essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
39b8a74 | Senator, I argue in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the united states. I argue in that favor because not everyone get's to vote for an electon. If keeping the Electoral College the same, the there will never be a way where when everyone will get the chance to vote. The Electoral College is very unfair for not letting everyone vote. Those people that work that process just go to places that they know they will get a vote.
Also, the Electoral College should change the election by poplular vote for the president of the United States because, when choosing your's elctors when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors. The people do not vote for president, the electors are who vote for president. When people think they are voting for president candidate, they are actually voting for slate of electors.
There's five reason to where the Electoral College should be retraining. Thse five main reasons are because 1) Certainy of Outcome, dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible. 2)Everyone's President, requires a presidential to have trans-regional appeal. 3)Swing States, the winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates. 4)Big States, restores the weight in political balance that loose by virtue. 5)Avoid Run-Off Elections, avoides the problem of election in which they have no candidate.
They just go to states where they will get votes, they know that other states will have no affect to them when getting no vote. Im guessing that they get their hopes up? They dont give other people a chance to vote. | 3 |
39bd4eb | My position on the driverless car is i think it is very interrestiing on how it works but it wouldnt be something i would want to have or "drive". My reason being is that like it said in the pasage is that they aret completly driverless you still have to be alert so when you have to take over for the car you can which i think would be pointless because if the car was 100 percent driverless on a long trip you could take a nap or text people or get on social media but with these cars like the passage says is that if there is construction then the person has to take over so its bascilly like driving you just dont have to control the car all the time but another down fall is that you have to keep your hands on the sterring wheel all the time because in the passage it said the steering wheel had sensors in it to make sure the driver was alert in case of a problem.
Another thing is the fact that if you were to get in a accident in the car would it be your fault or the car companys and how would insurance take care of that if one person was in a driverless car and the other was not or if both were in a driverless car who would be a fault and have to pay, how would insurance work because insurance is based on the human driving past and experience but if the car was driving how would the insurance be based. | 2 |
39c239f | The new technology created by Dr. Eckman is called the Facial Action Coding System. This is a fantastic device that can detect your exact emotions by creating a 3-D model of your face and analyze your muscle movements in your face to produce your emotions. This would be extremely useful in a classroom because the computer would show the teacher what the students are feeling and if the computer needs to change what is being discussed or not.
In a classroom, there are always a variety of expressions, mad, happy, upset, confused etc. Everyone is thinking something different about what they are learning. The text states that by using the Facial Action Coding System the teacher of the class could reference their "computer and be able to know if they need to explain the material more clearly, discuss something more interesting, or continue with what is being taught at the moment." This would allow the students to be more satifised with their school work and make them enjoy the material they are learning and comprehend it well.
On the other hand, sometimes people want their emotions to be private and do not want other people to know what they are thinking. The Facial Action Coding System is not something you have to have as a teacher. It is not required among the population, it is simply something you would want to have in a classroom. If the majority of the students want their emotions to be read for teaching purposes than the classroom should have the technology. If the majority does not want the device, they do not have to have it in the classroom and can go through their school days as usual. But, with this computer device all of the students would end up being satisfied because they are being taught what interests them and they would enjoy it.
Having the Facial Action Coding System in the classroom would detect the "nonverbal communication" throughout the classroom. It would process what the students opinion is on the discussion and turn it into their overall emotion. "The Facial Action Coding System can physically change the lesson into something the students are interested in discussing." The students would be more interested in the topic also causing them to be more involved and comprehend the material better. If the students understand the material well they will perform better on tests in the future which is good feedback towards teachers and Dr. Eckman for creating this valuable device for the world. | 4 |
39c8524 | Driverless cars, once a distant, far-fetched dream, are now close to becoming reality.
In 2016, Tesla is planning to release a car that can drive itself 90 percent of the time.
The kind of high-tech equipment it takes to manufacture a car like this hasn't been around for long.
Google has had a type of driverless car since 2009, but before 2000, none of this was possible.
With this rapid advance in technology comes reasonable concern, but the long list of benefits clearly outweighs the costs.
Because of the added safety features and convenience, driverless cars should be developed for all to use.
Driverless cars may seem like a safety risk to some, but in reality, these cars have been enhanced with top-of-the-line technology and have been tested thoroughly.
Google's driverless car uses many different sensors and cameras located all over the vehicle to replicate the ability of a human driver.
One sensor even allows for the creation of a 3-D model of the car's environment.
Sensors similar to these have been used in cars since the 1980s in antilock brakes.
Tried and tested, all the sensors on driverless cars serve only to protect the driver.
Driverless cars can also prevent distracted driving.
Some companies hope to create entertainment systems for drivers not currently controlling the car.
These systems and displays could be turned off right away when the driver has to take the wheel.
Right now, drivers often use cellphones and other distracting devices without the help of this technology.
As Google's cars have driven over half a million miles without a single crash, the combination of all these features has been proven to enhance car safety.
Driverless cars would also be cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and convenient.
Google cofounder Sergey Brin predicts that these cars could form an entire public transportation system, using only half the fuel of today's taxis.
This would save gas money and reduce greenhouse gases at the same time.
It would also allow for more flexibility than a bus or subway system because each driver would be able to personalize their destination.
The economic and environmental benefits, along with the convenience, show why these cars could serve to enhance society.
Convenience and safety are the two most important aspects of transportation.
Driverless cars have both, along with environmental and economic benefits.
These cars are a part of the future, enhancing the driving experience for all.
Driverless cars will only help the population, not hurt it. | 4 |
39ca929 | Did you know Venus is often referred to as Earth's "twin"? Venus is the closest planet to Earth in size and it is also one of the closest planets to us in distance. However, we haven't been able to explore Venus because of its hostile environment. Venus is a challenging planet for humans to study even though it close prximity to us. Exploring Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is our nearest option for a planetary visit, it would further our knowledge of the planet, and it would help us prepare for the furure.
First, exploring Venus is a worthy pursuit is it is our nearest option for a planetary visit. It is the closest planet to Earth in density and in size. In the text it states, "It may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This shows that Venus may have been a hospitable planet a long time ago. If scientist could explore Venus they could find evidence that Venus was once like Earth.
Second, we should explore Venus is it would further our knowledge of the planet. Venus is one of the closest planets to us yet we do not know much about it. The article states, "Scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks." This means even though there are risks to exploring Venus it would be a worthy pursuit because we would learn more to understand Venus. Despite the dangers of going to Venus it would help scientist learn more about why Venus is so inhospitable.
Finally, studying Venus would be a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because it would help us prepare for the furure. Gaining insight on Venus would be a challenage due to it harsh environment, but the challenge could push our limits. It cause us to create a new way of getting through the harshest of environments. The author states, "The insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." This shows us that creating a way to explore Venus now will likely help us to explore something with just as much challenge in the furture. Exporing Venus has dangers but it could help prepare for the furture.
In conclusion, exploring Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is our nearest option for a planetary visit, it would further our knowledge of the planet, and it would help us prepare for the furure. Venus is one of the closest planets to us we should explore it and learn more about it. It could have been very similar to Earth a long time ago but why is it so inhospitable now. Exploring it could help us in the furture for other challenges. | 4 |
39cecd2 | The "Face on Mars" was just a natural landforms. All of the planets have natural land forms. If there really was civilization on mars we would probably already know about it. But contrary to what NASA believes there are were other people who said that maybe the alien markings were hidden by haze.
NASA thinks that it would have been important to tell tax-payers if it were to have been a true alien land mark, but since you did not recieve any information; you can assume it was just a natural landform. If there were to have been a sign of life on that planet (Mars) it would benefit NASA and the whole world would probably know. "The face" is located on the part if Mars called "Cydonia" which according to Jim Garvin "Is not easy to target (paragraph 9)."
Mission controllers are preparing to go back and look again so they can try to prove that NASA is not trying to hide any evidence. It will not be easy. Mostly because we don't pass over the face very often. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa.
In conclusion, NASA is very sure that "The Face on Mars" is just an illusion and not bona fide evidence of life on Mars. In the future we hope to discover that it really is just a natural landform and not bona fide evidence on Mars. And if it is evidence maybe we can try to find an acient alien civilation. | 3 |
39d6bfb | I say that the auther did do really good supporties his idea .Somethings he says about venus being a worthy persuit despite the dangers is that venius is the closest plannet to the earth in the terms of its density and the size of venus.Venus iand mars orbit the sun a diffrent speeds witch means that we are either closer to mars at times ands closer to venus were not always just closest to
one of them.It
says that " humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world".So that shows that we have sent thing up there.But each of the missions have been unmanned ,and they say it was for good reasons.
They put into detail that "Venus's reputation as a challenging planet fir humans to study,despite its proximity to us". They state that it is challenging to study venus but they have been trying there best and they are getting there.Slowly but there getting there.They know that the atmosphere of almost 97 percent of carbion dioxide is over venus.What dosent help with sending spacecraft up there is the thick clouds that vinus has.and that is is 800 degrees up there also.The auther alos states that the pressuer on venus is 90 times greatee that what we have experience on out plannet. The author also states that "that the conditions are far more exstreme than anything humans have encounter on earth on earth". Venus is the hottest surface tempature out of any of the plannets i the universe.(NASA) wants to send a humans up
there to study venus.They thimk if they can get them to just float
above the fray they should be fine.And be able to study venus without getting hurt. | 2 |
39d96a1 | State Senate
In my favor i do not think that the Electoral College should still be a process. Most people in america are not so pleased with how the Electoral College works. Manily because the Electoral College, in a way, get to pick if they want this person as the president or if they want this other person as the president. The people of America do not really have their own choice. Now, if we would go from having the Electoral College and change to have election by popular vote for the president of the United States. The people in America would be much happier. I think that the Electoral College is not fair to American's. We all need to be able to select as who we want as the president of the United States.
"The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president." Found in " What Is The Electoral College?" by the office of the Federal Register. As you see there are 538 elector. All 538 electors have to conversate about who should be the president. The Ellectoral College has complet control over that. People could want this person, but then here comesnthe Electoral College. The Ellectoral College can change who the people vote for. All of them have to deside what should be the outcome. Its never really the people choice. Its the Electoral College's choice. Americans should be able to chose in which President they want for America.
Some people want the Electoral College because they think that they solve all the problems, then there are the people who know their rights and want to be able to have full popularity vote of who their presedent is. Most of the time te popularity vote is changed by the Electoral College, They chose what they think is so called "right". The Electoral College has a mind of its own. People dont have their rights with the Electoral College. Thisprocess is not the way things should be. American's need to have or at least know their rights. That is why people in America are not so happy with what the Ellectoral College picks. The total vote for one person chould be 46% and a total vote for another person could be 42%. Ellectoral College has controle over that again. If the electors chose the person with the 42% they can bump up the percentage to be higher than the other one. That is not fair to the people of America. We do not need the Electoral College. The people of America should have full popularity vote of who the peresident of the United States should be. | 3 |
39daa94 | I think that driverless cars could be very very dangerous and could cause lots of harm among the people on the road. i feel as if people would get to comfortable in the cars and wouldnt really pay attention to the surrounding traffic pedestrians or other roadblocks then you have to think of all the other possibilities and the consequences and all the legal fees and laws for anyone hurt.
the car companies are trying to have the people in the cars always have their hands on the wheel but people would end up taking advantage of their new found freedom in the car and it could turn into bad horrible disasters the cars are able to drive and what not but they cant navagate through difficult things the cars are also supposed to have heads up displays but i find that, that could prove to be a terrible decision in the endbecause if people get to comfortable they may end up sleeping at the wheel not tpaying attention or just being dumb.
so thats why i think we shouldnt have driverless cars becuase i dont think that everyone would use the cars as safely as the manufactorers wanted them to be used. Then you have to factor in the driving of people without the driverless cars will the driverless cars be able to react quick enough if the other people are driving eradically we dont know yet and thats what could cause lots of problems legally with the companies and individuals. | 2 |
39dad0d | Dear Senator,
My name is PROPER_NAME. It would be beneficial to keep the electorial college because it is in the constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congree and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens, if we used just popular vote candidtates would just go to bigger states like Florida, California, Texas, and Georgia and win the popular vote, and lastely without the electorial college there would be a greater chance of a dispute.
Five reasons to keep the electiorial college are:
1. Certainty of Outcome
A dispute over the outcome of an Electorial College vote is possible but it is less likely than a dispute over the popular vote because the winning candidate's share of the Electorial College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote.
Almost all states award electorial votes on a winner take all bases.
This means that if a president wins 51 percent of a states popular vote they win 100 percent of the Electorial votes.
In the 2012 election Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electorial vote, but only 51.3 percent of the popular vote.
Althought a tie in the electorial vote is possible because there is an even 538 votes it is highly unlikely.
2. Everyone's President
The Electorial College requires a presidential candidater to have a trans-regianal appeal, what this means is that no regian has enough electorial votes to elect a president.
Therefore a president with only one regional appeal is unlikely to be succesful.
If the president could win the electorial vote with just one regions votes the other regians would feel disenfranchised and feel that the president wouldn't care about what they want or need.
3. Swing States
The winner-take-akk method of awarding electorial votes makes candidates focus on states called swing states.
These voters in the swing states are most likely to bve the most thoughtful voters and they are the ones that decide most elections.
An example of a swing state is Florida.
Florida always changes between Republican and Democrat and having 29 electoirial votes that is a big deal.
4. Big States
The electorial College gives back some of the weight in big states that they lose in the senate where every state has only 2 representatives.
Florida is also a big state having 29 electorial votes.
This makes Florida even more attractive to candidates to visit because it is both a swing state and a big state.
5. Avoid Run-Off Elections
The Electorial College avoids a problem in which no candidate receives a majority of the vots cast.
The Electorial College takes away that complication by providing a clear winner.
Lastley if popular vote was used candidates wouldn't have to go to a variety of states, they could go to the same big states including California, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Washington.
Just winning the majority of these states they could win the whole election.
This would cause smaller states like Ohia, North and South Dakota, and Michigan to not be a piece of the election as much because of their low population.
I hope this helps you decide what to do about the decision between Electorial College and Popular Vote.
Think about the smaller states.
They don't want to be left out.
Thanks,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
39dad84 | In this article the author is showing how the monilisa shows alot of emion and alot of expression. The first paragraph stated that she is 83 percent happy 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and two percent angry.
For the most part she is happy you can tell she is happy becaus ehshe is smilling in the picture. What you can not see is the other emtions such as disgust or fear or angry. So how can the author really say that she is all those things if she. although it could be a fake smile you never know. That is like everyday life a person could look happy but really be sad or mad about something you never really know how a person is feeling unless they personally tell you. Facial expression are a big part of our world. As the author states, "Even though indivulas often show varying degress of expression for example not smiling broadly."
What I stated in my paragraph befor was that you may tell somebody that your really close with you feelings but then be smiling or not showing any emtion at all. The author states it later in the article. He states " you can probalby tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." Us as humans have a hard time showing emotion or descrinbing our emtions . Although this painting is meant to bring a smile to your face it shows how much technolgy plays a big part in this as well. You can change they way somebody looks in pictures very easily. In our world today the technolgy is so wonderful it can changes images with the click of a button. | 1 |
39dca7f | When the face on Mars was first descovred from a region of the planet called Cydonia first found in 1976, many people thought it might have been created by aliens. However this is not true, the face on this planet is a natural landform. The face is a natural landform because it is equivalent to a Martian mesa, there were no ther objects seen in the picture, and there was no alien movement detected.
The face on Mars is a mesa. A Martian mesa is commen around the area of Cydonia. The mesa is only seen as a face because it has unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. The shadows give the rock formation the ilolusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa which are landforms common around the American West.
There were no other objects seen in any of the pictures that had been taken. Michael Malin's team captured an extraordinary picture using the camers's maximum resolution. "As a rule of thumb you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size" Garvin explaned. So if there were any objects in this picture such as airplanes, Egyptian-style pyramids, or even a small shack it would have been seen in the pictures.
There was no alien movement detected on Mars. If it was aliens that created this face the camers's would have picked up the movement and captured pictures. On April 5, 1998 a 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 photos. The image revealed a natural landform proving there was no alien movement.
The Face on Mars is a natural landform that looks like a face becasue of the shadows it was formed by. The Face is a natural landform that was not created by aliens because it is equivelant to a Martiam mesa, there were no other objects seen in the picture, and there was no alien movement detected. | 4 |
39e422c | dear, state senator i argure that they should keep the electoral colege because it states in paragraph 1 that "the college is a process,not a place" so without it there would be no process to help figure out whitch person the president it not to mention are founding fathers established it in the constitution to compromise between elections by th evotes in congress. also the college process consists of eselections of electors and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. if we get ride of the college we will not have equal member. as you red more you notice that it says the college is widely regarded and without the electors we would not be able to elect are president. there are five reasons why we sould keep the college the electoral college is required to be there to elect the president the college restores some of the wight in the politics the collage also avoids the problem of election they are likley to be the most thankful votes they will be the person that gets the most informatiom and attention from the candidates.
the college also helps to make sure there is no pressure for run-off election.
this is my agument stating why you should keep the electoral college open thank you for your time and consisteration taylour sands | 2 |
39ed025 | Do you think the Facial Action Coding is 100 percent valuable and correct? In my personal opinion I say no. I have three reason that can explain why this technology is not valuable. I could be frowning and be happy ,but showing a sign of joy. Don't always trust technology; it sometimes can lead in the wrong way. Im amuse that people are relying on technology to lead them in a direction that could be wrong.
In the article it said " For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feelging simply by the look on her face." That's very incorrect because many times I'll ask my friend how she is feeling when she looks grumpy. She would say im good with me not knowing that because me thinking her facial expression is saying something different. People ask me all the time whats wrong with me when; I turn out to be just chilling. Some people natural look might just be a mug. I learned that the hard way its so very true.
Trusting technology can give you false information. I remember this time I sprained my foot. I went to the doctor to get in x-ray and the x-ray information was showing that nothing was wrong with it for a period of time. Although, im glad the doctor knew what he was doing ;he then figure out that the inner of my foot was spained. The bone was slightly bent and I needed time to heal it and recover. It sounds like the Facial Action Coding System is like a x-ray machine.
I understand that the Facial Action Coding System is a use of technology. With that being known we can believe that the technology want always be right. You can get stuff off the internet thats not true information, but yet it's a source of technology. Many people just go to get there information off of wikipedia for a research project. You never know if the stuff is true because any one can edit it. So you can compare the Facial Action Coding Sysytem with gettig information off of the internet these are both sources of technology.
Is it a possibility that the Facial Coding System is valuable? Yes but I wouldn't put all of my trust into it. Just because im frowning don't assume that something is wrong with me. Or if someone just has a mug as a look don't think that their mad. It can come back that your wrong. Believeing that everything with technology is true is very false. It a good chance that the technology is off. The Facial Coding Sysytem like a x-ray scanning. Sometimes it can give true information sometimes it can't. | 3 |
39f503f | The Face on Mars was not created by aliens. It is simply a natural land form. You can find similar land forms on Earth. Also, why would NASA even want to hide the existence of aliens? It is simply illogical to think that it was made by aliens.
The Face on Mars may look like a mask or a face, but that doesn't prove that it was made by aliens. There are many landforms here on Earth that look like faces or animals. NASA has taken photos of it, and it is clearly just a mesa. Why would NASA hide the existence of aliens from us anyways? Considering that it "has become a pop icon" and "has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows--even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years," wouldn't NASA benifit from the existence of aliens?
NASA has not covered up the existence of aliens. The Face on Mars is just a naturally occuring landform that happens to look like a face. It's fun to think about what would happen if it was an actual face or created by aliens, but it was not made by aliens. Anyways, NASA would be trying to prove that there were or are aliens there if it was actually made by aliens. They would benifit greatly if aliens made the face. | 3 |
39f7e07 | A spacecraft was launched into outter space. Outerspace consists of many planets, including Mars. On the planet Mars, scientists have a discovered a face. The Face on Mars is a natural landform.
People say the Face was crafted by aliens. Because it was winter, the camera in the spacecraft had to look through clouds to see the Face. Due to the weather conditions, some people say that "alien markings" were hidden by fog.
Many details support that the Face on Mars is a natural landoform. Jim Garvin, a chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, states that if "alien markings" existed on Mars, they would have been discovered because the image of the Face was enlarged 3 times the pixel size. Also, the Face resembles a butte or mesa, common landforms around American West. In fact, Garvin also says, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." This is an "isolated mesa" that is almost the same height as the Face.
Proven with facts, the Face on Mars is just a natural landorm. Outerspace has many wonderful discoveries. With proper research and equipment,
Those discoveries can be made just like the Face. | 2 |
39f8317 | The problem we have at hand here is whether or not we should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. My thesis is we all should join the program and help everybody ravanged by the war. It helps a ton of people get better and it also gives you a good gut feeling that everybody loves to have. In the following text I am going to give you some of the reasons why we should all join the Seagoing Cowboys program and help other people.
My first reason we should all go into the Seagoing Cowboys program is you get the wonderful oppertunity to help other people. The people you will be helping have had there homes destroyed by war and all of their personal belongings including food, water, and any gifts they might have gotten. Think about the smiles and tears of joy when you arive at these peoples' houses bearing gifts of food and animals to keep them stocked up on food.
My second reason we should all join the Seagoing Cowboy program is you get to see all of breathtaking sights as you travel the sea on a boat. These places you will be going to will have a ton of awesome sight seeing spots on the way to enjoy with all of the other Seagoing Cowboys. Also once you drop off all of the animal you can do a lot of really fun stuff with all of your buddys. For example vollyball, baseball, and a lot lot more cool activitys and games.
In the Seagoing Cowboys program it is dangorous and I will give the other side who do not want to join the Seagoing Cowboys program that. I bet if you are saying it is dangerous and it is not worth the risk that you have never tried to help a lot of people before. When you help a lot of people you get the amazing feeling that by risking your one life you probably just saved a hundred more lives just by going on a month to two month trip from the spot you are in to the spot you are going.
In conclusion you should all join the Seagoing Cowboys program. It is a great oppertunity to help other people that have lost their homes and to see a lot of breathtaking sights that you would not normally get to see. It is dangorous but you can see all of the joy and relief that you are giving to the people who have suffered great loss do to the ravanging way the war has treated them. I know that if you were to join the Seagoing Cowboys that you could be the thing that people in other countries dream of coming the next day with the gift of savour for them and their familys. | 3 |
39f9997 | The Face on Mars is a natural landform and not something that was created by aliens. The Face is a natural landform because the sharper pictures that were taken after the Viking photos revealed that it was a natural landform. Secondly, the scientists had taken another photograph which helped confirm what exactly the Face was. Also, the text states that the Face is "equivalent of a butte or mesa." Although some people think that the Face was created by aliens, there isn't enough information to support that claim.
First of all, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team flew over Cydonia in 1998. According to the passage, they "snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos." This means that this camera probably caught eye of more objects and got a more detailed idea of what this formation looks like. The Viking photos weren't as detailed, so the people who saw those photos originally got the idea that aliens had created it. The picture that was captured had revealed that this was, in fact, a natural landform.
Secondly, the Mars Global Surveyor went back to Cydonia on a cloudless day, since some people were second-guessing if the picture was accurate or not. According to the text, "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution," meaning that they could retrieve even more detailed objects. For example, the story says that if there were objects like shacks or airplanes, then they could see what they were. Also, the text states that "each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." People could trust these pictures and what scientists say that it is a natural landform because these photographs were very detailed.
Lastly, the very detailed photograph that was taken showed that the Face was equivalent to a butte or mesa. Butte and mesas are landforms that are commonly found around the American West. According to the passage, Garvin compared the Face to the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. He had said "that's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." Also, the scientists had already figured that this Face was another Martian mesa because they were commonly found around the area of Cydonia. This information is showing that the Face is most likely a landform.
The Face on Mars is a landform because of the factual evidence that was found. The cameras that were used were high quality, providing photographs that were very precise and accurate. Also, the photographs had showed that the Face was similar to formations on Earth. Therefore, all of this information concludes that the Face on Mars is indeed a landform and was not formed by aliens. | 4 |
39fa947 | The use of face technology is not important to the people. The face on a painting is important but no one cares what the expression is on the face. students in a classroom are not aleays happy or mad they are mostly bord in classrooms sitting there. The claim of the article is that using face technology is a good thing or not.
So people might think it is a good thing and there are others that think it is not a good thing to use that. Why would anyone want to know if a thing or person is happy or not. He made a painting of a person that is one of everything in the painting. There would be people that want to know if a painting is happy or mad or sad. It is just a painting on a wall that you look at not think if it is happy. | 1 |
3a01df4 | Venus is known as the second planet from our sun, it's sometimes called the "Evening Star" despite it wasn't a star at all. It was also referred as Earth's "twin," since Venus is the closest with density and size in terms of Earth's. But, we really don't know alot about Venus. Now why is that we don't sent any rovers, satelites, ANYTHING to get some few informations about Venus for the last three decades?
Because anything that touched the surface of Venus surrvived less than three hours. Which gathered the reputation as the as the challenging planet to study.
What is the challenges of studying Venus? Well, first of all, The atmospere of Venus has a THICK layer of carbon dioxide the covers 98% of the planet, in which makes Everything a much hoter place,but, to top it of with the atmosphere problem, the clouds in there have highly corrosive sulfuric acid. If we some how passes through the atmosphere, than we'll face ANOTHER problem with the ground. Since Venus is the second planet from our sun and with all those carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the surface ground temperature is over 800 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT. In which with the surface and the atmosphere, it could basically melt many types of metal with no problem. Another Problem is that the atmosphereic preassure is 90x greater than our Earth, with that much preassure could easily crushed a submarine that is built to surrvive the deeper end of the ocean. From what we gather small information from our space craft, the geology of venus pretty much have erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes.
Despite all of the troubles and challenges that Venus caused, many of the scientists, astronomers, and including the author themself think that it's worth all of the trouble to get s much information as possible to get to know more of Venus. But WHY is it worth studying it? Well, Astronomers are fascinated and interested in the past of Venus as many of them has theorized that might've used to be a lot like Earth from long time ago, with Venus used to oceans that support life like ours. Another reasons why it's worth the trouble and money to study it is that Venus could be our next Planetery visit as our nearest option.
To me, I'd thought that it wouldn't be worth all the trouble to study more of this when we can study other planets like mars that support life better than Venus since it's surface and atmosphere wasn't as crazy as Venus'. | 3 |
3a035fb | the advantages of limiting car usage is a good thing. cuts down on greenhouse gasses. but dont worry the rate that people are getting there licences is going down. i think that fines are a good way to cut down on golable emitions.
if we do what they did in vauban in the united states we could cut down on the greenhouse gasses and make citys more breathable. make them it better for people to get around and use less space for highways and malls. or we can fine people when they use cars and that would really cut down on the gas.
less and less people are not getting there licences because the have no reason to when thay can just car pool and the evolution of shared van services for getting to work. the rates of car ownership per household and per person started to come down 2 or 3 befor the down turn. if it persists many sociologists believe it will have benefical implications for carbon emissions and the environment. there are shifts in the driving population that have droped suggest that the trend may accelerate.
like in paris that fined people $31 for driving. and exceptions were made for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carring 3 or more people. but public transport was free. in the city diesel fuel was blamed, it makes up 67% of vehicles in france. compaired to a 53.3% average for the rest of western europe. paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in brussels and 79.7 in london in conclusion the advantages of limitating car usage is a good thing.1 it cuts down on greenhouse gasses. 2 fines help over all. and 3 licence rate is droping. | 3 |
3a05703 | Some people think that the "Face on Mars" was created by aliens. Yes I can see what perspective they're comming from because the "Face on Mars" was up in space and space isnt just like a place here or there its our galaxy. Who knows what's going on up there everyday? Many people, even scientists believe that the "Face of Mars" was indeed infact created by aliens.
Then there was this article about the "Face on Mars" it was called, "Unmasking the Face on Mars". It stated that many people had the thought that aliens did in fact create the "Face of Mars" and NASA even had scientists go on a mission to unravel the truth about the "Face on Mars" with evidence. It stated exactly from the article, "The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." Yes that is great that they were concluding the fact that maybe perhaps alien markings were hidden by haze but they're not sure it was just an assumption. But around April 5,1998 it stated from the article that, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." That is evidence that the "Face on Mars" was in fact a landform.
In conclution many people still think that the "Face on Mars" was created by aliens. NASA even had special missions for the curiousity with the planet and its Face. Many evidence was found through those missions and concluded that it was a landform. Even though many assumed that the " Face on Mars" was created by aliens, an image on the JPL website reveals evidence of a natural landform of the "Face of Mars". | 3 |
3a0686c | Do you want to know every big choice our country makes? Don't you want help deside that choice? But with Electoral collage we as american citizen do not get to do that. The reason why I belive we should change Electoral collage is because citizen should controll any big desition, we have the right to vote for what we want,and we most know whats goes on in the goverment.
First and foremost why I aruge that we should change Electoral collage is that citizen should be in controll of our conutry. We should be able to vote for what happens in this conutry. It not fair that people in higher leves gets to say what right for our conutry. Every one should have say in this. Its unfair to voter to be treated like this. This is why I belive that we should change Eletoral collage.
secondly why we need to change is that citizen should dircetly vote for candidates. we most know who were voting for but if we don't what the ponit of of voting then. If we can get to know each candidate we can be able to see which one do we want to help run the conutry. This is why I disagrue to this qutoe by Bradfrod plumer that ''voter sometimes get confoused about electors and vote for the wrong candidates? sametimes.'' No that amercia should have the right to vote for candidates because its our conutry.
The final reason I argue that we should change Electoral collage is that we most know what goes on in th goverment. We most be able to know is help rumming the conutry. that why I argue with Richard A. posner that ''its unfair for the voter.'' We need see and hear our candidates so we know the right choice for america. By doing this I know that america can will have less problems if the goverment and citizen worked togther more. This is why we need to change Electoral collage.
In conclsion we most change this system of voting. If we do america will be able to do bigger and better things. This is why if we I belive the Electoral collage wil be send america in the right dicetion. | 3 |
3a0a581 | Dear Senator,
As you may know, there is a huge dilema with the voting system we have as of right now. I am writing to you because it is in our best interest to abolish the Electoral College and change election to popular vote for the next presidential election. The reasons we should make this change is because the Electoral College is unfair for voters, also a disaster waiting to happen and the popular voting system bring so many more benefits and opportunities for the people.
The Electoral system simply takes away the people's say on who they think the best candidate is. It is simply unfair for the voters. In this system, according to the second source, popular vote, which is what the majority people select, most of the time loses the election due to the Electoral System. An Example used in this source was the 2000 election with Al Gore, he had won the popular vote, but had lost the election thanks to the Electoral College. With this system in play, voters cannot control who they want to vote for and that is not how it should be. In source one, it clearly states most states have a "winner-take-all" type of system that awards all electors of that state to the specific candidate, which is the complete opposite of benefiting the people, because not everyone in that state wants to vote for that specific candidate. Source 3 says big states that a larger state gets more attention than a smaller state does because of the amount of votes, however some states claim they never even got to see a presidential campaign had because of how small the states was. Its is Unfair to these states which include Rhode Island, South Carolina. It takes away opportunities from these smaller states.
In source two, Bradford Plumer mentions the single best argument against the Electoral College, which he calls the "disaster factor". Voters vote not for the president but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. This means that voters dont really have control on who they vote for, as mentioned before. The Electors can defy the will of the people, the only reason people vote, in this system, is to "sway the opinion". This is known as the "disaster factor", the electors defying the will of the people. Another problem with this system is that if there is a tie, it is definately out of the peoples choice. The decision is left to the House Of Representatives. The Electoral College is a disaster waiting to happen, like a bomb ticking, at some point in time, it will explode.
The benefits of switching to popular vote really pays off. With popular vote, these issues adressed would not be a problem at all, such as the unfairness to voters, the disasters awaiting to happen with the Electoral College. The only downside to this is that it will take a little longer to count the votes and finalize the election, but it is worth it. All voters would be at peace of mind knowing that their vote actually counted for something. In my opinion, this is the best choice and option out there. We need to get rid of the Electoral College because it brings us no good at all. We could finally stop worrying about the timer!
I hope you take this into consideration.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
3a0b1c6 | Using the technology in class would be valuable in classrooms. Using the new technology can help students stay focused or help them become more interested in school. The technology can also make the class more interesting if it picks up that the person is bored or whatever the case might be. This technology can change the way students think about school.
In the 6th paragraph it says "A classroom computer can recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This quote shows that this technology could change the way students interact with school and change their feelings about school. If the student is bored the computer will pick up on it nd make the assignment something more interesting which will change their mood into happy. If the student is becoming confused the computer wil pick up on that and will try to make it more easier and/or explain it in a more simplier way.
In conclusion, the technology would be a good idea because it could make assignments on computers more easier to understand. It could possibly improve students grades if it knows what to do to make it easier on the student. Lastly, it could possibly get students to want to be more invloved in school and participate in the lesson more. | 3 |
3a0f754 | Having driverless cars can vitally affect the world. Athough there are upsides to having them, there is also a lot of negative things that can result. I personaly think it is a bad idea to have driverless cars. The reasons for that being, if there is a software malfunction who is to blame, it takes away the fun and personal experiance of learning to drive, and there is not a way to prevent the car from malfunctioning.
Who is to blame for a crash when the cars are self driving? That question would be asked by anyone who experiances a crash with these cars. The government could make the civilian pay for the damages, or they could hold the manufacturer responsible. But, who would stop the manufacturers from sueing the civilian in the car and trying to make them pay for damages. Without any law to decide who is to blame there would be people sueing and blaming eachother to avoid paying.
Having driverless cars would also take away the experiance of learning to drive a car. Driving has always been something teenagers look forward to doing because it makes them feel free and like they have control over something. Without this, what would they look forward too? Learning to drive is also a great bonding experiance between parent and child and a wonderful way to pass on knowledge.
How would we be able to prevent the car from malfunctioning and causing a crash, or what if someone hacks the system to cause a car to crash? Having a computerized car with no way of letting humans take control would just be leeting in people to cause issues. If the president is in a car and someone hacks they syatem they can easily make the car crash killing the president. Unless they find a way to prevent this then there would be no order, and even id they put a one of a kind security system in it there is still no garentee that it wont get hacked.
There are some good things to having driverless cars though. Like how it would be safer without the risk of drunk drivers. Another good thing stated in the text is how they plan on making them use less gas than cars today, but couldnt they just make normal cars use less gas instead of making driverless cars? There is just so many small things that could cause big issues that the good from this is out weighed by the bad.
Having these self driving cars is just opening the door for issues to come through. Without clear laws on who is to blame for a crash, there is an opening for instability. There is no way for us to prevent people from hacking into a car's system and causing it to malfunction, killing those inside. Taking away the experiance from teenagers of feeling free to go where you want and destroying the chances of bonding with them through teaching to drive is just wrong. although it could be safer at some times there are also so many problems that can occur. Do we really want to take such big risks, just for a few small rewards? | 4 |
3a0fd12 | My opinion on driverless cars is a good start for the new "future". As seen in movies people have created amazing things to the world today that no one could think it could be created do to the fact of our resources. Also in todays world poeple are gonna develope these cars do too the fact of creating something different to the human mind and nature. The reason behind making driverless cars is a good idea to the delievering company. I think the first driverless anything should be semi's due to the fact people get paid over a 1000$ a week. In this way people will start being able to transport stuff a lot cheaper and more effactive then what it is today. If they make the driverless car its good for the use of traveling due to the fact of you can sleep while your car is drivering and show up to a place a lot faster than you should. It takes 24 hours to get across the USA without stopping. If a human is driving it willl take most likely 2-3 days to complete this trip. Due to the fact of driverless semi's delivering goods and supplies if that make it possible to where a driver doesnt even have to be in the car or truck there will still be a question asked. How will you fill the gas tank? Like they said in the passage of driverless taxis.(Pargraph 1) How would a taxi be able to fill the tank up if a driver is not presant. You cant ask the passenger too. There are some problems with driverless cars but most of them will be fixed in the next few years due to more and more smarter people and more technology being made. | 2 |
3a153f0 | There are few people who can can imagine living a full life in this generation without thewse glorified metal boxes with wheels attached to them; even fewer set living a life similar to that as a goal. The advantages of limiting the amount of cars being used are suprisingly unique due to the dwindling amount of disadvanteges there are. Some of these advantages include reduction in greeenhouse gas emissions and that there will be a reduction in smog. It is always nice to see humanity band together, willingly or forcefully, to work for a common good.
Let us begin with the most pressing issue: preserving the environment. Studies have shown that nearly "12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the United States." come from passenger cars (Rosenthal 1, 5). Reducing these greenhouse gases, which pose a threat to the Earth's atmosphere, would be an improvement, although slow, still an improvement nonetheless. While this would not be the immmediately noticable of changes, making an effort to cleanse our cities of pollution would be.
Moving on, some places have taken this matter into their own hands, matters that some would describe as extreme. Paris, France is one of these examples, "enforcing a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city...motorists...ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine..." (Duffer, 10-11).It is pleasant to see a city taking this matter into their own hands. This ban, though, did spark an uproar on the Internet, but it did die down. Many approaches to cleansing city-air have been drastic, but others such as in Columbia, had some sort of event where "the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog." (Selsky, 21). This did allow a public freedom, despite there still being a fine in place. The remarkable fact of this is that even though cars are being banned, a large portion of the targeted population actuallly do not mind the change, even "'the rain hasn't stopped people from participating'"(Selsky, 23).
Suprisingly enough, this car-ban revolution is still going on today. Many more people are starting to realize the benefits to the ban. Elisabeth Rosenthal, in her article
"The End of Car Culture"
even adds in that many "sociologists believe...it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment..."(34). This simply furthers the ideal that humanity as a whole CAN see a chance to change, wants to desperately do so, and WILL do so...eventually. | 4 |
3a17a01 | When you think of Venus, you think it's just another planet in out solar system. it's a planet that humans could live on if the Earth wasn't in our solar system. Venus could be another planet of human life form if we give it a chance.
Venus has the same size, density, and closest to distance to Earth. Venus temperatures are more high than Earth but still people could surive there.
Venus still has features like Earth such as valleys, mountains, craters, and oceans too. According to the article, NASA are approaching to study Venus by old computers called mechanical computers to see what is in Venus surface and pulling samples from the planet and testing the them in a chmaber back at NASA to see if humans could surive there.
Another planet that human life form could surive on is Venus. NASA has sent pilots on a mission to see if spacecraft could surive for more than a few hours on Venus to see if humans could live there. | 2 |
3a1dd7e | Is it possible for driverless cars to have a worse impact on earth than gasonline fueled cars? Although driverless cars are expected to use less than half the fuel we use now, the idea does not sound inviting. Say it were storming, the power goes out, and you need supplies for your family. If you happened to have a driverless car, the satellites could go out and make it to where you could not control the energy powered car. This could result in a accident or even mulitple of them. Driverless cars do not seem like the way to go.
In movies, they make smart cars seem amazing and like they require less work. In reality, you would need to charge the car daily depending on how much you travel in a day. If it were battery operated, you would need to change the batteries out excessively or charge them consistantly. Driverless cars aren't fully developed yet and still require you to be alert so why not learn how to manually drive a car.
As if the 21st century generation isn't already frowned upon enough, driverless cars would make this worse. Nowadays, we can get what we want with the snap of a finger. Everything is handed to our generation and everything is becoming more technology inclined. Instead of working towards certain milestones in our life, we just skip them completely. With this type of car, a lot of people would become unemployed. There are millions of truck drivers, mailmen and mailwomen, bus drivers, etc. that would all be out of jobs due to lack of motivation for people to actually learn how to work an automobile. Many of the students I've encountered today prefer not to drive because that would require learning and aquiring a life skill.
Another problem with driverless cars would be how distracting all the equipment involved with the cars would be. As if texting a driving isn't already a ginormus problem that has killed millions of people, without the obligation of mashing a gas or brake pedal and holding a steering wheel, texting and driving might be an even bigger ordeal. Many people suffer from mental disorders that don't allow them to focus and this could cause them to miss a cue when the car needs assistance on the road.
Technology is not always reliable or effecient. Sometimes there are glitches in the system, power outages, and sometimes things completely just shut down for no reason. If you miss a certain update for your car, you could be in the middle of rush hour, and your car be completely demolished and destroyed as well as yourself. We should not depend on technology for everything, especially when our lives are at stake. Car accidents are the most probable cause of death in the United States and this problem could be solved in other ways aside from automatic automobiles. Driverless cars are not a spectacular idea. they need a lot more planning and thought put into the making. Another problem could be cost. Most of the world is living in poverty an dwon't be able to afford the latest gadget the world has to offer.
I do not believe that driverless cars are a good idea. They come off as unsafe and it might not appeal to the older generations to learn how to drive all over again. Driverless cars could cause accidents that could have been prevented with fuel powered cars, they are not as effecient as they sound because they require just as much electricity which is run off of fuel, and they haven't proven reliable during an emergency. | 4 |
3a1f04d | DEAR, STATE SENATOR
We should keep the electoral college because we want the people to vote not the house. If the people dont vote how would we know if we are getting what we deserve. Also as the artcle states "the founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by vote in congress and election of the president". The people should be able to vote because if we dont we are not going to be happy that we didnt get a say in the election.
The article states the that the eletoral college consist of 538 electors but only a majority of 270 electoral votes is required. Where is the 300 hundred and somthing other votes do they not get counted or do you forget about them because i think that is unreasonable becaues we have more people voting. The article states that "most states have a "winner takes all" i think that this is basically cheating because you should only get what you have. If you get more than what you elected for the other people that you get will possiably turn against you thats why you should only get the people you already have.
If we let the people votes for who they may want then we would also be helping out the house to deside on who is president. For the people that like politics would like to vote but yes i know that some people arent going to vote,but we should still give are people a chace to vote. in this case i would like to have the electoral college to stay but let the people speak too.
this is why i would likw to keep the electoral college. | 2 |
3a20378 | Do you know what it is? It sure isnt an alien. The face shape mask is just shadows, rocks, or something that isn't alive. In the text scientist said "it wasnt a alien", it's just rocks or something for higher above the Viking ship. It could be an alien but it isn't.
The Scientist are just saying it is an alien is because they want the world to be curious. You are just using your imagination, but truley its just rocks/sadows.
After the technology was getting better, the sent another space ship to see if it is still there. Which it was, so they took many shoots of it. They finally relized that it was just rocks forming or hadows from other objects, and not an alien. they just wanted us (citizens) to think that it is an alien so that busnisess would make money or something good out of it. How can an aliens do that, to make it look like it is 3-D? They probably can but, scientist already figured out it's just the rocks shadows. Our technoloy today can determine what it really is just by one picture and some zooming in.
That's why that face shape mack on mars is not an alien. You can just read a passage about it, to find out what it really is. It's just rocks forming to make a face. But, that face, is not an alien artifact. They even said that "there was no alien monument after all." So, after what I said I hope you figured that isn't alien's making that mask shape face on mars. It is not aliens. | 3 |
3a20bfb | In " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers that Venus represents.
In the text it gives multiple reasons that Venus is dangerouse. Venus cann be a dnager to things that go on in space and the diffrent things that happen in space.
In the text it states that " Venus is the closet planet to earth in terms of density and size" This is stating that venus is the closet planet to earth so if something happpens to Venus then it couold effecct earth. In the text it says " A thick Atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus." When iI think of that statement it scares me. The reasont the statement above scares me is because th4e carbon dioxide that is on Venus could coem to earth and start puliting the air. Pullution in the air is not good for our animals or hummans.
I feel liek the author did a very good job at explaining why it is a good idea that studying Venus is a worthy despute inspite the dangers of studying Venus. I feel like the author could probablly give more backround on why it is not very safe to study Venus. I feel like the author could give more information why it is a good idea to prsue studying Venus.
In conculson i feel like the author did a good job suggesting that studying venus in the artical " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is a worthy prsuit despite the dangers that studying Venus might have. I feel like the author also needs to include more facts about Venus and making it more intresting for the reader. | 2 |
3a275eb | Technology is evolving and its evolving fast, for the fact that now we have a computer that may read students faces to determine if they lost interest and than alter the thing they are looking at. We will be talking about what this technology could leade to, what it may mean for schools, and how positive it may be.
Now this technology is quite advanced but, could it be a little far? Personally i feel this technology could be something positive in our lives but it could leade to many bad things. People will start relying on their computer to make them happy, people who have loved ones may just use a computer to read their emotions rather than actually trying to figure it out.
Schools are always trying to keep students happy, or willing to learn. But they seem to always lose their interest, so maybe it will help classes and maybe help advance students to a better grade or maybe even get them somewhere were they feel intrigued in. It could also help for the fact of students who are angry, helping them relax or putting them in a different situation.
This technology is very positive but still has its down sides. In my eyes, I see this as something negative for the fact being that humans need to try and reach someones heart and know them. We cant have technology just tell you if someone is happy or if they upset. You wouldnt really get any experience in social skills.
So to end this off, i do not agree of having this. This technology will end social skills and hurt schools for the fact of no one would be used to one another. Social skills is one skill everyone needs to have, learn, and use on a day to day bases. | 3 |
3a27911 | I agree with the passage and encourage that students have their visual expressions checked for their individual emotions. As long as they get consent from them to use such technology on them.
I agree for several examples. One example(although not stated directly in the passage) A counsiler could for example use it on a student if they showed signs of depression or high sadness and properly diagnose it, helping them that they couldn get previously if they kept a fake smile on. Next is because it would help teachers with information on their students is they enjoy their material and what they could do to help improve the material used. Lastly it was stated that it can improve things for video surgerys and video games, showing the expressiveness of human emotion so the game or surgery would be more realistic and relatable.
In conclusion, that is why I agree that this facial/emotional technology would be useful in peoples lives, with things such as diagnosing mental illnesses like depression. Public education improving to adapt more to student preformace and behavior. And lastly that things such as video games and video surgeries could get better facial expression for humans to make the games or informational surgeries more useful to the creators. | 3 |
3a27c7e | Imagine having a teacher that always helps you because they know how you feel about the class. Well this dream might not be too far away because prefessor Thomas Huang, of the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinois, and his colleagues have made software that can precisely calculate human emotions. This technology can be especially beneficial to us students because it conveys our exact feelings and emotions to our teachers who can then help us and give us feedback on the material. This new breakthrough in technology could mean massive changes in modern education.
As Dr. Huang coherantly demonstrates, there is no reason to doubt that computers can accurately read your emotions. People say things like "Computers will never know feeling" or "Emotions aren't just ones and zeros" but the facts hold true, this new mathmatically based software is both trustworthy and accurate. This new technology is a game changer because as Dr. Huang says,
"Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication" (Huang) and to students that might be shy or not clear when they talk, this means that they will be heard. This means that nobody is left to figure it out on their own.
As we all know, there are some teachers that are not the best. But with Dr. Huang's new software, every classroom could be at maximum efficiency. Dr. Huang ensures us that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored" and that this would cause immediate action because it would then "Modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor" (Huang). The time of students suffering through class is over, personalized lesson planning is in.
As you reflect on this article, try to imagine how easy it would be to communicate with your teachers if they could read your emotions. New technology is the future of the classroom and as shown, it can be more than beneficial to both teachers and students when it comes to conveying emotions. Nobody should have to make a big effort to tell someone how they feel, and nobody should be left behind because their teacher can't understand what they are trying to tell them. | 4 |
3a280d9 | Dear Senator,
I feel that the electoral college should be be removed from the voting process and replaced by the popular vote. The vioce of the people is the most imprtant thingin ensuring the president elected is truly the people's president. The Electoral college is an unfair system for many voters and keeps our nation from being the demorcratic society it was meant to be. Even those who oopose this view agree that the Electoral college is a non-demorcratic system. Doesnb;t that seem like an issue considering this nation was founded on Demorcratic beliefs?
I understand that some feel it's ok if the the voting is left mainly to toss up states because they seem to be the the people who are more thoughtful about the lection. The only reason this is the case is because the canidates spend their whole time in the swing states and they completely alienate the other states. In fact, in 2000, seventeen states were completely skipped over by canidates. This causes people to feel discouraged from voting because they feel as if their votes are unimportant or that they don't know enough to cast an educated vote.
Also people like to argue that there is no problem with the electors because they can always be trusted. But this also is simply not the case. In 1960 the demorcratic electors were almost completely replaced by electors who would vote in oppostition of JFK. Sometimes electors flat out refuse to vote for the canidate they were elected to vote for. Cases like this completly undermine the very idea of the electoral college.
Then in the case of a tie in electoral votes the election is put in the hands of the House of represenatives. Each state is only given one vote, so a state with a single represenative vote, such as wyoming, would have the same amount of influence as a state with 55 represenatives such as California. Plus people don't always vote with their party when electing people for congress so how can they be sure that their best interests will be represented in the case of a tie. Some may say that a tie is rare and has no foundation in this argument, but they would be wrong. In 1968 the outcome was only 41,971 votes away from being a tie. In 1976 it was 5,559 away in ohio and 3,687 away in Hawaii. With the Electoral college in use, a few swing voters could throw the whole election.
So to summarize, the Electoral college is basically an outdated system that may have worked when the country first started, but doesn't really apply today. It's time to put the power of the election in the hands of voters directly and make the election a truly demorcratic system. | 4 |
3a2b8f0 | The electoral college must go down! The electoral college is unfair to voters across the United States and the amounts of electoral votes doesn't compare to the actual population. The electoral college have messed up the voting system causing horrific crisis in the United States. This system of electoral colleges voting for the president and not actually counting the votes that the people in the United States vote for, which makes it a very outdated system. Using popular vote is more precise and accurate than the electoral college. Popular vote is voted by citizens in which many people not including me should change the electoral system for the popular vote system. Therefore, the electoral college must go down and replaced by a system called the popular vote to determine the president of this great country.
Having electoral voters instead of having the popular vote system is unfair to all. Basically the electoral college process consists of only a selection of the senators. The founding father have established this messed up system in which it compromise between the election of the president by a vote in congress. It is highly unfair because of the winner-take-all system in each state. This means canidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning. For example, they only focus on the "swing states" like California. Using the winner-take-all system, smaller states don't get the same oppurtunity as bigger states as in the year of the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see any canidates at all including, Rhode Island and South Carolina which holds the largest media markets. Yet these states didn't get to see a single campaign ad in the designated area.
Not only that using this system is unfair to all, but this system of electoral votes don't compare to the population. Meaning the 500,000 voters in a state of Wyoming who wants the other president to win, only have one representative to cast that vote in that whole state of that immense population. While California in the other hand have 55 representatives to cast the votes, in which the represent 35 million voters in that state. Using popular vote, is much more of a precise method or sytem to use. Instead of having one representative from one small state of 500,000 people, the popular votes turned in by qualified citizens will count than just 55 representatives. Imagine having each and everyone's vote count instead of having someone to do it for you. Now that is when people should start voting.
Using the popular vote will indeed avoid many crisis that happened using the electoral system. For example, the election that almost turned into complete disaster in the year of 1960 when Vice President Richard Nixon, who was presiding over the senate, validated only his opponent electors, but he made sure to do so "without establishing a precedent". This couldv'e been easily fixed if the government at this time would take off the electoral system college and instead use a precise system that many people want, named the popular vote. Popular vote is basically when the people have "the voice" and speak for themselves and not to another person. Another example would be in the year 2000 when U.S. presidential race, Al Gorereceived more individual votes that George W. Bush nation wide, but Bush wonthe election, receiving 271 electoral votes to Gore's 266. With popular vote, Al Gore wouldv'e won the presidency and the citezens of the United States would've gotten what they wanted instead of having people vote for them. This is why population vote should be in effect as soon as possible.
Using popular vote would be a great and ideal way to decide who is the president during the nationwide election. It should be important to many people as we the people of the United States decide who will take over the countries' responsibility and economy. Yes, the popular votes is a great and ideal way to vote but having electoral colleges will avoid run-off elections. Run-off elections are when no canidate receives a majority of the votes cast. However, they can fix this problem by eliminating the electoral votes process. Therefore, it makes it clear that having a popular vote to deide who is the winner would be better when it is election time.
Having popular votes system will be arguably the best system to use for the election and towards the voting process. Using electoral votes will be unfair to voters when they are voting because of the simply winner-take-all basis of each and every one of the fifty states. Not only that it's unfair, it also causes many crisis in the United States dealing with this system alone and then eventually lead to dramatic chaos across the nation. Also, having the amount of electoral votes doesn't compare to the population of the actual state. Remember it is still one representative for the 500,000 people in Wyoming. Popular votes should be used in every political system no matter what situation it is. As the passage says, the argument against direct elections are spuriors at the best. Abolish the electoral system college once and for all! | 6 |
3a2c718 | The use of technology to read the emotional expression of students face in a classroom is valuable. Its valuable because its helps students be interested in something their doing. For example the passage says, " If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow". That shows it keeps you interested and will keep kids interested.
Another reason I think we should have technology to read emotions is because it could also help teachers no what he or she should do to keep the children entertained like the computer. If this keeps the children entertain it'll help them learn better because if the kid is not interested then they will not watch the lesson your teaching them.
One raeson I think wde shouldn't have them in a class room is becasue it will distact kids because it'll have the kids focused on technology instead of learning thats the only reason i think we shouldn't have them.
Those are some reasons why I think we should and shouldn't have technology to raed emotions expressions. | 3 |
3a2ffd1 | Although there are advantages to having a smart car, the cars should no longer be developed. They should not be developed because the cars may assist but no car is completely driverless; The cars have several sensors but, still need full alertness of the driver just as a normal car would. The smart cars, by law, are not considered safe. In most states its illegal just to test smart cars.
Some may question wether the cars should be maufactured if they are not driverless. The smart cars require the driver to be fully alert so that they can take over in places where the car cannot drive it's self. Technology is something that help people do things more efficently, however, the smart car is not any more efficent than a regular car.
In most sates it is illegal just to test the cars, this is because the cars have not been proved reliably safe. If the cars are proved safe the law would then have to be changed to cover liability. In the case of an accident, who is at fult the car or the driver? This question could easily raise debate on wether the cars should be further developed because of the confusion and problems it could cause.
In some areas the cars can be tested. There have been no crashes in all of the testing but does this make up for all of the faults of the cars? Some may argue that the cars are benificial. If this is the case, how benifical are they? The fact that the cars are not consdidered "safe", that the cars are not driverless and that they are illegal all outweigh the potenital of the smart cars.
The cars should no longer be developed. The cars are not safe. Since they require as much attention as a regular car, they are not an enhancement to the tecchnology we already have. The idea of a smart car seems benificial however, this perfect car cannot be achived in reality. | 4 |
3a31b70 | Have you ever thought about becoming a Seagoing Cowboy? If you are gregeous you whould love to meet alot of different people. In the 1900s Seagoing Cowboys were hired to take care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped over seas.
When World War || was over in Europe many countries were left in the ruins. To help recover food supplies animals, and more, 44 nations joined togther to form UNRRA (United Nations Relif and Rehabilitation Administration. All of the Seagoing Cowboys are so altristic they feed horses,cow,mules, and mabye even chickens.
You can see land marks that are all over the country...no the world. You can possible go swimming in the Atlandtic Ocean and Pacific Ocean. You can go to places like Greece, China, and Europe. When you are traveling you will have a oh-muy-gosh-I-can´t-belive-I-am-going-to-across-the-world feeling. When you are traveling you will feel like you are going to lift off the ground and fly. In August 1945, Seagoing Cowboys recived orders to report to New Orleans,and they arrived in August 14 the day the Pacific war ended. They got their seaman´s papers and boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster, headed for Greece with a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them.
The Seagoing Cowgboy s program is just right for you. You can go different place, different people and experience a life full of adventure. You get to see monumants that have been there for over hundereds of years. Peple just like you, active, hard working, and gentle. You can see all different kinds of curses and yahts.You can go fishing and bond with friends see different kind of fish (maybe even a shark). Those are some reasons you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. | 3 |
3a3a47b | The idea of having new and evolved veichles might scare some people.
Having driveless cars has positive and negative sides to it.
Drriveless cars are cars that drive themselves and dont need a human being to be behind the wheel.
The idea for having invented driverless cars is so that different types of peple can multi task while they are in the car. Many people get destracted and need to become awear of what is happening in their sourroundings.
While different people think that driverless cars are a bad thing there are some positives to the idea. Some of the positives are that you wouldnt have to worry about texting and driving or drinking and driving. You would get home safe and you wouldnt even have to touch the stearing wheel.
Another positive is that it has sensors so that if your about to backup into and object it gives you a signal to inform you that you need to watch out, and the same with when your driving and you get really close to getting in an accident.
One last positive thing is that if you you are tired or are in a condition in which you can not drive back to a certain place, he driverless car can take you there.
There are negatives of having driverless cars aswell. not all driverless cars can and will do the exact same thing. Some of the negatives of having driverless cars is that not all of the cars will be the same.
Another reason is that they might not be capable to do its job.
Another reason is that many people may not like the idea of driverless cars because they are so used to the idea of regular cars and they like to be in control of where they are going and how they are driving.
One last reason as to why driverless cars are a negative thing is because the might be too expensive that not many people are willling to spend so much money.
There are also positives and negatives about regular cars.
Some people might be used to driving regular cars and dont want to change that. But because of all of the technology that has been changing over the years if at one point driverless cars do not become something that everyone has some people might think that we are behind on our technological advances
I personaly think that both types of cars are great if you want a driverless car then why shouldnt you be allowd to have one but if you dont want a driverless car and you like regular cars because of the fact that you can control where you are going and how you are driving then that should be fine too. we just need to make sure that everyone n the rode wether you have a driverless car or a regular one are safe | 3 |
3a41205 | My name is Luke Bomberger and I want you to join the Seagoing Cowboys program. When you join you can help different countries and their people. And you can see marvolous sights such as, Europe, China, Italy, and Greece. Also, when going home you can play games like Table-tennis tournaments, boxing, and fencing.
Another reason you shouldjoin the Seagoing Cowboys are the animals. You can feed the animals, water them and, make sure they aren't hurt. You'd be helping people too, by bring people livestock and food to eat. And for all your hard work, on the return trip you can play games, read, or do some whittling. I know all of this because I'm part of the Seagoing Cowboys crew.
In conclusion, if you join, you help people, be with some animals, play some games, see Beautiful sights onboard, and you'd be helping the military. So, be part of the Seagoing Cowboys crew today! | 2 |
3a46a7c | Cars today are driving closer and to being able to drive on their own. This can change the way people live and how people use tranportation in a positive way. Even though they aren't entirely "driverless" and still need a driver it's still a step in that direction. Driverless cars would take over public transportion system, create less accidents, and help people who can't drive well.
Driverless cars are esstientally going to be the future public transportation. The cars will end up taking the postions of taxis and even buses. Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisons a future where these cars will offer much more flexiblity while cutting the useage of fuel by half.
These self drivng cars will also be safer for others on the road reducing the chances of a crash. Car companies have taken extreme precautions with these machines fitting them with senors all over the cars. Google has taken the idea into its own hands with some companies like Toyota. They've modified a Toyota Prius and have outfitted it with a postiton-estimating sensor on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted ner the review mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor. These sensors will apply brakes and reduce power from the engine so that the driver at hand can take over.
Of course these driverless cars will need a passenger that a operate the car in case of an emergancy. In 2013, BMW announced a development of the "traffic Jam Assistant", which allows the cars to handle driving functions at speed up to 25 mph. Special touch sensors make sure a driver is keeping hold of the wheel at all times. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves but still need to notify the driver when it need human skills navigating through areas like work zones.
On the other hand, some people wouldn't lay their lives in the hands of a self driving car. Driving laws today focus on keeping the drivers, passengers and pefestrians safe. Today, traffic laws are written with the thought of a human driver controlling the car. In most states, it has been illegal to to even test driverless car; but scientist beileve that more states will allow testing after seeing results from those states that have been doing it already.
This future of self driving cars is near. Automakers like Telsa have projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving by it self 90% of the time. Other companies like Mercedes- Benz , Audi and Nissan have plans to release cars that drive by themselves by 2020. | 4 |
3a481f7 | Can you tell if someone is happy or sad? Using technology to read students facial expressions can help out in so many different ways. A classroom computer can read a students facial expressions, they use facial imagery, humans perform the same calculations every day. These are the things that makes the Facial Action Coding System useful.
A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored or is happy or sad. If you smile when an ad pops up on your screen another similar ad might appear but, if an ad pops up and you frown then it won't have the same ad come up again. Because of this the students would be happier and cheerful. If a student was sad or bored when working on a lesson then it would change the lesson and make it more fun and then it would be more effective. This would make the children learn more and not dread being at school.
Using video imagery to recognize the facial emotion. This weights the different units of the face so that the software can identify mixed emotions. Because of this they can tell all of the different things the painting was feeling. Every expression is compared against a face that shows no emotion at all. This is so that they can know what to look for in the face and see the differences between a neutral face and a face with mixed emotions.
Humans perform the same calculations every day. Humans can tell if someone is sad or worried etc. by their facial expressions. Because of this we know peoples feelings sometimes. We would have trouble describing exactly what they were feeling just by looking at their face but, thats what the Facial Action Coding System does. This is saying that people can't tell exactly what other people are feeling just by their faces so that what the Facial System does.
The Facial Action Coding system does so many great things that would help schools and society. It helps with schooling because it could make it more fun, they use video imagery which helps recognize the facial emotion, and humans perform this act every day but, the Facial System helps with expressing the emotion. These all help the world in so many ways. | 3 |
3a4e8d9 | Cars are used for transporting from place to place, but is it really the best way to get somewhere? There are many factors that are being affected when using cars. Many people believe cars are the best way to get somewhere but the only good thing about a car is the amount of time it takes to get somewhere. Even time isn't a good reason for why cars are being used. Limiting car usage would have so many advantages that people should take advantage of.
To begin with, some people use alternative transportations rather than cars. For example, Germany, Paris, and Columbia don't use cars on a daily basis like most people do in other countries. Those specific countries have either banned cars or they just don't need cars to transport from one place to another. Source 1 states, " Residents of this upscape community are suburban pioneers, going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars." In my neigboorhood, most people walk to the Publix right near our community because they either don't have a car or they just prefer to walk. Although it might be quicker to go in car, it is environmentally friendly to ride your bike or walk. In Source 3 states, " 'It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said the businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as her rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife." Taking a walk somewhere or riding a bike can be a great workout or just creates calmness if you are stressing. Alternative transportations are a good because then people wouldn't cause any harm to the environment or affect anything else.
In addition, smog is an issue that should be reduced which would limit car usage. Some places like Paris have already reduced smog so they could clear the air in their city. Source 2 states, " Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France after five-days of intensifying smog..." When the smog arose in Beijing, the amount of cars reduced which cleared the streets of France. Smog could be seen as a good thing because once it arouse, the amount of cars used decreased. Limiting car usage is a good thing, and people should realize that.
To conclude, there are so many advantages for limiting car usage. People have many other options instead of using cars and they should take advantage of that. Smog has created cars to be banned in many cities. Alternative transportaion makes many people not use cars and that is a good thing. Next time think about whether you want to use a car or just use something else. | 4 |
3a53b74 | The future is coming in fast. Driverless cars are what everybody has been waiting for. Sense 2009, cars have been created where they can drive by themselves under very specific conditions. They are the next big thing, but are they safe? Driverless cars are still being worked on, they are not very accurate, and the manufactures are only assuming that the problems ahead will be solved.
Driverless cars are constantly being worked on. They will never stop being worked on. In all cases, humans are actually still needed while sitting in a driverless car. "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." This quote simply means that while sitting in a "driverless" car, humans are still required to pay full attention and take over when needed. Driverless cars should be true to their title. They shouldn't be called "Driverless cars" if humans still have to drive it. Also, this means that the cars are going to be constantly worked on because they will always have a new techonological problem that they are going to need to fix in order for the car to fully be able to drive itself.
Driverless cars are not accurate at all. People are still in need of some answers. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver, or the manufacturer?" This shouldn't even be a question that the people would need answers to. Now, if driverless cars are going to be the next huge world-changer, than the manufacturues are somehow going to need to make the cars seemless. They are going to need better sensers, cameras, better navigation. They are always going to need to be better. Also, driverless cars should be something that a human can just hop right into, and relax while driving to work or to the grocery store. It shouldn't be something that humans have to be alert and scared while driving because they know that at any time, something could go wrong. If questions like this are being asked, the company just simply isn't accurate enough.
Manufactures are working on driverless cars all of the time. Does this mean that they have exactly what they need to make the cars flawless? "Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems will be solved." This quote simply means that the makers of the cars are still uncertain about whether or not they are going to be everything that everyone has been dreaming of. They don't even know if the problems that lie ahead will be solved! How could people trust their lives in the hands of such an uncertain and inaccurate company?
In conclusion, yes, a seemingly perfect driverless car would be totally awesome to have. It would be awesome to just relax and have the driverless car take you to go on a vacation or to work. The chances that people are willing to take is up to them. Driverless cars are still being worked on, they just aren't accurate enough, and the makers of these cars are still uncertain about them. Driverless cars just aren't ready and may not ever be ready to hand off to someone who intrusts their lives to the manufacturer or to the car. Questions are still unanswered, and they may not ever be answered; Therefore, driverless cars are not the best choice for our future. | 4 |
3a57893 | The Declaration of Independence granted us the right to control our government. Thomas Jefferson once stated, "When a nations government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of its people to abolish it and establish a new government." After viewing the articles Source 1:"What Is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal register, Source 2: "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, and Source 3:"In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner it seems clear that the Electoral Colleges have lessened the power of the people in our nation. With the Electoral College method of selecting our nations new president the people of our nation become less empowered, they may cast their vote but the choice of president is never truly theirs. The Electoral Colleges drive people away from voting because they see the election as if their vote will not matter. To further empower the citizens of the United States the Electoral Colleges should be abolished.
Throughout our nations history the majority vote has lost due to being outvoted when it comes to Electoral Colleges. Because of the majoity vote losing out to Electoral Colleges, people have come to believe their vote will not matter in the long run. In Source 2 Plumer declares, "faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's canidate". With this method of selection for our country's president, the vote is never certain. The slate of electors that the people essentially vote for may or may not stick to the original plan. This ties back into people losing hope that their vote will not matter because they trust the electors to vote their canidate into office, when the electors could go either way. Another key point is, the canidates may not campaign in states that have a lower number of electoral votes. In Source 1 the Office of the Federal Register also asserted, "Most states have a 'winner-take-all' system that awards all electors to the winning presidential canidate". Due to the Electoral College system being based off population some states have more of a say than others. Whenever a state decides their votes for Electoral Colleges the state typically contributes every vote it has to one canidate. When this occurs the state's people may be misrepresented.
Electoral Colleges do not reflect the democratic style of government we have had for hundreds of years. In Source 3 Posner states, "it is the electors who elect the president, not the people". Ever since the United States has been around our lifestyle has been purely democratic. The people are supposed to the empowering body of our government and their voice is the one that should be heard. But since we have the Electoral College the voice of the people has become muffled. No longer is the presidential election a democratic event, but one that is decided through the votes of only a few chosen American citizens. Plumer observed in Source 2 that, "During the 2000 campaign, 17 states didn't see the canidates at all". If the people of America are truly part of our governing body then they must see the canidates and hear what they have to say. The Electoral College has driven canidates away from states that will not have much say. These states are then left to make a decision for themselves and decide based on their personal preference, they are never able to truly hear what these canidates may or may not have to offer.
On the other hand, Electoral Colleges do have a lack of uncertainty. As Posner said in Source 3, "the dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible but it's less likey than a dispute over the popular vote". The Electoral College provides the American people with a certainty of outcome. Whenever a state decides where its Electoral votes are going the canidate typically wins by a landslide electoral-vote victory.
Although the Electoral College has a few appealing qualities, it is mostly an unfair system for the United States. The colleges should not have the power to decide the president, that should be the people that reside in the country's choice. Thomas Jefferson spoke of the people taking control of their country's government and the citizens of America should do just that if they are ever to escape the grasp of the Electoral Colleges. | 5 |
3a611ed | Have you ever wondered if there was life on Mars? well Mars is a planet that is very cloudy. Its atmospere is made of mostly cloud. Many people believed that there was life on Mars.NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft spotted a shadowy likeness of a human face. The Face is more of a natural land form; it is located 41 degrees north(it is winter),camera had to peer through wispy clouds, and was possibly caused by a butte
The Face is located 41 degrees north martian latitude during the winter.This was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. This is showing that the dust could've been moved around to create this shadowy likeness. This could prove that there was no type of form of life on Mars.
The camera on board the MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Aa a thumb rule, you could discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size. This could mean that the camera overlooked the rock formation. Meaning it could have created an illusion or some thing of that sort. if the camera created a type of illusion than that could mean that the there is no form of life on Mars. | 2 |
3a664f7 | The face was just made by the sand moving around. The face shouldn't be this big of a deal. Just because it looks like a face doesn't mean someone made it like that. But to others it may seem like aliens did do it. But they think what they want but aliens don't exist.
The face is not that big of a deal. The face is a way for organizations to sell their products. As it says in the fifth paragraph, "The 'face on mars' has become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years!". All the face is is sand that has been moved around by sand storms and now it looks like a face nothing fun about it. All I'm saying is the face is not as great as it once seemed.
Even though the face really means nothing, some people thinkthat the face was made by life on mars. They say that they made it to show that they were there. "The face is bona fide evidence on mars". But we also know that sand storms are very common on Mars, how could it not just be one of those that did it?
The face is not as amazing as everyone was making it out to be. It is just sand that happened to make a face when it blew together. In conclusion, I feel that the face is not as big of a deal as it was made out to be. | 2 |
3a70d68 | Driverless cars are an intereszting theory.
The thought of someone being able to get in a car and just let it take them where they want to go is definitely appealing, but at the same time I feel that it could have some serious reprocussions.
I am both for, and against this idea.
I have good reason to be in the middle, too.
They're convinient but dangerous.
Also not to mention they're going to need a new system despite our advancing technology.
Plus, what would we use as fuel for them?
Firstly, driverless cars, though being more convinent, could end up being a major safety hazard to those who are still pedestrians. Having a self driving car witch pedestrians around is like letting a wild wolf into a sheep pen.
There's a chance that there maybe a casualty just as much as there isn't.
That brings me to my next point.
I understand that the technology we have now is absolutely outstanding as compared to what it was only 20 years ago, but we really need to step it up.
With GPS, it doesn't quite always get right on the destination.
Say you're letting your car drive you home.
It could very possibly overshoot your drive way and pull right into your lawn that you had been slaving over getting mowed properly for the past hour and a half yesterday.
I think that they need to creat a more accurate GPS system, either that or create a new system all together that can detect speed, what's going on in front of/around you, and be extremely accurate.
As well as going home, going to the gas station will be a nuscience, too.
And that brings me to my last point.
If we were to switch to these cars, what would we use as a fuel reserve.
Would we switch over to electricity, since that's what the HUD system would most likely use?
Even if we did stay on gas and greatly reduce the an=mount used, the combination of all of the people who would be using them would still cause a great deal of pollution.
Plus people would see it as an oppertunity to get out more often without having to do nearly as much as normal.
With that in mind, one would have to think, "Could we possibly end up causing more pollution?"
All in all, I think that though, yes, some of my ideas are a bit far fetched, I have a point.
Yes, having driverless cars is an extremely appealing idea because it would save energy.
I'm just saying that, as there are pros to the situation, there are also cons to it, too.
I'm staying neutral in this case.
It would be great to see, but I guess time will be the ultimate teller. | 2 |
3a737b0 | Why do you think that author think we should studying Venus, and is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers in presents? I think we should study Venus before trying to visit or exploring ,because you never know whats going on up there. Venus is like the first or second biggest planet on earth. To me i think Venus is a cool planet to study and learn about. In the passage I read that venus has the hottest surface temperature. In paragraph 3 it says on the planet's surface the surface tempertures average is over 800 degress. If i had a choice to go to Venus i wouldn't go, because i feel like its not save to go there because anything can haappen. Some people that do go up there 50% of them either cant breathe, get hurt ,or other things happened. Venus has about 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets . In paragraph 4 it states that the value of returnig back to venus seems indisputable, but what are the options of making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive. So therefore I agree with the author. I think you should study before trying out new things and exploring venus. | 2 |
3a74972 | Have you ever heard of the face on Mars? In 1976 the Viking 1 was going around Mars to look for a landing spot for Viking 2. They found something that looked to be a face. It was about 2 miles long in a region called Cydonia. The unusual shadows of the "face" made it look almost to be an Egyptian Pharaoh.
The scientists just figured it was another Martian mesa which were common to the region, but the caption took notes of a "huge rock formation, which resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Nasa decided to take a closer look.
On April 5, 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor took a picture 10 times sharper than the original photo. It turns out it was just a natural landform. Not everyone was happy though, they say it was too cloudy to see if there were any alien markings.
Once again on April 8, 2001 the Mars Global Surveyor took another picture on a cloudless summer day. Chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, Jim Garvin, says "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." The picture was so close that if there were anything on the ground we would've been able to see them. The picture shows the Martian is equivalent of a butte or mesa.
In conclusion, there were no alien momuments or anything weird happening. It was just a natural landform, although NASA wishes there was an ancient civilization on Mars. | 2 |
3a77919 | Have you ever heard about a face on Mars? Do you believe it or not? Well some say that a picture was captured on Mars claiming that it is was a face created by Aliens. But on the other hand some say it is just a natural landform on Mars. But in this article I will be proving that the face is just a natural landform.
The face on Mars is just a natural landform because scientist figured out that it was just another martian mesa. Only a shadow that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. After they dicovered that, a few days later NASA put the 1976 picture out to the public also saying "huge rock formation... which resembles as a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth." On April 5, 1998 team snapped pictures ten times better then the first one but the camera had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. On April 8, 2001 they tried again on a cloudless summer day. The team captured an extraodinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butter messa, landforms common around the American West. So there you have it the mask on Mars was just a natural landform.
So have you ever heard of the face on Mars? Do you belive it? The face on Mars was jsut a natural landform proven by NASA. | 2 |
3a79c7f | Throughout the article, In German Subburb, Life Goes On Without Cars they are talking about certain advantages like, less air poluttion. The money running threw germany are going to better causes like placing walk aways on a main street. Cars produce a gasy smoke called "smog" which causes air pollution, which then forces plant growers to keep there plants in a green house to keep them out out of the polluted air. Emission from tail pipes not only hurt plants its also hurts animals, and if enough can hurt humans, "passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of green house gas emissions in europe, and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the united states". By cutting down on car usage it can make cities denser and better walking. Another advantage of cutting down the usage of cars is people can also get more exercise, witch will cause people to be happier and more healthy.
The smog from cars has forced paris to enforce a "partial driving ban" to clear the air. If you were to drive your car on a day you werent supposed to then you would have to pay a 22-euro fine witch is 31 american dollars. Over 3,500 drivers in paris were fined and 27 people got thier car repossesed. Due to this enforcement congestion was down by 60 percent in france. Without as many cars highways and streets we less packed and probably less car accidents. This movement will lower air pollution drasticly and encourage more people to take a walk or take a bike ride. As years go by the number of people getting licenses are decressing and more younger people seem to be less worried about getting one.
Between 2001 and 2009 the percent of younger people driving has decressed by 21 percent. Younger people dont really care about the features of the car as long as it gets them to point A to Point B. This is good because they can make more fuel efficent cars that don't have all the speakers and lights. They can just focus on the reduction of air pollution. If they start to make the prices of electrical cars more cheaper they can probably start a movement that will alot of people to switch from gas powerd to battery powered. Which will also decrease the amont of air pollution.
With the decression of cars being drove they can focus on improving things like bikes, bike trails, and smoother side walks. This will make more people to do things and the can advertise them on t. v. Another advantage of limiting car usage is you might not have to pay for gay anymore, they will probably switch to hybrids. There will be charging places instead of gas stations, and it will also decrease the amount of noise the cars make. This movement probably wont fully end car usage but it will probably bring light to the things that need to happen future wise. | 3 |
3a7a186 | "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy and i thinks so to beacuse its like Earths twin "Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closet in distance too." If there where something to happened to Earth then Venus would be the closet pleace to send people but since they don't know anything about the place because there has been no spacecraft survived the landing for more then a few hours. Also there hasn't been a spaceship that has touched down on Venus in more then three decades. Other peolpe don't want to study it because its dangers the atmosphere is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid in Venus atmosphere the temperatures average over 800 degrees farenheit and the pressure is 90 times greater then what we experience on our own planet. A long ago Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and might of supported various forms of life just like our Earth. | 2 |
3a7aa19 | Imagine a life without your car. Seem impossiable? Residents in suburban Vauban, Germany are giving up their cars for a "car free" community. Sure, we love our cars and easy transportation to far away places but consider the benefits such as: environmental rehabitation, saves money and a happier lifestyle.
Cars cause lots of of pollution that dirty our atmosphere. According to Source 2 by Robert Duffer, "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Smog, pollution caused by driving, is haunting cities and threating the environment. In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Elisabeth Rosenthal states, "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." That being said, less automoblie use is fundamental in order to preserve our environment.
Diesel fuel is expenisve but also nessacery in order to drive. Gas prices are not only high but in order to provide gas we strip the earth of its natural resources thta take millions of year to replish. Wars have been started over it and some are still in action. Walking could save money and lives. In The End of Car Culture by Elisabeth Rosenthal, " Part of the explanation certainly lies in the recession, because cash-strapped Americans could not afford new cars, and the unemployed werent going to work anyway." Buying is car in both expensive and stressful.
Happiest is key to a good life. In Source 1 by Elisabeth Rosenthal a Mother states, "'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and a mother of two, as she walked verdent streets where the swish of bicycles and chatter of wanding childern drown out the occasional distant motor." Without the danger of cars, pedestrians are safer and have less to worry about. Car accidents would be at an all time low and would save millions of lives. Imagine a world where the constant threat of an accident didn't occur.
Finally, the end of the use of cars is upon us. Sure, we love our cars and easy transportation to far away places but consider the benefits such as: environmental rehabitation, saves money and a happier lifestyle. Together we can insure conservation of the environment and provide a happier and cheaper lifestyle for the generations to come. | 3 |
3a7ccc8 | The " Unmasking the Face on Mars" is a natural landform because it's a mesa. It's not made by aliens because they would've mad more or diffrent things. In 1976 the picture looks like a huge rock formation. In 1998 the picture don't look like the same as 1976. In 2001 the picture look's more clear but it looks like a moutain.
If aliens did make the "Unmasking the Face on Mars" they would've already found a cilvilization or something else. NASA would already know if there is a civilization on Mars because because NASA discovered the "Unmasking the Face on Mars" in 1976. The "Unmasking the Face on Mars" is just a natural landform said web surfers. There was no monument afeter all.
In April '98 the Face on Mars was located at 41 degrees north martain latitude where it was winter, a cloudy time of the year on the Red Planet. Mission controllers took out their camera and MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Skeptics say alien markings were hidden by haze.
MIssion controllers prepared to look again but it was hard. They never found it. On April 8,2001 a summer day without no clouds they found the Face on Mars. They took a picture.
The picture was good but their was no evidence of a alien civilization. The picture shows that it is a butte or a messa-landforms common around the American West not a alien artifact. "it reminds me most of Middle Butte in the snake river plain of Idaho," Gravin says. "Thats a lava dome dome that forms of a isolated mesa about the same hieght as the Face on Mars. This is why the "Unmasking the Face on Mars" is not made by aliens. | 3 |
3a7d684 | In the passage "Driverless Cars are Coming", cars are shown to be "futuristic cars" , that can run, drive, steer, and basically do everything a normal car would be able to do, except, it is "driven" by a computer. Arguments have been shown as some say it is dangerous, and as others say it is a good thing. These cars are, i believe, a bad thing, becuase cars are not safe at all to be automatically driven by themsleves. A human, is the safest and most effective way possible, to drive a car, not driven by a computer created so it makes driving "fun" or "safer". In fact, this is a very dangerous act, that should not be invented.
Evidence and details from the passage, in paragraph 9, it states that "most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers.", and this is saying, that, basically, a computer, or automatic self controlled car is not safe to drive, and that the safest way to drive a car is to have an alert human behind the wheel driving. I highly agree with this, becuase driving a car is much more safer and effective towards pedestrians, passengers, the driver of the vehicle, and other drivers, unlike an automatic- computer self controlled car, which is not safe or effective at all, and it is actually very dangerous. It also says that the car will be able to detect when it is too close, going too fast, or is about to wreck . As stated in paragraph 7, it states that "the car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel.", also, "they can steeer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to noltify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents.", etc....
Futuristic cars ARE NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. at all. simply, becuase, more accidents could occur, drivers are not contolling the car at all, it is all the computer controlling it, even though the car has cameras inside it, watching the driver, making sure they are focused on the road, paragraph 7. This is not only safe and somewhat dangerous in a wya, but is also creepy. Imagine you were inside a computer controlled car that has cameras inside watching you.
Based on the evidence and details from story, it is proven that these cars are both safe and dangerous to drive. So, should we drive these cars, or no? I believe the answer is no, myself. Because, yes these cars are somewhat safe to drive, but they are also very dangerous to drive as well. All of this depends on how the driver and the car respondto certain things while driving thopugh, in way, but is still dangerous and they should not be created or permited fro a driver to drive. | 4 |
3a8262e | Dear state senator,
I will like to argue about the Electoral College.The voters vote for the presidant,but they are just voting for a slate of electors that they can elect the presidant.They are called disaster factor .The disaster factor got the name from the 2000 fiasco.The question we are all worrying about is what if it happened again?We dont want to go through it again,we might not get lucky as we did from the 2000 fiasco.
What if we have an electoral tie like in 1968.There was 41,971 votes that could of gotten deadlocked the election.Its unfair for us voters because of the winner-takes-all system.Candidates don't spend time in states of them knowing there is no chance of winning.We need to put fate of the presidency in the hands of swing voters.There isn't alot of basis in reality.
It's against direct elections that are spurious.We need to go with Bob Doyle accusation of that we need to abolish the Electoral College.Everybody is arguing about the Electoral College.Everybody thinks its unfair,outdated,and irrational.Listen to the people,listen to what they have to say about this.Let's change the Electoral College by making it better for us and Congress.
Thank You
From,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
3a8b10d | The thought of having driverless cars being introduced in the near future is for one, scary and exciting. There are two ways that you can come about the driverless cars, you can enjoy and agree with the idea or you can disagree.
Google has been working on this project since 2009, they have built cars that can drive more than half a million miles without crashing. The cars arent's 100% percent driverless. Yes, the cars will be able to drive for you, but only for a certain amount of time. People think that since they're driving driverless cars, that they can text, be on their phones, or do whatever while in the car. The cars cannot deal to drive around roadwork or accidents, drive in traffic issues, or pull in and out of driveways. That's when you have to take control of the car, and drive yourself. So, the drivers have to be alert and ready to take the wheel when the time comes. GM has came up with the idea that the driver's seat will vibrate when the vehicle is in danger and needs assistant. Google's vehicles announce the driver when the driver should prepare to take over the wheel. They are improving more and more each day. Telsa has a project in 2016 that releases cars to be able to be on autopilot 90 percent of the time. "Mercedes-Benz,Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020."
I am not against the idea of having driverless cars. I honestly think it would be a great idea. Airplanes have autopilot, why can't vehicles also. Drivers also have to be real responsible while in driverless cars, they need to keep their eyes on the road at all time and hands on the wheels. So when the vehicle needs assissting, the driver can assist. | 2 |
3a93842 | Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The passage states, " humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades". This means that it isnt really safe to go study Venus despite the dangers it presents.
Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system. the passage states, " Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather presents additional impediments like erupting valcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface". That means that it is really hot in Venus even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Earth, Venus, and Mars are planetary neighbors but orbits the sun at different speeds.
There is a limit you have to reach in order to go to Venus. The passage states, " peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective". In order to stay safe you have to follow the rules. | 2 |
3a976b4 | Technology that reads emotion? sounds like a crzy mad great thing huh? well let me tell you why I think its a bad idea for the rt community..
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author talks about this "amazing" technology that can read emotion from a 3D picture. The reason that I think the Technology is a bad thing is becasue yes its good that the technology can read emotion of paintings but its not at the same time.
Its not a good thing becasue thats the art of looking at the art, to figure the emotion out on your own, seeing the different emotions and seeing the anger or the confusion instead of having it told to you. thats the beauty of looking at the art and in my opinion the Technology ruins that beauty by telling the emotion.
thats why I think this new emotion reading technology is bad for the art community and isnt valueable. | 2 |
3a97cf5 | The Face is just a natural landform. It happened 25 years ago. You can say its from aliens but it is not an alien! Iv'e seen pictures of Face. From reshearch only robots walked on Mars. Aliens are not even real. There are camras om thoes robots so they would know if they seen anything. Have you ever got a warning that an alien invation was about to occur?
I think that some dust and rocks made this shape occur. Scientist have thier studies. My question is how did this alien form this pop up form. If u say it was a alien does it live under the dust. I don't think so,because it adventually is going to die. This is nonsense to belive that aliens walked on Mars and formed a type of shape. It is just a natural form.
Why do you think this is an alien. One reason they would is because of it's shape. Do you have any evidence to prove to that this is an aliens shape. They probably would say no,because I do not see any antenas. That is a big hint to tell if that was an alien or not.
Were's the body all you can see is a face so why assum it's an alien. Perfect good sense would tell you aliens aren't real. It's just a from that was created by natual resources on the planet. Use your research and don't go believing anything crazy. Such,as aliens living on Mars with just a head. I mean use common sense. What do you physically see on an alien. A big head,antena's,body,and wierd looking feet.
This is not an alien people it is just a from that was created by natural resources. So don't go believing nothing foolish that we have aliens roaming different planets. Tust in NASA the greatest of all. Don't believe anyone who isn't and professional lke use. Nor trust a person with fause information,because they will have your mind,and you worried. | 2 |
3a99159 | In this article about the Facial action Coding System I think that this invention from thomas huang would be super great. For example if someone was feeling down and didnt think the could talk to anyone about it. This would be shown only on percentages which woudnt tell you much but it also coud help.
I think it would help many things in our nearing future we could help many more people if they were feeling sadness or deppression. Also it would be good to know how people are feeling without them saying a word to them If you had a bad day at home or something that would be great for people to understand what your feeling and just not bother you.
In conclusion I think that it would be a greta idea for them to have a machine that would understand and recongize ur emotions because it could make people's lives alot more simple. This could help a man at his job he didnt sleep well that night his boss looks through the machine and notices that his worker only got ten percent of sleep last night and lay's off | 2 |
3a9bdb3 | Imagine being in a car, going to work, school, or out to eat, and not having to drive. Well many car manufacturing companies plan on releasing driverless cars in the future. While these cars are not completely driverless like they suggest, they rely on the driver only in certain situations. With these cars soon to be on the market, there are many benefits these have over regular, self-driven cars such as saved money, less reliance on the driver, and in-car entertainment systems.
A big part with any new technology, is the cost. With all these new sensors and gadgets placed on the cars, it is surely going to cost a good amount of money. However, in the long run, less accidents will be caused as these cars will know when to break and when to turn which can help save the money someone would need to repair their car.
These new cars will rely less on the driver altogether which will limit the amount of accidents as most of the accidents are due to human faults, not the car. With this new technology, the driver can sit back and let their car do most of the work, and then grab the wheel when alerted such as in a work zone or around other accidents. While the driver is waiting for their turn to drive they cannot simply just sit there and wait or they would get borded, so what would they do?
These smart cars are going to have in-car entertainment systems to keep the driver amused. When the driver needs to take over, these systems are simply turned off until it is the car's turn to drive again, something not available in phones while drivers are texting. So the driver could be watching there favorite movie or playing a game, when it is time for them to grab the wheel, it will temporarily shut off, and when they are done, they can continue watching or playing. So in a way these in-car systems are actually a safety feature in these new cars.
Some people will say that these new cars simply will not be possible due to the law. Most laws are written with the assumption that a car is being driven by a human and many states have it illegal to test computer-driven cars. However, if the states that do not have a ban on these cars test them, and they work, then other states will lift the ban and laws will be made to go along with the new cars.
New technology is produced everyday, and one day humans may not have to drive. If this is the case the benefits of this would include saved money, less reliance on a human, and in-car entertainment systems. So do not be surprised to go out on the road tomorrow and find people watching a movie and driving a car, as this new technology, is right around the corner. | 4 |
3a9c6cf | The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The electoral college process consist of the selection of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors wher they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress. Personally I believe that Electoral Colleges work because it would be a great process where students can work their way up to become a congressman, and it would also look good on your reputation.
It would be a great process where students can work their way up to become a congressman. Imagine all the wonderful things you can learn about congress and you can have your own personal experience. The electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is requried to elect the President. Your state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in the Congressional delegation: one for each memeber in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators. Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for aslate of electors, who in turn elect the president. If you live in Taxas, fpr instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democatic electors pludges to Mr. Kerry.
It would look good on your reputation. Each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors. I know your would wat that because that would be great, and really helpful. The presidential election is held every four yoears on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. You help choose your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors. After the presidential election, your governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment" listing all of the candidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors. Your state's Certificates of Ascertainments are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of the official recors of the presidential election.
The single best argument against the electoral college is what researchers call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century. The system allows for much worse. Consider that the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. | 2 |
3aa2365 | Dear senator my opinion of the electoral college is that we should change it to a more popular vote. As stated in the article "under the electoral college system voters vote not for the president but for a slate of electors " in this electoral college why do voters vote for electors and not for who they directly want voted in. Also what about the disaster factor and voters actually get confused on who they are actually voting for. At the most basic level the electoral college is unfair to voters because of the winner take all system,in each state candidiates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning focusing only on the states they know they will have the best chance for more votes. Like in the 2000 campaign seventeen states didnt see the candididates at all, including Rhode island and South Carolina. The people need a popular vote because they dont want to vote for people who will vote for them they want to vote directly for the person they want to vote for and as everyone refers the electoral college to as an anachronism, a non democratic way of selecting a president that ought to be overruled by declaring the candidtae who receives the most popular votes the winner. its official the elctoral college is unfair, outdated,and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without mush basis in reality. Cause some people get so confused or angry on who they are voting for they end up not voting or vote for someone completely random they become faithless as they cannot find a solution. | 3 |
3aa696a | Should we the people allow driverless cars to be sold and manufactured? Yes, yes they should be manufactured and sold to the public because of how much easier and less hectic and stressed life would be in the future. Driverless cars should be allowed to be built and 'driven' in every state in the United States of America.
Driverless cars have a lot more pros than cons. With driverless cars that google cofounder Sergey Brin has designed and envisioned, these cars can go miles and miles with out needing to fill up with gas. Also they can get through tight situatuions since they'd be much more flexible than a bus. As Brin says, "[cars such as these] would fundamentaly change the world.". Google has modified a Toyota Prius and tested it's driverless skills; it has gone farther than half of a million miles with zero crashes.
The facts stand, driverless cars are simpler, smarter, and easier to use that we've ever thought before. This is the future; why stop it when you can embrace the change and hold on for the long run? Driverless cars must be made legal in the United States so that Americans can have peace of mind when going on long trips or even just driving to town. Make the peoples lives easier and all around better; give them driverless cars. | 2 |
3aaa9c1 | The argument that the face is a natural landfrom is true because there is evedince in the passage backing up my fact.
First he took three pictures one in 1976,1998 and 2001 in 1976 they didnt have good camera he just showed the outline of the butte or mesa landform. In 1998 it was in the winter for the planet was so it change the outlook on the butte. 2001 was the best by far it was during the summer and it was the most recent one taken
Second in 1976 the camera was even close as it is now.
In 1998 the camera made a big step and made the image have the best resolution having a stuning 1.56 meter compared to the 43 meters in 1976 they only problem it was in winter and it was really hazy. So in 2001 they took another image it was not even close to ether of the photos in 1976 or 1998
It made it look like it was a face but thank to better cameras we can see that it is not a face it was just a butte. | 2 |
3ab1a2d | I claim that the author does support theides of studying very well becausethe travels on earth should not be limited because it may be very dangerous .
The evidence or explanation that supports my claim is that it says so many thing that are drangeous like "Not a single spaceship has touched down on venus in more than tree decades.Numerous factors contribute to venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximityto us. And it also says "A thick atmosphereofalmost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challrnging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere. The sufaces temperatures average is over 800 and its pressure is 90 times bigger that what it was. This is some information of my evidence that the author supports his ides that studying venus is a worthypursuit despite the dangers.
Venus can provide only limited insighton ground conditions because most forms of light cannotpenertrate the dense atmosphere.The most important thing is that researchers cannot take saples of rocks,gas, or anything in venus.Therefore scientists want to do a mission going to understand venus .Researchers are working on innovations so the machines can last more time to knowledge.There making electronics made of silicon carbide,and they have been tested.
This is why i claim that the author supports the idea of studyng venus.I think its dangerous.And scientest orany researcher shouldnt go for its safty.In conclusion Thats my claim for the authors support. | 2 |
3ab3ab1 | Against the Development of DRIVERLESS CARS!
Now why in the world would they make driveless cars? Can anybody answer that for me cause i want to know and i want to know now.They cant even figure out what should help the car drive by its self.So WHY? WHY? and WHY?
I got so many questions and one of them is.What would this car look like?Would it look like an old fashion car? Would it look like one of the cars from recent years.Or would it just look like a disfromed car.They say they got to put this and that in the car so to me it seems like the car is going to be a weird shaped car.Thats my opinion an dimma stick to it.
Now is this car safe?Cause to me they dont know what it is.They say it could be accidents and all that nonsense that i dont want to hear.So why would I MyKale want to waste money on a car that i cant controll and that i might get
into an accudent with.Cause I would never ever want to waste that much money on garbage cause theres no reason to.These car sthese day sare safe and i know all this.I know im not bout to to get in no reck and brake anything.Because from my knowledge i know these regular cars now days is safe and are under my controll.I can controll the car the car does not controll me.
A driverless car.Now like i said why would they make a such thing like that.What was going through they heads when they thought about it.Or did they even think on it.Cause to me they didnt.Cause i would never think of an diverless car.Its just too much to think about to much to figure out and how much is going to be in the car how is it going ot run.How fast will it go.How far until you got to take control.
If you going to make a diverless car nobody should be putting their hands on anything.To me we could be concentrated on our phones or doing some other stuff.But instead we got to pay attention the whole time just incase we got to put our hands on the steering wheel.But NO! i dont want to put my hands on nothing if yall want to make a diverless car make sure yall do it right to where my hands dont have to go on nothing.Its a diverless car right well get it together.
We shouldnt have to look at the road the whole time.We should be able to do something and look up and not be in a car reck.The car suppose to be protecting us and steering us to our destinnation.And making sure we get there on time.If the car got to go an certain speed and it makes me late.Im burning that car down for good.Driverless car shouldnt be making nobody late.Cause if so we can just buy a regular car and call it a day.
So to me this Driverless Car is pointless it shouldnt never been in they heads.Theres no safety no nothing.I just dont understand the concept of the vehicle.So me MyKale is not on the list of buying a DRIVERLESS CAR! | 3 |
3ab4c11 | The face is not created by aliens and here are a few reasons why. It was a mesa, or maybe even a shadow. but aliens is not a logical reason for this face to exisist on mars.
First, A mesa, a mesa is a very common landform found around the American West. Even so there is one in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, USA. Which is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on mars. If something on the earth can have a mesa about or the same height had the face on mars it is very likely that it was a mesa.
Secondly, shadows We all knows that shadows can be very deceiving just like in this instance. A shadow could have been reflecting off the viking 1 while it was taking this photo of the "Face", or maybe the shadows were from a bigger land form. that was infront, behind, or on the sides casting a shadow onto this mesa.
All in all, From these facts you can conclude that this was a natural landform and not some type of alien thing. If you still do not believe that it was natural. Another spaceship went into space and found the "Face" and took a very detailed picture and there were no markings or signs of aliens. | 3 |
3ab54cd | Computers are becoming more similar to humans over time, as new technologies are developed. One such technology allows a computer to recognize a person's emotions based on the movement of muscles in their face. Some say this technology can be used in the classroom to slow down a lesson for a confused student, or make it more interesting for a bored one. However, the truth is that while this technology certainly has its merits, it may not be reliable in the classroom because it cannot accurately determine a person's emotions, understand their cause, or properly respond to them.
Although fairly accurate at times, this software that detects emotions may not be always accurate. For example, according to the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", the software calculates that the woman in the famous painting "Mona Lisa" is "2 percent angry." This is likely untrue, and Leonardo da Vinci probably never intended this. She does not appear angry, and if anything, da Vinci simply could not recognize facial expressions well enough to accurately depict the emotions that he intended the subject of the painting to have. Additionally, the article states that there are six basic emotions the software can detect: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise. These emotions are useful, but this also means the computer cannot detect emotions like guilt and confusion. These are very important emotions in the classroom, and the computer must be able to detect if a student cheats on a test or does not understand a concept. The software is very limited in detecting emotions, and this could lead to adverse consequenses.
Sometimes, not only are a person's emotions unclear, but the cause of a person's emotions may not be obvious given the current context, because people often live in the past. A student may appear to be confused, but only because the student does not understand a joke they heard before the lesson. The article says that the computer could recognize this confusion and modify the lesson, despite the fact that the student's confusion has nothing to do with the lesson in the first place. Also, if a student does not understand a certain part of the lesson material, the computer will not be able to detect the exact part; the student will be confused no matter what part it is. The computer will be forced to explain and clarify everything, when the student may only need a small part clarified. In a similar way, the student may still not understand the material afterwards, but the computer cannot ask the student why this is so, because it only detects the student's confusion.
While detecting emotions and their causes are important in the classroom, the most important thing is responding to them appropriately. For example, if a student is feeling sad, this will likely affect their retention of the material being taught. However, the computer likely cannot alleviate or eradicate this sadness, because it is most likely caused by an outside source. The computer may try to comfort the student, but the student will know that the computer does not actually feel any emotions and will not be comforted whatsoever. Additionally, the student may feel bored, but the computer may not be able to change this if the student feels that the material being taught is boring, because the computer has no choice but to teach this material to the student. As a result, even if the computer can detect a student's emotions, it may not be able to do much about them.
No matter how useful this emotion-reading software is, it should not be used in the classroom. It may falsely detect an emotion and change the lesson when unnecessary. It could also assume the wrong cause for an emotion, leading it to make a lesson longer or more thorough when the student understands it already. Additionally, the computer may detect emotions well, but it may not be able to fix them or change them, making the software pointless. Technology may have great benefits, but detecting emotions in the classroom is not one of them. | 5 |
3ab7697 | Dr. Huang
says, "The facial expressions for each are unviersal". This technology will improve on how student will do in their class. The emotional expressions is valuble for students, becasue it already been tested, can determined fake emtions, and can help modify lessons.
Also, this technology has been tested on actors. The author states, "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them". This shows that Facial Action Coding System can work on anyone.
The Facial Action Coding System can determine fake emotions. The author states, "But in a false smile, the mouth is strerched sidways". The computer can exam the students face, and determine their real emotions. Students would not have to worry what emotion they have on thier face.
This technology will help improve the students acdemically. Dr. Huang says, "The facial expressions for each emotion are unviersal". For example a student looks confused it could take them forever or maybe never to finish the lesson, but the Facial Action coding system could change that. It could modify the lesson to help the student understand more and finish the lesson more quickly.
This technology is very valuble to have in a classroom. The students will be able to get more help and will not be confused as much anymore. They would not have to worry about the computer determing the wrong emotion. All schools should get the Facial Action Coding System. | 3 |
3ab8183 | Today i am going to be telling you why you should be a seagoing cowboy
These are some ways you should be a seagoing cowboy. You git to ride the ships free . You can learn how to take care of animals. You can have fun when you are done unloading the animals like boxing,reading,and fencing there are lots more ways but these are the most common. It will be fun just like the guy luke said in the article. You will be working . You will have to be careful . You will get to know how to take care of horses. It might make you like horses and might make you want to buy a horse. You git free trips and when you are done you can have some free time to git to know the place more . You will git to ride on a ship if its your first time riding on one .
this is some resones you might want to go be a seagoing cowboy there is lots more stuff but this is the most importent stuff that gives you more facts and that gives you more details but if you want more resones you can go to the article so you can read it for your self and see how like it. | 2 |
3aba100 | Most people wonder will technology come in handy to read emotions? I believe it could one day. Look at it this way what if we were able to use glasses that had a computers chip in it like spy movies but instead of it being high tech it could read expressions. For instance the article Also states "Using video imagery, the new emotion- recognition software tracks these facial movements- in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighting the different units, software can even identify mixed emotions (as in da Vinci's masterpiece)." One could possibly imagine how useful it could be for those who are in relationships most guys would know what im talking about because its hard to read ones girlfriends expressions weither they say they're fine when in reality they're not. Just imagine how easy it would be for people to talk about how they really feel when someone that is willing to listen to them about whats on their mind.
In conclusion the world even people will get revolutionized with technology that can read facial expressions. | 2 |
3abb6ee | Many people believe that it is necessary to use a car to get from one place to another. Many studies have shown that this in fact is not true. There are many advantages to limiting car usage. I am in favor of limiting car usage because of the advantages it brings to the world. One reason to limit car usage is, because it reduces the amount of pollution. Another reason, is because many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage. Lastly, limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. Beneficial and critical, limiting car usage helps humans as well as the environment.
First of all, limiting car usage reduces the amount of pollution worldwide. Reflective and didactic, Robert Fuller's "Paris bans driving due to smog," reflects the amount of pollution that is reduced due to limited car usage. For example, Robert Fuller explains that "...[Last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found." This statement layers Robert's opinion that car usage can create vast amounts of pollution. If car usage is limited, the amount of particulate matter would decrease. For instance, this theory is created when Robert Fuller states "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday."
Another reason, is because many people around the world are in favor. Appauled and enthusiastic, Andrew Selsky's "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", molds the theory that limiting car usage has many advantages. For instance, businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza states "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. The fact that many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage is shown, when Andrew Selsky sates that "Municipal authorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were enthusiastic." Bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus is also in favor as he states "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating." These statements show that limiting car usage is very beneficial and has many advantages.
Lastly, limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. This is shown in Elisabeth Rosenthal's "The End of Car Culture." Elisabeth states that "...it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment." Elisabeth Rosenthal also states that "...transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions just behind power plants." Limiting car usage also improves safety. Last year in Barcelona, Spain, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, proposed partnering with telecommunications. Bill Ford wanted to partner with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which "pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transpotation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." This statement forms the theory that limiting car usage has many advantages.
In conclusion, limiting car usage has many advantages. We as people of the world need to limit car usage for many reasons. The first reason is, because it reduces the amount of pollution. The second reason is that many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage. The last reason is, because limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. This is why we as citizens of the world need to limit car usage worldwide. | 4 |
3abfed1 | What would happen if someone was in a driverless car and it got into an accident and the person got hurt? If the person was driving they may have been able to prevent the accident and avoided getting hurt. Because of these possible accidents and mistakes that the driverless cars could make it is not a good idea to have them. Yes, there are times when they would come in handy. Say someone woke up late and did not have time to get ready. If there were driverless cars that person could get ready while the car was driving itself. Although times like these may come in handy it is still not a good idea to have them around.
In the reading it says that sometimes the car gets into situations when it does not know what to do, such as traffic and construction zones. If this were to happen the person would need to take control of the car and go along as if it was not even a driverless car. This seems to defeat the whole purpose of having a driverless car. So why have them when in reality it is not completely a driverless car.
There will never be a time when we can fully rely on the safety of a driverless car. Yes, they may know the rules of the road, but they do not know what to do in all situations. Because people cannot fully rely on these cars, it will cause them to worry, and will constantly be looking at the road and what is going on becuase they do not know if the car will know what to do. This situation also defeats the purpose of having a driverless car because it will be like they are driving, but with more anxiety.
Due to all of these reasons for possible crashes and causing stress and anxiety to the passengers it is not a good idea to have driverless cars around. Even though at times they might come in handy, there is always a downside that goes along with that. In this case there are just to many downsides to make it worth the time of fixing and improving the driverless cars to run properly. | 3 |
3ac8dc9 | In my opinion, I feel that drivless cars are both a pro and a con. I say that because there are some great points that comes along with the idea of drivless cars, and there are also some not so great ideas. Meaning that having a drivless car may give you many benifits and set backs all in one.
A pro and also a great point for having a driveless car is that there will be way less accidents. It states in the passage that, " while the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver." Meaning it will send an alert to the driver if they're texting and driving, or basically just not paying attention to the road.
A con to having a driveless vehicle is that it'll be very expensive to buy one because of all the technology and sensors they're using within the car. It states in the passage that, "Within 10 years, sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to danger of out-of-control skids. Meaning that they puts lots of work into this car to make it safe for the customer, but in the end they put lots of money into it as well.
In conclusion, I still stick to my opinion on having a drivless car is both a pro and a con. Although the car may be highly advanced and gives you a higher advantage of being safe, it'll also be alot of money. If i was ever asked the question, " Do i see myself having a drivless car in the future?" The answer would be, I dont know. | 2 |
3ac8feb | A world without an ozone. People walking place to place. No electricity. There is no fossil fuel. These are some potential, yet dramatic, long run effects of the growing car usage since the early 1950's. Limiting this could cause a better environment, more nonrenuable energy, and safer environments.
This new idea of limited car usage could improve our environment. The ozone layer is being depleted and many believe it is due to the fossil fuels being burned by cars, trains, planes, and many other types of things. If everyone did not use their car for just a few days a month, then imagine how great the atmosphere would turn out. Some people such as Heidrun Walter, a new member of a "carless" community says that, he is much happier this way.
As many of you may know, the nonrenuable energy source, also known as fossil fuels, is slowly but surely running out. Like stated before, if we were to just not use vehicles a few days out of every month, then these recouces may slowly start to build back up. We definetly would not be using as much. There is a town in Germany that does not allow car parking on the street and the usage of a vehicle is very limited. It is said that there is only the occasional distant motor sound. Imagine how much money they spend on gas. That was sarcasm.
Finally, we all know how worried everyone is about getting in a car accident, or being hit by a car, or getting 'T-boned." Imagine being able to walk knowing in peace that there would be no accidents. Children would be able to roam the streets. The town wouldn't be as spaced out because things have to be within walking distance. IT would all be apart of something called "smart planning."
It would be wonderful not having to worry about danger or ozone being depleted. Knowing that a energy souce would always be around would be nice too. Everyone could agree that this is a glorious idea and the turn of a new leaf, the start of a new world. A more safe and stable world. So keep them in the garage and grab that bike you bought three years ago. Start peddling. | 3 |
3acd644 | The face that NASA found on mars was not made by aliens. The Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia and got better pictures than the Viking did and it showed that there was no alien monument, it was just a natural landfrom. The picture shows the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. Lastly the picture that the Viking took was not very good quality compared to the pictures took in 2001.
One reason that the Face on Mars was not made by aliens is because the Mars Global Surveyor got the best picture of it in 2001 and it just turned out to be a natural landform. In line 11 it says that "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," he also added. "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"
Another reason that the Face was not made by aliens is that the face is the equivalent of as butte or a mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. In paragraph 12 it compares the Face on Mars to the Snake River Plain of Idaho. The Snake River Plain of Idaho is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa that is about the same height as the Face on Mars.
The pictures that the
Mars Global Surveyor took in 2001 were a lot more clearer than the pictures took by the Viking in 1976. In paragraph 10 it says that Malin's team captured an amazing picture using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixal in the 2001 photo spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixal in the best 1976 Viking photo. This proves how bad the quality was in the 1976 photo taken by the Viking. Also, it proves that it was not a good photo and that the 2001 photo shows so much more and is way better quality. Other people might say that in the photo of '98, taken by the cmaera on board the MGS had to pear through wispy clouds to see the face, which made the alien markings hidden by the haze. Then the picture or 2001 proved that there was no alien markings and that the Face was just a landform.
In conclusion, this is why I believe that the Face of Mars was not made by aliens and is just a natural landform. First of all, The Mars Global Surveyor got better quality pictures than the Vikning did. Also, the 2001 picture shows that the Face is the equivalent to a mesa or butte, which are landforms that are common in the American West. Lastly, when you compare the '76, '98, and the '01 picture side by side you can tell that the '98 and the '01 pictures are more clear and show that the Face is just a landform. | 5 |
3ad3cd5 | Dear state senator.
I think that the electoral collage should be changed because it makes voting unfair, more people would vote,and it would be more effective.
The electoral voting system is unfair because your vote dosnt really count if the majority of the votes goes to the opposing party. It would be more even if your vote counted directly towards the party rather than voting for your states electors. I also feel that more people would vote because with the state electors your vote wont matter if the majority of is oppiste of who you voted for.
Also, other people would vote for other parties more rather than just the democratic or republican parties because the majority of the people are just gonna vote for those parties.
If the votes were not for the state electors and for the president than George W. Bush would not have been elected and the majority of the votes went towards John kerry so that wasnt fair for him.
Also every states number of electors is different, if they are going to have electors per state I think it should be the same amount for every state because if more of the states voted for the republicans but the democrats could have had the states with the larger amount of electors and won the election. The tinier states wouldnt do much for the election if they only have three electors. Also without electors voting, there would be a less chance of there being a tie in the election. It might make counting the votes easier but voting would be more effective if it was without state electors.
Those are the reasons why I think that the way voting is should be changed and hopfully someday it will be. | 3 |
3adb427 | The use of this technology in classrooms would be a good idea. As it states in the article in paragraph 6 this technology could recognize if a student is not understanding the lesson or is becoming frustrated ect. The use of this technology would help many students in classrooms.
The use of this technology could bring many changes to schools, because it could let teachers know if a student is sad and needs help, or if a student is angry and becoming frustrated because of a lesson it would change to help the students. as it says in paragraph 6, " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instuctor. this could also help students who are doing work from home and become confused and need help.
This technology could help students and teachers in a lot of ways and could change the way we do work. This technology would help teachers know when a student is mad sad, frustrated, not feeling well, ect. These are some of the reasons why this technology should be used in schools. | 2 |
3adbfc3 | The face is just a naturl landform by being a " huge rock formtion" (3) as they said in the story. They said that this is just a huge rock formation with shadows giving the illuion of the facial features. Also weater this was real or fake they still hoped it would be a good way to get mars in public attention. It most certainly did get the attention they wanted Mars to get. And if we never took those last photos what would of happen to this research project.
As they told us in the story that this as probably just a huge rock formation with shadow giving it the facial feautures to make it look like a person. Some people stil dont belive NASA that that is what it is, they think alliens created that. But those people are probaly wrong becasue those people dont get close looks like NASA and dont get to go into space and look at that these things like NASA gets to do. Also no aliens would just go out on mars and make a random face there for everyone to look at. It pretty much is just a huge rock if you look at it from the pictures and you can tell that the shadows are giving its facial features.
Next, this was all to hopefuly get Mars into some publicity with us and make us pay a little bit more attention now that they hade what some people think is a faec on Mars. And for everyone to try to get Mars this public attention they succeded because everyone started talking about Mars a little more. By the people talking about Mars was not just people it was Hollywod films, magazines, radio talk shows, even haunting grocery store checkout lines for 25 years. When Mars got onto the talk shows and the Hollywood films it strted to get bigger and everone start talking about it even more than they already were.
Also when the Viking missions were over and the talk started to die down a little NASA went back and took more pictures of that so called face again and more closer this time. When they took the photos the first time it was Mar's cloudy month and you couldnt see the "face" very clear and good to get good looks at it. And that wasnt the last time the took another picture of it because on April 5, 1998 "Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos"(7). Then after taking the such good photos they were going to upload them to a JPL web site where they had thousands of anxioius web surfers wating to see the image(7). Once they posted it and everyone got their look at it on the web site they said " a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all" (7).
Last, after all the people though that it was a alien and NASA
thought it was just a shadow NASA was right. Also maybe if we never gave Mars all the public attention you would never know if ths would happen either. And if that last picture that had been ten times better than the originals not been taken then we may not of never knew if it was a alien or the NASA research of just being a shadow. | 3 |
3addf83 | "The "Face on Mars" has since become a pop icon." NASA discovered the face, on Mars, when they took a picture of it in 1976. Some people believe that the face is real and some don't. Although, it might look real, it is just a messa. So far they only have older pictures of it, they also have confimed it a messa, which is common on Mars. A cheif scientist for NASA said it reminded him of Middle Butte in Snake River Plain in Idaho. Therefore, if the Face was real then why haven't we gotten more pictures of it.
In contrast, they only have older pictures of it. Very few scientist believed the Face was an alien artifact. "Scientists figured it was just another Martian Messa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." However, people thought it was a real face. When the picture went online or on TV, people thought it was "bona fide" evidence of life on Mars. Even though some people are defenders of NASA, we still shouldn't give them money to see if there is an actual ancient civilization. If we do we could possibly be putting that money to waste. We should think about if the pictures are real or if they were photoshopped.
However, NASA has confirmed it a messa. Which is a natural landform. Since it is windy or cloudy on Mars this messa could have been pushed around to make it look like a face. Even though we got pictures we would still be able to see things like airplanes, Egyptian-style pyramids, or even small shacks. We could have actually seen those on the ground. NASA dosen't even pass over the face that often. In contrast, we would not be able to get much information on it. So we should not even worry about how to figure out what it is.
Therefore, when scientists Jim Garvin says it reminds him of "Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," we should think about how is he right. When a scientists says something big and important we are listening and comparing something on Earth to Mars means that it could have been caused by erosion. Even though we are just getting pictures of it isn't enough. We could have better pictures now then they did back then. In conclusion, erosion and plains on earth come naturally. We have no idea what that could be made of it could be made of, sand for all we now.
Therefore, we may have confirmed pictures it is a face. But do we have pictures that it is not just darker sand. The face could be anything on Mars. Because their pictures confirmed it a messa, it is a natural landform. In contrast, it formed naturally. Just like how it looks like Middle Butte in Idaho. Which was formed naturally. If this gets people saying that their could be life on Mars we probably would have found it by now.
All in all, if the face was real then why don't we have more advanced pictures of it. NASA only has older pictures of this so called "Face", it looks like a natural landform in Idaho. So next time NASA gets people crazy about another ancient alien civilzation, think about how they need to prove it. | 4 |
3adfa2e | Introducing this new technology that allows us to see when students are telling the truth on how they feel about an assignment would be very beneficial. With this technology we could see how students respond to certain types of activities and what they find interesting or boring. When a teacher ask a student feels about a particular lesson or assignment they might lie and say the enjoyed it or they found it interesting because that is what he or she thinks the teacher wants to hear. If this technology were introduced into classroom envrioments students would actually recieve education in a way they would find interesting and productive.
Students can often become bored or loose focus in a classroom envrioment if what is being presented to them is not fun or interesting. With this new technology teachers can truly find out what their students enjoy the most. One of the leading creators, Dr. Huang states that "'A clasroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored'". With acess to these types of programs students wouldn't get bored or confused. The author of this article, Nick D'Alto states that "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry". If we can tell the facial expressions of a painting from hundreds of years ago, imagine the endless possibilities we could do on livng students. With the acuracy and many beneifts of this tecnology clasrooms would become not only more interesting and maybe even fun but they would be more productive than ever before.
Overall the Facial Action Coding System would be a very useful tool for both students and teachers. With students becoming bored and confused less classroom productivity would increase and even the students grade would increase. Without testing these technologies in actual classroom enviroments we will never know the true impact this technology could have on our learning experience. | 3 |
3aea048 | I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because it is very fun. One reason is because if you would like to see a lot of countries, you could see them on this program! Another reason is because you can take care of many animals that are on board. I think you should definitely join! It would be fun to have you here!
You would be a big help and very much appreciated if you joined. As it says in the passage, the UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration) is also very much appreciated. The passage states,"UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas." So since my friend and I read it, we decided to sign up. Like it says in the passage, "In August 1945, they recieved their orders to report to New Orleans." Which really means that my friend Don and I recieved our orders to go to New Orleans.
In conclusion, I really think you should join. This would be a great opportunity for you. You and one of your friends could sign up together. Like I said before, you would be visiting countries, and taking care of animals. I think you would really enjoy this program. | 2 |
3aea134 | I believe that the electoral college should be taken away because presidents that have won the popular vote have lost the election due to the electoral college and to me that just does not seem right "Al Gore-thanks to the quirks of the electoral college-won the popular vote but lost the presidency"(source 2 Plumer 9). If it was not for the electoral college Gore would have won the election. If this country really is a government by the people and for the people then the government would get rid of the electoral college.
The electoral college is very outdated it has been in use sense the founding fathers made it "The founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise" (source 1 OFR paragraph 1). it might have worked well back then but now it is outdated it has been three hundred years since it has been changed and it simply does not work that well anymore.
If there was no winner take all system it might just be a little more fair "the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all-system" (source 2 Plumer paragraph 13). Candidates do not even give every state a chance they usually just skip the state that they know they will not win over "candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning"(source 2 Plumer paragraph 13).
That is why iI think the electoral college should be taken out it is outdated, and it is unfair. If this country was really run by the people than the people would really get to pick the president. Those are my only really big issues with the electoral college, but that does not mean that I do not want to see it go. | 4 |
3aea5c1 | For all these years there has always been an advancement in technology. Google cofounder Sergey has always been around technology. Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues. I honestly think driverless cars are a good thing. These days there are people who text and drive and do not keep there eyes on the road, and one day they are going to regret texting and driving. These driverless cars is an extra safety hazard for these people, and if somehow or someway they still end up texting and driving and they hit someone, i honestly think they should go to prison. Cars are not toys they are dangerous, and so are those people who are behind those wheels. I think all the cameras and the sensors in the toyota prius is amazing. One day it might save someone's life. Today people are all about privacy so they might not like that camera, but they don't realize that it's not going to be used against them it's there to save their life one day. The toyota prius is like a moving computer, there is so much technology in it, it's unbelievable. Automakers that make these driverless vehicles are bringing home the big bucks. Driverless cars are so expensive because of the technology that they have in them. Today I personally think that people wont buy the driverless cars because they might not like all the sensors or the cameras. There was a metaphor that someone came up with "Look Twice Save a Life." I have no idea who came up with that saying, but it is one of the greatest sayings i have ever heard when it comes to driving. Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. Telsa has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90% of the time. That is crazy! I couldn't imagine what cars would be like in 20 years. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020. That is in 2020, could you imagine what cars would be like in 2040. So if you were to ask me how i felt about driverless cars. I would smile and say "they are the best thing ever invented." They alert drivers when they need to take over and they made a track to run test on these driverless cars. When they ran test at this track for the driverless cars the track was embedded with an electrical cable that sent radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the car. Engineers at Berkeley tried something similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity. The car read the positive and negative polarity as messages in binary code. These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical. I think all this technology that they have to offer us is amazing, and I think if we didn't have it I think there would be more crashes. Which leads to more people dieing. So how I feel about driverless cars I love them! | 4 |
3aed042 | I had so much fun being in the Seagoing Cowboys program. I would tell anyone to try it, and I am going to tell you why it is such a great thing to do.
First, you get to help others in need. It was felt amazing being able to help those who were hurt in the war. I also got to visit beautiful Europe and China. It was unbelieveable too seing the Acropolis in Greece. Taking a gondola ride over wonderful Venice, Italy was breathtaking. I also had a tour through a castle, how great is that? I was also marveled by the Panama Canal on my way to China.
If you enjoy animals, you'd love this job. While on the two week trip crossing the Atlantic, the animals kept me very busy. I got to feed and give water to them about two or three times a day. But, stalls had to be cleaned.
It was always fun on board, especially on return trips because I got to play baseball and volleyball, which were held in the empty animal holds. We did many other activities, like table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and other games.
Mainly, this experience made me more aware of people of other countries. This awareness even lead to my family generously hosting some international exchange students.
The Seagoing Cowboys is an amazing program. There a many reasons why I believe this, and I tried to list most of them. If you do not try this fun, great, wonderful thing, then you're missing out. | 3 |
3aedc23 | I think studing venus is a good idea becuase there a proboly a lot of new thing to descover on venus. Venus is the cloest planet to earth in the terms of density and size. Even tho each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more then a few hours, and it will still be a good risk for a new life. Not a single spaceship has touchdown on venus in more then three decades. I think studying venus is a good idea because the spaceship that was up there never made it back and one day sombody will. There is a thick atmosphere of almost 97 precent carbon dioxide blankets venus. the clouds are even more challenging (of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere). Venus has the hottest surface temerature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Venus is almost's earth twin but it is just hard to get there and take a long time. There are alot of things that people haven't found yet but are geting closer to finding, it's up to them to bring it back. they are still tring new ways to study venus. for example, (some simplified simulating the chaos of venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such condition). They are trying many different ways to study venus, they are looking back toan old technology called mechanical computers. These devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important role in the 1940s during the world war 2. I think that they should still study venus becaus it is a lot of thing that haven't found yet. | 3 |
3aedf9d | Dear Mr. Senator,
The citizens of your state are crying injustice, but nothing is being done to serve them. The Electoral College goes against the Bill of Rights opening words of "We the People". The current system of electing the President is more complex and less beneficial than choosing our leader through popular vote. The popular vote actually listens to the people of the United States' opinion and how they want this country run. The Electoral College has many faults such as in the case of electoral overuling popular vote, possible corruption of state senators (no accusation presented), and could lead to the rare event of a tie.
Such as in the election of 2000, Al Gore should have won the race. The people poke through the popular vote to choose him, but the Electoral College thought otherwise. As stated in the article, that usually state senators choose the representatives of the state in the Electoral College, if bribery and corruption affect our nations such as those in the Miuddle East, the presidential race can and will be rigged in one party's favor. Due to Mane and Nebraska policy of "proportional representation" could lead to a tie.
As you can see, the Electoral College has many faults and is outdated due to the rapid population increase of our nation and reasons stated above. Some may argue there will be inaccuracies with popular vote whereas we already use the popular vote today as a way of forecasting the oucome and seeing the people's real choice.
Thank you for your time Mr. Senator.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
3aeffd0 | Is technology that is used in the classroom good for identifying facial expressions of students useful? Computers in the classroom that have the capability to identify whether a student is actually paying attention and to when they are bored or uninterested, is something that I think is a good. Putting all this techonology to work that we have could be beneficial in the classroom.
The software can tell even by a painting how the person is feeling. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry."The software identified how the Mona Lisa was feeling just by detecting her muscles in the painting. "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face..." The software begins by taking a picture of your face and then constructing a 3-D model of it.
Next, the software takes a closer look at your face. "...all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles." The software constructs the 3-D model into your facial expression and then it runs it by the 6 basic emotions. " Eckman has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness..." By putting your 3-D face through the facial identifying portion and identifying your emotions.
Now, in the classroom this would be very beneficial. "... we humans perform the same impressive "calculation" everyday. For instance you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." The software can do the exact things that us humans can do. Just by looking into the camera lense the conmputer software can identify how I am feeling. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Then i could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". By using this software in a classroom the software can modify the activity to make it more fun for the students.
For now the software can only identify simple expressions but later on it should be able to do complex ones with new algorithms. "Perhaps Dr. Huangs's emotion algorithms are a different sort of "Da Vinci Code!" Since most of our communication is non-verbal communication, this software could be a big help in the classroom. "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, So computers need to understand that too." With technology rapidly expanding and getting bigger and smarter, it needs to understand how to recognize our human emotions and to better activities and such. In conclusion, I agree that emotion detecting software is useful in the classroom. | 3 |
3af343a | Cars have been a part of our culture for some time now. Since Henry Ford created the Model T, we have been crazy about these machines. Molding, crafting, and improving since, we have come to know these as daily objects. However, with all the new and progressing theroies now, is there really a need for cars? Limiting car use cold be beneficial not only for the Earth, but also for people. Limiting car use can improve people's moods, can reduce pollution, and improve community interaction.
Firstly, limitng car use could in turn improve people's moods. In Vauban, Germany, there has been an experiment of great proportion. They are living a suburban life without cars. Not only is this community close and in touch, the people are happier. As mother of two Heidrun Walter stated, "When i had a car in was always tense. Im much happier this way," it is showing that not having a car can really relax a person. Just think about it, no insurance, no car payment, no thinking if wil my car last until the end of today, just saving thousands a year and having a lot of stress put off.
Secondly, limiting car use can reduce pollution. Im almost certain we've all heard about Global Warming and Greenhouse Gases, and the devastation they do to our planet. Withou cars these problems are still present, but lack the massive numbers in which it was rising. Smog is a horrible kind of pollution that affects the biggest cities throught the world. Paris banned cars for an entire day to remove the amont of smog in the area. This shows that pollution can be stopped. Even though they only banned even numbered licenese plates one day and odd another pollution still went down. If all cars were banned then pollution would have gone down even further.
Lastly, limiting car use can improve community interaction. People now dont need cars for everything. They can walk, and take trains, and carpool. All these interactions strenghten the community. Walking makes people maybe wanna buy things from stores along the way and help local stores. Taking trains can create friendships and long lasting personal buisnesses. Carpooling cits down on emissions and reduces pollution. The community can do nothing but benefit from these.
In conclusion, limiting car use could be extremly helpful. It could improve people's moods, reduce pollution, and improve community interaction. Maybe someday we could actually get rid of cars and listen to the grinding of the pedals down the biking highways. | 4 |
3af3bfb | Some people might like the idea of driverless cars but I am against it. I think having a driveless car can cause damage to a person, there is a possibilit of something going wrong / the automobile malfuntioning.
In paragraph one it states that " the car will offer more flexibility than a bus. Some people might prefer the bus rather than a car because they don't have to deal with the responsibilities. Even though the car might have a human mind that doesn't change the fact that damage can occur.
Lastly, In paragraph 7 it states "that the car can steer, accelerate, and brake itself but humans have to be notified when the road has something that needs the human mind. It also says how when on the road the driver has to stay alert, but there is most likely a possiblity of the driver losing focus.
This can cause great damage to the car and the human itself. | 1 |
3af6a4a | The Challenge of Exploring Venus,is that how evening star,which is aslo the name for venus,it is that venus is a plant of the solar system,venus is our second plant from the sun. Each mission they have done was unmanned,and for a good reason why."Since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours."There might be an issue of why it explains"why not a single spaceship has touched down on venus in more than three decades.
The thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide. The more challenging is that there for,the clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit,aslo the atmospheric pressure is about 90 times greater than what we experience in our own plant. It is nothing like we humans have encounter on earth. venus has the hossest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system.
"Venus may well once of have been the most-earth like planet in our solar system."Venus might or probably have been covered largely with oceans and maybe just maybe have life just like earth has have."The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features shuch as mountains and craters."
NASA solution would be to the hostille conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. They want to hover over many stroms and travel at higher altitude to fly landscape,aslo so they can aviod unfriendly ground condtitons staying out of the way.
However,venus from a ship obriting or hovering above the plant safely can only provied limited insight on ground conditions. Most light froms cannot penetrate the dense of the atmosphere,rendering standard form phitigraphy and videography is ineffective. Resachers want to take a sample of rocky,gas or anything esle they could get on to it form a distance. Therefore scientists would take the risk to get up close to it .
"NASA is working on other approaches to study venus. For example,some simplified electronics is made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of venus surface and lasted for three weeks in such conditions."They are looking at the past by telling us of how they require elections.
But at the end they are still expanded to meet in the edged of imagination and innovtion. | 1 |
3af84f4 | In my opinion I believe Facial Action Coding is valuable. You can look at a picture or a person based off there facial expression and conclude what there emotion is. It might not necessarily be accurate but you'll be pretty close to right, but now you have the technology to be accurate. A persons face changes depending on how they feel and most people are able to detect what that emotion is whether its sad, mad, happy, etc.
Dr. Paul Eckman creator of the Facial Action Coding system (FACS) classified six basic emotions which is happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. FACS is a computer process that constructs a 3-D computer model of the face and all forty four major muscles.
Professor Thomas Huang of Beckaman Institute, in collaboration with his collague Proffesor Nicu Sebe University of Amsterdam, are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. They rely on Dr. Paul Eckmans creation using video imagery the new emotion-recognition software tracks facial movements in a real face or painted face like Mona Lisa By: Leonardo Da Vinci.
Like taking a test at the end of the year Istep+ or Nwea can determine how much knowledge your brain has took in and if you are able to pass and further your education or if your incapable of taking in information in a classroom.
As stated before i think the work being put in by these Proffesors and Dr. Paul Eckman is very valuable and should be taken into consideration as usable to determine facial expressions because of the statistics being provided in the article and the credibility of these men. Thats why i think the Facial Action Coding computer process is valuable. | 3 |
3af8e31 | Dear senator i think that you shuled change to people vote then a Electoral college.
Here are the reason why you change it is unfair, stuipd. these are the reason why we should go to people vote for the president of the USA.
why does a state person can pick are next president. when the people cant choose and the state vote are more powerful then the people. the people can choose the president.
for example Nixon in 1968 and clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percsnt purality of the popular votes,while winning a majority in the Electoral college (301 out 370). These is a reason why people right need to count more the the state.
A nother reason is it is stuiped you can have more people vote then a nother guy can get the state vote it cost more . If you can get tmore then 200 and get litten the half you won. if you win the big state that have electoral vote you can win. you can get CAL, texas, and florida you got a lot of vote .
These are the reason why you it not faair and stupid. These are the reason why you should not letthe stae vote. You should let the peopel of the USA vote for the president then the state. | 2 |
3aff9ea | Dear State Senator,
I understand that there have been some issues regarding whether or not to keep the Electoral college or to change the system to a more simple- election by popular vote. From my understanding, the Electoral College has worked for many years with no issues or roadblocks so to speak that have interfered or had a bias on these decisions. But, from my recent discovery it might not be as well thought out and fair as we thought.
I was just informed that i'm not really voting for the president, i am voting for the official voter that will then, in turn vote for the president(Using their own biases). Since i was not aware of this, i am quite shocked. I'm assuming that this is just something that gets passed by or not looked at very deeply, but i willbe that person that digs down and gets all up in the business of somone other than myself.
This is offical: The electoral colllege is unfair, oudated and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without a basis in reality. Yes, The electoral college does avoid the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast but, either way the method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state anyways.
Thank you for your time,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.