essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
29d00ed | Do you think that the Face on Mars is created by aliens? I think not, I think that the Face is just a natural landform. Just because there is a face on Mars doesn't mean that it is caused by aliens. It could easily be formed on its own on the planet.
The Scientist and I at NASA have discovered that it is just a natural landform from a picture the team got when they flew over Cydonia for the first time. There was never any alien monument after all. Skeptics, like you, thought that alien markings were hidden by haze, so the team went again to look for the face. The face was shown again, and so my team and I took another picture but with a different camera and realized if there was any life form on Mars then they would catch it.
So to there isn't any life form on Mars, actually the face compare to a butte or mesa. We compared the face to Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. The face compares a lot to the butte and so that proves that the face was not formed by aliens. | 1 |
29d4a8c | As a student, if I don't understand something in class, I will ask someone about it. Whether that is a teacher, a student, or a parent there is almost always someone who knows. If any one of these reliable sources does not know, I can most likely look it up on one of my devices that has the internet. If we were to introduce the new FACS technology, it may have unindended lasting impacts which could be detrimental to our society.
It was mentioned in the passage on paragraph 6 that " 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modiy the lesson, like an effective human instructor.' "
The first reason that it could be bad for our society as a whole is that it is not the computer's duty to explain how to do everything and to change to our will. While computers were made to help us, it cannot be our only source of information. On the other hand, teachers are st school for the sole purpose of helping you learn. It is their actual job to be there to help you learn things. While computers are a tool to help achieve this goal, there are other ways to learn about things and get them explained to you.
When you are in highschool, many teachers and parents will say things to you along the lines of "In the real world" and " Highschool is preparing you for the real world". Later on in life, "in the real world", if you get bored at a job you cannot just change what you are doing. You have to continue on with it because it is your job. If we implemented this system now in schools, many kids and teens would get in their mindset that if they are bored or don't understand something, things will change for them. Kids should not rely on a computer to help them understand everything. There are teachers, classmates, parents, and other adults who can help.
The second reason why this could be bad for our society is the accessibility. Not every school has computers and not every class uses them. If we were to implement this software, it could be giving an unfair advantage to the students who had acsess to it. There are still plenty of schools that may not have a computer in every classroom. Similarly, not all students and parents can afford this kind of technology. Because of how new and high-tech this software is it most likely will cost more money to be put into effect. This would cause the schools with more money to be able to get it while the schools with less funding and less money to be pushed aside and not get it. This causes the students at the schools that cannnot afford it to have a disadvantage.
The third and final reason why this could be bad for our society as a whole is simply that people may become less sensitive to reading other peoples emotions. Without needing to have face- to- face human interactions to see how people are feeling, it could result in a decline of being able to recognize emotions in facial expressions.
I learned a few chords on the ukulele this summer. I could piece together a song or two. Now after a few months, I can't remember the first thing about playing those chords. This example shows that if you learn something then don't do it for an extended period of time, it will take a while to relearn how to do it. Although reading emotions is nothing like playing ukulele, the same holds true; if you learn something, and rely on something else to help you do it, it is going to be hard for you to re-learn how to do it again.
People also have a right to privacy and some people may not enjoy those particular rights being breached. I am a person who does not let all of my emotions show. Other people may bottle these feelings up in hopes that nobody will see. If people want to keep in how they feel, they should be able to do that as it is what they want.
Because it is not the computers duty to exlain everything to you, not everyone has accsess to this kind of software, and people may lose their sensitivity to the fine art of emotion reading, I am in opposition of implementing this FACS technology. | 5 |
29d8985 | Driverless cars, this idea is an idea straight out of sci-fi, or at leas it was. Driverless cars, as perfect as they sound, I don't side with them, when it comes to these cars i don't prefer them. This being said I say this because driverless cars go against our freedom, they restirct us by controling us. Cars like this really don't give us the full luxury it should, driverless cars are just another way to control the world. All these cars are is truly a box of metal and circuits that you are stuck in until, they decide to stop.
Now, as the author states " He believes such a car would fundamentally change the world." he is quoting Sergey Brin, but clearly is not dening his support for the car. He agrees that "a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." , but we all know it will lead to more then public transportation. With the advancement in cars this is another one that could ruin society, as it will make us more dependent on these new cars to get a to and from and charge a heafty price. Not only that ,but will also lead to these cars taking over modern day manual cars and making human use a little more obselite.
Fraud! These cars are also not completely unmanned as they would need a driver when road conditions follow. I am talking holes, accident, and how will this machine cope with police and other emergency government vehicles? The driverless car is a clever sham designed to make us believe that we wont have to do anything, that this machine will make us lazy and we will depend on it. If this car were to actually make it to release it couldnt handle the irrational moment humans have.
To conclude, this car is nothing but an idea staight of of sci-fi and with its existence coming into play, only ensures problems for the human race. We as humans shouldn't have to endure an era where machines are masked as mighty when all they are is the same gps you have had for years. This car is a navigating, regulating system all fancy in a silver lining but reality is that this car is penny pench move to get people to pay for a lie in diguise. As one we can make laws to stop this nonsense from ever spreading outside of sci-fi as it cant possibly function in todays society, for we are complex beings build semi-complex machines. | 4 |
29daf40 | As the global concern for the environment increases with time, the desire to use cars decreases. People are aware that cars release fumes which, when combined, can be detrimental for the environment, and they want to do something about it. Elisabeth Rosenthal writes in her New York Times article, "In German Suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars", that up to fifty percent of environmental greenhouse gas pollution comes from the cars driven in American suburbs. In her article, she quotes David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America, that "All of our [the U.S.A.'s] development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change". It seems like America, and the rest of the world, is becoming more aware about what cars can do to the environment and that car usage needs to decrease, and they are taking steps to do so. So why should you limit your car usage? By limiting car usage, the average citizen can decrease pollution and harmful greenhouse gases that are causing damage to the environment, improve living conditions in large cities and reduce smog, and feel better in general, with more exercise and less stress.
In the past decade, America has struggled with an obesity epidemic. In the early 2000s, obesity was at its peak, with McDonalds' "Super Size" menu options, huge SUVs, and endless television programs to keep couch potatos on the couch. If you visit New York City's Manhattan, you won't see a whole lot of obese people hurrying down 5th avenue to hop on the subway or pick up groceries at the local market. Why is this? Not many people drive in NYC, mainly because it would be far too expesive to buy and park a car in this already monumentally expensive city. The cars one does generally see are either from out of state, taxis, or businessmen who live in the other boroughs of the city. Very few who live in Manhattan drive. Most people take the subway, walk, or use bikes to get around. Because of the way it's made, everything one needs is just a few blocks away, from the grocery store, to the drugstore, to the postoffice, to the bank, there really is no need to have a car. If you have to go to the airport, just take a cab. Naturally, people who walk and bike everywhere are slimmer and healthier. In the suburbs, this is not the story. Many people in the suburbs drive cars out necessity, because it would take the whole day to walk to the grocery store and back. The way suburbs are set up, walking or biking is almost impossible to do if it's not for leisure. Driving around all day to pick up kids, go to work, and finally pull into the home garage can be draining and stressful. If people were to get around and get exercise at the same time, they would be less stressed and healthier. Andrew Selsky quoted businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza in his article, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota". Plaza said that, "It's [limiting car usage] a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution". Many people are already doing this. Vauban, Germany, is a new "car-free" suburb. In this town, things are close together, just like a city, eliminating the need to use cars. It is not illegal to own a car in Vauban, but people who do must pay a heavy fine and pay for parking on the edge of the city that is also highly expensive. People in the German suburb get along fine without cars, because of the way the city was built. The idea of a "car-reduced" community appeals to the U.S. as well, and legislators and other government officials are trying to make it happen for the environment as well as the sake of the people.
Bejjing is supposedly the most polluted city in the world, and Paris the most beautiful, but Paris is more polluted than one would think. Robert Duffer reports in his article, "Paris bans driving due to smog", that Paris, after suffering from "five days of intensive smog" called for some drivers to abstain from using their cars for the day or face a fine of twenty-two euros. The system was based on license plate numbers. One day, the drivers with even numbered license plates would not be able to drive, the next the ones with odd numbered license plates. This helped reduce smog in the city, which is more polluted than others in Europe like Brussels and London. Once the smog cleared, the ban was rescinded. This ban on cars, although only for a short period of time, is actually a great idea. Emissions from cars cause a large amount of smog to pollute the air, which is bad for both the inhabitants of the city and the environment. The reduction of the use of cars will reduce the amount of smog in the air in large cities, and improve the living conditions in those cities. Almost two centuries ago, smog, soot, and dirt covered Victorian London and its people. This smog was not from cars, but rather from the rising popularity of factories powered by fossil fuels such as coal. Today, all cities of the world are polluted, and almost two hundred years have passed. Shouldn't some improvements regarding the environment and smog in cities have been made by now? There is just as much environmental damage being done as there was in 19th century London, but now, instead of factories being the main cause, it's cars. Although cities are cleaner now, they are just as polluted. In Bejjing, some say the air is so dirty that if you blow your nose, your tissue turns black! It is the 21st century, and we have to be taking strides to improve the environment for the good of the people who live in cities like Paris and Bejjing.
Limiting car usage is important to create a better living environment for people as well as improve their well-being, but the most important reason is to limit pollution and damage to the environment due to emmisions from cars. President Obama, according to Elisabeth Rosenthal in her article, "The End of Car Culture", has "ambitious goals to curb the Unites States' greenhouse gas emissions". If the President of the United States is concerned, this means it is a real problem. The immense amount of greenhouse gases caused by cars has already aided Global Warming and the damage to the ozone layer that exists today. If car usage increases or holds steady, even more damage will be done, so much so that it may become unfixable in the future. If the world does not cut back now on its vehicle usage and reduce environmental damage, things will only get harder to fix. But things are looking good for Mother Nature, because according to all four articles given, including, "In German Suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars", by Elisabeth Rosenthal, "Paris bans driving due to smog", by Robert Duffer, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", by Andrew Selsky, and "The End of Car Culture", by Elisabeth Rosenthal, people are already taking steps to reduce the use of cars and better the environment.
Ever since the Model T came out in the early 20th century, cars have become more and more popular in America as well as around the world. They have become so popular, in fact, that they have become a problem. Cars emit harmful greenhouse gases that pollute the environment and cause excess smog in large cities. They can also be stressful and unhealthy for people who depend on them for everyday modes of transport. Limiting car usage is important and will help not only the environment, but also the people of the world. | 5 |
29def82 | Have you ever wondered what it would be like if you didnt have to drive a car, and instead it drove itself. This is what Google is trying to do. They are trying to make the driving cars you see on television a reality. While it may seem like a fun and cool idea I dont thhink a driving car would be a good thing. While they might use less gas they would be better if they just helped the human driver instead of taking over. Cars that have human drivers and the car helps them when they need it would be better than self driving cars.
Cars should be able to just help the driver to insure not only the drivers safety but the safety of others. If the car would help the driver the car would "apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone"(paragraph 5). Technology working along with humans makes the world a safer place. But giving too much credit to technology is when you start to mess up. When cars start to help out drivers, humans look for more ways that this can happen. When doinng this people make "Further improvements in sersors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more and more driving task on their own"(paragraph 5). This is when cars should be where humans are driving the cars. If you keep allowing cars to be able to hand all of the drivng tasks they start to take over and drivers start to lean on the car for helping than using their driving skills. When this happens drivers depend on the car and when the malfunctions the crash or hit something because they were to busy trying to let the car do all of the work. Some wonder why people would need a driveless car would still need a driver. A BMW project manager by the name of Dr. Werner Huber says '' We have to interpret the driving in fun new way''(paragrapg 8). The thing about this is driving in itself is a fun thing. When you you take a driveless car and replace the it takes all of the fun out of being a driver. In order to make driving ''more fun'' "Some manufacture hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up display. Such displays can be turned off instantly whenthe driver needs to take over"(paragraph 8). The thing about this is not all humans have a quick reaction time. That is why have a human driver that does all the driving is better because it gives the driver time to react. Lastly self driving cars dont have a law were if a self driving car hits something or someone the car gets put into the dump. No the law says that if a human someone or something it goes to jail. So if it is true and a self driving car malfunctions and hit someone do the company get sued or does the driver goes to jail? If the driver goes to jail, I bet a less people will go out and buy a self driving car becuase all technology malfunctions sometime, nothing last forever.
I think cars should not be able to drive themselves. Cars were made so humans can have fun and go places that are to far to walk. Cars should just be able to help out the driver to insure everyone safety not give in-car enterainment beacsue 9 times out of 10 that driver will crash because their reaction time is slow. When it comes down to it and you are in the car would you want to be able to see around you and stop the on time so you dont get hit or hit something else or would you rather be watching tv in your car untill the car needs you and you get hit or something hits you because your were to slow to hit the brakes? I would choose the first one because i value my life and the life around me. But the chose is yours, just remeber that once cars take our jobs there is now going back. | 4 |
29e3246 | Twenty-five years ago a photo was taken of a natural landform that appears to look like a face. Many people will argue that it isn't a natural landform but, more of an alien artifact. While the two sides still don't see eye to eye they both have evidence that could support their belief.
While, some people think that the face on Mars is "bona-fide evidence" that there once was life there. NASA has defended that remark by saying that they wish that it was a mark of ancient civilization but, it's not. NASA has also made it a priority to photograph the face because, they felt as if it was "important to the taxpayers" to give them evidence that it wasn't an alien landform.
So, in 1998 they flew a shuttle over Cydonia, the face/lanform, for the first time to go take pictures of it. Thousands of people were waiting to see pictures of it. It had turned out to be just a landform ,like NASA had said, not an ancient lifeform. Many people disagreed with the pictures that NASA took because they had stated that it was cloudy during the time they had taken the pictures on Mars so, they couldn't really get a clear shot of the face. While NASA agreed with them that it was a cloudy time of year on Mars they are still sure that there has never been life on the planet.
While NASA hasn't changed there opinion because it is in fact just a landform. Many people still want good proof that it could quite possibly be acient civilization. So, they prepared to send up another. This time they sent it up on a cloudless summer day so that no-one could argue that the weather affected the pictures. NASA was right again. This time they took up a camera that zoomed in the structure and it didn't show anything new that would have meant that there has ever been any life there.
All together, these facts prove that it is just a landform. A scientist named Garvin was quoted saying "That's a lava dome that take the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." The face is indeed just like a landform that we have here on Earth. Although the other side of this long running debate did have some evidence that might have made NASA think twice, there is still more proof that it is a landform. | 4 |
29e4c71 | Luke Bomberger went on many adventures. He helped cattle animals and people in need. On his adventures, Luke saw many historic landmarks. He saw things such as the Acropolis in Greece and the Panama Canal. On his way back from his trip, he usually played games. He had a fun time.
Luke Bomberger had two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank. One day, his friend, Don Reist, invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. To help countries in need to get food supplies, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration) and they hired "sea cowboys" to help countries in need. It was 1945 and the end of World War II in Europe when Luke and Don signed up to become a sea cowboy.
In August 1945, Luke and Don received orders to get a boat in New Orleans. They boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster and headed for Greece. On the way, Luke turned 18, which ment he could be drafted for military service. When the military found out that Luke was a sea cowboy, they decided to let him do that for service. Luke went many places such as Greece, Crete, Panama, and Italy. He spent the rest of his life at his home.
Sea cowboys get to go lots of places, according to the text above. Luke went to places such as Panama and Italy. Why don't you sign up to be a sea cowboy? Sea cowboys get to travel the seas and see different places. Sea cowboys help people. Sea cowboys travel. I don't see why you shouldn't become a sea cowboy.
Sea cowboys helped many people in the 1940's. Luke Bomberger traveled many places and helped many people. He is a legend among the sea cowboys. Sea cowboys got to see many places and different countries. Sea cowboys helped the military. Sea cowboys got to go down the Panama canal and ride on boats through the canals in Italy. You should become a sea cowboy too. | 3 |
29ebaab | To start off with the electoral collage should not stay and be the ones to vote for us because its we the people have the choice that we make to pick our leaders weather its the president or congressmen/women or even judges. But we the people also have a say in this economy on what we want not what the government wants it should be up to us weather we want a good leader or a not so good leader but now lets get on to some resons why th electoraal collage should let us the people be the ones to vote.
Now as a quote this from source one this is one reson why we the people should be the ones who decide,"the electoral collage process consist of the selection of the electors."but now if you see in the end it can be proven that we are not the ones who get to pick its the electoral collage who gets to pick for us. but now if you look at anoher quote from source two it also shows more evidence that we don,t vote for the president but we simply vote for people who we think would represent us the best but the qoute still shows why we shoule be the ones to vote for president"under the electoral collage system,voter vote not for th e president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.
Now in the end do you not agree with or what that we the people should be the ones to pick the president and not us be the ones to vote for who we think would represent us best and vote and pick the president for us. | 2 |
29edcfa | In a student enviorment this technology would help teachers understand what problems the student is having on a particular problem or lesson. Is it not part of learning, for students to ask the teacher for help? Also it would be difficult for every school system to encorperate this technology into there computers in order to make there lessons better for that student.
On one side of the argument, this technology could prove useful for teachers and students alike. For students it could make the lesson easier to understand and then the students would understand the material and be better a what ever subject they were stuck on. Then for the teachers it would be easier for them because then the teacher could help that particular student who is struggling to learn this new subject and teach them a different way that maybe would seem easier to that student. This is evident in paragraph 6 when it says "A classroom computer could reconize when a student is becoming confused or bored and figure out a new lesson or modify it
On the oppisite end, this technology could not help the students or teachers at all because the teacher does not use computers or the system gave the student and different way but it seems harder than the last, then the teacher would have to find and entire new way to help this student learn this topic.
But then again, this new technology could end up being very beneficial to both the student and the teacher by giving the student and easier time to learn the topic and the teacher and easier time to teach the topic that the student or the entire class is struggling with it. Also this technology for better or worse would help teachers learn what that student is struggling in without the student even telling the teacher
So in conclusion, this technology would help both the students and teachers by giving the teachers a helping hand on what subject he/she really needs to work on, and it would help the student by giving an easier time learning the topic with a new method | 3 |
29efbea | I think the author does not support his reason very good because he states a lot of reasons why its bad. A couple reasons why it is a bad for example in paragraph three he says the average temperature on Venus is over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. For the temperature being so high and the pressure being so high all we can do is be in a vehicle 30 miles up from Venus talking pictures and still the temperature from that far up would be 170 degrees farhrenheit and we could take rock samples but it would be very hard because of how hot it is. The only reason he says why its good is in paraghraph eight and he says we should explore Venus is because of human curiosity. In conclusion the author does not support the exploration of Venus very goof because he states to many facts of why its bad and to little of facts why it would be good. | 2 |
29f0b19 | The advances of limiting car usage is not only helping the communtity but also yourself. In Vauban, Germany 70 percent of their families do not own cars, and 57 percent saold a car to live here. people find it better to walk to places rather than having to use a vehicle. "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change," said David Goldberg, an official of Transportation America. The Environmental Protecton Agency is promothing "car reduced" communties. Delivery companies complained of lost revenus, while exceptions were made for plug-in cars. it was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of 7 million. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. Two other Columbian cities, Cali and Valledupar, joined the event. The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. In parks and sports centers their pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth, sidewalks. With all these changes, poeple who stopped car commuting as a result of the recession may find less reason to resume the habit. New York's new bike-sharing program and its skyricketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorities. A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, proposed partnering with the telecommunities industry to create cities in which "pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources lower emissions and improve safety." | 1 |
29f91ca | Car usage all over the world has reduced and been reducing slowly. Some of the advantages of limiting car usage may be the reducing of pollution or just to save moeny. Also due to many different reasons, even if it's for their own needs, or to just minimize the pollution going on in different parts of the world. In many places car usage has been being limited for countries all over. If it's China, Spain, Columbia, Paris, Germany, or even the United States of America. Not all countries have taken part in trying to reduce the use of cars to an all time low. That may just be their own choice. While other countries are sure trying to cut the usage of car for a variety of reasons. Some places in the world are doing it so they can cut some of the pollution done to the world. And if you think about it if half of the world tryed as hard as they possibly could to try and minizie pollution the world wouldnt be so pulloted. I know cars aren't the only things that cause pollution, but its a pretty big part of the daily life for any person no matter where they are.
In Vauban, Germany a suburban area has almost completely given up driving and even owning a car. "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park" (Rosenthal 2) but it cost a lot of money to even own a parking space. "Car-owners can buy a space, for $40,000, along with a home." (Rosenthal 2) That price may just be enough to keep people from owning a car all together. According to the article "
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars
" by Elisabeth Rosenthal, 70 percent of Vauban's Families don't even own a car and 57 percent sold a car just to move there. Isn't that crazy? Imagine life without cars, it has advantages and disadvantages of course but advantages can lead to a positive outcome no matter what the reason is. By people in Vauban not owning cars they are most likely saving a lot of money because they don't have to buy the car, pay the ridiculous amount for a parking spot, and pay for the gas thats going to end up pollution the world anyway. Just a few of the many advantages in reducing or cutting out car usage completely.
Due to all the terrible and mass amounts of smog in Paris, France, they enforced a "partial driving ban to clear the air or global city" (Duffer 10). For example, in this article called "
Paris bans driving due to smog
" by Robert Duffer, on monday motorist with even numbered license plates were told to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22 euro fine which turns out to be $31 U.S. Dollars. And then the same thing would happen to those whose license plates ended in an odd number the following day. This had to have cut pollution a huge amount. If you think about how many people are living in Paris, and you think about them all staying off the road due to a ban then you may be able to understand the amount of pollution that wasn't produced during this ban. Now Paris, did this for the advantage purpose of reducing the amount of pollution they had in their air and by not adding more to it. It couldn't have a negative impact they were doing something good for the enviornment even if it didn't really help that much. Out of the whole city of Paris about "4,000 drivers were fined," and "27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine" (Duffer 12). Another advantage that Paris had due to them banning car usage was that "Congestion was down 60 percent" (Duffer 14). The ruling French lifted the ban when the smog cleared up enough.
Bogota, Columbia turned what they did as a tradition, into a big hit to tons of poeple in other countries. "
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota
" by Andrew Selsky informed the public about what was started a few years ago back in Columbia.
For a day cars except for buses and taxis were banned. In the city of "7 million, the goal is to promote alternative transportation and also reduce smog. Violators faced $25 fines." (Selsky 21) Due the day without cars, the city of Bogotas has "118 MILES of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American City." (Selsky 27) One advantage they had was that because of the day with out cars the parks and sports centers have been in the best shape they could possibly be in. They also did have to reduced the amount of pollution that was being put into the air, because it was such a big hit to other cities and countries.
Yet another article by Elisabeth Rosenthal called "
The End of Car Culture
", is stating the advantages in the United States and what has happened with the reducing of cars. "Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." (Rosenthal 29) The minimizing of cars in The U.S. has some advantages those being, "Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions" (Rosenthal 29). New York City for example is home to the heart of public transportation due to all the taxis and the subway. Not many people in New York city drive or even own a car due to the congested streets, and the ridiculous amount of money you have to have just to park it like it was in Germany. Crazy amounts of money to park a car is just an outrage. The advantage here would be the money saved by not even owning a car and storing it. Another one would be the traffic is bad but not as bad as it would be if more people had cars. Public transportation is huge in New York. It's already expensive enough to live in New York imagine if there werent as many taxis and if the subway wasn't there at all. Picture all the pollution there would be.
To wrap up everything, as stated there are many advantages to reducing car usage all around the world. If it was to reduce smog or pollution of just to save money they are still advantages to decreasing the amount of times you use a car. If something is in walking distances why not just walk instead of taking a car and wasting money and also polluting the air (unless it's a hybrid). The limiting of car usage is slowly but surely growing all over the world. Yes, cars are faster to get places, but why waste the money and clean air to be somewhere quickly? Think of all the advantages there are in reducing car usage not the disadvantages. | 4 |
29fa226 | In the past I have had so much trouble while taking tests, they are either too hard and I don't understand what is going on or I just can't focus. That is a bad thing because that means if
I am doing bad other kids might be doing bad as well. In class computers should be able to use the Facial Action Coding System to alter things to our knowledge if we get confused on a problem, bored, or distracted.
One way computers can use the FAC System is recognizing when we get confused on a test question. When we get confused instead of asking for help from the teacher the computer can take us through steps to solve the problem and then gives us a new problem so we can do what we just reviewd ourselves. The text also gives us a similar way, in the text it says that the computer can tell when we get confused or bored and modify the test or lesson to make it easier.
Another way the FAC System could be useful is if we get bored during a test or lesson. If we get bored during a trest or lession that computer will recognise that and then taylor the losson so it can be less boring and more fun.
The last way that the FAC system can be useful in schools is if we get distracted. If we get distracted by something while taking a test or doing a lesson of some sort the computer could be able to recognise that and give us some sort of brain break to help give our minds a break to think before getting back into the lesson. This can be helpful in many ways because sometimes if you are distracted by sonmething you are not going to give other work your best effort.
In conclusion in class computers should be able to use the Facial Action Coding System to alter things to our knologer if we get confused on a problem, bored, or distracted | 3 |
29fa6eb | Not driving cars sounds like a crazy idea; How will soccer moms get their kids to soccer practice; How will commuting executives get to their offices? Although driving a car is an easier way of getting around, the amount of pollution a car throws out into the atmosphere just isn't worth it. When people stop driving cars, they start to drastically reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that's being sent out through a car's tailpipes, reduces traffic congestion, and is satisfying a lot of people world wide.
Europe alone is responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, following the United States' 50 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, in some car-intensive areas. Paris, the capital of France that champions the use of diesel fuels typically has more smog than other European capitals, having 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared to 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London. Although the bans on cars may receive complaints for delivery companies, there are exceptions such as; Plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more people.
As a result of Paris's partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city, almost 4,000 drivers were fined, and some even had their cars impounded. This partial ban led 60% decrease in traffic congestion. In Bogota, Colombia, millions of Colombians hiked,biked,skated, or took buses to work during a car-free day, leaving the streets of the capital city devoid of traffic jams. Rush-hour restrictions in Bogota have also dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have sprung up.
The reactions towards the idea of limiting car usage has been taken with great satisfaction and support. In the city of Bogota,Colombia, a city of 7 million people, millions of colombians participated in a car-free day by either skating,biking, or even hiking to work. Althought it rained, Mayor Antanas Mockus of Bogota explains, "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating". Mayor Antanas's quote just shows what people are willing to do, rather than taking the easier, and lazier way of simply taking their cars to work; In a sense, it shows dedication to the event. Even a high-society man like Carlos Arturo Plaza, a business man from Bogota describes this event as a, "Good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution". This idea; the idea of limiting the usage of cars can be excersized by any class of society, be it poor, middle class, upper class, even rich, can participate, anyone can participate.
In the end, the advantages of limiting car usage includes, reducing the amount of greenhouse gases, reducing traffic congestion, and satisfaction. | 3 |
29fb0d0 | The idea/concept of driverless cars is revolutionary, humans wouldn't need to drive ever again. Cars since 2009 have been able to drive themselves without a single crash. Google has made it an option to drive the car under specific conditions like navigating through road work or accidents, pulling in and out of driveways, and dealing with complicated traffic." The cars would use half of the fuel of today's taxis and offer more flexibility than a bus", says Sergey Brin. He believes such cars would fundamentally change the world.
I think that it is a great idea to actually be able to get in a car that drives itself. It would feel like a luxury. The article says that there are some major liability conflicts between companies right now over the issue of who would be responsible for if there was a wreck. Would it be the driver or the manufacturer? The idea of a driverless car still needs to be worked on and equipped with more technology and more assurance that the car is safe.
These cars would be rarely seen when finally on the market just like a prius. Some studies show that it could be boring not being able to drive. "The psychological aspects of automation are really a challenge," admits Dr. Werner Huber, a BMW project manager driver. Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human dirver in control at all times. Even when there is a human in control driving is never safe, because you constanty have to worry about humans not being responsible drivers.
The artical states that, "automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved". The problems might be solved and the cars might drive perfect but nothing is perfect. There is still going to be defects on the cars and by then it will be too late when people are injured. I think it is not a good idea to do this, because its not completely reliable and would defeat the purpose of being able to drive. America would only get lazier and soon technology will do everything for us. This is what I am afraid of, because we will get used to everything being done for us and we won't know how to do anything outselves. Cars should stay how they are and let humans get some activity in besides walking from the door to the car then being driven where they need to go.
The idea is very nice, but I wouldn't buy a car like that just for safety precautions. Technology is slowly taking a huge role in life now and I just think it's moving too fast. We are more focused on technology now than enjoying life itself. Teens can't live without phones anymore, and teachers are constantly using them. Things should just go back to paper and pencil. | 4 |
29fe49b | My names Luke and
I got invited to the Seagoing Cowboys Program by my friend Don Reist.
At the time i was working two part-time jobs. I knew that this was going to be an opportunity of a lifetime so obviously i accepted Don's invitation.
We got our first orders in August 1945 to report to new orleans.
We were smooth sailing from that point on.
As i was on the ships i learned a lot of valueable lessons.
Being on the Seagoing Cowboys program was such a blessing and it had quite a few perks.
We got to visit a lot of cool and different places around the world.
Not only did we get to visit them we also got to learn a few things about them.
Being on the Seagoing Cowboy progams is not just all fun and games it is also a lot or hardwork.
Feeding and taking care of the animals is real hardwork. In the article is says " Caring for the animals in the crossings kept me busy."
This was very true because the work kept you very tired.
All things have to come to a end though.
When we finally did drop off the animals and all thier food and supplies we got to have a little fun.
After the animals were unloaded us cowboys got to play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds were the animlas were being housed. I think if your a hardworker your sure to do just fine in the Seagoing Cowboys program. If you do go and become in the Seagoing Cowboys program a good peice of advice is to watch your step because some nights the ships tend to get a little slippery. | 2 |
29ff531 | there has been so many stories about aliens ,but are they real?.Imagine seeing something like an unmasking face on Mars would you think it was a alien or a natural landform?.
Well as you can see the scientist figured it was just another Martian mesa. Common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Accorrding, to the NASA a few days later unveiled the image for all to see. "huge rock formation.... which resembles a human head...". Formed by shadows giving illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. As said in paragraphs 2 and 3.
Although few scientists believed the face was an alien artifact. It could be a alien face but when do we usually see aliens. Sure there maybe other creatures out there but as paragraph 7 says" when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time , Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photo. 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.
In conclusion , we would all want to belive that aliens are real and that the face on Mars was a alien but it wasnt. On the other side we have discovered an amazing face on Mars as us the NASA and Michael Malin have proven. The picture is not a alien as you can see from all the prof we found. | 3 |
2a09cb9 | The Face Action Coding System would be great for classrooms because it would also help the teachers alot becuase as soon as you walk in the room it would let the teacher know if you are mad, sad, happy,etc. As Dr. Huang said "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression" watching tv that can change your emtions. so imagine that you had a bad day at school and you are just getting out an you are mad about something that happen at school an you want stop being mad, just watch tv that sometimes helps people alot. Then when you turn on the tv use the Facial action coding system.
People sometimes dont know what mood there in at school, some people love coming to school, some hate it, but some people dont like to be bothered. Alot of people like to stay to themselves at school, so maybe using the FACS would make thhat student angry, when probably that person was in a happy mood so it works both ways if you ask me but i really do think the FACS would be good for class rooms. | 2 |
2a0f5b4 | Although some sciencetists belive the face was an alien artifacet photograpging cydonia. NASA when marz global surveyor became a priority. The nasa people though it was a good idea beacuse of the tax payers. Nasa photograph the face as we could get shot at.
Mosly the land form was owned by allies. The capition noted a Huge rock. NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The face on marz has became a pop icon. It has starred in a hollywood film. There must have been a drgee of suprise among missions contollersback at the jet propulison lab when the face apperared on their montions. RAdio talk shows says that the alies haunted the gorgoey stores checkout lines 25 years, some people think it wasnt always haunted. Missson again its not always easy to spot a face on the surfce. The people think when people go to space the alies thake them and put there faces on the surfsace and makes it all stay there.
Most people dont belive its the aliens that are doing this. in 2001 the image spans. 1.56 meters comapred to 43 meteres per pixel in the best viking photot. Most pictures you bring back often shows but mosly they never do the alies dont wnat people taking back what they did. On april 8th 2001 a cloud lesss summer day in cydonia marz golbal surveyor drew close enough for a second look. we had to roll out the spacecraft 25 dreggs to the center of the filed view. The team capturd an extardoiary photot using a good camra.
I think that its kinda cool that people go out there to see the faces on the plants. I would aloso like to see hown they would do that. i would bring home so many pictures of all the faces on the suface. It would rally be cool if they picture really shows. some people would really like to see the faces on the earth or surface. The most biggest of the people are when the people bring back lots of the pictures to show and to sell. when you look on the website to see what people had said about it when they went to see it.
Most people lie about the alies but you never know what you would see when you to up with NASA.YOu never know what you are going to see. | 1 |
2a14518 | Hello my name is Luke, I work for the seagoing cowboys. We have many fun jobs. We travel, play games,and care for animals. we need more recruits so come join us. I will give you a little more information.
We travel to amazing places! We once went to China and I just adored the Panama Canal. We went to Venice, Italy and went on a gondola ride it was beautiful. When we went to Greece, the Acropolis was the grandest thing I have ever saw! So if you like to travel why don't you just travel with the Seagoing Cowboys.
We also play games on the long trips. we play baseball and volleyball in the animals old holding rooms. We also do fencing, table-tennis, reading, and even more fun sports. So if you want to play sports, read, and even more come join the Seagoing Cowboys.
We also care for animals that are being shipped overseas. We care for young cows, horses, mules, and even more animals. We once had a cargo of 335 horses but we had enough hay and oats to feed them and we traveled from New Orleans to Greece. So if you enjoy caring for animals you should join us and help us care for them.
Do these things interest you in any way?
So if you love animals, playing sports, and travel you would be perfect for the Seagoing Cowboys. When I became a Seagoing Cowboy so many new oppertunities opened in my life, so if you want new oppertunities in your life you should sign up and join. | 3 |
2a161b2 | Is it good to be curious or not? The author evaluates that Venus is a worthy pursuit and dangerous. NASA wants to send humans to study Venus so they can benefit from it. Venus have many dangerous elements that can kill a human while entering the atmosphere. NASA creates machines to be able to withstand Venus to study it closer.
The author evaluates that Venus is worthy pursuit. In paragraph 8 it says "Striving to meet the challenge present by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." NASA wants to study Venus so they can learn more about the materials there that can help build the future and scientific data. The author evaluates that Venus is worthy pursuit because it can help gain insight on the planet itself and human curiosity. Despite being worthy pursuit Venus is also dangerous.
The author evaluates that Venus is dangerous. In paragraph 3 it says "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." Going in Venus's atmosphere is enough to kill a human so NASA is working on other approaches to get close and study Venus. NASA is getting ready to get closer to the dangers of Venus and uncover its mysteries.
The author evaluates that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit and dangerous. The author shows that studying Venus has value and gain insight to the planet itself. The author also shows what obstacled humanity needs to break through to be able to explore Venus more. Curiosity lead to many peoples death but it also leads to the advancement of humanity. Due to the article, the Earth may become Venus where it's unhabitable by humans but studying Venus might give humanity an advantage if it happens. | 3 |
2a162fa | "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is an artical about how Venus an unhabitable planet thats very dangerious for human to go, dispite the bearing heat of the sun blazing down on Venus at over 800 degrees fahrenheit, atmospheric pressuses 90 times greater than earth's, with the planet also being the hottest planet in our solar system. The author suggest many reasons why a trip to Venus is not like anyother trips but also a worthy pursuit.
My first reasons is how the author shows both Cons/Pros of exploring Venus, acording to to artical "Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and Weather present additional empediments kike erupting valcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." (3) this show how dangerious Venus is for a humans. but the arthor also stated that " Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." (4) the author stated that Venus could be Earth long lost brother a planet that once support life, and many scientist want to study Venus to answers.
My Secound reason is how the author claim humans should strive to new challenges for the curisoty to the answers. according to the last paragraph Venus "Our travels on Eath beyond should not be limited by danger and doubt and should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation" (8) the author that being cerious for answers it the expande to meet teh edge of imagination to it fullies. My thirth reason is how the arthor concluded different scientist working on new equitment and technology to better the trip to Venus.
Although Venus is extremely dangerious with an unbearible heat and pressure enough to crush a submarine, it may be worth the danger to pursite studying Venus and it hold answers to many question with its history, while on extreme contition a nice trip to Venus might just be worth it. | 3 |
2a188a7 | The Author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well in this writting. Teh author is good at showing the two diffrernent sides to the agument but makes you agree with his stance. He used many diffrent examples and also gae a lot of detail in his writting.
To start off his essay with some facts and expalined what he was going to be talking about and some things about planets. One fact he used to start his essay off was " 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) This was a great way to start off the writting because he informed his readers about venus before he started to persaude them on a topic.
The author also displaces the oposing information which is always a good thing to do in a pusasive writting. An example of this is " Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for human." ( Paragraph 5) This is higlighing that yes Venus has some dangerous things but is still worthy. So by doing this he is showing the dangers but then can back them up and say some good things about them.
Following this, The author was really good at making the dangerous stuff sound not as bad, one example of this is "Peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely for above teh planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrated the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." (paragraph 6) This supports that he is a good authour and deplaning his stance on the agurmeny becasue he can make the other side information help his stance in an way.
In conclusion, the author did a great job at suporting his idea. The diffrent ways of supporting it made it seem more persasive and he got across alot of ideas and information. | 4 |
2a1adef | The Facial Action Coding System, has a promising applications for a variety of school. Dr. Huangs studies shows that the facial expressions for each emotion are universal, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expressions". The article also includes that as humans we perform this impressive "calculation" every day. Dr. huang predicts if we have this facial action coding system in classrom computers it can recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Then it can modify the lesson like an effective human instructor. Having these computers in the classroom would be effiecient for parents to indcate if there child or someone close to them are having trouble communicating or show there emotions. The article indicated that the Facial Action Coding can indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one. The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D coputer model of the face; Then Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologist to classify the six basic emotions, such as happiness, surorise ,anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. Which help you determine there emotions. The article states "According to the facial feedback theory of emotions, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them". Whoever thought that the Facial Action System can become very valuable to classrom computers and be so effiecient with knowing what someones emontions are. | 2 |
2a1e9ef | Having your own car can be great, but it's hurting the earth. So much pollution comes from cars, about fifty percent of the greenhouse gases in America are from cars. Cities have put bans on driving causing people to find our ways to get to work, cities like Vauban, and all of the driving causes pollution.
In Pairs, France, there was so much pollution and smog in the air, people with even number plates coiuldn't drive one day, and odd numbered plates the next, it was like this for five days. In Bogota, Colobmbia, there's one day every year where cars are banned, taxis and public buses arre still permitted though.
"It's a good oportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution"
said Carlos Arturo Plaza when asked what he thought about the idea of they day. Two more Colombian cities partook in the event this year.
In Vauban, Germany, many people have given up their cars. Having a car is allowed, but there are only two places to park, in a large garage, or a spot that cost $40,000 along with the home they buy. Vauban's streets are completely car-free other than the downtown area where the tram runs. 70 percent of Vauban families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold their cars to move their.
"When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way"
, said Heidrun Walter, a resident of Vauban.
As mentioned, about fifty percent of the greenhouse gases in America are from cars. Only about 12 percent in Europe. France is one of the most polluted countries in Europe because of it's tax on gasoline, that is not on diesel fuel. Diesels make up 67 percent of France compared to the 53.3 percent average of the rest of Western Europe. Paris has more smog than other European capitals, Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared to London's 79.7!
The use of personal transportation should decrease because of how it's effecting out planet. The air is getting worse for us and we can control that! If we start driving less, or taking public transportation we can cut back a lot. | 2 |
2a21d68 | The author suggest that studying Venus is worthy pursuit the dangers it presents. The author thinks that it's worth exploring Venus no matter the dangerous a human may go through. The author did not so good in explaining his opinion. He mentions only cons through out mayority of the article.
First the author mentions that Venus is Earth's twin closest plant in term of density and sizes and closest to distance too. But this hasn't been much of help, the fact that none spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. Secondly Venus is covered in a thick atmospher of almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide making it hard for us to see through a spacecraft camera. Then on Venus suface temperatures are around 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric perssure is 90 times greater than Earth's. The conditions on Venus are more far extreme than what a human can experiance on Earth. NASA has tried serval ways to study Venus, for example peering at Venus from hovering safetly far above the plantet can provide limited insight on ground conditions because the light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere. Exploring Venus is a challengeing planet for humans to study.
In my opinion this article does not explain why it's worth studying Venus no matter the risks. The author just talked about all the cons Venus has, the diffculties, the conditions of weather and all kinds of dangerous Venus provides. This just makes us think that just maybe it's not worth risking yourself having in mind this mission might fail as well. | 3 |
2a26e9d | The Facial Action Coding System is a coding program that can read emotions, some say this could help in the classroom to tell if students are ingaged in the lesson. This system was created by Professor Thomas Huang and Professor Nicu Sebe, leaders in their fields of expertise.
The usage of the Facial Action Coding System in schools to determine if a student is getting bored, tired, or angry at a lesson could be very useful. If a student were to get angry or bored during a lesson they are more likely to not pay attention and if you are tired you may not retain the information as well. If your computer could sense this and alert the teacher or change the lesson accordingly then it would give students a better working enviroment and a better chance of doing well in school. This 3D construct could also help teacher's understand their students better and help them learn more efficiently. This can also see through a fake smile and know the students real emotions which is important in case the student is trying to fake it through the leason when they really need help. According the the professional Dr. Huang, he predicts that, "A classroom somputor could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then is would modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."
So in conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System can read emotions and see the real emotions present. This could lead ot improvements in the classroom so that teachers and the computor can alter the lesson as needed to the specfic student and their needs. This is a good idea because it will improve the work enviroment created for students. | 2 |
2a2d8ba | Hello, today we shall be explaining why Venus is worthy. It's like Earth it's also slightly closer, 'cept for the fact it rains actual acid, plus the the tempature is to high. But that doesn't stop the scientist from checking it out! So let's check it out!
Venus has really powerful 'eathquake', it has weather, volcanoes. I mean it does has similar characteristic with Earth. I do understand why the scientist would try to land spaceships, even I would wanna know what Venus holds. Venus has a rocky area. That means is has familiar places like valleys, moutains, and craters.
I don't think it would be something anyone could live on but it doesn't mean in the future they won't try, everything is possible if you believ you can do it. Nothing should stop you, except for the rules, like the rules we bid by -- not the ' Golden Rules', don't get me wrong. I don't want to have anyone against me thinking I'm "crazy".
I have no religion, I have nothing against anyone. I do believe in evolution. Back to my conclusion. Scientist, NASA, will still check the planet, they might be checking it to see if life is able to grow, they also think that there could have possibly been water on the Venus once before, ages ago. I think they should continue thier search, continue their theory, and try to succeed with their dreams finally coming true. | 2 |
2a2f394 | The author suggests that studying Venus is a good thing to pursit. He thinks its a good idea because there so much to explore .The author also states that there or some dangers while studying about. Venus is also referred to as earths twin as its almost the same size and density as earth. Mars is also one of earths neighbor as is Venus too.
The planets orbit the sun at differnt speeds. A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. On the planets surface temperatures averages over 800 degrees farhrenheit. The atmospherric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experince on our own planet. The conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on earth.
Such a environment would crush even a submarine. Did you know earth has a sister planet that is inhosoitable. Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been earth. Astronmers are givin long frames of time in space. Venus can be our nearest option.
The National Aeronautices and space administartion has one particurly compelling idea. They send humans in space. There are rocks and gas on venus. venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks.
Reserchers cannot take rocks or gas or anything else from a distance. Nasa is working on other approchers. some simplifed electronics are made of silicon carbide. | 2 |
2a36c77 | The Seagoing Cowboys is a program, and its main goal is to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that are shipped overseas. This might not sound fun or interesting. These trips might be half-year long trips, but the trips are life-changing experiences. I'll show you reasons why to join the Seagoing Cowboys program. These reasons are coming from a person who has joined the Seagoing Cowboys and served for three years.
The first reason is because of the experience you'll gain from the trips. The trips are life-changing. You have the benefits of traveling the world. You get to see and do a lot of things an average person wouldn't do. You get to see Europe, China, and Greece, and many other beautiful places. You might even take a gondola ride in Venice, Italy or pass the Panama Canal. The experience is an amazing one.
These trips can cheer you up. Like I said before, you get to travel to amazing places and do amazing things. These might sound like fun things to do, because they are. You might ask how you have fun while on the ship in the sea. You can play table-tennis, fencing, boxing, baseball, volleyball, or any other games that helped pass time. You have a lot of fun during the trips. At the same time, you're helping peope and other countries and serving as military service.
Last but not least, you are more aware of the world. The trips open the world up to you. You're more aware of people of other countries and their needs. This awareness can change your life.
All in all, the Seagoing Cowboys is a great program to join. It's an opportunity of a lifetime. On these trips, you're gaining experience. You're visiting a lot of places and having a lot of fun. Your awareness of the world changes during these trips. In conclusion, the Seagoing Cowboys is a life-changing experience and an amazing opportunity. | 3 |
2a38aa5 | Here at NASA the Face on Mars is known to be a natural rock formation. However some people believe that the Face was created by aliens. We are attempting to prove that it is natural.
The Face is a natural rock formation. Evidence such as a picture taken on April 8, 2001 shows that it is nothing more than a mesa which are common in that area of Mars.
The picture was taken with a camera that had a higher resolution than the camera used by the Viking 1 in 1976. The pixels in the image had a closer meter spread at 1.56 meters per pixel to the Viking 1 with 43 meters per pixel causing more of a blur effect.
Others say that the Face is an alien artifact. They say that us at NASA are covering up the fact that there is life on Mars. Another thing they say is that on April 5, 1998 when the Mars Global Surveyor took pictures of the Face the alien markings were hidden by the haze due to it being winter on Mars at the time.
The final thing to say on the matter is that the Face is a natural rock formation. The Face was not created by aliens. The pictures prove that it is natural. The fact that us at NASA say that the Face is natural doesn't mean aliens created it. Conspiracy theory disproved. | 2 |
2a3cc3b | Venus, also known as the "Evening Star," is one of the most challenging planets to work on. With its many volcanoes, and its atmosphere full of sulfuric acid, there is nothing safe to this planet. So why do us humans continue to pursue the trip despite the risk? Is it due to the similarity between it and the Earth? Is it really "a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents?"
To start off, Venus is the hottest planet in our solar system, despite being second closest to the sun. This is because Venus contains the most volcanoes out of any planet. The thick atmosphere of Venus is composed of almost ninety seven percent carabon dioxide blankets. Like so, the clouds are made up of highly corrosive sulfuric acd, in which adds to the dangers of exploring this planet. On the surface of Venus, temperatures have the capability of averaging over eight hundred degrees Farenheit. To build off of that point, the atmospheric pressure is ninety times greater than what we experience here on Earth. Thus, these conditions are far much more extreme than any human being could handle.
An environment like so has the capability of crushing a submarine that is designed to dive into the deepest parts of the ocean, and along with that the temperatures would liquify many metals. Other factors such as powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes seek probes attempting to reach the surface.
In addition to atmospheric conditions, lets revisit why we even discuss further visits to Venus? Todays astronomers are extremely fascinated by the planet because they believe it was once one of the most Earth-like planets in our solar system. It is prpedicted that in some point in time, Venus was once largely covered in oceans and may have even had the capability of supporting various forms of life, similar to Earth. Venus still has failiar features to Earth, such as a rocky surface, valleys, mountains, and craters.
To continue the idea, how close are we to Venus? Earth is located between its two planetary neighbors, Mars and venus. Lets recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, in which is a crurcial consideration while considering the long time frames in order to pursue space travel. This may seem indisputable to many, however we need to consider, "what are some other options for pursuing such a risky mission, while creating something in which can be both safe and scientifically productive? NASA has proposed an idea of basically hovering thirty miles above the surface in order to avoid the harsh conditons of the atmosphere. The upside, it would be a moree safe alternative. The downside, Astronauts would be unable to collect samples from the surface of Venus, which brings up a whole new concept of being "scientifically productive."
In conclusion, is Venus still worth the pursuit despite the conditions humans can and will face? We still are unsure of a final answer. If we want to further human exploration in space, then it is quite possibly worth the risk. If we are not in nedd of expanding research, then it is not necessary. However, it is quite the given that NASA
would like to expand its knowledge. NASA
continues to work on otherr approaches such as using a heavy duty material in which would last weeks in the conditions. Some equipment used in the past for others sorts of events, doesn't even require electronics at all, which is a major upside to the research of Venus and its aroma. Modern computers would be much to delicate to function in such conditions, and that is why NASA conitnues to pursue research and exploration of Venus. Finally, it is worth it to pursue such a captivating planet despite the intimidating factors. We can now reach a point in which nobody else in the world has reached. | 4 |
2a3da2b | Do you think driverless cars are a good idea? Yes or No? Driverless cars can have positive effects and negative effects. The cars could change the world or they could not end well.
Driverless cars are not a good idea at all.
The reason is, because the cars really are not fully driverless. if you are in a constrution zone or near an accident the car has you take over. The car isn't full capable of handling driving in a situation like that. The car lets the driver know when they should take over. So the question is " If the car is driverless how come you have to take over in certain situations"? Why can't the car handle it all on its own since the car is smart? For the driverless cars to be very smart they need a bunch of sensors.
My postion on driverless cars is I think they are a bad idea. They can't fully handle all situations. Also if the person behind the wheel is drunk or worse and they come upon a bad accident " What will they do"? " How will they act"? Since the car can't handle itself and the driver is incoherent I dont think the ending result will be very good at all.
First off, the driver of the car must stay alert at all times and be ready to take over if needed. If there is an accident or the wiring or technology fails in the car.
" Who is blamed"? "Do you blame the driver or the maufacturer"? Even though the traffic laws would be changed, according to the driverless cars there would be new laws put in to cover liability in a situation if there was an accident. Also there are special sensors that make sure the driver keeps his hands on the wheel.
Do you think driverless cars are a good idea? Yes or No? Driverless cars are not a good idea at all. My position on driverless cars is I think they are a bad idea. First off, the driver must stay alert at all times and be ready to take over if needed. | 3 |
2a3f826 | The face on Mars is just a natural landform. It was not created by aliens. If it was created by aliens, Then the discovery would benefit NASA. I can help you to understand why it is just a landform and not an alien artifact.
The face was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows to make it look like a face. Eighteen years after the face was discovered, we sent Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter camera team to take a picture ten times sharper of the face. In the picture, It was revealed that it was just a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. Later, there was a second picture taken up close even more than before. There were no signs of alien existence around the landform.
After looking at all the pictures taken and research found, we can conclude that there was no alien monument to begin with. Like I said, it was just another natural landform. Has you understanding about the face changed? | 2 |
2a41ece | In introduction, NASA and Scientist are trying to get information about venus. They already try landing meachin but it only last an hour. So they have to do something about it to test if human would be able to live in venus. NASA and Scientist believe that there use to be life in venus because of the feature, like mountain, vally and other. So NASA and Scientist are still planning on something else.
First, according to the text venus is sometime called the evening star, and is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. Scientist say that this nickname is misleading becasue venus is a planet. Venus is the second away from the sun, which mean it really hot. Mars is the first one but according to the text venus is the hottest of all of them, hotter then the mars. Venus is often referred to as earth's twin because it the closest planet to the earth, in size and density.
Second, all of the planet move at different speed so something earth a closer to mars than venus. The most challenging part for NASA and Scientist is studying the planet, at the same time it the most important part os the mission. Their mission is to see and test venus if human can live in it. They already try sending meachin but it only last one hour so that was a bummer. According to the text the most challening part of it is the cloud of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere. The other challeng is in venus the average temperatures is over 800 degrees fahrenheit.
Thrid, NASA possible slolution is to allow Scientists to float above the fray, which mean it like car hovering 30 miles above the surface. The temperatures would still be around 170 degrees fahrenheit inside, Scientist will be able to live according to the text. All the researchers can do is look around and write it down on paper since they cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, but it is safe from creature if there is any. Somehow someone would need to get up close and personal despite the risks. According to the text, NASA and Scientist can also build another meachin that would be able to go to venus and come back with samples. Nowaday computer need electronics but this computer from 1800s dont need electronics and was played an important role in the 1940s during world war 2. According to the text, these devices make calculations by using gear and levers, and tend to be more stonger when it come to extreme physical conditions.
Inconclution, NASA and Scientist are trying to find away for human to visit the "earth twin" (venus). They have try alot of way but none of them work so now they are trying to use computer from 1800s with extreme physical conditions to get some samples from venus to study. I hope it work too, who doesn't want to visit the earth twin (venus), will there be alien. According to the text, modern computer are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick but weaker in extreme physical conditions. All in all venus is planet that is consider as earth twin, and Scientist believe that there use to be grass, tree and other, but it too hot so they all died. | 4 |
2a447bd | CLAIM
The author explains the story very well by including the high co-op of the united states that could be the NASA and scientists are studing this planet because of the simelarity that has with planet earth.
To sport my claim thwe author says " if our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientist even discussing further visists its surface? Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have beem the most Earth-like planet in our solar system.
INTRODUCTION
This story talks about how the nasa is trying to study the planet called "the even star" or for short "Venus." However, this nickname is misleading since Venus was considered a planet in our solar system. Scientists says that "venus is to simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of earth", the NASA refers venus as the twin of earth, venus i the closest planet to earth in terms of denisty and size and the closest in distance too.
On the other hand sometimes the Earth is closer to mars in other times to Venus, sometimes right around the corner-in space terms. However, humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. This planet is nnot that all safe the atmosphere of Venus is almost at 97 percent carbon dioxide and it has more challeng to studing it because of the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere.
Scientists are discussing further visits to the surface of Venus because it's the planet more likely of planet earth in our solar system.
BODY
Venus,sometimes called the "evening star," is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even
an amateur stargazer to spot. Often referred to as Earth's "twin, Venus i sthe closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occassionally the closest in distance too. Earth, Venus and Mars, our other planetary neihbor orbit the sun at different speeds.Thses differences in spped mean that sometimes we are are closer to mars and other times to venus.
Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent of carbin dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, tempetures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.
To conclude scientist are keep studing this planet to see if it's safe to live their or not. | 3 |
2a45bab | Introduction:This essay is going to be about convincing readers that the Face is just a natural landform. It all started when NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was on the planet and was snapping pictures,as it was snapping pictures it noticed a shadow of a humans face,in other words a big enormous head.
paragraph2:Mars is a planet anyone can travel too not just humans but martians and other strange creatures that we dont know about. Well it is just a natural landform because they got all of the evedience they needed to prove that it was no sign of an alien. Cydonia did everything they could to prove everyones suspicious but not everyone was satisfied they still thought that it was signs on mars that they saw a martian.
Paragraph3:In my opinion if i was a scientist at NASA discussing the Face with someone i would kinda like go close to snap better pictures to prove innocents on my behalf to cover me and to prove everyones suspicious so it wouldnt have to be that big of an argument. They did a good thing by zooming the picture in three times bigger and all of the other objects in the picture,they saw clear so they had to see clearly that it wasn't an alien in the picture. | 1 |
2a4b0b5 | I think that from Luke's point of view it looks like a great experience and it would be an opportunity of a lifetime to be a Seagoing Cowboy. By being a Seagoing Cowboy you get to travel and see many amazing places and meet so many types of people. Also if you like animals you are in luck because you get to take care of them while your on the boat sailing across the sea. Another thing you might get to do is have your birthday some awesome like Luke did in Greece. In the following pharagraph I am going to be telling you some things about being a Seagoing Cowboy like what it's like to take care of the cattle, some amazing places that you might visit ,and how you must be careful while board the ship.
By being a Seagoing Cowboy you get to do so many things and experience them. One huge thing that you would have to be willing to do is take care of all of the animals on the ship sailing with you like young cows, horses, and mules. Like Luke the animals on the ship would keep you busy, you would have to feed them and give them water at least three times a day, pull bales of hay and bags of oats out from lower holds of the ship, and clean out the stalls. Also you would get to go to many amazing places around the world like Luke did. You might get to go to places like Europe and China and see Acropolis in Greece, and maybe take a gondola ride in Venice, and see Italy the city with streets of water. You would also have to be careful while board the ship. One night Luke slipped down some stairs and almost went over board, and because of this he cracked a couple of ribs and had to take a break off the job. It would be quite an adventure to be a Seagoing Cowboy.
Now that I have told you some thrilling things about be a Seagoing Cowboy what do you think? I think it would be so much fun to sail acrossed the world while taking care of animals and going to all kinds of places. It would be so exciting, but it would also make me nervous because when Luke Bomberger was a Seagoing cowboy he almost went over board. I think that by being a Seagoing Cowboy it would open up the world to you and how you thought of the world just like it did to Luke Bomberger who was an amzing Seagoing Cowboy. So know that I told you what I think it would be like from Luke's point of veiw I hope that I encourage you to want to being a Seagoing Cowboy. | 3 |
2a4ca7b | Imagine you are a NASA scientist discussing the face seen on Mars with a person a person who thinks it could have been alien life form that created it. Do you think it was just a natural landform or do you believe in alien life form doing this? NASA believes it is just a natural landform. NASA made a discovering on Mars that they believe looks very much like a face though they say it is just a nartural landform many others disagree, there is not any life form on Mars, aliens are just theory, and it looks similar to the landform in west America Idaho Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain.
First, there is not any life form on Mars. NASA has not yet caught any living creature on Mars when observing Mars and taking pictures of it. They have not been able to find any other things to point toward life on the Red Planet. For example in the passage it says "...you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size...if objects in this picture like airplanes on the fround or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shack, you could see what they were!". So this quote proves there is no life form on mars because they would have seen it.
Second, aliens are just a theory that has been around for years and years. The meth of aliens have been around for decades but still no one has ever seen one some may believe they have but mistakeing it for other objects or even seen them in their dreams and thought it was real maybe. In this example it shows that this is a strange find but could very well be just a landform "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first apperaed on JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." this was found in paragraph seven of the passage, saying there was no life form when they discoverd this picture of a natural landform.
Finally, some have said it looks like the natural landform MIddle Butte in the Snake River Plain in Idaho, west America. Like in this quote from the passage, " That's lava dome that takes the form of a isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.", proving it is just a landform and no more then that. Though this could open up another opportunity to discover is there lava or water on Mars.
Though NASA discovered this face and would of loved if it came from an alien
that was not the case, don't you agree? There is still no life form on Mars today, as for the theory of alien, and the Idaho plain land mark looked just like the landform on Mars, were all are fact to prove this was just a strange land mark of Mars. And now we know this thanks to NASA's research. | 4 |
2a519df | All our lifes we have wonndered what the future would be like, or what tecnologies will we have. This is a step closer to that world we imagine and wonder about. This I believe is a great step towards what we imagine the future will be like. Personaly I believe driveless cars are great and we need to do more test on this subject.
All our lifes we have wonndered what the future would be like, or what tecnologies will we have. This is a step closer to that world we imagine and wonder about. Driveless cars are in my opinion amazing and inovating. The fact that what we have seen on television and dreamed about is finally starting to come true is just mind blowing. We need to do more towards making this bigger. We need to get more states to change trafic laws so that more testing on these driveless cars. People are affraid of the things that might go wrong but that is why we need to be allowed to do more tests and fix what might go wrong. More states need to allow this. A lot of companies are manufaturing computer driven cars. These cars have a lot of different sensors and cameras to let the driver know what the car is doing and let the driver know he is safe.
There is more reaserch and testing needed for this but it will be big. The driveless cars are a great new thing. The world will seriously be impacted greatly by them. | 3 |
2a52391 | I agree that this technology is hepful, I believe it can help a lot of different people in many ways. I believe that this could be helpful because some kids/adults go through hard times and turn to death as an option. Many others may not agree with this technology because they don't want help nor do they want their emotions being able to be detected. This type of technology could help others in a various amount of ways. Here are some examples, a kid at home could be upset and the parents will never know because they don't pay attention to their childs emotions.
The parents would be required to do an everyday scan so they are aware of their childs emotions. Some parents could find out how their kids really feel and get them help. This technology could keep the suicide rate from uprising.
Doctors could use this in their offices to help patients. Especially infants, infants can't state how they feel. The doctor could scan the babies face and see their emotion.
" Eckman has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness."
Those six emotions detectors could be very helpful. Who knows they might even come up with more emotions to detect. This could help large amounts of people. So I agree with this technology. | 3 |
2a585ab | Our world had been "centered on the car, and that will have to change" and europe is taking a stand on this subject. europe takes a stand and tryed and experioment on a new suburb and influnses paris to partake in car-free week and all is a rage and influnces colombia to try.
Europe is taking a stand to the enviromenting harm that cars are causing by conducting an experiment. They have now made rules and regulation abut the Parking of cars in the suburban. An artical writen by Elisabeth Rosenthal states " street parking, drivewaysand home garages are generaly forbidden in this experomental new district on the out skirts of Freiburg... Vauban's streets are completly "car free". this is forcing people tio complie and live with a car. Heidrun Walter a media trainer and mothere of two telles the writer " when i had a car i was always tense. i'm much happier thid way". she belive that a car is not nessacery to make her happy and now that her carless she coulf never be greatful.
Car are a handy tool to have but the damage that they are causing our environment is unrelistic. "
paris bans driving due to smo g" by robert duffer enlightens us that " Paris typically has more smog then other european capitals...[last]week paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (pm) per cubic meter comp[ared with 114 in brussela and 79.7 in london". this is a very dis heartining thig that is being caused to our enviroment. luckly people are relizing the damage thate they are causing for generations about ahead of us and trying to solve the problem. paris awhated to try to sovlve the smog issue. paris plan of action was " Public transit was free of charge from friday to monday... the smog cleared enough monday for the fuli9ng french party to rescind the band of odd numberes plates on tuesday". this experiment did not please alot of people but did show the dramaptic effect that not driving for a five day period can positivly hgave an affect on out enviroment.
In corosponding to hearing about all of the enviromantal news for europe. BOGOTA, Colombia decided to participate in this movevment about cars and had a "car-free day"This fananium has spred liek wild fire and is having millions of people participating. andrew selsky tells us " millions of colobians hiked, bicked ,skated or took the buses to work during a car-free day." People are wuilling to suffer with incovelents to help or enviroment for the generations to come. this car-free move ment is not only for the enviroment. Carlos Arturo rode his two seated bick with is wife and told us " it's a good opportunity to takeaway stress and lower air pollution".
These countrys and people are taking steps and leading other epeople in the right direction and creating a better enviroment by participatin in car-free week. | 3 |
2a62a1c | I do not belive that self driven cars are the are a good alternative, or that they would save lifes. They are not able to react to new or unforseen senarios, they would cause people to become comfortable and be unprepared in the case of a problem. People will overall become worse driverse and be more werried and more likely to panick in case of a siguation needing their atention manifesting it self. In adition a car is an item some people hold very closely and injoy driving, these people will likely resist driverless cars, making for an uncomfertable mix of the two. For these reasons it is my beleif that driverless cars are not the future and will in no way benifit society.
The driverless cars produced so far require humans to take over in siduations such as backing in and out of driveways, the visinity around ancidents, and unforseen complications. Right now these cars are only able to handle low speeds around 25 mph, and relly heavely on human intervention. Perhaps the greatest problem is the expence, the equitment is heavy expencive and likely requires constant revisions to the design as knew flaws are revealed, as well as constant repair. To add to that any accidents that do accore will can not be blamed on human error, so any manufactorer would have many additional expenses in court, not to mension how many laws must be changed in order to make any of this posible. Any human driver would have to remain alert at all time to make sore that the car is making no error, but seeing the miles go by any driver would be luld into a fake sence of confort and reliability.
In conclusion, through expences and through the impracticality of the entire concept this is an idea unlikely to make it to the market. People would blame any misshap on the unsentiant driver, and they would be very hard to rebuke which in adition to the manufactoring cost would make this undoable for most manufactering componies do to the cost alone. Laws woud need to change,people would become worse drivers, and would be unprepared for taking over. The most difficult parts of driving would be left for the humans. This idea is intreging but it is as many ideas are, impracticle, and very, very expensive. | 3 |
2a70d56 | There is so much technology in the world we live in today. Our society revolves around technology and depends on it to survive. Without cars how would we be able to travel places or simply go grocery shopping. It would be potentially impossible to do the simplest of things. Transportation is key to the society we live in. Cars are very fundamental, but are driverless cars really that necessary. It might be very fascinating to drive but are they all that safe?
Driverless Cars still require the driver to do some of the driving if the circumstance requires them to. Such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" Meanwhile the drivers are waiting they could easily fall asleep or get distracted and not pay attention to their surroundings. They would rely on the car so much that if it came to their turn to drive, they would not be prepared to take over the wheel.
"Lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." Because of the development of the driverless cars; the driver will not be in control at all times, only sometimes. The car will be doing most of the driving. The drivers only job will have to be to stay alert and watch out for his/her surroundings. This is likely to cause more accidents because the driver may not be paying attention to the road at all times. Since he/she is not the one driving.
"If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" This is where the arguments will began. If someone driving a driverless car gets into an accident who will be the one that is really to blame? If this type of technology gets approved they will also have to make new driving laws towards driverless cars.
"We grow closer to the destination everyday." Even though driverless cars are the future for our society. It is also important to remember the importance of safety. We must care for one another and not let new technology overwhelm us. Ourselves, as the priority, must come first. The safety of everyone is at stake with this new development of driverless cars. | 3 |
2a73724 | The new technology can catch how you feel. That for your moves how u expreess in the mirror. As Mona lisa if this was in that time maybe they knew how she feel. Also with your muscles he can show you how your emotion.
The humans perfom this same impressive "calculation" every day. Probably your friends know when you are mad, sad, angry, happy ect. The computer 3D can just tell you your emotion and if you want to be more happy. For example "The facil expression for each emotion are universal" (par, 4).
These can help people to be more happy and not being in other emotions. It say that happy face work. But sometimes we intimidate people so they change. This it can be math class you calculete the cumbers an that's what the computer do it, the computer say a porcent to knew how much emotions you have.
Let's say you have 44%of sad, 33%happy, 12%hungry etc. The movement of one or more muscles is called an "action unit" The creator modificate correct the computer 3D so all the humans can see they emotions | 1 |
2a76a2f | Most people would like to think the "Face on Mars" is related to aliens in some way. However, that theory is highly unlikely. As in the in the article, the pictures from three different time periods, show different things, and each is more accurate than the other. It appears in the third picture (the most updated picture from 2001) that there is no face at all. It simply looks like a natural landform. The face was just shadows.
Even with the most updated and accurate picture from 2001, people still like to argue it could be a connection to alien life. Alien life has yet to be proven and is based off of theories, just like the face on Mars. These people are just ignoring the facts. My question is, why are people still basing there theory on an outdated and poor-pixlated picture when the newest one prooves its just a landform? I would like to think it has to do with fantasy. Most people get so stuck on something they wish were true just to make there life more entertaining, and most people like a little mystery as well. The thing is though that facts over-rule theories and perdictions.
According to the article, it says that with the newest picture, if there were something, we would've caught it in the picture. That is proof that it is only a landform. They even compare it to some of our landforms on earth, so I don't see how people still believe it could be something else. As I've adressed before, alien life isn't even prooven, so how could we be sure if this is connected to that all? We can't.
I would also like to adress shadows. In the first picture it had been said that they were only just shadows. There have been many instances of when we've seen shadows on objects and thought it looked like something else. This case isn't any different than that. We base most things on what we see rather than what it really is. It tells us in the article people have put the face in things such as movies, books, and magazines. For some reason people tend to feed into those things rather than whats really true. That goes along with the thing I said earlier about how people will believe what they want and pick the thing thats more exiting over whats logical.
There are facts and there are theories. Facts are what tell us that the 'Face on Mars" isn't anything alien related just a natural landform. Kind of a dissapointment really. | 4 |
2a7701b | It's astounding how driverless cars are coming. They may not be perfect and fully ready yet, but they still work and are able to be used. It feels like the future is here. It's amazing how people can create these types of technology that has the potential of being fully automated. Who would have thought that people would be creating fully or half automated cars. It's facinating that technology has come so far, but isn't this a little to much?
Driverless cars, yes it would be nice to have but are they really safe as they say they are. What if something were to malfuction in the car and the driver is to careless and doesn't get alerted and this said person gets injured and injures someone else in the process. In paragraph 9 it states "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault, the driver or the manufacturer?" This is a good question. Who is at fault? It depends on the situation. If the driver was too careless to pay attention it could possibly be the drivers fault, but what could have caused the driverless car to not work as properly.
So, what could have caused the driverless car to not work properly? One could be other unsafe drivers. How can some type of technology rely all by itself and worry about other outside objects and obstacles at the same time? What if some other driver who doesn't have a car that has "autopilot" and they were to have an accident and interfeared with your vehicle. In paragraph 2 it states that "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash". Yes without their cars crashing but what if someone else crashes into you? Imagine how expensive it would be if you were to have an accident with this car. Cars are already expensive enough when you get into an accident, but imagine how expensive it would be with a car that has all this technology in and on it. Plus imagine your insurance rates skyrocket with all of this.
In paragraph 9 it states that "if traiffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident." Yes, what if there are new traffic laws added. How would the auto piloted car know if something has changed or not. It's good how car manufacturers implemented the fact that a driver can take over if something were to happen. The same statement comes up again. What if the driver isn't alerted enough and doesn't pay attention. Something could still go horribly wrong.
All in all driverless cars would be great to have. It would make life so much easier for the common man or women to go to work everyday. It would even be nice to have for a nice long road trip with your family. There still is that one question, what if something were to malfunction and not make the vehicle safe anymore. Who is to blame? Even though the car manufacturers say that automated cars are safe, are they really the safest to have. | 4 |
2a785b1 | How you ever wonder how venus might look or want to go up to space and explore it? well here in my story going to describe how venus might look if you are to be interested.
In this story, Venus has it's up's and down's because venus is like Our Earth's twin because it is the planet that is really close in size, shape and distance. The rest of the planets are just like neighboors to venus and earth.
Some of the advantages, to go and explore venus is that it has similar things to compare to earth meaning that is we go see venus we wouldn't be surprised of how it could look because it like earth's twin having the same features as how earth look today. venus has rocky sediment which are familiar to earth today because that can mean that venus has valleys, mountains or craters. Another thing that would be cool for us to go visit venus is that knowing that earth and venus are really close to it's "one of the nearest option for a planetary vist." like the author stated.
Some of the disadvantages, would be that though earth and venus might look the same have same features it could be dangerous for us humans to go and visit venus on space if their hasn't
been prove that some one has gone yet or that we could live there; because Venus is the second planet closer to our sun
meaning It is so hot or get really hot just by knowing the tempertures you could just imagine. how we could not survive that easily the tempertures for venus could get up to 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Which knowinfg this it also has different atmosphere pressure which are 90 times greater than what we have ever experience here on earth. Not even the heat and the pressure but it can be even more dangerous becasue there can be other features that we could face on earth just not that frequelety, but in venus the weather can be way off and different we could be seeing way more erupting volcanoes, or way more powerful eathquakes or even lighting because we are just that just to those high tempertures that cause all of this chaos. well these are just of the disadvantages.
In conclusion, i feel that if we do come with higher end technology in how we might survive to visit venus in the future than it would be fine to go see venus the other half or twin or earth; but if not we could be really expiose to danger out there because their hasn't been a person there do to the extremes tempertures and how it could be bad to be there if NASA, still has to do some more research in order to know all the facts and we could go but as of right now we really just have to wait and thanks for this article; Now the people or audience can have a more depth note into how the other planets work and are. Since venus is too close to the sun i think that 800 degrees fahrenheit must just be an estimate i must be even more hotter than we might think. | 3 |
2a7d71d | Dear State Senator,
I believe that we should change the electoral college to election to popular vote for the president of the United States. The electoral college is in no way fit to be the basis of how we choose the president of the United States. This country was based of of popular soverignty and we should keep it the way that it always has been with all the decison makeing done be the people.
The electoral college is an overwhemingly unfair system to voters. The canidents will not spend any of their time in states they know will not win because of the winner take all system in each state. they only focus on the tight races and some of the states dont even get to see the campaign ads. Some of the states did not even see the candidates at all. The electoral college is essentially one of the most unfair things in the prospect that the candidates dont spend time in the states that they dont think will win and the states that they know wont win are not even privillaged enough to see the campaign ads.
In addition to being unfair the electoral college can cause serious damage. The electoral college have the power to go against the will of the people. Back in the '60s segregationists in the Louisiana legislature were almost successful in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would not vote for John F. Kennedy. Also during that time some electors would occasionally vote for whomever they please and not vote for their party's candidate. If the electoral college were to ever go into a tie it would be given to the House of Representatives. During this time the the states representatives will be cating thier votes on behalf of thier state. The problem with that is that those representatives are voting on behalf of thier entire state and that means they are voting for who they want and acting like that it is something the entire state wants.
There are five "offical" benifits of having the electoral college. The benifits are certainty of outcome, everyone's president, swing states, big states, and you avoid run-off election. All of these things are in fact true but what if you are willing to risk all of that just to be able to be the one who has a say in who becomes president. I know that they kind of do but in reality that does not really mean much if there is someone who is going to completly disregard my vote and do whatever he feels like doing. I know that all of those five benifits are important but isnt my right to have a say in whose president important as well?
Senator, the reason for my letter is that I want to have a say in who the president is going to be and the electoral college resticts that. I believe that the president of the United States should be elected by popular vote because this is America and in America we do what the people want and the people want change. We want the electoral college out and popular vote in.
Sincerely,
A concerned citizen | 5 |
2a7dcac | Think about the planets in the solar system, how about Venus more than the others. Studying Venus is like trying to study the bottom of a valcano or the inside of Earth. The planet, Venus, has many challenging aspects. Although the planet has these challenging conditons it also is the closest planet to Earth in density and size, it is one of the brightest points in the night sky, and many scientists think that there may have been life on Venus before.
Venus is the closest in density and size to Earth. "Often referred to as Earth's twin, Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size..." The planet is sometimes so close that scientists have tried to land spacecrafts on it. "Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner--in space terms--humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world."
Venus is one of the brightest points in the night sky. "Venus, sometimes called the Evening Star, is one of the brightest points in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot." The name however is misleading. "This nickname is misleading since Venus is actually a planet. In our solar system, Venus is the second planet from our sun."
Many scientists think that there may have been life on Venus before. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The features on the surface are somewhat like Earth too. "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogus to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters."
Some people might argue that Venus is inhabitable and should not be visited by any human because of the highly corrosive sulfuric acid and thick atmosphere. "A thick atomosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." However scientists want to create a ship that hovers safely over the planet. "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." "...A vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way."
Visiting Venus and studying it would be ground-breaking for the science field. Even though trying to study Venus is like trying to study the bottom of a valcano or the inside of Earth, it would still help scientists to know what the planet is like. The planet is the closest to Earth in density and size, it is one of the brightest points in the night sky, and many scientists think there may have been life on Venus before. So, before people go right to thinking about the dangers of Venus, think about all the good that could come about studying the "twin" planet to Earth. | 4 |
2a838f9 | Hi im luke and I think you should join the seagoing cowboy's I have really been inspired and had fun there is a bunch of neat thing's to see you can ride a boat for free but I will tell you if you dont want to do a little hard work this job is probally not right for you but if youre aperson who like's helping other's or you're not scared to get your hand's dirty this would be a good job because we see alot of happy face's and smiles. And that is because we bring people food livestock and make the hard time's easier for them because everyone want's to be treated the same so do it and help. But if youre a person who want's to do work to be rewarded then you still might want to help we get to go over sea's and see a bunch of exotic animal's elsewhere plus vacation spot's like touring a excavated castle or see the panamal canal and taking a gondola ride in Venice Italy. But the price is not paying a bunch of money but doing a little bit of work and on board you can do thing's like volleyball reading and ping-pong championship's.
But like I said I can see where someone else might come from because the work isn't alway's easy like feeding the animal's an watering them alot cleaning out the stall's but like I said everything has it's ups and downs and turn around's and some people would enjoy my work.
But if you want to try it out come on down to the sea cowboy's and have a good time. | 2 |
2a847b0 | In the article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile", I learned thet computers can now feel what emotions that you are feeling. This is a really cool thing cause now we can see and know when someone is actually happy or not. We could have so much more uses for this then trying to guess what emotions someone is feeling.
I think that this type of technology is actually very useful, my reasons for that come from the article when the author tells about how using a special camera can detect when someone is becoming bored when doing homeowrk or doing someother type of school work on the computer. If you can tell when comeone is confused or bored then you could really get some help or get a better, more fun filled math questions. Than would make students more productive and want to actually learn rather then when you are bored and doing ISTEP, they can make the test more exciting.
But there could also be some down fall to it. When a computer is watching your while your on it then that could be really weird feeling for some people. Also when a computer is seeing your facial expression all the time you could just be talking to someone and the computer would think your not getting what ever your doing so then it would have a tutor come up when you dont even need one.
So in my conclusion I think that these emotion reading computer cameras could not be so good but in other cases could be really handy or even in some events save you from getting a bad grade on a test. But in all I do believe that if these were to come into our schools I would just hope one thing, and that is to be graduated befor that time comes. | 3 |
2a857fb | Dear Mister Florida Senator,
I want you to tell mister president that we should keep the electoral college. Popular vote is not fair. not everyone is popular in all the states that is why people need the electoral votes so they can get a chance.
In source 2: the indefensible electoral college: why even the besy-laid defenses of the system are wrong states "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." This is telling me that democratic presidents dont go to republican states, like california, because they already know the republican president won them over without really doing much. Now, if it was a swing state, like florida, then both candidates want to fly over to the states and make sure they give a good speech to get as many electoral votes as possible.
In source 3: in defense of the electoral college: five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing a president it states, in reason number 2 "everyones president"
, that no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. If the president knew they would be able to win a region because the region believes in what he chooses, the candidate will not get electoral votes because he knows he will win those states. A candidate with only the regional votes is less likely to become president. If the president tries in the harder regions-regions he might not win or the swing states- he will get more votes.
In source 3 , it also states, in reason 3 "swing states"
, voters in the swing states are more likely to listen to both candidates than other states that already have who they chose. These swing state voters are going to decide the election fairly. They are also recieving the most attention and information from the candidates, so when one of the candidates become president they know what that candidate is goignt to do for the united states. Large states stes get more attention than small states since they are most likely to get more electoral votes and help the candidates win.
Also the electoral college system makes sure there are no run-off elections. Run-off elections are elections where no candidate wins a majority of votes. This leaves leaves pressure. For example, if there was no electoral college system if Nixon and Clinton were in an election and were running against each other it would lead to a serious problem. Since both men had only 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, it would be hard to choose a winner since they were both tied.
Now you see Mister Senater, why we need the electoral college system. Without it everything willl be really stressful and everythings already stressful. Dont make it worse. | 3 |
2a911f5 | Driverless cars are not a thing of the past any more. There are many companies that believe that creating a driverless car is a step froward, but it could also be a step back. The driverless cars we hev today require a human to take the wheel when there is something that requires human skills. However the car does alert the driver , it still seems dangerous to have a driverless car when the human's skills are still needed.
The most important thing under consideration about the driverless car is safety. If safety is the most important thing then why are driverless cars still being improved, when the project should have been shut down. The driverless car isn't really driverless because it still requires human skills. To me that means that the driverless car is not really safe when it requires a human to do the controlling at certain points, such as driving through a construction zone. For example, the driver is not paying attention to the alerts will the car crash injuring the driver and posibbly others around the driver.
In conclusion, the driverless car is illegal for a reason. It is only able to be tested in a few states. So I hopoe that the idea of having a driverless car seems unsafe because under certain circumstances a driverless car is not always a positive. | 2 |
2a912c5 | Driverless cars are coming, but they may not be the future most people are hoping for. Of course people want one--it is new and cool, but it will not be what they expected. Driverless cars would extremely expensive with all of the technology they are using. Also, it could be very dangerous without an alert driver ready to step in. There are several problems with driverless cars becoming humanity's future.
One problem is money--how will people be able to afford these driverless cars? For example, Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. The combination of all of these is absolutely necessary for the driverless car to have the skill of a human at the wheel. The combination of all of these is also very costly. Only a minority of the population would be able to buy such a car, and just because they're able to, doesn't mean they will be willing to. Many people might think the car isn't worth that much money if they can drive themselves. Economic problems will always be around.
Another issue is the danger of driverless cars. Nowadays, sensors can detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers and can cause the car to apply brakes by itself. It is a brilliant plan, but what happens when it does not work? Technology cannot always be perfect; it is bound to have glitches at some point. If manufacturers do bring in in-car entertainment and information systems so that the driver will not get bored, that means that the driver will not be alert and ready. For example, if the car's automatic brake system does not work, and the driver is not paying attention, there could be a serious crash with many people getting injured. Technoloy should not be relied upon because there is not a 100 percent guarentee of it always working.
In theory, driverless cars are an excellent idea. However, when they're actually applied and put to use, it is not going to have the best results. Many people may want a driverless car, but how will they get one if they cannot afford it? Not everyone has money just lying around, ready to buy a driverless car that would cost a fortune. In addition, the risk factor is too high. So many things could go wrong which could result in people actually getting injured. Driverless cars may be what humanity wants, but it is definitely not what they need. | 4 |
2a97d85 | I would be against the development of theses cars, just for the fact if you have no control over ther car the car could crash more likely than a car a person is controlling, because what happens if a car is about to have a car accident and you have no controll to turn the car so it won't crash as well. I feel it would be better if we people took controll of driving and not some system put in the vehicle that controls it. We may have had google cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009, where cars can drive more than a half a million miles without crashing, but at the same time the google car is truly driverless because the car will still have to alert the driver to take over if something goes wrong.
In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant", cars can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure drivers keep hold of the wheel in case something goes wrong. None of the cars we drive today are completely driverless, we still have to keep control of the wheel, how fast we go, and sometimes when we stop. Some of the cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills.
I feel we should just have control on the car for most of the part, just in case something does go wrong because if the car takes over who knows if something will go wrong because what happens if your car can't warn you if something is going wrong. You wont know til something does go wrong, that just isn't safe to me i am completely against the development of theses cars. | 3 |
2a9bea8 | Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because, our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. Venus had once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, this keeps astronomers fascinated. People are intrested in the topic that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit.
The author states in paragraph 2 "Often reffered to as Earth's twin, Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally closest in distance too." Despite the dangers Venus has, It is 'Earth's Twin' we could learn a lot about Venus and Earth if we decide to study the planet more. Scientists believe we say that Venus is Earth's twin because it once was covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth does today.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of finding other ways to get nearer and study Venus. These Astronomers are aware of all the dangers of getting to close to this planet and all the affects that come with studying up close. But for them to truly understand what comes with Venus, they will take the risk. | 2 |
2aa01a0 | A future with driverless cars can have many mixed feelings. Driverless cars could help solve many issues, but in the same way cause just as many problems. Many companies have been working on driverless cars now for years, but none have a definate answer to a car without any help and opperational needs by humans. Not having a fully driverless car already can represent the struggle, and challenge of creating a driverless car in this era. So i believe that the creation of a driverless car is a waste. They can be dangerous on the streets, cost lots of money, and have no real need in this day and age.
Driverless cars have already been proven to be dangerous on the streets. Companies have not yet come up with the technology for a car that can self-drive; the self-driving cars need a person on the wheel for emegergencies. Also, these cars can brake, steer and move on there own but need the assistance of a human when challenges come in the way. They need special help, and require the driver who is already at the wheel to take over and navigate through work zones and accidents. Having a "driverless car" but with a driver in the driver's seat, with his hands already on the wheel, but not driving makes it reduntant. Why waste that effort if a driver is already in the current position to drive.
If companies are putting all this effort into driverless cars, why cant they put the same effort and money into a real world issue? A nice, new car can cost a whole lot of money, and at a low can run upto 25,000 dollars. So a nice, new car that would drive itslef would run upto even much more money than that. We already have nice cars that we can drive oursleves around in, and with no problem at all. We shouldnt be focused on making cars that would make us Americans even lazier by not having to drive them. Companies should instead put this money to helping find the cure for cancer, or fighting against poverty and homelessness in America or other countires. Better things could be done with this money, instead of trying to make Americans even lazier.
A car that can drive itself has no real need in todays age, people drive themsleves fine everyday around the world without a problem. Some might say that having a driverless car is beneficial by having the car drive you somewhere, but then go back home for another family member to use. That isnt a real need, because almost everyone has a car nowadays anyway. Also, you need to have your hands on the sterring wheel while the car drives so its really not an option. What if the car didnt need your hands on the wheel while driving? Well say something harzardous did happen on its way home or a car crash, and the car needed to alert the driver to take over. The driver wouldnt be present, and the car would shut down and not make it to its destination.
Driverless cars are meant to sound fun, while having fun riding in one. Instead, they can infact be a waste of time, all in determination to find a new product for consumers to buy. They can even be a burden to opperate in; adults and young adults learn how to opperate and safely drive a car, but they would need a new curriculum to teach how to opperate a driverless car. They would need to show what to do during your ride in a driverless car versus what not to do. There is even the possiblilty of needing a different license, and test to be able to opperate a driverless car. So why go through all this hassel, and complexity for somwthing new, when we already have a fully functional car now that fullfils our needs. | 5 |
2aa5a24 | The idea of Venus being worth of pursuit, depsite its dangers, isn't completely outrageous. The author of this passage dives into this idea, stating a reason as to why Venus exploration should happen, and also stating reasons that it currently isn't possible. Though the author does touch on the ideas of why we should explore this planet, they do not give enough reason to support the claim, or at least enough reason and ideas to keep the idea circulating within the brain of all of the readers.
The author seems to use at least two of their paragraphs to give why we should travel to Venus, in a sense that we were able to do so. In Paragraph 3 they describe the conditions of the planet, adding that Venus has volcanoes, earthquakes, and lightning strikes just as Earth does. This is just the start of the author's biggest and only claim, which fully arrives in Paragraph 4. The author does so by adding more physcial features of Venus and almost putting them side by side to Earth's. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life...", and adding that "...Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." Later on, they also state that Venus has recognizable features, such as valleys, mountains, and craters. The author wrote only about how scientists would learn the history of Venus, and gave no reasoning beyond this.
Though displaying a solid claim, the author gives no further explaination to their only reasoning, and goes straight into talking about the difficulty of traveling to the planet. There are multiple things the author could have slipped into the passage, like the abundance of information that scientists would learn, opening further travel, and the creation of new technology. Scientists and man alike would obtain much needed information from exploring Venus. Not only would going to this planet tell us its history, just as the author said, but it would push us closer to the exploration of planets that sit beyond this.
The author described a trip to Venus as being one that would be no fun for humans, but if able to create technology to keep our explorers safe, there would be smaller and fewer limits on the places our explorers and scientists could go after. By picking such a harsh planet to start one of many trips, the work and energy put into a way to reach the planet would pay off more than the world seems to understand. Though the technology used to get to Venus would have to be updated depending on the length of travel and the conditions of travel,--snowy and colder climates or hot, tretorous terrain like Venus--it is quite possible to get more out of Venus than what is displayed.
Readers do receive great information from this passage, but the author could have been equipt to know more reasons as to why studying Venus would be a great thing for scientists. They did give the wonderous and plentyful reasons as to why it will be harsh to reach and remain on the planet, however. Despite this all, Venus is a planet to reconcile with, even if it means waiting the months or years it takes to make just the technology compatable enough to work with its body. | 5 |
2aa79b2 | I think the idea of Driverless cars isn't the best thing. I do not agree with these at all. I feel like there could many things that could go wrong with these. Here are a few that I believe that are the biggest probloms.
It says that the driver may have to start driving if a work area is up ahead. People may take advantages of them and they will be either asleep or they will be busy on their phone. It would be very difficult to pay attention and have to drive some if your sleeping. People are on their phones now when they actually driving. They are going to be on their phones even more and not paying attention.
Another thing that i think of is wrecks. If the cars do wreck how do you know whos fault it is with a car that has no driver. There would be many people that can be blamed for the accident. Like it said in the passage you dont know either to blame the car company or the driver that isnt driving.
It would be extremely difficult to have all these cars on a grid. they would all have to be on a grid so other driverless cars would know when to stop and turn. all of the cars would have to be programed to the same grid. That could be extremly difficult to have all of them in order and no glitches happen.
Then on top of everything the people that cannot afford the car will still have the cars we have today. If there is still cars on the road we have today then they would also have to programed to the grid with the driverless cars. That could be very expensive and not all people have the money to afford this.
This is why i strongly agree that this idea would not be a good idea unless the government hands them out. Which that would cause a whole nother agurment. | 3 |
2aaa8cf | advatanges of limiting car usage will be less polution in the air and less gas and oil that is needed to be found on the botton of the earth. limiting car use can only be the only way to save humanity and the population of this eart less oil and gas to be found, healthy air to breath, and also transportaion will be either to walk or ride a bike. also we can use other transportaions such as buses and trains. types of transportation that not only one to four people ride in but multiple people so not much gas is being using instead of 30 cars one bus ride can be equivilent to 20 cars. so talking the advatanges of limiting car usage will be a creat idea in so many other ways, then the way that were described.
many other advatanges of limiting car usage is the decrease of car crashes. causing insurance rates and prices to go down. also causing the limiting of teen drivers and very old people to drive as much. car crashes in america increase rapidly on a daily bases. meaning that there will be the cause of more deaths, hospital bills, and insurance will go up. less car usage less bills, money to reapair uneeded things. dont get me wrong cars are creat, cars changed this whole world on a new way to transport with its new accessories and gagets. but also limiting that car companies dont have to spend a whole lot to be in det. cars are something out of this world people still wonder on the functions of how it works. but sometimes its better to keep that way not knowing how and not using it as much. limiting car usage is a good idea but also it can cause alot of damage on what job, and also what the person uses the car for his or her natural habitat of the usage of the car. | 3 |
2ab0ffc | "But America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling", quote from the excerpt "The End of Car Culture", explains that people in the United States have started to become less dependent on cars. Not only Americans, but people all around the world such as people from Germany, France, etc. Reasonings for the recent drop in car usage is that there are problems with air pollution, bikes and other transportations that do not involve the use of cars also give place more space to make more town centers and sports complexes, and cars can be a very difficult machine that causes many problems for people everyday.
Smog has become a very big problem for France. France has blamed diesel fuel as the reason for the smog problems. Diesel is favored more than gasonline due to a tax policy, diesel makes up over 67 percent of vehicles in France. The smog in France was so heavy that it, "rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world" according to an article by Robert Duffer. Smog is a very big issue that should not be taking place it can cause many health problems. France decided that the smog was getting out of hand so they began a "Car-free day", this meant that people would not be using their cars for a whole day and some people would not agree with this idea. France started these "Car-free days" with the people who had even numbered license plates and then the next day would have cars with odd numbered license plate would not drive their cars. The consequence for not following this rule was a $31.00 or 22-euro fine. Many people were fined the next few days and twenty seven people had their cars impounded due to their reaction of the fine. This "Car-free day" helped to reduce the smog problem in France.
When people use any type of transportation other than a car they would be able to have many more places to go and have a good time. When people are using cars and other motor vehicles they are also causing more and more construction for new roads and places for cars to be able to park. If people rode bikes and walked more than we would have more places for people to build shops and complexes that are all together and easy to get to. In Vauban, Germany most residents there live a life without the use of cars. "The streets of Vauban are completely "car-free"- except the main thoroughfare", stated in the Article by Elisabeth Rosenthal. Only 30 percent of people in Vauban's familys own cars, the other 70 percent do not own cars. More than half of that 70 percent sold their cars just to live in Vauban. In Vauban they have begun to create more sidewalks that are better accesible for bikes and walking. This has created more room for people to construct new stores and places that are walkable distance for citizens, so less car usage could lead to many new places such as shops, stores and even new sports complexes.
Cars can be very difficult machines that cause many problems for people everyday. They can just stop in a matter of seconds and people would not know what happened, causing people to get their cars checked out at a car-shop and paying more money to get the problem fixed. If people began walking or using bikes as transportation they would not only be saving money but would lower the problems they would be having getting to and from places. Not using cars can save so much money for people because they would not have to pay much gas and they would not have to go to get their cars fixed almost every year. Even with bikes there might be a problem such as getting a flat tire or the chain popping off, even those little things would cost only a few dollars where as a trip to the car-shop would cost a least $100.00 out of pocket.
Limiting the use of cars can potentially save places from smog and more air pollution. Not using cars as much can leave more space for places to be built, instead of using the space as a parking lot people could use that space as a place for shopping or sports complex. Car-free day could even be a very helpful idea that might change the peoples minds to use other types of transportations besides a car. Having no cars could save a numerous amount of money for a lot of people. They will save money by not having to get a lot of gas and they will save money on not having to fix their cars almost every year. So limiting the use of cars could become a potential idea that can help people around the world. | 5 |
2ab58a5 | Dear State Senator,
Perhaps you may know about the 'electoral college'. In my point of view, I would keep the electoral college because it's better and the process has been the same in decades. So why change it?
The Electoral College is better because it's more fair. In the story, What Is the Electoral College?, it tells how the voting for president and vice president works." one for each memeber in the house of representatives plus for your senators" Meaning the state votings plus the the number of members in the Congressional delegation. Also in the the story, What Is the Electoral College?, it states " Each candidate running for President in your state his or her own group electors"...... "but state laws vary on how the electors are selected and what their responsibilities are".
In other words, canadiates that are running for President have their own people to elect them but the state laws say that candidates are suppose to be elected by their responsibilities. Even though other say " the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational" I think it is fair for how they process the Electoral College because it let's the candidate that you or that your state is voting have the opportunity to make some changes in the world.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME. | 2 |
2ab69a7 | My position on driverless cars is that I am against it. Autonomous cars still need the driver to be focused on the road. The driver must always be ready to take control of the car in any situation. I feel like autonomous cars give a false sense of safety when it comes to driving one of these autonomous cars. The cars arent fully autonomous they still require the driver to have his hands on the wheel in case he has to overtake the controls.
One reason I am against it is because no road that we drive on is fully predictable, so the cars wont know what to do when some situations arise. Most people who buy autonomous cars think they dont have to focus on the road and just leave it all to the car. Thats false, thats what makes these cars dangerous in a sense. " The can steer, accelerate, and break themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill," this is the reason I am against it. There may be a time that the driver needs to take over and steer the car out of danger, but since the driver had a false sense of security, he/she wont have time to react. They wouldnt have time to react because they might've been doing something else in the driver seat thinking that the car will steer itself. This is why drivers should always be in full control of the car at all times, because no road is predictable and it requires fast human skills if any situation arises.
There might be safety precautions that can try to prevent you from falling asleep at the wheel. This wont help at all in my opinion. Since the driver isnt doing anything, they will feel tired and bored and close their eyes and sleep. If they're really tired they wont hear the warning signs about work zones or any other warning in that matter. Everyone is different, some people are light sleepers and others are heavy. "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object." This will fail in some occasions. Say you're a heavy sleeper, and you dont feel the vibrations, and you crash into an object. Will that be your fault or the manufactorers fault for giving you a false sense of safety? Does the vibration have a setting to make it vibrate violently to wake the driver up? Does the vibration start happening at different distances depending on the speed of the car? Also how does one know the reaction time of a driver? These are the test they need to do to know how to make these cars safer. The reaction time of a person woken up from sleep is really slow compared to someone who is fully awake. Also how does the car recognize that a danger is going to happen.
In conclusion this is why I think autonomous cars is not good for the people. Its not safe for the driver who is moving at high speeds down the highway with a false sense of safety. Its not safe for pedestrians who cross streets not knowing if a human is controlling the car or not. Streets will never be predictable and the computers on the car will go off of predictability. Yes there will always be a traffic hazard everywhere you go, and the car might not know what to do and its up to you to get yourself and the car out of harms way. This wont happen if you're asleep at the wheel thinking the car will do it itself and you wont have to do a thing. I feel like if a person is wanting to buy a autonomous car, they will have to take courses on how to correctly use the controls and also what to do when theres an emergency ahead. They will have to know the fundimental things like dont fall asleep on the wheel, always be focused and looking for potentional hazards ahead. Always put your hands on the wheel whenever the car tells you to. Also the main thing they should focus on is to never trust the car to get you from one place to another without your assistance along the way. Thats why in think autonomous cars a negative thing. | 5 |
2abd742 | You all should join the Seagoing Cowboys group because in paragraph nine it says that being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke, it opened up the world to him. Paragraph nine also states that Luke said "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." If you were to join the Seagoing Cowboys you would be sure to highly to enjoy it! Here are a few reasons about why you might reconsider your thoughts.
Luke was just an ordinary boy who was working two jobs. In paragraph one it states that Luke's friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Paragraph one also stated that Luke couldn't pass up the offer becasue it was an opportunity of a lifetime. In paragraph two it states that Luke and Don signed up to be apart of the Seagoing Cowboys. Because of Luke and Don signing up for the Seagoing Cowboys they got many opportunities to cross the seas.
Another reason why some of you should join the Seagoing Cowboys is because you could be a small-town boy or girl like Luke in paragraph five, and expirience many amazing opportunities if you just take the chance and say yes. If youn think that all you will do is stay on a boat and go somewhere and then leave, then get back on the boat and do the same thing you are wrong. In paragraph five Luke states "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China." To a lot of people that is really cool because a lot of people woud love to vist China and Europe and have a great time.
Last but not least, you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because you would be surrounded with a ton of great people. In paragraph eight it states that Luke found time to have fun on board. It also states that the cowboys played baseball and volleyball games so it will be sure that you will have fun! But only if you join the Seagoing Cowboys because if you don't you will miss out on a lot of fun things other than just work. Joining the Seagoing Cowboys is something you don't want to miss out on so you better come and sign up now!
That is why I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys because it is a very big opportunity of a lifetime, something some people wouldn't want to miss out on. The Seagoing Cowboys want you to join and they don't want you to think thatb you are just doing work they want you to also have fun! | 3 |
2aca278 | One big milestone in a person's teenage years is when they have to take a driver's test to get their license. Many people often become stressed behind the wheel during the driver's test because they are afraid of making mistakes. The people of our generation are just as nervous about these test as our older generations but what if that were to change in the future? What if, instead of driving cars where we have to be driving one hundred percent of the time, there were cars out there that allowed the car to do the driving for us? Many companies have been working on the idea of "driverless cars" in hopes that they will reshape the whole concept of driving. However, that does not mean they are a good thing. Driverless cars should not be used in the future because they could take away the focus of the driver, the future generation wouldn't know about driving basics, and they are illegal in some states.
First of all, they could take away the focus of some drivers. As these driverless cars are being invented, they allow drivers to meerly sit back in the drivers seat and enjoy the road. Sitting for thirty minutes in a car will not be enough to satisfy the boredom of some people. There are people out there who can not deal with sitting in one place for a few minutes and have to do something to keep them busy. Therefore, their focus could easily move to something else other than the road, like a fellow passenger or at the scenery around them. Driverless cars are not entirely driverless. As said in the article, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." What if the driver is not prepared to take over when the situation requires? These new cars may have features of notifying an individual when they need to take over but if they are not ready because they were focused on something else, then the results could be disastirous. This is why it takes away focus from drivers.
Next, the future generation would not know about driving basics. Many teenagers today have to take drivers ed classes as they attempt to obtain a license from the BMV. But what would future generation drivers have to go through for their driving exams if we have driverless cars. As stated before, driverless cars aren't entirely driverless. The newer generations still have to learn to basics of driving even if they will be driving in a driverless car in the future. If this does not happen, then they could be in trouble if their driverless cars malfunction or they are forced to drive a regular car instead. The future generations will probably not know about the driving basics because they will think they are too far advanced for it. For example, not many people know how to drive "stick" or even know what that means even though it was vital for driving long ago. If someone were to enter a car that needed that kind of function, they would not know what to do. And the same thing applies to future generations if they would not know the driving basics.
Finally, these vehicles are against the law in some states. According to the article, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control ata all times. As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." With the government concerned about the safety of a driver behind the wheel, they will not allow driverless cars on the roads. The safety of the people is more important than to advancement of technology. Until the driverless cars have been updated to the time where they are safe for everyone, there is no way that driverless cars will be seen on the roads with regular cars for quite some time. This is why driverless vehicles are against the law in some states.
In conclusion, driverless cars should not be used in the future because they take away the driver's focus, the future generations need to learn about the driving basics that we use today, and it is illegal to use computer-driven cars. Of course, in the future, new technology will arise to give people more mobility and ways of transportation but that will not happen until everyone is safe. Many individuals are in car crashes every year from lack of focus on the road. Driverless cars can add to this problem just like any other and until we have to tools necessary to ensure they safety of the people using driverless cars, there is no way that they will be seen among the streets. | 5 |
2ad0a98 | Using technology to read the emotional expressions of students is not a very good idea. We all have bad and good days. But there is no reason to use the technology to read students expression.
Some kids would perfer to be left alone when their feeling sad. Others dont want to be bothered when mad. When kids are sad or mad it can be easy to tell. or when someone is happy. They have a big smile on thier face and the smile isnt being forced by them, they're actually smiling.
"Dr. Pual Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happines, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness." These six basic emotions can tell alot about someones day. If they seem sad you can guess that something bad happened. If mad, they probably got into a arugment with somone. "For example, your frontalis pars lateralis muscle (above your eyes) raises your eyebrows when surprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightnes your lips to show anger" If you are aware of what peoples expressions do you are going to be able to teel peoples emotions.
Therefore
we do not need a computer or technology being able to read students emotions. You can simply ask them how they feel or try to read their expressions. | 3 |
2ad190b | Diverless cars sounds like a fantastic idea for the future, but not now. We are developing and avancing in technology to fast. Which can led, to many errors in our technology. In the coulpe years technology has becomed our need to survive for some people. Adults are growing children with technolgy, for example computers, phones, iPads, etc. Well, my position on driverless cars is that they are a smart and wonderful invention for the future because the cars sound more reliable and safe, but
I feel like it is just not the right time for driverless cars to be introduced in four years. I am still trying to catch up with all the new avanced things that are bing invented each day.
The idea of driveless cars sounds really cool because the car can drive for you, without you needing to drive. And that it involves a heads up display by turning off instantly when the driver needs to take over. Therefore, it makes it safe to travel in driveless cars because safety is a huge concern. That means there should always be a driver, who can drive to remain alert. It is also cool how the driver watches the road and the car watches the driver. I cannot wait for driveless cars to come out.
It seems like the ficitional movies were correct that by 2020 technology will change and do a huge impact on the world. Hopefully, we don't loss the track of time. And don't develop technology really fast that we can be disspointed in the future. | 2 |
2ae04e2 | The Driverless Car of the Future
Driverless cars are the cars of the future. The driverless car itself isn't actually driverless. In fact it is on autopilot for 90% of the time except for when the car needs to go somewhere that only a human can navigate through. The driverless car is more safe than a car that needs a human to drive it, they are more gas sufficient, and they abide by the law.
Driverless cars are not fully driverless, but that will change in the near future as technology advances. The car can accelerate, turn, and brake while observing its surroundings so it does not get into a crash. There is a car coming out in 2016 that can be on autopilot that can travel up to 25 mph without assisstance.
The driverless car is more safe. Google has made a driverless car that has traveled 500,000 miles and the only crash that it had gotten into was because of a human crashed into the car. The cars are very safe and could be inserted into taxis in the near future.
The cars that google forsees is a driverless car that uses half of the gas that the taxis of today use. As gas becomes more rare, it will be more useful if the cars that use gas are more gas sufficient so the gas prices can still stay lower.
In conclusion, the cars are more gas sufficient, and they are more safe than the modern cars of today. The driverless cars will take over the car business in the near future and they will be in the modern house and the taxi systems. | 3 |
2ae4810 | ''the challange of exploring venus '' in the number four the author says Astonomers are facinated by venus because it may wee once have been the most earth-like planet in our solar system.long ago, venus was probably covered largely with ocean and could have supported various form of like earth, the author seggest that studing the venus is a worthy because to learn all about the planet because our solar system is the most important in the world it's worthy to know about the planet the planet exist for us to give us sun and cold for our good to be fine and nathing happened to us the world is our all the people live in the world have to worry for the atmosphere the venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system even thought mercury is closer to our sun.beyond high preasure. venus is actually a planet ,in our solar system venus is the second planet from our sun while venus is simple to see from the distant but safe ventage point of earth,it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely
in conclusion, is about the planet and aur solar system ,to study about the planet all about the planet is important to know because is important for all the people in the world and the venus to because is the second planet from our sun in the world so venus and mars is our other planetary neigbor,orbit the sun a different speeds the is my conclusion | 1 |
2ae8014 | Do you want to participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program? The Seagoing Cowboys program is a good "opportunity of a lifetime". Its a good opportunity to learn how to be responsible such as" taking care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas".
So Luke Bomberger learned a lot from not ever going overseas before.
The Seagoing program is educational because according to Lukes adventure he learned a lot about taking care of animals, and learning that
"World War ll was over in Europe, and many other countries were left in ruins".
So I could say that Luke probably was interested in many different things and he probably had fun learning them. According to the article it sounds like Luke was very anxiuos when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe with him on a cattle boat. When Don Reist invited him he kinda sounded like he was kinda confused when Don said cattle boat but then I think he thought that it would be a perfect opportunity to learn or see what is would be like.
You should go try the Seagoing program! It can be a very exciting experience if you have never tried it or even heard of it before. I also think you can learn many different events that havehappened overseas, such as visiting it to see what it looks likes if you live far or just seeing where World War ll was hield at. I also think it could be very interesting to just see what happened or if theres something there from World War ll. So you should go and visit Europ e on a cattle boat just to see how interesting or what you see that you dont see around where you live. | 3 |
2aee9ae | The face you see was not created by aliens because there has been many of rock shape figuers on other planets.
We have in NASA came across many differnt type of natural landforms through out space.
The rock formation
is a mesa the NASA came acrossed
and it was a huge rock formed by shadows giving the illusion eyes, nose, and mouth.
The picture actually shows is the Martain equivilent of a butte or mesa land form common around the American west.
The head shape is just like a volcano it looks like it is a huge rock that comes up just like a volcano.
Then once a clear shot was given it was shadowed as a face but really it was just a huge natural land form.
There are probly all types of land masses that might look like a face, on planet earth or on other planets that we have not found yet might have faces exactly like this one
so there is no way to say a alein created this when the NASA has came across this more than once.
the only reason the NASA paied attention to the land formation is because it has a face on it that was made by a shadow.
That is why aleins did not make the land mass because volcanoes come up to pionts and rise as so due the land formation and some volcanoes have faces as well as the land formation.
So no this is just a natural landfom created by outerspace and gravity. | 3 |
2aeff1e | Luke's point of view is convincing others to participate in the seagoing cowboys program. His experience with the program had opened up the world to him and he has experience some exiting events. As seen in paragraph 9 it says '', It opend up the world to him". It also says ''it made me more aware of people of other cuntries and there needs". I like that Luke had aggread to go on the trip and that he is engoing it after he broke his ribs because that means he has a good spirit. I did injoy this story and people shuld participate in the program.
Luke's participation in the progran hays allowed him to experince adventures and visits to many unique places. Such as when he saw the Acropolis in greesce was special. He also saw Europe and China. There took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China. Luke also saw Italy with streets of water. He is a lucky person to see those great places.
Luke is likes the program good all its good things. So i whould go and other people shuld to. | 2 |
2af05b5 | For years I've heard that voting time is the choice of the people. But with Electoral College, it's not about the people; it's about the slate electors. When voting for what president the people want, they aren't voting for the president, they are voting for a slate of electors. But if two people are going for president, and one wins the national popular vote but the other has more electors votes; the one with more electors votes will be president. I think changing the election to popular voting for the president would be better than Electoral College, I'm not the only one that agrees.
When voting time comes around you see a lot of publicity about each person running for office months before the actually voting time. And between that time of the publicity starts and to the voting date you are picking which person you want in office. You may do some research, listen to all the radio or TV interviews, and/or watch all the speeches each person does. The whole time you are set on one person to be president. But yet you can't vote for them, becuase of Electoral College. You vote for the slate electors, the electors vote for the president. Maybe your slate elector doens't want that person, they can vote for the other runner. Voters can't always control whom their electors votes for. Sometimes voters get confused on the electors and vote for the wrong candidate.
To pick a electors to depends on the state. Maybe it's a state convention, state party's central committee who chooses, maybe the presidential candidates themselves even. It's not always the people's choice on who is president. It has happened before, two people gone for president, one gets more national votes while the other has more electors votes. And of course, the one with more electors votes goes into office. Even though the people decided they wanted the other runner.
During elections the runner for president tend to only pay attention to the more populated state such as California, New York, Florida, and Texas rather than the smaller states that have less number of electoral votes like Hawaii, Alaska, North and South Dakota, or New Hampshire.
According to Bradford Plumer in "The Indefennsible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong," Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, and AFL-CIO all agreed on getting rid of electoral college. Over 60% of votes would rather have a direct election to having Electoral College. They rather have a president win by popular vote than having slate electors vote on a president for them.
Voting for a leader of your country should be the people's choice. Not slate electors. It should be by popular vote, not Electoral College's vote. I say listen to the people, vote on popular vote. | 4 |
2af2552 | Driverless cars were a thing of the future, but now they are a thing of reality. There is a population against driverless cars. Driverless cars are good for the whole population.
With driverless cars, the the person occupying the driver-seat could relax while tired. Decreasing the amount of accidents caused by falling asleep at the wheel. Stated in paragraph 1 of the article, Google cofounder Sergey Brin has envisioned these cars will use half of the fuel of a taxi. With using less fuel it will cause less pollution. Say there is a man named Dan who takes the bus everyday to work; he has caught some kind of disease. This could be prevented with the driverless car. Say Dan drives himself to work everymorning in his Jeep. One day, Dan stays up until 6 in the morning to finish his work; he has to be to work by 8 AM. Dan rushes in the morning; he starts speeding. Dan closes his eyes for a second because he is exhausted. He hits a child walking to school. The pain of the child's parents and the gulit of Dan could have been prevented with the driverless car.
However, it is to be believed that this car would malfunction is some way shape or form. Road work is always occuring. How will the car get through that? Some person on the road does not know how to drive. How will you avoid that? Some kind of thing that could potentially be unavoidable arises. How are you going to deal with that?
I assure the buyer no worries. In paragraph 7 it explains how the car is designed to let the driver-seat occupant take control of the car if the situation is needed of a person instead of a robot. The car is designed with sensors and cameras. If roadwork is ahead the car with notify the driver to take action. Same for any other situation. The driver can take control at anytime if needed.
The driverless car is a good thing for the population right now. It gives more of a chance for driver's to bond with passengers. It is also a safety feature we need on roads. Remember, you do not want to be like Dan. Getting diseases, hitting pedestrians, and what not. | 3 |
2af44aa | The Debate of the Faces
A new technology called Facial Action Coding System, which enables computers to show human emotions by facial expressions, is not valuable to students in the classroom. I do not think that a computer system to read the emotions of students is needed for a quality education. Students have been learning in schools without the Facial Action Coding System for hundreds of years, so why would the Facial Action Coding System help us now? The Facial Action Coding System could actually be unbeneficial to students in the long run. This system could make students feel uncomfortable and insecure about their learning.
The main reason that the Facial Action Coding System is not valuable to students in a classroom is beause it is invading to the students privacy. The students may feel like their emotions are invaded by a computer that is constantly watching them. The Facial Action Coding System could make the student feel like they are being pressured and that their emotions for a certain day can alter their learning style. "Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movementsin a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa" (D'Alto). This shows that the system can watch the students' every move. Would you like to be watched all day by a computer that is reading your mood?
Another reason why the Facial Action Coding System is not needed in the classroom is because many classes in school are taught by a teacher, not by computers. The Facial Action Coding System might not be used at all if the school is taught by a majority of teachers, which could be a waste of money and software. Dr. Huang says in paragraph 6 that 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.' Even though this statement is true about the Facial Action Coding System, many lessons in schools are not taught by computers, but are taught by teachers. The teacher could also probably tell if the students are bored or confused so they could alter their lessons. In paragraph 5, the author says that, "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" (D'Alto). This shows that the classroom teacher could effectively alter their lesson based on the expressions of the students, just as the Facial Action Coding System could.
In some cases the Facial Action Coding System could be valuable to the classroom and learning environment. If a student is taking online courses or a school is predominantly taught by computer lessons, the Facial Action Coding System would help students stay more focused. The system could try to change the way of teaching based on the viewer's expressions. The system can also be beneficial to ads on computers. "...if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different" (D'Alto). This shows that the Facial Action Coding System could also make ads more interesting for those on computers often.
The Facial Action Coding System is definetly an amazing invention to computers and reading facial expressions. Although it is a great invention, I do not think that schools are ready for a program that studies the students' faces. This technology should not be used so it can protect the students' privacy, make them feel comfortable in the learning environment, and make them feel like their lessons are not forced. Many schools are also probably still taught by a majority of teachers, whearas the Facial Action Coding System would not be needed at all. All in all, it depends on where you fall in the debate of the faces. | 5 |
2af9cde | Imagine you could tell exactly how someone felt, just by looking at their face. This is precisely what a new technology, named FACS (Facial Action Coding System), does. This technology could have some amazing applications in the real world, like to suit web page ads to someones liking, to make computer-animated faces more expressive, and to monitor students emotion in the classroom. FACS should be used to read the emotional expressions of students in the classroom.
FACS should be used to read the emotional expressions of students in the classroom. One reason FACS should be used in classrooms is because it can monitor if the students are becoming confused or bored. The article says this here, "A classroom computor could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." This is valuable information for the teachers, because it can help them make lesson plans that are liked by and are more efficient for their students. Another reason FACS should be used in the classroom, is because it could adapt the lesson based on the emotions of the student. The article says this here, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This is important because it can modify the lesson plan to help the student directly, when they need it, even if they are not wanting to seek help.
FACS should be used to read the emotional expressions of students in the classroom because it can monitor if the students are becoming confused or bored, and adapt the lesson based on the emotions of the student. This could be one much needed, huge change in the educational system. All in all, FACS is a great piece of technology that could help brighten up the future the same way the lightbulb did. | 3 |
2b057fb | I am aginst the development of driverless cars. I am aginst driverless cars because they could be very dangerous machines, the text states "...The human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." In other words the human must take action when the car doesn't know what to do and this could be very dangerous if the car doesn't stop driving or alert you soon enough to take the wheel. Another reason for being aginst the development of driverless cars is if the vehical is one hundred percent driverless then it means you are being transported by one big computer and like other computers under the wrong conditions it will crash.
If there were driverless cars not everyone would be able to afford them so the cars on the streets today would have to be extra careful when around a driverless car because they don't know if it could mess up and make them wreck. Also if there was a situation where a driver of a regular car made a mistake the driverless car wouldn't have the reaction time of a human to avoid any crashes and that would put the ones in the driverless car is a paranoid state until reaching their destination. The development of driverless cars would mean more regulations and rules on transportation which might not be a good thing. If there were more regulations and rules regarding the driverless cars there would also be more loop holes in that part of the justice system.
These visions of a future with driverless cars should be left at just visions because of the dangers and unessesary risk of getting to a destination a bit sooner. It is because of the reasons stated above that I am aginst the development of driverless cars. | 3 |
2b075b4 | Was the Face on Mars created by aliens? No,The Face on Mars is just a natural lanform because scientist figured it out that it was just another Martian mesa, the rule of thumb, Micheal Malin and his team snapped a picture of the Face revealing a natural landform.
First in paragraph one and three, The region where the face was found is called Cydonia and scientists had also found that it just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia.
Next in paragraph eleven, Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, explained that "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times than the pixel size, so if there were objects in the this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptain-style pyramids or even small shacks, you can see what they were!'
Finally in paragraph seven, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photo. Thousands of web surfers waiting when the image first appeared on a JLP web site,revealing a natural landform. There was no alien monument.
In conclusion, the Face was not created by ailens ,but just a natural landform because scientists have figured out that a mesa is a common lanform, the rule of thumb, and MOC team snapped a picture of the Face revealing a natural landform. | 3 |
2b082c1 | Have you ever thought about how life would be like in the futrure? How technology would develop? or How people would come up with new forms of transportation? Well, what if I told you that someone has developed what is called a driverless car. Yes, a car that steers, accelerates and brakes itself. I will be telling you about some of the pros and cons about using this new technology.
Google has come up with a car that drives itself, but the driverless car still has a long way to go. When it comes to the driverless car you still need a driver in the vehical to take control of the car when it needs to drive through roadwork detours, and traffic accidents. Althought this is still the case, Google is trying many diffrent approches to see how they can improve this technology in many differnt ways.
When it comes to new technology and developments in the world, I am for it. New developments can improve your life, and make it easier. With technolny like the driverless car, even though you may need to take control of the car sometimes overall it's still a very helpful and safe way to maybe answer a call or send a message, and still be safe with your driverless car. | 2 |
2b0bc6d | The challenge of Exploring Venus is a pretty big challenge. Venus is often referred to Earth's twin. Venus is the closest pranet to earth in terms of density and size. Venus and the Earth orbit the sun at different speeds. Venus is sometimes right around the corner in space, humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. No spacecraft has survived the landing fo rmore than a few hours.
There are a lots of challeneges of landing on Venus. Like 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 other planets the temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. This is 90 times greater than what we experience on the Earth. It's dangerous for people to land on venus because Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, Even though Mercury is closer to our sun.
On Venus there are erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes. This is really dangerous for us to spend a lot of money on that then a lightning just hits us or something. Venus is a really dangerous planet if compared to the Earth. But scientist are still discussing further visits to its surface. It's because Venus may well once have been the most Earth-like Planet in our solar system. Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters.
NASA has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. However, peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can only provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense.
There are a lot of dangers of going to Venus. But I think if we can land there we can have a chance of making that the second earth. Venus has a lot of reasons why people can't live there but they called it as the most likely planet that is closer to earth. | 3 |
2b0d36b | Ever wonder what someones feeling even if they aren't sowhing in well this might be something worth looking into. Many people have heard "Fake it till you make it", well that might work sometimes but now those people are gonna have to step up their game. A software has been made by a a team of professers and this software is called "FACS" or Facial Action Coding System. People belive robots and computers are not eligable to understand emotions but thats changing.
First of all, this software that has been created by two Professers. One of theses people is Dr. Huang from Beckman Institute for Advanced Sceince at the University of Illionis, and the other is Prof. Nicu Sebe from the University of Amsterdam. Together these two men are working and striving to devlop better ways for humans and computers to communicate. Not only did this work later on, but they also made something very interesting its called FACS.
Also, the FACS software begins with a computer and this long code which then gets turned into a 3-D computer model of a face. This model includes the 44 major muscles in the face to replicate a human face and determine its emotion. They tested this technology on the famous Mona Lisa, which is a famous panting made by Da Vinci. In this panting there is a woman who is somewhat smiling but it doesn't appear t be a real happy smile.
Not only, when these two scientist ran a test on the Moan Lisa did they prove it worked, but they also got results of the emotions that were astonishing. The results showed that the woman in the panting was 83 precent happy, 9 precent disgusted, 6 precent fearful and 2 precent angry. This infromation came from a computer just running a scan and replicating the movement of the facial muscles. Not only was this a remarkable sceintific discovery, it also could become very helpful in many ways. We could take this software and read childrens and students emotions just by scanning the facial muscle movements, we could also even use this on older or people that can't express their feelings.
All in all, lets just face it we may have devloped a technoloy that can read peoples emotions and give us results based appon the simplest movements of their face muscles. Thats remarkable and not only is it going along with the tecnhnoloy these days, but its also so helpful. This is a tool that can become very effective and useful in schools, hospitals, nursing homes, and even mental instatutions. What these two men acomplished with a set of codes and a computer just may in fact help change the world. This would possibly help end the increasing suicide deaths, so people could get help and not be alone with their emotions. | 3 |
2b14412 | Dear Senator,
"The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens"(Office of the Federal Register1). Thus, the Electoral College is a balance of votes that includes many different sources for which the President is elected. For this, the Electoral College should be retained due to its contribution to successful elections even though there are some instances which occur and to help the elections remain fair and equal. Additionally, this process should be continued, but there are certain aspects that would argue for changing the aged process.
In Richard Posner's, "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President," he incorporates in his defense, that the electoral votes are awarded in a winner-take-all basis, which means that the states play an important role in the deciding factor of who will become the next President. Posner explained theoretically, "In [2012's] election, for example, Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 perecnt of the popular votes cast for him and Romney... even a slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state" (Posner 1). With this, this shows that the state votes are important and essential to the canidates who are trying to obtain electoral votes in the states. Thus, this method or process is successful in ways many people do not aknowledge. The citizen's votes do matter, when every aspect is put into a big picture and taken into account. Furthermore, the Electoral College alllows for everyone to have the chance to be apart of the elections. The Office of the Federal Register explains, "The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress" (The Office of the Federal Register 1). This adds suppprt that at the end of the election, almost every part of an election including votes, is taken into consideration, thus making the election a sucessful one.
In The Office of the Federal Register's excerpt, "What Is The Electoral College," there is certain reasons that further divulge how the Electoral College is fair and equal to the canidates and the citizens who are voting. This is reliterated when The Office of the Federal Register statees, " Your state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional Delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators...(Office of the Federal Register 1). In addition this means that each state will receive an opportunity to have a meaningful vote to the elections because every state has the same kinds of members being awareded to them. Each state will have a different number of members due to the size, but they will all be of equal value to the canidates. To add for support, Posner says, "No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president"(Posner 1). With this, all the states understand that their vote is crucial to the election and the canidates. Fortunately, the Electoral College is fair and equal to all the state's voting in the election, sometimes even more than some states know. For example, Posner states, " Voters in toss up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign-to really listen tp the competing candidates-knowing that they are going to decide the election"(Posner 1). Ultimately, the Electoral College is the most fair way to decide and vote for a future president who will be our leader of all the citizens.
Lastly, the Electoral College is the best way to determine a president, but there are some flaws. For example, Plumer explains, "... Thanks to the quirks of the electoral college- won the popular vote but list the presidency over 60 percent of the voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now" (Plumer 1). The elecotral college could alter the outcome of an election dramtically. Another issue that Plumer wants people to know is that, " Under the electoral collge sysytem, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors..." (Plumerr 1). This is true but also could be a little dramatic. Ultimately, the citizens are the ones who are voting for the candidates not the electors. Without the vote from the citizens there would be no electors. The Electoral College process should still be kept even though there are some issues.
In conclusion, the Electoral College is very important to our modern day elections. The citizens and the states determine who the next Presidents will be. The process provides successful elecions which are fair and equal to not only the people, but the states. Posner states, "Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a poltiacl preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election" (Posner 1). The Electoral College makes sure that every person and state vote is accounted for and will be contributed to who the next President will be. One day maybe there will be a process that will exceed the Electral College, but for now, we will trust our founding fathers and keep the process that has been with us since the start. | 5 |
2b1618c | I am for the deveIopment of the cars. I believe that the developement of driverless would be great. There is always a good and negative side to thing. The negative thing about driverless cars is that they still require humans. The good thing about them is that there would be less accidents due to people on their phones while driving. Driverless cars would improve our world in both good ways, they also have a bad side, they would also require half of the amount a current car uses.
Driverless cars would improve our world for the better. According to the article the cars would have sensors that cause the car to apply brakes when there is danger. The cars would also alert the driver when it needs you to take ove the wheel. There would be less reckless driving. The roads would be much safer. The self driven cars would not require as much as todays cars do.
Driverless cars also have a negative side. The cars still require a human to be alert in case he needs to take the wheel. The care requires a human hand to be on the wheel while the car is driving. A danger is that the brakes could suddenly go off putting the people in the car in danger. According to the article the car cannot drive itself around work zones and around accidents. So the human would need to drive.
I am for the development of driverless cars. I believe driverless cars would improve our world.
I think they would be a great developement. According to the article they would require half of the gas a regular car uses in todays market. The cars would react much faster than a human due to thier sensors applying brakes much faster. The number of deaths would be less due to driverless cars. Less control a human has the less reckless driving there will be.
Automakers should continue their work to improve the driverless car. They would require half of the current cars. They would make the steets safer. The self driven cars would allow humans to be on their phones without putting others in danger. Humans could still gain control of car if needed. | 3 |
2b164b9 | The develepment of driverless cars is a very unique and intresting topic. The driverlass cars would come with many pros,and cons. From making a living off of them to the cities and counties using them to benifit the citizens.
My belief among with many others is that as a country we do not need anymore reasons for us Americans to be lazy. Although I believe that there would be astonishing benifits with the Firefighters/Parametics using this equipment,there should also be limitations. "There cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash." This show that there is obivisly some reliability behind these machines. The should be used for the elderly,wonded vetrans,and emergency response teams. Although they should not be used for just a lazy or overweight person that wants to take the easy way out. In my personal opinion,and assuming it is for the use of a healthy person they should not be allowed. The furthest it should go for the average person is as the car had its own little auto-pilot for long rides and so on.
I would like to further research thses cars before I can give an educated opinion, but from what i have learned from this artice is that I am aginst Driverless cars. It will cause more trouble then helpfullness. | 3 |
2b1c1bf | Cars, the pride and joy of many people. They may look nice and go fast, but they hurt the environment more than most people would know. If Americans in certain places used public transit or walked, air pollution would go down by 50% in those areas. It would be better for the environment, and for the human body's health to reduce the amount they drive in their personal car.
To begin, cars are the second most cause of air pollution in the United States behind power plants. Since the end of World War II the U.S.A has been idolizing cars, and they have been focusing on the production of these cars. In Vauban, Germany there is a ratio of 3 to 10 people who own cars. Only 30% of the population owns a car, which is saving the air from quite a bit of pollution. Another event that will help lower pollution would be banning driving cars for a day or two. In Paris, there was so much smog that it was compared and even rivaled Beijing, China; which is one of the most polluted cities in the world. The people who drove their cars on this day would be fined $31 American dollars. The public transit was free of charge because it was being promoted to use, as it helps the air become less polluted. This event also happened in three Colombian cities, Bogota, Cali, and Valledupar. The ban on the cars made many people seem to be happier, and more energetic. This ban has been happening for three years now in Bogota, and other Latin American cities are now seeing the importance of it. The use of bicycles, the public transit, or even walking helps reduce air pollution in your city.
In addition to not using personal cars, walking from jobs or to the mall has seemed to make many people in these driving bans less stressful and much happier. From government officials to the commonfolk of the street, all of the Colombians in Bogota look much happier. Even rain hasn't stopped them from biking to work. One woman in Vauban, Heidrun Walter, said, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." She does not own a car and lives a happy life. She even sold her car to move here, along with 57% of other families who live in the town. Not only does the relaxation of not driving make you less stressful, it also makes you get more excersize. Since 70% of Vauban's families do not own cars, we can assume that they are one of the healthiest cities in Germany or even the world. If all cities in Europe were nearly identical to Vauban then they would have only 3% greenhouse gas emissions from cars, but they would also have a much lower rate of obesity. Even in some parts of the United States, car emissions would go down by 50% which would, in turn, cause obesity to go down by a gigantic number as well. The use of bicycles and your feet would greatly reduce obesity along with increasing happiness.
Although some people may argue that people who don't own personal cars will use public transit instead and societies without personal cars will not have a decreased obesity. This may be true, but if people use public transit then they are helping the environment even more than themselves. They would still have to walk to and from the bus stops. Which will decrease obesity although it may not be in as big of numbers as we would like.
In conclusion the absence of personal automobiles would greatly reduce the air pollution in most major cities. Beijing could become it's once beautiful city, and Paris wouldn't have to ban driving because of thickened smog. The United States would also never have problems with smog, and we would also reduce air pollution by 50%. Communities like Vauban and Bogota are prime examples of people who do not need cars to survive. They are stress free, and much happier than most car driven societies. Personal cars do much more harm, than good. This is why we do not need to rely on the use of personal cars. | 5 |
2b1fd83 | I don't agree with using this technology to read students emotional expression. I think it wouldnt be a machines business to know how your feeling because some people like muself sometimes dont want to know how you really feel. For example. if I was feeling down one day about my dog passing away, and my little sisters want me to take them to the park. Im gonna stay as positive and happy as possible so it doesnt ruin their day. I would take them to the park making it seem like im happy, then eventually be happy myself after the fun we have. I wouldnt want some machine telling me or other people my emotions because thats my business.
Our emotions belong to us only and we choose for people or other things to know how we feel when we want to.
I am not the only one who sometimes hides the way they feel for a bit. We all know if you try to stay positive and have a good day that you will get over no matter what the situation is bringing you down. If you stay positive and happy, then it will all go away eventually instead of expressing how you feel and staying depressed or crying all day.
It seems like this technology can be useful or pretty cool to use on histroical people. Like who wouldnt want to know how Abe Lincon felt when he took his picture to be on the dollar bill. That would interest me by alot. Only because that is history and its very intersting, but using it everyday of your life can be really annoying and show less privacy. It is a good way to cheer people up like if a friend was feeling down and didnt want to tell you how he or she felt at the moment. That is understandable, but like i explained all you have to do is asume that they are feeling down and cheer them up the best you can and carry on with the day. Eventually they will be back to they're old self again.
Knowing how someone feels right off the top can be annoying for some people like myself. It can cause others like myself to feel very uncomfortable and not wanting to express how they feel because some machine does it for you. Maybe some people want to express how he or she felt a few days after they felt down or depressed. I highly disagree with thus technology being used in our everyday lives to see how we feel, although it would be very nice and interesting to use this technolgy on histroical pictures like the famous Mona Lisa or how President Abe Lincon felt on the dollar bill photo. | 3 |
2b237a3 | Driverless cars are coming there are both pros and cons about these new cars. Theres many saftey rules we should worry about which make it a con. On the other hand some pros are that the cars woudl more advanced and luxurious. For example they can be driven on there own, they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves. With new driverless cars would have to be a change of laws and to alert drivers with there very new system.
My positon on driverless cars is that people should not trust technology to much. A technology error could happen that could even
cause someones death just for these cars. As a result it's illegal to even test computer driven cars in many states. There would be a massive change in are drivng industry it would be like having robots all over are nation. There should more precution about the driverless cars and to think about the cons that can happen even though since 2009 they've had something similiar to a driverless car.
Many people seem to be facinated by television and movies with cars that could drive themselfes. Entertainment is an easy way to fullfill people about getting or even thinking that they can make driverless cars. Whenever people see this on TV they don't think about all the risks there putting them selfs in. Everything isnt sured that it will work which my opinion that driverless cars should not take it farther then what it has been.
Tesla has projected that Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Niassan plan to have cars that can drive themselvles by 2020. This companies are taking things to fast this should be thouht over and over a millions times. I think with the driverless cars pepople are getting to excited about it and that not taking precaution. Everyone of the buyers should be more open minded about all the troubles that could go on to buying such an expensive car.
Overall I think that the manafacturer should be more cautious in what there exposing to people. If the technology fails and someones get injured who's fault would it be the driver or manufactor? Yes exactly manufactures make it seem like driverless cars are going to be fully well safe. Manufactuers even believe that moer states will follow as soon as cars are proves more reliably safe. Which i think is outrages because a human should not trust computer technologized cars for all the many things that could go wrong. | 3 |
2b2431b | In the article "The challenge of exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit besides the dangers it presents. He says the planet is right next to us and is our planet sister, it can be our nearest planetary visit, and we need more reasearch on this planet. Keep reading on and you'll be interested.
In the article "The challenge of exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit besides the danger it presents by him saying the planet is right next to us and is our planet sister. He want's to know more about this planet because it's right next to us. Mars is also next to us, but all of the three planets go at a different speed. In the text is says "Sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus." They have sent space crafts and don't really know what happned to them. It has been more than three decades that a space ship has been sent out to Venus.
In the article "The challenge of explorng Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit besides the dangers it presents by him saying "It could be our nearest planetary visit. He says this because in case of a world emergency we could send people to Venus. They could have that planet as an "Emergency planet". In the article it says "Many reasearchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." They say this just in case they need to be ready for the emergeny at the planet Venus.
In the article "The challenge of exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit besides the dangers it presents by him saying "We need to do more research on this planet. He says this because he has noticed that Venus might have been like planet Earth once back then. He says "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth". "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and crators". These are evidence that venus used to be like planet earth and why not do more research on it.
In conclusion, the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit by Venus being our planet sister, it caould be the nearest planetary visit, and we need more research on this planet. It is important to know what the other planets gave in common with planet Earth. | 4 |
2b260d4 | There have been many claims about the Face being a sign of intelligent life forms on Mars. The Face is not an extraterestrial artifact. It is just a natural landform. By looking at the images from 1976 and 1998 I can see where someone might mistake it for a humaniod face. The images are a little blurry and because of this you can see what appears to be eyes, a nose and a mouth.
Upon closer inspection of the 2001 image you can see it is just a natural landform such as a mountain that formed from the wind blowing sand over the years. NASA has done scientific research to prove to you that the Face isn't really a face, it's just a mountain that resembles one.
There have been many claims of extraterestrial life forms on Mars. Most of these claims lack evidence. There may still be life on Mars, but we have yet to gather any real evidence. I assure you that the Face is nothing more than a natural landform that shadows had an effect on to make it appear to resemble a monument. If it wasn't for the high resolution camera that was used to take the 2001 image of the Face, we might still believe it to be an extraterestrial monument. | 3 |
2b29c21 | The author supports the idea of studying Venus becuase it is worthy of showing the dangers it presents. Venus is bascially Earth's twin because it is pretty much just like us in a way. Even though we haven't been able to land on Venus. Astronomers are fascinated with it becasue they have features just like Earth. The author wants to know more about Venus and find out how we can get on to Venus without the danger of it hurting us.
Why can't we land on Venus that's what we all want to know why. Scientists have been studying about Venus to try to figure out a way to land there and its not been a easy task at all. Venus has features just like Earth like earthquakes, volcanoes, and lighting but we can't get there to see it and learn about it. What can we do to get there without the danger of us getting hurt.
Astronomers are fascinated with it but thats not helping us to get there and see if there is actually some kind of life there. Who knows what kinds of things are there are we going to see people or animals. Scientists are discussing futher visits to its surface but if we can't even land there the first time how are we going to be able to land there the second time. Even though Venus is the second plantet from the sun why is it so hot there with temperatures of 800 degrees Fahrenheit and atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater.
The author supports the idea of studying Venus because it is worthy of showing the dangers it presents. They hope to figured out a way to be able to go to Venus and learn more about it. The author thinks it is fascinating to learn about
Venus and have people go there and do research over it. | 3 |
2b2bbb9 | I don't think it is a good idea to have driverless cars because one day you may be driving and your car is driverless but it is an on coming car coming toward you and you don't have control of the car and the car might not sense when another car is coming toward it and it may and can cause a wreck. Others may agree to have driverless cars but I don't think it is a good idea to have driverless cars it may be safe to other but it is not safe to me because I wouldn't want to have a wreck driving in a driverless car. It is good to have motion sensored cameras on the back and front of some vehicles but it is not good to have a car that parks itself because you could maybe put the car in to driverless mode it may cause a wreck or crash while the car is parking or driving on it's own. it is not good to have antilock brakes either bc you could be on your way to work and your coming to a yellow light that is turning red you may not be paying attention and not have your seatbelt on and the car just brakes on it's own it could cause serious and major injuries to you or anyone else who may be in the car with you. | 2 |
2b33aff | Cars can be very dangerous to this day. So many people are get hurt driving in cars or driving the cars. There are so many things cars can do that can hurt you or before you know it you're dead. Would you want to be that person that gets hurts because the car can drive by itself? I don't think anyone would want to be that person hurt because of a car messing up and it wouldn't be your fault one bit. I would rather take responibility on getting hurt or dead then knowing I can't do anything about it because my car is driving itself.
My position on driverless cars are that you should drive the car yourself. In paragraph 7 it says, "This means the human driver must remain alert to be ready to take over when the situation requires." Most humans aren't alert driving by themselves let alone being alert when something goes wrong and not knowing when it will be. Technology is really good today, but it is also can go bad whenever it wants to. You don't want to be put in a sitituation where you don't know when something bad is going to happen and you aren't paying attention so you can't do anything about it, next thing you know you're in the hospital or even worse in a coma. I just think having a fancy car that can drive itself is not worth getting hurt over. It's really not. In paragraph 8 it considers, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" It's not about having fun driving. It's about getting to one destination to another. You can put your family in danger.
Having a car to drive itself it's not worth getting hurt over. Technology is really good in all, but it could always go wrong not knowing when. Cars are already dangerous today. I think it would produce more reckless drivers and more accidents around the world. Most people are never focused on the road all the time, and when you have a car that can drive by itself you have to be focused on the road at all times. There are still a lot of postive things to this. It's not all negative. I just think there are more negative than postive. | 2 |
2b33dcc | The FACS (Facial Action Coding System) has good and essential uses. The FACS could be used to identify what emotion the painting or drawing has. For example, the "Mona Lisa" painting could be a great example of why to use this system. I believe that the use of this technology to read the emotional exressions of students in a classroom could be valuable. In a way, the students can be learning at a way where the lesson will have their attetntion if it is interesting to them.
I agree that the FACS could help in a classroom with students and maybe even improve their way of learning. If the computer could see what facial expression the student has, the computer realizes the student gets bored then it might boost itself so that the lesson can becomoe interesting to the child. As I read the text called "Making Mona Lisa Smile" I understood the point the author was making. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored", Dr. Huang predicts. I highly think there would be a change in the academic learning environment. According to the passage, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication", meaning that the computers would also have to understand what the feeling is without actually communicating with the person.
Overall, I do agree with using the FACS in a classroom with students in a classroom to help the students and the learning environment. The computer system would read and determine what the emotion is by detecting how the muscles are behaving. Meaning that if most of the muscles are at rest, then the emotion would most likely be a resting face. If the professors are right abot their prediction, then we would see somewhat of a change. | 3 |
2b34d79 | Do you think there are aliens? Well I don't. This unmasking the face on mars is not a alien thing because strange things always happen on earth and different planets. This could just be are pollution is spreding not just in the air but even in space. Or Mars could just be doing what earth does every amount of years earth changes in like the land-scap mars land-scap could just be changing.
On Earth we have weird stuff happen a lot like symbols in corn feilds, some people think they see flying space ships some people are just crazy aliens don't exist. We don't have any proof that aliens exist like just because some cows go missing or found dead doesn't mean they didn't just leave or a wild animal didn't kill them. I don't know how to explaine the corn feilds but the "flying space ship" is just a jet or plane nothing big and if people say other people have been kinapped by aliens or saw some aliens they would be lying because aliens don't exist.
Earth today has so many pollution problems rigth now it's just not funny but are pollution could somehow start to spread to other planets because we have air pollution. Air pollution can spread pretty easy so when we like have rocket and go to a different planet we may bring different substances to that planet it's not use to. Or just how we went to the moon the pollution we brougth to the moon could have spreaded all over the galxay.
So we all know how the Earth changes once every speacial year or years but were use to that cause we know it's going to happen. So now there is a new change but not to planet Earth but to Mars it's weird but it's just a planet. Like are it may have some new changes may not this doesn't mean it has to do with aliens. We have traveld or seen with are cameraas in space so many planets but never one trace of aliens or any life form so that means aliens aren't real.
So in conclusion with all the evidence we got from prior knowleged and reading this article there are no other life form on anyother planet just Earth. Also aliens don't exist all the weird things that happen in the world or on different planets all happen because humans do something wrong to the earth. We sometimes get granted the most beautiful things ever or it hits us with earth quakes or hurricans and punishes us so do good to the earth not bad. | 2 |
2b34eff | Venus is the closest planet to the Earth and despite its challenges scientists need to explore Venus to study the worst condition in the planet to see if its a managable place to go for a planetary visit so that in case of danger in the Earth there is a closer place to run to and be safe in.
The author explains how Venus is a challenging planet by telling us how it has been the only planet without a single spaceship landing on it in three decades because no one survived the landing more than a few hours. Venus also has clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid with temperatures over 800 degrees Fahrenheit which is 90 times hotter than the earth. beyond that it suffers a lot of natural disasters.
Even with all of this
Astronomers sre facinated by Venus because it might as well once been the most earth like planet in our solar system.
NASA's possible solutions for making venus survivable for humans was to float above the fray to avoid the harsh conditions on the ground. Through this the air pressure would be close to the sea level on the earth, solar power would be plentiful, and radiatio would not exceed earth levels.
To acheive this scientists have to refrain from bringing things like rocks or gas or anything from a distance, so to change that, NASA is working on how to make electronics with silicon carbide and also using old technologies that dosent require electronics to prevent them melting and causing radiation.
In conclusion our travels on earth should'nt be limited by the dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet edges of immagination and innovation. | 2 |
2b37663 | "The Electoral College is a process not a place." The Electoral college has 538 electors. Two-hundred and seventy electoral votes is established to elect the president of the United States.
Every single candidate running for President in the state that you live in has his or her own group of electors. Usually, the electors are chosen by the candidate's political party, but state laws vary on how the electors are selected and what is their jobs and their responsibilities are in that spot. The presidential election is held every four years on the 2nd Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Generally, a lot, or most states have the "winner-takes-all" system tattooed in their minds that all electors to the winning presidential candidate.
After the presidential election, the governor of the state that you live in prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment." That makes a list of all the candidates that ran for president in your state along with the names of their electors. It also shows the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors in December of the election of the year.
To commence, some presidents don't like or believe in the electoral college, these include Richard Nixon, and Jimmy Carter. According to the Gallup poll in 2000, taken right after Al Gore, thanks to the problems of the electoral college, won the popular vote but, unfortunately lost the presidency. Over 60 percent would like a more direct vote then have this system in which we have now, and this year's presidetnial election could even have the same upset, someone winning the popular vote but falling short for presidency. the single best argument against the electoral college would be what we call the disaster factor . Back in the 1900's, 1960 to be exact segregationists in the Louisiana legislature almost won in the fight to replace the Democratic electors with new electors who would not like, even oppose John F. Kennedy.
At any rate, most people say that the Electoral College is tuned as an anachronism, a person or a thing that seems to belong in the past and not fit in the present. The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance nthat large states lose by virtue of the mal-apportion of the Senate decreed in the Constitution. The popular vote was very close in Florida (in 2012); nevertheless Obama, who won that vote, got 29 electoral votes. A win by the same margin in Wyoming would get the the winner only 3 electoral votes.
As a conclusion a larger state gets more attention from presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does, also that the electoral college could have some ups and some downs but facts are that the government are not going to get rid or abolish the Electoral College any time soon. | 2 |
2b3f2d8 | The article "Driverless Cars" is about the stance on when and how driverless cars will be made and deploded onto the roads of the United States and elswhere. When I read the article I was fasinated by someparts of the story and not happy about other parts. I believe we shouldn't have driverless cars or have some version where we can turn on and off the driverless mode.
If we have driverless cars I wouldn't buy one because it is so much easier to me in my opinion just to drive it on itself. The reason being is that I don't believe they will be as safe as they say. The reason I say that is because people might want to drive their own cars and people might not like computers controlling their every move. I personally think that since most of the world's population already know how to drive it will just have more deadly accidents. In the story it says "The combination sof all this input is to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel." They don't say it will improve human driving just that it will mimic. So why would we replace something that has worked for a hundred years with something that will work the exact same way and not improve it? I don't get it.
Now I like that we have cars that will be able to make the roads safer with sensors. That's something we can capitilize on, not driverless cars that change nothing except the driver. Tesla will not release a car by 2016 because it is 2016 and I've not heard anything. The technologies not even there for people to drive on highways and it's a big waste of time on all those engineers when they can be making something to make this world better.
I hope you all enjoyed this. If not I'm sorry and i don't realy care. So thanks for everything. This is why we shouldnt have driverless cars. Thanks for nothing. | 3 |
2b41246 | i agree with the article, knowing that a technologly can be use to see how people emotions are is pretty cool for someone to know how you and another person is feeling. the resson why i agree to this passage is because i mean it has all sorts of context. the emotions that people have are very important because thats why we all ask each other when somwthing looks wring we always ask and say "whats wrong" because we can tell by there emotions. some people lie and say there fine but we know deep down there not.
In the picture you can see that Mona Lisa Smile is not real. so many peoole love with stuff amd keep in there back of there head and just leave it alone, but deep down we all know their thinking about it. " movement of one or more miscoes is called an "action unit" Eckman has classified six basic emotions happiness.
surprie, anger , disgust, fear , and sadness. movement of the facial muscles." that how Mone Lisa feels. As you look really close into the picture you have see 83 perecent happy , 9 peecent disgusted, 6 perecent fearful, amd 2 perecent angry. artists can make a picture not look like whats the person is feeling
Mone Lisa as we all know is a very strong independent woman. we all kmow she was going through some tuff times. i feel like everyone asked her if she was okay. and than everyone had went to a conclusion. "lets make a system on peoples emtions." everyone believed that their was gonna be thsi system to figure how peoole were gonna react. And when we tried it in Mona
Lisa we all knew that the technology was gonna work. Mone Lisa was a cery hard working last who never would show her emtion to anyone. until the technology was imvented.
Nicu sebe of the university of amsterdam had memrion feom the text that " expert at deveopling better ways for humans and computers to communicate. people really know now on how people feel and there real feelings are being shown. i think its for the better anyways, reason being is because if we did not know how people felt that mean we would not be able to stop people would harm them selfs.
i think this techology is a good way to start this world into a better way than just asking peoole on how they feel and making them think about it more. people can find all different ways to makes somene else feel better. Mone Lisa never speaked up she would always say she was fine. she wiukd always bave a smile in the back of her head. but she knew no one would ever understand her so she never told anyone and just never spoke like the feeling she always felt. | 2 |
2b41dea | I think driverless cars are a great invention. Driverless cars would make everyone's lives easier. It would save lots of time, and even keep people safer. I think everyone should have access to self driving cars. This technology could help us improve our lives, and open a new world of technology for us.
I strongly agree with Google cofounder, Sergy Brin, on his ideas about public transportation. Public transportation systems that self drive would be amazing. It would indeed change the world. These cars would make transportation extremely easy, and replace old cars.
These cars could also make driving even more safer for people. The self driving cars have sensors that can auto brake. This could prevent many accidents in the future, and maybe save lives. Although this technology may help, it all lies on the driver. This technology may cause carless drivers. All in all, the technology of driverless cars could make driving safer than it is today.
Overall, I think that driverless cars are a good idea. They are safer for people, and young drivers. Also, they are just convienient for us. It would improve out quality of life. I would like to see these care implemented into our daily lives. | 3 |
Subsets and Splits