One thing that this could be used for is it to help out countries to figure out what other nation leaders and enimies are thinking, or how they are feeling. It is a nice program but I think it will not work for in-school applications. I think it would get in the way of kids learning. The system is actually pretty cool but I do not think that it should be used in education. | 3 |
ea26dc4 | I belive that they should change the elections to elections by popular vote for the president of the United States.
The electoral College consists of 530 electors, tey choose the president by a vote in congress or "qualified" citizens. A majoriy of 270 electoral votes are required to elect a president, therefore in my opinion a popula vote would have mor meaning, beacause it's more people the vote would be chosen fr the mayority making the rest of the people satisfied. The number of citizens all togete versus the number of the electors at the Electoral College is superior; the people are te ones that follow the law might as well let them choose he president thats going to run the country and establish laws.
The electoral college system prevents us from voting for the presidet directly, instead they make us vote for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the pesident. For example if you were to live in Texas and wanted to vote for a president you'd have to vote for a slate of 34 elector of that political party that are pleged to him or her, on the off-chance that those electors won the statewide elections. The electors get picked at state conventions, the states party's central committee and sometimes the presidential candidates themselves. Also electos can be anyone not holding public office.
Furthermore the best argument against the electoral college is the disaster factor. Americans should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 disaster was he biggest crisis in elections that century since the system allows much worse. Consider the fact that the state legislatures are in a way responsible for piking electors and those elector could defy the will of the people back in 1960; what tells you that they stopped doing it?
The electoral college system has a lo of flaws and they can choose if they want o do what the peopl think is best or just take mater into their own hands and do as they plese.
In conclution its very clear that they should get rid of the electoral college and just let the peopl vote directly fo the president. That would cause less drama and would prevent fiascos in the elections. | 3 |
ea31ba3 | Driverless cars are an important imporovement in technology that will make commuting easier for everyone. Driverless cars will be safer than human drivers. Making driverless cars will create more jobs. Creating driverless cars could lead to other advances in technology. Driverless cars should be created and allowed on American roads.
Driverless cars will be safer than human drivers. They are not capable of getting distracted and causing an accident like humans do. They will be constantly aware of their surroundings. They will also eliminate human error, such as not stopping quick enough or running a stop sign, and will have a better reaction time than a human. Their better reaction time will allow them to stop quicker than a human would and cause less accidents. They will also have technology to make driving safer, such as a spinning sensor on the roof which forms a 3-D moldel of the car's surroundings, which the typical car does not have. Driverless cars will also eliminate drivers driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or otherwise not able to drive safely, and save more lives. They will allow people who are afraid to drive a car a chance to drive because the car will be driving for them.
Driverless cars will create more jobs. There will be people needed to run the machines that create these cars. There will also be people needed to make the technology it needs. Engineers and scientists will have to be constantly working to make sure all the technology works as it is supposed to and does not need to be improved. The jobs the driverless car creates will improve the economy.
Improvements in the driverless car could lead to other scientific advancements in this field. Scientists could learn from making this car and apply that knowledge to creating other inventions. Driverless cars could lead to using the technology they built for the driverless car in other inventions. Scientific improvements always build off of eachother.
The driverless car will be a great thing to have on the roads of America. Driverless cars will make the roads safer. They will create more jobs which will improve our economy. The advancements scientists make while creating the driverless car could lead to new inventions. The driverless car should be created and allowed in the United States. | 4 |
ea37dc6 | The author suggets that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Venus may have once been the most Earth-like planet, NASA wants to know more about the surface, and it willl give us a reason for new technology innovations.
Astronomers believe that Venus may once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" article it states in paragraph 4, "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." Venus is known to have a rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters.
NASA came up with an idea for sending humans to Venus since all previous missions were unmanned. No spaceship has survived the landing for more than a few hours. NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. In paragraph 5 it states, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." When the scientists are floating about the fray thirty-plus miles about the surface, the temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. NASA says, "Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." If NASA's idea succeeds we could send scientists up there to float above the fray.
Not only is NASA working on the idea of floating about the fray, NASA is testing some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide that stimulates the chaos of Venus's surface and has lasted for three weeks in such conditions. NASA is also testing mechanical computers that played an important role during World War ll. In paragraph 7 is states, "These deviced make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all." Modern computers are powerful flexible, and quick, but tend to be more deilcate when it come the the extreme physical conditons like Venus' surface.
Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despte the dangers it presents. Studying Venus will give us more information about the once most Earth-like planet in our solar system, we will find out more about the extreme surface conditions, and will provide us with many technology innovations and advancements. | 4 |
ea3d2d2 | I think that the author did very well at explaining about venus and its worthy pursuit despite the danger. one of venus dangers is that it was 800 degrees fahrenheit which is so hot that if a cellphone was out on the planet it would melt and anything with tin can melt. And the atmospheric pressure there is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. these conditions are far more extrem than anything we have encountered on earth. Its so hot out there that it would liquefy most metals. fun fact is that venus has the hottest surface temperature of any other planet in our solar system even though its no the closest to the sun its still the hottest. Venus has erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeling to land on its surface. i know your thinking why would people wanna go there, well its because a long time ago scientist think that venus used to be like earth just with alot more water butit was capable to form life there. venus still has some features similer to ones on earth like a surface of rocky sediments and valleys, mountains, and craters. So I think that the author did a very good job at explaining his ideas about venus | 2 |
ea3f4cc | Venus is the second planet from our sun. Sometimes called the "evening star", It can be referred to
as Earth's twin. Venus has been proved a very challenging place to examine.And there are many reasons listed for Venus being an explorable planet.
The author suggest that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the the dangers it represents because Venus has many features that are interesting. There are many reason why people still go and
explore venus. One of the reason why people are exploring venus is curiosity. Curiosity because we want to know what's happening in Venus. Us, Human are brave, we
love to explore new things. There might be one braver than another but at the end we are all brave. We all take risks everyday.
Another reason why people would explore Venus is because it was once the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus probably had oceans and supported some of the various form of life, just like Earth. Even today, Venus might still have some features that are alike to those on Earth. This would be a good reason why Astronomers are fascinated by the exploration of Venus.
Although venus is one of the planet that is not safe to Human. NASA is still willing to explore Venus. Venus is one of the interesting planet that has features related to some of the features on earth. | 2 |
ea429da | I am arguing to change the ways of the Electoral College vote. I think the popular vote is a great way for us to express our own opinions. where as on the other hand there is only a small group deciding, which isnt fair, we should have our own say too. Afterall, he is going to be our president not just the 538 electors. "Its official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational," says Bradford Plumer. some people may wander whats wrong with the electoral college? why isnt that a good idea? well in source two of mine it says "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electorors, who in turn elect the president." its also stated that "at the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." | 2 |
ea436e2 | Have you ever wanted to be a Seagoing Cowboy? Well if it wasn't for my friend Don I wouldn't be here right now. I even have a story written about me!"He was working two part time jobs in a grocery store and a bank when his friend Don invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime." This proves why you should be a seagoing cowboy. Hold up why dont you wait so I can intrest you more!
Also, you need to be a Seagoing Cowboy because you get to explore parts of the world that you wouldnt get to explore elsewhere. You get to help the people in need that need your service, such as being in the war. You get a great feeling to overwhelm you. This includes confidence and smarts. How do you feel about being a Seagoing Cowboy? Well its more fun than anything. I definatly recommend it!
So you can see, being a Seagoing Cowboy can be a big impact on you life. If you dont want to join then there is soemthing about you. It is by far the best carrier thats puts work after play. Time to pack your bags you're going to be a Seagoing Cowboy like me! You're still thinking about it? Oh, I'm sorry, but you should totally join me in being a Seagoing Cowboy. | 2 |
ea4f708 | Driverless cars seem very intriguing to have in the world. The thought of not having to drive when you do not feel like it. It would make our world much more luxurious, but it might not be the safest.
Machines and computers mess up all the time. They malfunction and have to be fixed. Us, as humans, have a better perception of the world, because we can makeour own choices. Computers are programed to do a certain thing. They do not have that consciousness to decide right from wrong, and that could provide safety hazards. Driving is already dangerous with us controlling the car, but with a computer it might be worse. I believe that we should have computer assistance when we drive.
Humans should drive still, but the computer, or car shoukd be there to assist us with driving safely. The computer to human ratio should be fifty to fifty. Even though this would helpful, we would have to consider the expenses. We would have to add sensors to most cars, which will put a pretty unique debt money-wise. We might even have to upgrade the roads to have sensors. This might be worth it though. We will never know until we experience it. | 2 |
ea57a9c | I think they should because the electoral college is a process not a place. The founding father established it in the constitition as the compromise between election of the President by a popular vote. The electoral college cobsists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. Your state's entitles allotment of electors equals the number of members in its congressional delegation: one for each memeber in the house of representatives plus two for your senators. Each candiate running for president in your state has hin or her own group of electors. The Electors are generally chosen by the candidate's political party, but state laws vary on how how the electors are selected and what their responsibilities are.
The presidential election is held every four years on the tuesday after the first monday in november. You help choose your state's electors when you vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you actually voting for your candidate's electors. After the presidential election, your governor prepares a "Certifacte of Ascertainent" lsiting all of the candidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The Certificate of Ascertainment also declares the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of the electors in december of the election year. Your state's certificates of acertainments are sent to the congres and the national archives as part of the official records of the presential election.
Under the electoral college system, voters not for the president, but for a state of electors, who in turn elect the president. if you lived in texas, for example, and and wanted to vote for john kerry, you'd vote for a slate of democatic electors pledged to kerry. On the off-chance that those electors won the statewide election, they would go to congress and kerry would get 34 electoral votes. Who are the electors? They can anyone not holding public office it depends on the state. That is how it works this is my reason. | 1 |
ea5dcff | Hello welcome, come join the merry crew of the Seagoing Cowboys. Yes, we got every thing you need from fun adventures, get to help people, and to friendly crew mates. So, come join us for some fun!
Fun adventures are what you need. "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable opportunity for a small-town boy," says Luke a Seagoing Cowboy. Luke toured an excaved castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China.
It was 1945, World War 2 was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins To help these countries revcover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration). That's when we stepped into the fight to help others survive.
The crew also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded By playing games and having little tournaments with one another. So if your playful but responsable , you'll fit right in.
So by helping others please join the Seagoing Cowboys. With all it's good resons you will find a spot thats good for you. Help make a difference in the world of war and conflict. Join the helpful hand of Seagoing Cowboys and the U.N.R.R.A. (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration). | 2 |
ea5e6cd | Is facial action coding good for students?I would say yes it would be good for students.Theres many reason why i say that it would be a good thing. I think it would definitley benifit students learning and the attitude toward school. Here are some reasons why i think its a good thing.
Facial action coding for students.....? I think that it is a great idea. I say that because say a kid is in a bad mood or is sad and then the computer then figures out that the kid is sad and the computer can do something to make the kid happy and not sad.This can also help students cause if the computer detects that the student is getting bored then the computer can do something to make to were its not boring and has the kid excited to do the work. There are also some thing from the text that i thought could really help students for example"a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" Dr. Husng predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". There are my reasons on why it would be good for students.
Facial action coding is a good thing as proved in the paragraph before. Facial action coding is something that can be used to change the future and chang the generations to come.This would be a good thing if it was put in to place. With the facial action coding there would be a big diffrnce. Those are my thoughts of facial action coding..... do you agree? | 2 |
ea722cd | Dear state senator ,
Despite some of the risky things that can come along with Electoral College voting ,voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election .Some people therfore think it is useful and some on the other hand think that it is unfair and that it should be changed .
Fortuatntly though one thing that a Electoral College can promise you is a certainty of outcome. A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible. It happened in 2000 but it is less likely than a dispute over the poppular vote . For exmaple in 2012's election with Obama and Romney , Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney. Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner -take-all basis , even a very slight plurality in a state creates a big elecoral - vote victory .
Moving right along , the Electoral college also can aviod Run - Off elections . The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast . For instnace , Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes while winning a majority in the electoral college . That situation then creates pressure which would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by the Electoral college. Therefore ,there would be a clear winner . | 3 |
ea743ff | The technology is very valuable. It's actually quite amazing how something like that can pick up on peoples emotions. There so many ways that something like that could be very useful. Say such a teacher teaching in a college. It's hard to give all your attention to one student's confusion on something. It'd also be hard to be able to see if every student is paying attention and staying on task. But with this technology, it could help change that.
There are many ways that could change that, and that the fact is, it wouldnt take long for the computer to realize soemthing is wrong. A way it could help change that, is the teacher could easily switch on the topic he's speaking on. Most students when it's something they're not intersted in, seem to zone out and lose foucs. But if the teacher knew that most students felt that way, there's ways he could bring in something that they'd enjoy. Another way the computer could help is the teaching methods. It said in paragraph one, that they're wanting to make computre and human talking easier. One way is having a one one review, talk, or lesson. The Facial Action Coding System could easily pick up on when the student is lost or needs help. | 2 |
ea7d445 | Is the "Face on Mars" really a natural landform? Seeing from pictures and other kinds of photographic things can you really tell? There may be alien markings or there may not be any markings.
I say that the "Face on Mars" is in fact, a natural landform. There is no alien markings to be seen from a picture. For example, ""As a rule of thumb you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," he added. "So, if there were objects in the picture like airplanes on the groud or Egyptian-style pryamids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"
So, if there were alien markings on this natural landform you would be able to see them. This was stated by Jim Garvin who is a chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program. The picture uses the camera's absolute maximum resolution.
Many people said from the photo took in 1998, "Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." The photo in 1998 was taken on a cloudy winter day on Mars and caused a haze to appear over the camera. By going in 2001 on a nice sunny day on Mars, the picture was clear and easy to see. You can tell in the picture that there is no alien markings of any kind. The picture was took with great resolution and couldn't be better.
In conclusion, there could be a possibility of aliens making this natural landform but, it could also just be a natural landform. It should not be famous for a conspiracy theory that it was made by aliens, simply of its shape. This landmark, looking like a human face, is just a natural landform. | 3 |
ea7d77b | I see a future with these cars. But, these cars are not a neccesity. They can cause big safety issues and lawsuits. As manufacturers proved, these cars will never be fully automatic without a human present and alert. Otherwise there would be a ton of money spent on unreasonable sensors and cameras. Plus due to how much gas these would use, it would be expensive and might even raise gas prices. I don't think cars are the best way to spend our future.
People take automatic interest in driveless cars. We see them all the time on television. What doesn't come to mind is the amount of comitment and engineering these cars are going to take. And even with all of the hard work, these cars are never going to be 100% safe or driverless. They will never fully reach the high expectations people want them to. It is an unrealistic dream. It is illegal to test computer-driven cars in California, Nevada and Florida. There is reasoning for that, the cars simply aren't reliable yet.
Automakers assume that their work will eventually solve the problems of these driverless car. Which overall is a long term kind of result. The maufacturers should stick with the progress we have now and not put "Driverless" in the title. That creates disappointed customers and future lawsuits. With the safety issues and the high prices on the cars. Will these cars be worth it to invest in? | 3 |
ea817ee | NASA is a goverment funded project that uses science facts, pictures, and advanced technology. NASA has been constintally working hard and, according to the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars."
"NASA's Viking 1 spacraft was snapping photos of possible landing sights for its sister ship Viking 2, when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human face." As soon as NASA saw the picture they instantly started going to work to see what it was.
NASA has already created scientific technology for this reason. They would want to get the best looking picture and the most acccurate one. The acticle states, "Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos." The first immage they snapped revealed that it was nothing but a landform, but still people were not satisfied. On April 8, 2001 another photo was captured at the cameras maxium view. Each pixil spanned 1.56 meters, compard to Vikings 43 meters per pixel
NASA has been specifically designed to explore outer space and to discover what was there. They have been working even before 1976, Thats more than 40 years! They have only had a number of break throughs, proving that NASA would not hold back information about ancient civilizaions or alien lifeform because it would be a great breakthrough. The defenders of the NASA budget even wished there was an ancient civilization on mars. There was a degree of suprise for mission controllers at the Jet Propulsion Lab when the face appeared. They were fascinated by what they saw.
The alien conspiercy believers may reject the pictures and say they have been tampered with. NASA would not do that, however. They have already spent loads of money for this project and made all the equipment. They would not go through all that trouble just to lie to the public. NASA also took may pictures with their instruments from many angles and different views. They are high resolution photographs and they even have 3D alimetry, according to the article "Unmasking the Face of Mars."
Overall, NASA is an important space project that is honest and truthful about their work. They prove their claims with scientific facts and photos. They have the brains, tools, and budget that allows them to do that. If the public is not happy with their results they will find a different way to show it and find more evidence that will satisfy them. | 5 |
ea84dea | Dear senator i think that the electoral collages should stay because .With out the the electoral college we could not have a party that is the tie breaker. So then we could not have a president .and they all so vote for the ''president and vice president all 538 electors but to win the vote a party must have 270 of the votes to win ''.and to have equal there are 2 senators and one member of the House of Representatives.
But a electors are chosen by the candidate's political partys by law .In a certan way and then be given a responsibilaties . And on every first monday in november the people vote for the prisedent that you want to win. but you are voting for the candidates electors but each state has a plathora of electorals like texas has 38 electors and californa has 55 and florida has 29 so does new york they are given more because the more populatina a state has the mor electorals you can have . and one other good reason that electoral college is more sofishint way then popular vote because " the winning candidate shares the popular vote and people starte to bicker about how to share it .
The large states restored a good porshine of the weight in the political balances because the larger states have a bigger population so for example Obama got 29 elactoral votes and the person who won would get 3 extera elactoral votes . but it is easeyer for the larger states to get attention from presidentail candidates in the campianes than the smaller ones because of how many larger ones have more electores vote then the other smaller ones. | 3 |
ea860f6 | "Skrt!" "Boom!" That could be you in a car accident. Car accidents are really high in america and thats terrible. Many people believe that driverless cars will help reduce accidents. They won't reduce accidents they will only increase it because technology fails alot, it wont have fast reactions, and drives wont see whats going on.
Todays technology is great, but it fails alot. Once they perfect technolgy then maybe they could use a driverless car, meanwhile they shouldnt use it. I think its a great idea and descisons that some states wont allow or test driverless cars. They can hurt someone by technology turning off. What if someone hacks and goes and controls the car? People need to realize that its a bad idea.
How can a driverless car react? A human would have to be awake and see whats going on. If a car spuns out the car wont stop because it wont see it and its only focus is getting the human to the destination point. Humans rely on technology way too much. Its not safe, but it is usefull dont get me wrong.
The most important thing is that driver will trust the car and they will just sit back and relax. They wont see whats going on because they trust the driverless car. What if your running late and the car goes only its speed limit you wont make it to your job or the plave you need to be. Thats why driverless cars shouldn't be used until technology is perfected.
They are many reasons why we shouldn't allow driverless cars. I believe we shouldn't allow them until they are perfected. Until then we shouldn't be using them. There is also good things about driverless cars like using only half of fuel a regular car uses, but they stll aren't safe. | 3 |
ea87989 | 'The development of the smart car"
It probaly seems like a terrific idea of a car that can drive it self i mean who wouldnt want a car that can drive it self when you can just relax in the driver seat?
All though it seems like a great idea for a car to drive it self there are some down falls with the idea it seems perfect but perfect can go all wrong.
The idea of a car that can have a autopilot or can drive it self isnt a bad idea why? because lets say your driving to another state an you dont want to drive for number of hours all you have to do is just switch to autopilot an have the car drive it self seems like a good idea doesnt it? Though it seems like a great idea from google...Did google ever stop an think about the saftey of others? Did google stop an think about safety period?
I feel that the smart car idea an development is a bad idea an kind of a waste of time because all that work of selling cars an making cars is going down the drain I say that because almost 90% of the world population have dreamed about driving a car an getting a car. I dont know about you guys but the story said that the smart car is going to have a camera in the car while its driving it self to watch the driver to see if he or she is prepared to take the wheel at any moment. When I think about that statement I think to myself if theres gonna be a camera in the car watching me to see if im prepared or not shouldnt I just drive the car myself 24/7 365?
The whole smart car idea yes its a great idea but what about getting your permit an you licsense? Im sure on a driving test we wouldnt be able to use our autopilot to park the car. The idea of the car driving it self its actually taking the fun out of learning how to drive learning how to park an other things.
The smart car is a great idea by google but personally I feel that they should just keep that idea to themself because anybody can get in a smart car not knowing how to drive an just turn on the autopilot then when its time for the driver to actuallly try an drive it might end up in a conflict with another pedestrian. Sources say it self that an alert or deffensive driver is the best driver because the driver is aware of traffic. Did google stop an ask if the computers were aware? Probaly not they think that the car is so perfect they probaly didnt stop an think safety.
Google came up with the idea that when the driver should be prepared to take over the car flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays will appear thats a bad idea I say that because what if the lights appear on the dashboard an the driver begans to take over an soon as the lights go away the driver hits another car or a pedestrian?
Dr. Werner Huber said "why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?" Wouldnt drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?"
The story also said "Even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault the driver or the manufacturer? Thats a good question an I say that because what if the car does get in a accident who can the other person blame? The driver or the car it self? Im sure that the other person is going to blame the driver because the driver should of been paying attention despite if the car was in autopilot or not.
Another point of mine is what if the sensors of the car go out an you have no idea that the car autopilot doesnt work?
Lets say that the smart car is the number one car in the world that is getting sold so is everyone going to have one? What if other people feel the same way as I do? That the idea of the smart car is a great idea but I want to stick with driving on my own. Is the world going to stop sellingg cars that drivers can malfuction on their own? If so thats a bad idea because not everyone is going to like the idea of the car it takes the fun an the expererince away from driving an learning how to drive.
The smart car might be a great idea for old people because what if they drop something in the car or they might need some type of assistance.
Ive came to the conclusion that the smart car is a great idea but I dont agree with it because it just takes the fun out of learning how to drive it seems safe but wouldnt you want a driver behind the wheel that is alert? | 3 |
ea897d8 | There are many people that love driving for the fun of it or for family bonding or even friendly bonding. There are companies that want to start making driverless cars so that we don't have to drive and I don't think that should happen because obesity and laziness is a huge problem in america already, these cars I believe are unsafe, and I don't think the laws will even allow this. Driverless cars should'nt be made and in these paragraphs I will tell you why.
The first reason I have is that obesity and laziness is already a huge problem in America. I have read many articles and heard many stories on the news about America being obese. If these cars are made this will only add to the problem and I say that because if people don't have to drive anymore then most will go home and sit on the couch to watch some tv. And when doing that they usually have a bite to eat while doing it. When driving you have to walk out to the car, move your foot when your driving, move your hands to steer, and also get out the car and walk to where your going. These are all ways of getting some type of excercise. The world needs it's excercise.
The second reason I have is that it appears to be unsafe. In the article it states that, " If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--- the driver or the manufaturer?". This is why I think it is unsafe if the car as some type of disfunction or mishap while on the road with other human controlled cars it could hurt someone really bad or maybe even kill a person. If that happens the world would be very angry at the particular company who is making these cars. So why even put yourself in that prediciment? If the company can't assure that this driverless vehicle won't hurt anyone then they shouldn't be on the road at all.
The third and last reason I have is that I doubt the laws will even allow this to happen. In the passage it states that, " Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers". This shows that it would be very difficult to even make these cars without being illegal because it goes against all the laws of driver safety. I think the laws should stay the same and not allow these cars to be on the streets because they can be very dangerous if misatkes were made. You need alert drivers on the road so less crashes happen.
In Conclusion, I believe that driverless cars shouldnt be on the road because obesity and laziness is already a big problem in America, driverless cars are unsafe, and the laws will not let these cars get on the road anyway because they don't reflect the laws already made. That is why I think driverless cars should not be made or on the road. | 4 |
ea8d794 | The author of the passage(The Challenge Of Exploring Venus) suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.I belive that the author suggests this because even though venus is a dangerous planet and no human could possibly survive the climate there,it is still a planet worth researching.
Also all though venus is very easy to spot from a distance and safe vantage point of earth,It is for a fact a very challenging place to examine more closely.
As it says in paragraph two''Humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on this cloud-draped world.each previous mission was unmanned,and for good reason'' With out being able to send a person to study it up close an bring back samples scientests have limited knowlage on venus.For
more then 3 decades not a single space craft has touched down on venus. Acording to the passage paragraph 3 ''A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent blankets venus.even more challangeing are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfric acid in venus's atmosphere.one the the planet surface,temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit,and the atmosphericpressure is 90 times greater then what we experience on our own planet. '' All of these condition are way more extreme then anything humans encounter on eaarth we wouldnt even be able to survive this.
Even though venus really is an imposible planet study with alot of obsticles the author still belives it is a worthy persuit.Even though we cant meet the challenge venus has alot of value,not only because of the knowlage we want to gain on the planet itself,but also because our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers an doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation ( as said in the last paragraph).At this point i agree with the author we should keep exploring all posebilitys and not give up. | 3 |
ea918ff | Mars has aliens! Many people believe that the landform on Mars was created by aliens, but here at NASA we have found that landform was actually created naturally. The landform is referred to as a Martian mesa, which is common in the region of Cydonia, but this has shadows that make it appear as if the figure has a face. Since the discovery of the form, it has been in movies, books, and radio talk shows. Some consipiracy theorists say that the form was actually created by aliens, but why would we want to hide the fact that there is life on Mars when in reality it would benefit here at NASA. The landform is Martian mesa formation much like the Middle Butte in the Snake River of Idaho.
The Martian mesa is the term used for the landform. It is very common to find them on Mars in the region of Cydonia. The Martian mesa was naturally formed, but with its shadows, it looks much like a face. In 1998 Mars Global Surveyor was close enogh to actually see if there were any alien monuments and turns out that there wasn't any.
Here at NASA we recieved a lot of attention when the "Face" was discovered. If the landform was actually created by aliens, why would we try to hide it? The landform had no monumemts near it when looked at by the Surveyor. "Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." People wanted there to be something because it would benefit us.
In the end, the landform was found to be a Martian mesa. There are many mesa's in the region of Cydonia and that's a part of how we found out how it was a natural landform. Also the Surveyour verified that there wasn't any other monuments near the landform. If there was any life on Mars we would want to tell the people so they can be intrested in the activity at NASA, but for now there has not been found any life activiy on Mars. | 3 |
ea97531 | Technology is advancing at a rapid rate and is consuming our lives. With the new software created by Prof. Thomas Huang and Prof. Nicu Sebe, computers are now able to recognize human emotion. This technology can be useful for various things. The software can make video games more realistic, it can give more insight on psychology, and it can even be useful in classrooms.
Often, children in classrooms do not understand certain things, but may be too shy to ask questions. With the emotion recognition, teachers will be able to tell who is understanding the topic and who is struggling. Another way the software can be helpful to classrooms is that if it shows a child is upset about something, but tries not to show it, that may be a clue that they're struggling with something outside of class. When a child is in a bad state, they will most-likely not try in their classes, but if a teacher could talk to them and help them, it could be a good way to get the child to vent and relieve the pressure from themselves, causing their grades to go up. Lastly, the software can help teachers notice bullying. Many times kids get let off the hook for bullying someone because, "they were just kidding around", "we're buddies", but that is not really the truth. If the emotional recongition software is installed in schools, teachers will be able to notice if a kid out of a group of people is feeling uncomfortable while the other kids are laughing. Stopping each of these problems will allow the children to make better grades, be less stressed, and hopefully enjoy school.
Technology is a big piece of this generation and it has come a long way and has helped society a lot. The advancements in them are drastic and they continue to become more useful to society. The emotional recognition software can help make many impacts on this world to make it become a nicer place. Using the software in classrooms would be an awesome start. | 3 |
ea9b94d | I am against driverless vehicles because too many risks and complications can become of these advanced automobiles.
The article's author states that while the technologically advanced vehicals will use approximatelhy half of the fuel used today in your average vehical, the cars cannot navigate roadwork and accidents. While putting your car on autopilot for a few minutes can be helpful, having it on autopilot 90% of the time could be scary. As if people didn't have enough complications with manually driving normal vehicles, trusting your life with an advanced automobile may not be the safest route to your vacation home.
While the cars are said to alert the driver when his/her skills are necessary it can not be assured that the driver is focused, unintoxicated, or under the influence of narcotics and drugs. Another problem could be the vehicle could glitch and spiral random alerts or not alert the driver at all, causing the drivers life to be in danger. In the majority of cases, the driver may not even need to manually manuever the car on their way to their destination and decide to take a time manageable nap or scroll through their newsfeed on their favorite social media application. They say the driver must be alert, but when the car is doing the majority of the work, won't the driver occupy themself with a tedious task?
Google's car was said to go a half a million miles without crashing, and while these cars notify their drivers and use 1/2 the fuel used in your average car, there is no guarenteed safety for the driver and the other attendants of the vehicle.
Therefore, if a crash were to insue due to a problem in the system of the vehicle or the lack of focus/ distracted driver the fault would fall onto someone. The outcome of the situations caused by the vehicles are completely unpredicatable. So I state, a safer route for society is to avoid the introduction of technologically advanced automobiles as they could come with misfortune and become a threat to civilazation. | 4 |
ea9c6be | We at NASA are going to take this topic head on starting with you. We are going to try to make you think different about the "alien landform" you believe in. I will be the person you will tell about your theory and I will try to change you belief on the whole idea and if you don't it is just your loss. I will admit I would have loved it to have been an alien monument to some sort of king or ruler too, so we could of seen it more than what it was if it really was an alien monument. That is besides the point here that it is a natural land form like the mesas we have here on Earth.
The first picture had a terrible resolution of 43 meters per pixel! That is completely unaccepltable in today's terms for resolution. The first picture in 1976 was only speculated to be an alien monument was due to the shadows on the land and not the actual characteristics of the land. In 1998 the picture could have been altered due to fog, but in 2001 a clear picture proved that the "face" on the mesa was just nothing to be excited about. Also if it was some sort of landmark of an ancient civilization you probably could have seen houses or shacks somewhere near it. Also why would we cover up an amazing dicovery that could benefit us in the long run with more funding and credibility.
To put down the truth your theory is more like a thought than an actual theor a this point due to the facts that already prove that it is a mesa a lot like our in on earth. You have to support your statement with much more than an outdated pickture taken about 40 years ago and just accept the facts that are in your face laid out right now the unaccuracy f the first picture, the shadows only showing that if could have been a face, and how why we would cover up soming thing that could get us more publicity to the public eye and more funding. So I hope this discussion changed your mind anout this whole thing and if it didn't you are a stubborn person. So I hope this is the only time we have to correct you. | 3 |
ea9f1f5 | New Planet, New Home
"It is hard to leave something that you really loved." my mom stated, Rebecca Sulayao. Here, in this case it is really hard when the things they get used to will going to be dissapeared or gone. When something gone they need to get or find another one. They can find the same as like this or just like a duplicate of it. But, in this case leaving home or finding new one was hard. Because, all the memories are there. Finding a new one was hard they need to transport all the things that they left in there home. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggest that studying venus is worthy to pursuit despite the dangers it present because it is same as earth, human curiosity, and the planet Earth will dissapeared after how many decades.
First, In some cases planet Earth and Venus have some similarities. The Venus has some good nature too. In paragraph 3 it said there that "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." It explain here that the planet Venus has more atmospheric pressure than Earth. Also, In paragraph 4 it said there that "Long ago,Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Eath." it explain here that even the scientist discovered that the Venus and Earth have same similarities and the nature of Venus can supported life.
Second, because of the human curiosity the scientist want to know what is going on to our neighbor planet. In paragraph 8 it state there that "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." It explain here that the people should not make a story. They should know their limits when it comes to imagination and telling story that is not true. In paragraph 7 it said there that "NASA is working on the approaches to studying Venus." it explain here that because of the curiosity the NASA or the scientists that work on that try to explore things outside the Earth. Since the people are curious on what is happening on some planet they used technology. Because of the curiousity they used some technology and invented new one that has many gears so it can reach the Venus. But because of the heat of the Venus the gadgets they invented was not working. It will work in how many decades then after that it will crashed again because of the Venus temperature.
Last, the Earth will slowly dissapeared after how many decades. It is hard when the Earth dissapeared.That is why the scientist try to investigate new things outside our Earth. They trying to figure out when or where the people will live after the Eart dissapeared.They should examine fast as they can so the people can move on different planet. Because who one knows when will planet Earth will explode. In paragraph 1 it said there that "Venus is the second planet from our sun. While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely." It explain here that they trying to figured out the Venus. Because the Venus should have same characteristics as Earth because if not the scientist should try to search more information on other planet. It is hard to examine something when it is new. In paragraph 2 it said there that "Often referred to as Earth's "twin" Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of densitity and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." It explain here that this a good sign because the people need the same characteristic as Earth have. Until now they still working on it they try to figured it out more so as soon as possible the people on Earth can move to Venus.
In conclusion, The planet Earth and Venus have same similarities. While Venus is more on danger because of the characteristics and material of it. Still the process of exploring Venus was still on process. The human curiosity lead the scientist to search more on what is outside on Earth. The Earth will exploded after how many decades because of the global warming and the people on Earth should evacuate as soon as possible. Life must go on even if we are living on different planet! | 5 |
eaa07cd | Car usage is very popular in this world we have come to know. It used for many means of transportation like going to work, school, social events, or just simply going shopping or hanging out with friends. Those are some up sides to having and using a car. But they are some down sides as well. I will be explaining the down sides of using a car as well as the advantages of limiting car usage.
My first reason in this topic that i have chosen to tell you about are "Car-free" cities. what are Car-free cities? well the name says it all is a new project they are working on in europe of this city who is car free. This new city has no cars, no street parking, no driveways or or home garages. Why do they exist? well the obvious answer is to minimize car pollution that are creating green house gases and are polluting the air and more places can adopt this idea and have more "car-free" cities so we can save the planet and ultimately save our selves from extinction because we did not know how to maintain our planet clean. Also a thing a like about this new "Car-free" city is that theres a main street where theres all the stores at a walking distance like how great is that? u can just take a ten to twenty minute walk and go shopping for anything like grocerys, shoes, clothe, restaurants instead of driving to a mall along some distant highway and ultimately that is where everybody is so hanging out with your friends and meeting all up in one place is at a walking distance and if you dont have any friends well you make new friends at this main street because that is where everybody is.
Another great reason for considering less car usage is less traffic. Who does not like less traffic? everybody hates traffic is slow, boring, and annoying. Now if we have less traffic that means we have less commute time when trying to get to work if you have a job that is far from your home and that means you get to work sooner and on time and hopefully get a raise because you feel like you dont get paid anough to do what you do. Also if we have less traffic we have less commute time and what does that mean? well it can mean multiple things like having more time to sleep because you dont have to worry about waking up early to beat the morning traffic like my mom and plenty of other people do. At the end of the day you will be able to get home quicker so you can spend more time with your family and do stuff you usually cant because of the time you spend at traffic.
My last reason is a very important reason and it is simply "safety". Think about it, it is simply just common sense. if they are less cars in the road at one time then the chances of car accidents decreases. Now i dont know about you but that sounds like a win win to me. One theres less accidents so theres less people in the hospital so they dont have hospital bills to worry about and less accidents means less traffic as well. And also if you ban the cars for a day or have one of them "car-free" cities you have less drunk drivers; one because they dont have a car so they will probably just drink at home and two if the bar or where ever is that there going to drink is close enough then they can just "walk" there sober and "walk" back to the house drunk instead of being in a car a causing a fatal accident.
Ultimately i feel that the usage of cars should be limmited because of many reasons. This reasons are as follows. Less car pollution. living in a car-free city so you are able to walk everywhere. Less traffic, less commute time, having more time to do stuff. and last but not least the safety of drivers. personally i think we should supervise the usage of automobiles and have more "car-free" cities and have days where car usage is baned or restricted by some amount. | 4 |
eaa5794 | The technology to read students' emotional expressions known as the "Facial Action Coding System" is helpful and valuable. The advanced technology could help modify a lesson on a computer when a student is showing signs of boredom, help with communication skills, and tell whether or not a person or celebrity is lying due to facial muscles.
In paragraph 6 the article explains how if the "Coding System" were to be in computers in classrooms, it could help modify lessons for students who get bored. 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," and this technology could help "make computer animated faces be more expressive for video games and video surgery." Also in paragraph 6 Dr. Huang states "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, so computers need to understand that too." meaning that in day to day life humans interact by facial movements or gestures so if computers could read those expressions and gestures, life could be made easier. Finally, in paragraph 8 it reads "muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risouris." showing how "these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling politician or celebrity isn't being truthful." So in the classroom if a student was being untruthful the computer would be able to detect when the student is lying due to their facial muscles.
In conclusion, the technology to read students' emotional expressions known as the "Facial Action Coding System" is helpful and valuable. The advanced technology could help modify a lesson on a computer when a student is showing signs of boredom, help with communication skills, and tell whether or not a person or celebrity is lying due to facial muscles. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits