essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
3fb7516 | I am here to discuss with you the topic of the landform on Mars. Yes, it's the one shaped like a human face. I have been getting many claims of it being a monument built by ancient life on Mars. Believe us, here at NASA we would love for the claims of alien life to be true, but we've been given substantial information that those claims are incorrect. There are many reasons why these claims are invalid. First of all, landforms like the so-called face appear on our home planet it would be easy to find; secondly the appearance of a face was given merely by the casting of shadows over the surface over the red plant; and lastly, the intensely zoomed in picture showed no sign of anything that would hint at any type of civilization.
Here on Earth, we have tons of natural landforms created by erosion, glaciers, and the sea. The landform on Mars appears to be a mesa, a landform that happens to be very common in the western area of America. The climate of Mars can be quite similar to that of the West, and that hints to us that because of the hot climate that usually occurs with the sun shining on Mars, this landmark has formed only because of the climate and conditions of the area. It is a reasonable idea to consider and should be proof enough, but there are still some sceptics so I will continue.
Some may say, even if it was a natural landform, how on Earth does it look exactly like a human face? Well first of all, people see what they wish to see. They think it's a face because it is such a fascinating and fantastic thing to think of. "A human face on Mars?! No way!" The landform isn't actually shaped like a face, it is merely the shadows that are cast on it that cause the appearance of it being a face. However, upon closer inspection by NASA the landform was revealed merely to be a completely normal patch of land, nothing special at all.
If all of what I'm saying isn't enough to convince you, I have got one more important point to make. NASA has gone to extensive lengths to examine this landform that has caused such a big fuss among the people. In the April of 2008, scientists set out to explore the face of Mars once more. It was an apparently cloudless day and it was that day that they took the picture. The picture was zoomed in as far as it could have been, so that anything on the face of the planet could be seen. There weren't any signs of life, no tents where extra-terrestrial life would sleep and no proof of anything building this landform.
To sum all of this up, there is simply just no way that this landform could have been built by alien life. There are too many facts and too much research done on this landform, we know all there is to know and what we can say for sure is, there is simply no way the Face was createed by Aliens. You'll just have to face the facts and wonder how on earth this picture managed to look exactly like a human face. The mystery was fun while it lasted, but now that we have the facts, it is time to lay this case to rest. | 5 |
3fbe68d | Would an "Facial Action Coding System" be useful in a classroom? No, I believe it would be too troublesome for just a classroom full of students trying to learn. For example, some students wouldn't want the sensor to scan their face for some stupid reason. I believe it could be put to better use.
Reson 1 on why I say no. The artical may state ""A classrom computer could reconize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor"", but that is about where the effectiveness of using this tech in classrooms stops.
Reason 2 on why I say no. This tech can be used in court or in buisneses. If someone is lying in court, we would know and could ask for the truth. With buisnes, you could tell if someone is impressed with your quota or idea then branch off from there.
Reason 3 on why I say no. This tech could even help with therapy. You might tell your theripist that you're better but sill need therapy. Theripist could even use this tech to help develop specialized lesons for certain people.
Reason 4 on why I say no. Who in thier right mind would want tech that would give them more ads? No one wants ads in the first place. If they do want to see an ad, then they can just go to an search engine and look up the ad on thier free time when they want to.
To sum up on what i think. I believe this tech would be so limited in the classroom that it would practically wasting money. It should go toward something that not knowing the correct emotion or state of mind could cost hundred or thousands of dollars. Or when you need the truth but no one will give in. | 3 |
3fc04bb | I think one reason to join is because he helped people who needed the help beacause in the strory World War 2 just ended and some people needed help getting their country's or city's back together. Another reason is because he got to go on an adventure by traveling on a boat with cattle, horses, and more. Also he had an adventure by traveling at sea and seeing all the wonderful things at sea, also he visited many unique places while he was on the trip as he did in the story.
Luke claims these reasons by telling the reader how he felt being on the trip and telling them how he helped all of these peaople. Also he told us why he kept on going out and doing/helping anyone he could. Another way he claimed his reason's is by telling us how and what he did on his free time from wherehe was at. Also his emotion tells us how he claimed some parts of his reason's.
I belive that this show how Luke claim's his reason's because one he used his emotion by saying how he felt when he was there. Second He said that he had a fun and adventurious time at sea caring for the horses and other farm animals. Also last bot not least he told us what he did on his free time witch was go explore and get tours of special building's that were/are special to the people who live there. | 2 |
3fc2fb9 | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" did a decent job at discussing how studying Venus is worth the time and money. The author discusses intresting topics such as the idea that there were oceans and even life on Venus at one point. Though these would be nice, there are also many dangers listed.
The author makes it very clear that there are many dangers that would come with studying Venus. Some of these dangers are 97% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, clouds made of corrosive sulfuric acid, 800 degree heat, and atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than Earth. The author then goes on to say that these challenges could be avoided in some ways. A solution the author proposes is an idea made by NASA to make a "blimp-like vehicle" that would let explorers observe in less extreme heat and much less pressure. From there, the author states that solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels, which is immediatley followed by "not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." Though this would make many people think that Venus' exploration is possible, the author then brings up more skeptisism with the ideas of of photography and videography not being effective and not being able to get samples without people touching the ground.
The author had conving points that would make sense for anyone to want to visit mars, but were overshadowed with doubt that it could actually happen. Therefore, the question is raised if it is worth continuing to use millions of dollars and the possibility of losing life to learn what a planet was like in the past which as of now is not capable of sustaining life. | 3 |
3fc6349 | I am against driverless cars the reason i am against it is because the saftey aspect. Also the technolgy could start not to work , they dont know how their going to make the laws and some people wont be paying attention and cause more accedients then their already are. Which is very bad.
So one question I have is , what if the technolgy starts not to work in the middle of the road ? That could cause many problems becouse people could sue them. That could also cause a lot of people to get hurtand that wouldn't be good. The article said the cars will have sensors in more places than you will ever know but what if one of those sensorrs don't pick anything up for it to stop it
self ? Then thats another cause of a crash we will have to deal with.
Speaking of crashes and accedients , they don't know who their going to blame for being at fault for the crash. Whoever they pick their going to have to make new laws and get a whole lot of paper work done. Then the company and driver will have to deal with court and that is going to cause major conflict between the two like the story said in pharagraph nine. I know the driverless car is supposed to prevent crashes but you still have to look at this and make sure everyone will be safe.
Also the fun part is driving and their takeing that away from people. Like the story said " the driver will still have to be alert for human like situations" but most people will not be paying attention they'll be on their phone or talking to the passenger. Even if the car does alert them they either won't hear it and crash which will be very tragic.
Finally that is why I don't agree with driverless cars. The saftey aspect is not 100% . The technolgy still needs to be worked on to make sure it works at all times. They need to know how their going to handle the laws. People will need to pay attention and where not sure they will do that. | 3 |
3fccfd5 | Driverless cars can go in many different ways for me. I have postive effects on the subject such as, a person not having to drive as much is they don't want to, less accidents, and less distraction. I also have negative effects on driverless cars. Not being in control 100% of the time, being distracted with other actions, and defects with the car.
To most diverless cars sound like a great idea. I know a person like my mother would love the idea of driverless cars because she hates driving. Anyone who really not fond of driving all the time and are really busy alot of the time in their life must get tired of driving. I feel as if the driverless cars would be a huge plus for them! Also I feel as if less accidents would happen if driverless cars were made. The world is full of wreckless drivers and theirs really nothing we can do about it. But if everyone car is driving at the same abount of safety then that should lower the rate if accidents around the world. Plus its like driving with an extra brian in the car,because the car has special ablilties. This creation would also help the mind of teens as well. There are teens all over the world getting ready to drive or are already driving. Teens can be really distracted by just being a teenager. And by the car being a extra helping hand on driving could help the teens do certain things while driving such as chaning the radio, adjusting windows or mirros even making a phone and that could not only help teens but everyone.
Even though I have many positive effects on the driverless cars there is still negative affects. Driving can being a very dangerous thing. There always something you have to look out for while driving. Your mind has be focus everything around it most importantly people. Even thought it is a driverless car I feel as most of the time you should be 100% incontrolled of the car just to make sure nothing bad happen outside your sight. You should be able to control everything. Also not driving your driverless car might give people the idea that it's their time to do what ever. Which is not the case! Even though you are not driving you still should be completely focus. You should not be texing or anything els that would keep yours eyes off the road for more than a few seconds. Lastly with newer cars their will always be deffects in the cars. If the car is brand new then any problems the car has might more difficuly to figure out. And driverless cars have deffects written all over it.
So there goes my position on driverless cars. That even though driverless cars sound like a great idea we always should keep an open mind on cons of the invention. Also that saftey should be a number one factor in the whole situation. I love the idea of making advantages in the world today. Just as long as they work well and make life safer. | 4 |
3fcf11a | At first the Electoral College is a process of compromising between election of the president by a vote in congress and by popular votes from citizens. To my opinion I could favor this as a smart compromise.
Second it goes to show that when a president gets elected and wins by popular vote by only citizens is not a good idea. Reason is that people only vote for a certain president based on not their support or ideas for america, but based on their looks. When the Electoral College comes into play, Citizens vote for a slate to pledge a candidate. Then it depends on the state.
Finally when the electors who elected the president and not the people, the citizens votes goes into a good cause. When they agree to a final vote then that candidate gets the job.
In conclusion, I think the Electoral College is a good idea becuase when an idea strikes from a candidate ,and approved by congress. Then everybody wins the vote. | 2 |
3fcff84 | We need to find other ways to limit car usage. We should stop relying on cars so much. In "
Car-Free Cities"
it expains and provides examples of people not using the car that much is happier in there life and that we dont need to have cars because you can be more active walking and riding a bike then just driving and when you stop using the car so much you can have a better enviroment. We all have a choice weither or not to use cars but not using a car can makes your life better.
We all have our perfrences, like maybe you just like to use a car because it gets you from point A to B faster but walking or riding a bike can help you become more fit and active. In "
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars
" by Elisabeth Rosenthal it states that " "when I had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter... as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering childerm drown out the occasional distant motor". this quote explains how when she gave up her car she seemed much happier and she didn't have to hear the sound of cars, all she could hear is bicycle wheel's turning and just the laughter of children. In "
The End of Car Culture"
it says " They organize thier summer jobs and social life around where they can walk or take public transportation or car-pool with friends." this quote is explaining how teens don't use cars that much they think of other ways to get around then just using their own car. They are trying to be more active in their life life then just using cars for transportation. They walk or car-pool they think of smarter ways to get around.
Although, we may think that oh it is faster but do you know what you are doing to the enviroment due to using cars as much as we do? In "
Paris Bans Driving Due To Smog
" it tells the reader " After days of near-record- pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" This quote is illustrating to us that people are driving so much that they had to ban cars and not permit anyone to drive due to , to much air poulltion. People need to start walking more then use cars a city should'nt be able to ban cars because that means people are using them to much and poullting the air with that. In "
The End of Car Culture"
it claims that "it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviroment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's eissions, just behind power plants." this quote explains to us is that if less people use cars , the more beneficial it would be to the enviroment. It would help us to stop poullting air and just help the nviroment out as well.
In conclusion, if people could limit the usage of cars it would beneficially help us out by us being more active and not using cars because it pollutes air and destroys the enviroment. Their are other ways to move about then cars. i know it is faster and easier but is it worth losing the enviroment because you didnt want to walk a short distance and back? | 3 |
3fd037e | Dear state senator,
It has come to my attention that there has been some debate on whether or not our nation should continue to use the Electoral College to elect our presidents. Despite the claims that this method is outdated and unfair, I believe that we should keep it in use. The presidental election is held every 4 years and has addressed all issues that may occur.
One such concern would be if a candidate won the popular vote but did not win the presidency as shown here " This year voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidency."(source 2). This does seem rather odd considering the seemigly non-democratic nature of this process however, there is a explanation for this. When a person votes for a candidate using the Electoral College, they are actually voting for a slate of electors who in turn vote for a nominee. The reasoning behind this is that a larger state such as California, has a much larger population that a smaller state such as Utah. If we were to chose by popular vote, California would have a very unfair advantage over Utah. While some might then say that the system is still very biased, no one group has any advantage over another as shown here, "All are practical reasons, not liberal or conservative reasons." (source 3).
Another concern was what the outcome would be if both candidates had equal votes. This problem can again be solved by using the Electoral College. While this is very rare it can also lead to pressure for a run-off election which would make the election process extremely difficult. Electoral College is an efficient producer of an obvious winner. If you still do not believe that the Electoral College is truly "fair", we have even allowed Columbia to vote as shown here, "Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College." (source 1). To close off, I would greatly appreciate if you would consider this letter.
Sincerely, A student | 3 |
3fd18bb | The author supports the idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit despiting all dangers by making it seem like a challenge and having interesting facts about what kind of planet it is. The author starts it off by referring to Venus as " Earth's twin ".
In the artcle it states,"often referred to as Earth's " twin ", Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size."(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 2). This explains how they start to talk about Venus being interesting. Then the author starts talking abut how Venus is a difficult planet for humans to study and details about it. Sometimes, us as humans like challenges and they like to test their limit to see how far they can go. In the article it states,"Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging plnet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us."(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 2).
This explains that they see it as a challenge. Another reason that the author supports the claim is they start stating unusual facts about Venus despite the circumstances. In the text it states,"Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any other planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun."(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 3). This explains that they draw in more attention stating unusual facts. The author also talks about how professionals like astronomers find it interesting. In the text it states,"Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our system."(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 4). This explains why people who go up into space see it as a fascinating thing.
The author makes it seem like Venus is our closest option to visit for space travel. The author tries to infrom us that studying Venus is a good thing by looking at it as meeting our curiousities and as us getting insight on what it really is. In the text it states,"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because of human curiousity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavours."(The Challenge of Exploring Venus 8). This explains how they appeal to this as gaining insight on the planet and seeing it as a challenge.
The author of this text supports the idea that going into studying the fact that Venus is a great pursuit despite the dangers by providing infromation that'll make you curious and having you look at it as a challenge that us humans would want to complete. | 4 |
3fd3ab7 | Have you ever thought about driverless cars? Well I have, to many things can go wrong. One is the car does not have eyes. It would also be boring just wacthing the road. Many people would fall asleep instanted of being ready to drive when the driverless car can't. So I strongly disagree with driverless cars world wide.
First of all, the car can not see, it only has senors. As it states in the text, .... "they need a whole lot of senors." For example, lets say a bird flys past the front senor the car is automuclly going to slam on the brakes. If a human decides to drive that day, it is going to run into the back of the driverless car.
Secondly, it takes all the joy away from turning 16 and getting your liecense. For many kids, like me I can not wait till I can drive by myslef. Just thinking about makes me happy, and also not needing to ask for rides anymore that will be great for most kids.
Lastly, As it states in the story, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themsleves, but all are desinged to notify the driver when the road ahead requries human skills." All that I am getting at, is that prople can fall asleep and not wake up when the car needs the driver to.
These are my reasons way the diverless car is a bad idea in eyes. Hopefully you can take these reason and not contiue with driverless cars. Thank you for reading my statements and have a great day. | 3 |
3fd4c4a | Have you ever wanted to help people in need?
Are you a charity sort of person? Do you like seeing a battery of people happy? If you said yes to any of these, you're in luck. We have a job for you. My name's Luke and I was in the Seagoing Cowboys.
I know what your thinking, "What is a Seagoing Cowboy?" well I'll tell you. You get to travel around the world, look at all new types of animals, and try new foods. I've gone on these kinds of trips before, and trust me it's fun. You help people get back to their normal lives before the war. You'll look after their animals, such as horses, young cows, and mules.
Your life in America might be perfect, but every three seconds a child or adult dies in another country. So help out, pull your weight. We need to step up to the challenge and make a difference. The world isn't as perfect as you thought it was. You don't just help people. You change their point of view. | 2 |
3fdaaec | Fellow citizens there are many advantages to limitng car use. One big advantage is a reduce in global warming. Auto-moblie causes a large percent of greenhouse gas emissions as stated in source 1, paragraph 5. Limiting car usage can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than half. Car pollution can also can aslo cause smog which aslo took a toll on Paris , who had to ban driving do to smog .Due to the smog delivery companies lost revenue and public transit was free of charge for a couple of days. Smog can also travel easily to other cities throughout the air. Also car usage has taken a toll on previous bills in the united states as stted in source 1 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only the other 20 percent to other transport.
Limitng car usage can greatly reduce the number of traffic jams throughout cities. As staed in souce 4. During Bogata car-free day parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout the city; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up. There has been 118 miles of bicycle paths , which means more exercise which is good for your health. | 2 |
3fdbec2 | The Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. This new software has a promising applications for a variety of industries. "Can we actually calculate emotions, like math homework?" "How can a computer recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel?"
The process begins when the computer constructs a three-dimensional computer model of the face. All forty-four major muscles in the model must move like a human muscle. Movement of one or more muscles is called an "action unit." The facial expressions we use for each emotion is universal. The software can identify mixed emotions.
The software is the latest innovation from Professor Thomas Huang. Dr. Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. He then relies on his pyschologist Dr. Paul Eckman, the creator of Facial Action Coding System. He has classified six basic emotions like happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness.
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", it tells us how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. "Why would they want this?" Some students could use this software on there computer to use for when they have no one to talk to, to use for homework like instead of looking it up on the internet they could say,"hey computer what is two plus two." This could be the next siri, but on the computer.
For students in a classroom to use this software could be valuable. The article, the psychologists, and the professor tells us the good things about this software. The Facial Action Coding System, we can use it for anything. You can also use it for anamonical information.
The Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. Yes, we can actually calculate emotions, like math homework. The computer can recognize your emtions through software and through a special program Dr. Paul Eckman created. | 2 |
3fdf204 | Back in 1976 while NASA's Viking 1 space craft was flying around Mars near the Cydonia region when it snapped a picture of an odd landform that baffled scientist for years. It had come across a mesa that resembled a face. NASA said that it was just an optical illusion to make it look like a face. When NASA first revealed it to the public it drew some attetion in the entire country. It had a movie, books and was even in every grocery store check out aisle for 25 years.
NASA then began prioitizing photogaphing Cydonia to see if it was an alien artifact or not. They then sent another spacecraft eighteen years after the Viking missions.They took a better picture of the face as soon as they could, even though it wasn't a clear picture and was taken during the cloudy season on the Red Planet they seen that it was not a face but a landform istead.
There are many reasons why this was a landform and not an alien monument as even the first NASA report said that the shadows were just an optical illousion to make it look like something it is not. Many scientist then said that the face was like a butte that was located in the Snake River Plain in Idaho. In 2001 NASA sent another spacecraft into space and got an even better picture of the mesa and put an end to the conspiricies that said that the mesa was a face.
In conclusion, the "face" had attracted alot of attention to NASA and Mars as it became a major pop culture refference.That then began to deminish as NASA's photographing technolegy got better they then revealed that it was a butte that was just an optical illuosion.There were so many facts to debunk the myth that NASA's deffenders hoped that it was an alien artifact so that they could get more money. | 3 |
3fe0efe | A decline in the use of motor vehicles would greatly help the whole world in many unique ways. Most importantly, cars have an awful effect on the enviornment. Eliminating motor vehicles all together would remove many of the polutants effecting the eviornment. Also, removing cars has a great effect on the community as well by helping places to grow and prosper. Finally, the thought of limiting car usage is trending rapidly with the common man as well as higher ups in the government.
Cars produce up to 12% of Europe's greenhouse gases and up too 50% of America's greenhouse gas. High levels of greenhouse gas absorb heat and prevent it from leaving Earth's atmosphere causing a rise in temperature better known as global warming. Second, the carbon monoxide and other noxious chemicals that are released by vehicles can come together to form a thick smog. This somg is very bad for people's health and can contaminate land and water with toxic chemicals. In order to prevent these two things a lack of usage of cars is necesary in today's world.
Just like the enviornment, reduced car usage also can benifit your very own community. Citizens reported being "much happier this way" as well as being less tense after restrictions on cars were imposed. Second, a lack of car usage would caue much denser cities. In turn, buisness that were staged on highways would become local and city centers would allow friends to live close by. Finally, in cities that imposed bans on motor vehicles parks and sports centers were not only revived but began to completely flourish.
Finally, laws about car usage are smiled upon by both pedestrians but by people in legislative positions. Fist off, European places like Switzerland and France first adopted these types of rules. As a result, events like car free day in Bogota became a big sucess with many supporters. Therefore, even president Barack Obama revealved a plan to be imposed that limits the usage of cars in America. Finally, sociological professors like Mimi Sheller have noticed people accepting and embracing the new anti car policies.
In turn, restricting car usage has nothing but good to offer the majority of cities. From helping reduce the global problem of polution. Or, helping to build bigger more tightly knit cities. The new very popular laws will be imposed in many Eurpoean countires and sonn the U.S. As a result, the positive effects will be embraced by communities for generations to come. | 4 |
3fe12c4 | Fellow citizens, there are advantages of limiting car usage! Many of citizens are estatic about barely using their cars. Media trainor and mother of two Heuidrun Walter said "When I had a Car I was always tense. I'm Much happier this way." As You see Not having a car gets that stress off your shoulders. In the united states the environmental protection agency is promoting Car reduced communtities. Meaning the air pollution would go down a huge amount. In Source two " Paris bans driving due to smog" Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the city. After a few days after they enforced that partial driving ban Congestion was down 60 percent ! Public transit was free of charge from friday to monday.
In source 3 "Car free day is spinning into a big hit in bogota" A program set spread to other countries .Millions of colombians hiked, biked , skated or took buses to work . In colombia cars were banned for almost three years can you believe that!! Bogota Mayor atanas Mockus said " the rain hasnt stopped people from participating" from the program. This shows that the people of bogota do care about their daily lifes and that they care about the environment. Not having a car is a good way to get out and be more productive with your life. Lots of authorites from other countries came to bogota to see how many of bogotas citizens participated .
This program was apart of an improvement capaign That began in the 1990s .
Colombia has seen 118 miles of bicycle paths ! Parks and sports of colombia had revealed itself to the city. Rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic. Shopping districts have cropped up .In " The end of car culture " Prseident obama plans to to talk about the greenhouse gas emissions .Recent studies show that americans are driving less and buying fewer cars . That leaves a big question to the president "Has america passed peak driving". America has been one of the worlds prime car cultures . " It is the birthplace of model t ".
What makes me wonder is the rates of car ownership. Michael Sivak who is a research professer at the university of michigans transporation Says " I think that means something more fundamental is going on " Which is actually a really smart way of thinking | 2 |
3fe1ffb | Nowadays people show their emotions simply just by looking at their face. Today's technology is advancing quickly that they even found a way to tell people's emotions. How can they accurant about they're emotions though? I personally think that only a person can feel what they're going through. I don't think technology is so accurate to look into someone's soul.
Prof. Thomas Huang and his crew discovered a new software that can recognize emotions. However I believe that no one can tell other people how they but them theirselves. How can they actually calculate emotions, only us humans express what we feel, not technology. This software begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. This software is not very accurate.
We humans perform this same impressive "calculation" everyday. You can probably tell how a friend is feeling by simply looking at their face because you know the person that well. Although most of us would have trouble describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc. Yet Dr. Huang studies artist such as da Vinci to help him paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotions. His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electrical code.
The famous painting Mona Lisa is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can do. It's like saying that your own PC can tell your emotions, it's pretty impossible. To an expert, faces don't lie. Muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful.
Moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them. For example, actors carefully reproduce smiling and frowining as a way of creating these emotions on stage. Someone's emtions is way more different than the science of emotions. | 2 |
3fe4901 | Even though driverless cars can solve many problems, they can also create many problems. Driverless cars can enhance the risk of accidents on the road and put other drivers on the road at risk for danger. They also rise the question of liability. Who is responable if there is an acciedent involving a driverless car? The creation of this car can also promote laziness.
Driverless cars can enhance the risk of accidents on the road and put other drivers on the road at risk for danger. Roads are already dangerous with human error that can lead to accidents, and sometimes death. By putting a car on the road that can drive by itself rise the danger rate. How can you insure safety for other drivers on the road? It reads in the text "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves" cars are machines and machines have malfunctions, so how can you trust a machine to have control of your life?
However, driverless cars also rise the question of liability. Who is responable there is an accident involving a driverless car? Who should we blame the car or the driver? "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrains safe" if this is true driverless cars have no liability. Driverless cars open a window to endless amounts of questions, all of which needs to be answered before they are on the road.
Lastly, driverless cars also can promote laziness. Technology is a beautiful thing to have but it can also make us lazy. Technology such as cellular phones have become a dependent for many people. So adding driverless cars to the list of technology that make us move and be active is dangerous. Car driven by people allow them to interact with their surroundings, but driverless cars take away a lot of that interaction.
In conclusion, I do not support driverless cars because of many different reasons. One it has a safety risk for other drivers, two who is responable for a accident involving a driverless car, and finally it promotes human laziness. Until all of the logical concerns have been answered these cars should not be on the road. Driverless cars might be in the wave of the future but not until we are sure their are little to no health concerns. | 4 |
3fe76e7 | In America people use automobiles for evryday life. Look at it this way, if there werent any cars anymore we would be walking all the time. Which would leed to bad joint pain and expensive doctor bills. Plus think of how crowded the side walks would be. Your kids would get lost or even stolen right out from under your nose now do you really want that. Automobiles have been around forever why ruin what people worked so hard to gain. A lot of people would lose their job if we got rid of them. You think the unemployment rait is bad now get rid of cars and watch it increase.
If we had to walk everywhere, that pain that just went away in your ankles and feet would suddenly come back again. And what if your in a hurry to get to work how are you going to get there in time if your only going at a walking speed. The crowd would slow you down emensly, even at school the crowd can slow a person down by a lot. when the teacher lets us out early I dont have to fight the crowd as much and can get to my parent much faster to go home.
Think about the children, if you were walking one day to the store and look back to see that your five year old is suddenly missing, what would you do. You would look and see nothing but people in the crowd, you would have no clue to who has your child. But if your in your car and you look back he/she will be right there safe and sound waiting to get home to watch there favorite show, not in the hands of a stranger wondering who is this person and will I ever see my mommy again.
We Americans work hard for what we get in life, and if you get layed off from your job what gose through your head. Well I dont personnly have a job but you do, and so do hundreds of people at Ford Motor Company, and General Motors two very famous automobile manufacturers. If we dont drive cars and buy cars guess what happens they lose money and if a huge manufactuer loses money then its time to start lowering wages and laying people off. So do you really want that.
So think before you do things like take away our car rights. The prompt says to find good things about not having cars but I just cant because the bad is more bad than the good is good. Personnly if I had a child I wouldnt want him/her being stolen by a stranger. Or being me being layed off because people dont wnat to harm the earth's atmosphere. | 3 |
3feb2e6 | Venus is like the non explorable planet. The technology we have in the world today is not good enough to wistand the envirnment of Venus with its extremely harsh conditions. One of the things the is keeping people so interested is that Venus at one time was supposedly the most Earth like planet in our solar system.
We have tried to explore Venus multiple times but the explorations have been un named because after a few our the spacecrafts broke or quit on us. We think that this is because of Venuses harsh envirnement constisting of acid rain and clouds, the hottest surface temprature in our Milky Way, and the fact that it is so hard to catch the planet when it is close to our planet. "Also notteble Venus has the hottest surface temprature of any planet in the solar system, even though mercury is the closest to the Sun". Thats a reason why we cant land and stay there. One of the reasons we believe Venus used to be like Earth is because of its nottable past. "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth".
We are working on more developed technology as the years go by, but we are still not able tpo land and stay on Venuses surface. We are getting closer but are not ready or prepared to try again yet. | 2 |
3ff2177 | Some people think that the Face is an artifact from aliens, but the fact is, it's a natural landform. Natural things happen everywhere, so seeing something that happens to look like a face should not be automaticlly assumed to be from aliens. After all, Earth has some things that look odd or familiar to our daily life! NASA is sure that this phenomenon is not from alien activity. Wouldn't you think NASA would tell us if it was?
The Face is just a huge rock formation from the Red Planet. The shadows from at the angle it was taken gives it the effect of human features (3). They released the photo to "engage the public and attrack attention to Mars" (3). People have just gave it such an off turning idea that gives it even more attention than intended. People made such a huge deal out of it that more and more people think that there is aliens existance on Mars.
For the beliefs that the fog that appeared in another photo was due to alien activity; fog happens on Earth too. If we take this even farther, it could have just been that the lens were fogged up, or the area was getting something like precipitation. I do not know for sure, but NASA has been said to have some of the most high quality equipment. I am more willing to believe that it is a fog and not a problem with the equipment (7). Although anything could break at anytime, I beileve that the fog was just a natural thing and not something overall crazy.
NASA's equipment is probably more successful than many would think. If you look at one of the older pictures of the Face, you can obviously see that it is not, whatsoever, the most high caliber evidence. Looking at a recent photo may help you or others see that it is indeed a natural process happening. I believe that most who have a say in what the picture looks like, did not see what was happening in that moment in which the picture was taken. Therefore, making the guess that the lens may have broke, or the foresaken fact that it is just fog (10).
In conclusion, I beilieve everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I like to think the more logical side of this debate. More and more people can do as much research as they please, but with facts know that; the Face is just a landform, that fog can happen just about everywhere, and the fact that NASA has high caliber equipment. I would like to hope that if there was a signal of alien activity, that NASA personal would tell us so we would know how to address the problem. | 4 |
3ff53d1 | In order to inform the fellow citizens about the advantages of limiting car usage, let's first talk about how it impacts society, what will happen if society doesn't reduce the excessive amount of car usage, and what they can do to improve societies living conditions. Driving has majorly changed since back then, driving is an everyday thing for society; most kids get dropped off to school by car, adults drive to work, and families go on trips by car. Driving has succesfully impacted society in a positive way in this generation, but it does have some negative and unseen sides to it.
Limiting access to a car can positively change the outcome of a suburb, whether it be the United States, or Canada. According Source 1, "In this new approach, stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway." That gives the reader an idea of how the suburb is like without the use of cars, everything is closer to your house. You can walk to the nearest bakery or grocery store, creating the central idea of the stereotypical 'perfect town' seen in shows. In order to build that idea, cities around the world are being influenced by that concept. According to Source 3, "uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." That proves the fact that if cars are used at the minimum, the city will change for the better. According to Source 2, "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday." In conclusion, with less usage of cars, the better conditions the city would have.
If society doesn't start reducing the amount of car usage in their city, it will end up being a horrible decision. According to Source 2, "after days of near-recorded pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global the city." That being said, cars cause the city to endure smog, causing leaders to input a partial ban. In order to fathom the idea of how many drivers refused to follow that law; Source 2 states, "almost 4,000 drivers were fined." That can easily manifest the idea of how society won't be able to live without their cars, which can end up being disasterous. Smog seems to be a major result of car usage in cities, but in the future, it will lead into a worse situation. In Bogota, Colombia, an event was created to ban the use of cars. According to Source 3, "The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog." To conclude, if cities tried to reduce car usage, it'll drastically decrease the risk of smog and greenhouse effect.
Improving the living conditions of society will produce a tremendous amount of positive effects towards the city. According to Source 4, "President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in american behavior." That being said, America is planning to attempt reducing car usages in the country. Also according to Source 4, "recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." That also manifests the idea that America itself, is slowly reducing it's numbers of car usage. Whether it be the expensive prices of cars or the hard driving tests, the less people who drive, the better the environment. According to Source 1, "the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor." That forms the idea that without cars driving around, children have an excuse to go walk around outside. Rather than being inside not doing anything, and taking a car ride to where they need to go; Vauban's rule helps provide children with a different and active childhood.
Driving is slowly causing the countries to change, children don't go out that much. Technology already limits childrens excercise and their time outside, but driving causes children to barely be outside. Also, excessive driving can cause horrible conditions towards the environment itself. Limiting car usage and how it impacts society, what will happen if society doesn't reduce the excessive amount of car usage, and what they can do to improve societies living conditions are all explained, creating the idea that the less drivers there are, the better outcome it'll be. | 5 |
3ffaa28 | Dear Senator:
I think that the Electoral College should be changed to a popular vote. I have many reasons to believe that our system of choosing our president is corrupt. It needs to be layed out more clearly as to how to president should be chosen. It's not fair that some states have more electors than others based on population, we should all get a say as to who should become president.
The Electoral College is layed out in a way that states with a higher populous have more electors in the Electoral College. Even worse than that, if Florida, for example, were to win the Democratic vote for the state, the Democratic party would win all 29 electors. I think that if we should keep the Electoral College that the votes should at least be distributed evenly amongst all of the electors.
In 2000, Gore won more individual votes while Bush won the Electoral College votes. We ended up having a whole fiasco as to who should be elected president for that reason. It'd be alot easier if we had a more direct system of voting for president. The winner-take-all system is what helped Bush win the 2000 election, even though those votes were gained indirectly by a majority rule. It's almost like we don't even have to vote anymore and just let the Electoral College take all of our votes away.
That's why I think that the Electoral College should be changed to a more direct rule of electing the president. About 60% percent of people agree that we should change our system of electing the president. I hope to see the Electoral College changed. | 3 |
3ffd355 | It was an oppurtunity of a lifetime. There was so much to do, learn, and see. " When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service." There are many wonderful benefits of participating in the Seagoing Cowboys program.
Everyone should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. There is so much to see, and learn. A cattle-boat trip was an unbelievable oppurtunity for a small-town boy like me. I had the side benefits of seeing Europe and China, we also saw Acropolis in Venice, Italy, a city with street of water. I toured the an excavating castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Cnal on his way to China.
I could have possibly been drafted earlier then I was. "When my draft board learnd thta was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing what I was doing for my service. Many apposing sides may argue that joining the Seagoing Cowboys is a rediciolus, idea. I disagree when people say there is a danger of joing the Seagoing Cowboys.
To conclude there are sentimental memories in joining the Seagoing Cowboys,and many values. There are great lessons to learn things to see.
The oppurtunity is something you will not want to miss out on. The amazing feeling you get from joining is nothing that you will ever believe until you join.
There are many new friends, fun, enjoyable sights, and lessons to learn. | 3 |
400076e | To begin with, the advantages of limiting car usage, for example Vauban Germany Residents of this upscale community are suburban poineers, they gave up their cars just to save up and move. Some street parking areas, driveways, and homes with garages are generally forbidden in this experiment. Car ownerships also has to buy land jus for parking and to sit their cars on, their ownership is only allowed that garages at the edge of the development where they buy space and homes for the cars. The percentage of Vauban's Germany families that do not own cars is 70% and its 57% of families that sold their car just to move here. The autouse of the car separates the united states from the suburban life that is a movement called "smart planning". Passenger cars are responsible fro 12% of greenhouse gas emission in Europe. Up to 50% in some car-intensive areas in the untied states.
In Addition to, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city, if your car didnt have a license plate that means to leave the car at home or drive it instead and get a ($31) fine. It was 4,000 drivers was fined, according to the passage it was Twenty-seven people who had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. The passage says that 60% in the captial of France. after five-days of intensifying smog, the smog rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. Disels make up 67% of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3% average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, says the Reuters. Reuters found that Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in london.
Finally, Bogota Columbia is a program thats set up to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams. It was 3 straight years cars had been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of 7 million. The passage says " their goal is to promote alternative transportation and try to reduce smog". Violators faced $25 fines. The businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza says "Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s, parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven sidewalks but they have been replaced, new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have did over and rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic.
To sum it up, people have to work together to the keep the earth and the air clean for cars. Cars now in days are expensive for people to buy thats what the buses are for and it really helps people save money and enjoy their life til they feel they need a vehicle for their kids. They want people to follow the rules and get their license to drive their car and things so that want have to get a fine for driving without what you need. Transportation is one of the biggest things in the world because people now in days walk, catch rides, use the bus, use a bicycle, and etc., people need transportation but some use the buses to help them save or people with transportation sale there's to save and move in a better environment. | 2 |
400105a | ther artucule says envelope el study of venus in venus for the exploration
complete of venus he author claim that is dangerous for the estudent because en venus the temperute is more cold and is difficult , others thing very importan is that venus have 97 parcent of carbon dioxide and 800 degrees fahrenheit besides of the density that have he planeta venus other option is mars but not change much is same that venus only the temperature change on little but the estudents want know
the planet venus only with clothes special for have success in the study od he planet so the NASA wint more planets for when he planet eath have dangerous of destruction have more planet for life with no dangerous and survive the humans with water , oxygen , food , work , family , friends, law , reproduction ,and more that nothing happy . for this he all the planet earth need much money for pay el studing in venus the exploration and construct in other planet for survive , is all of the articule , i think that if is possible have life in other planet in all galaxy exist a opportunity is mi conclusion if have opportunity in other planet only lack more tecnology and money for all this process in others planet . all this says the articule only explain when i think and boliver of this theme . | 1 |
4009e22 | The face is just a natural landform. That is it. There are no aliens so therefore, aliens could not have created it. There is a landform on Earth that is similar to it and we are not aliens nor did we create it. It is the equivalent of a butte or mesa. Stop saying aliens created it because they did not because aliens are not real. "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West.'It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,' says Garvin. 'That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.' " " 'As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital 3 times bigger than the pixel size, ' he added. 'So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-styled pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were.' " So an answer to this question, ladies and gentlemen, is why the Face on Mars is just landfrom. | 2 |
400b44f | In the passage the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. In the passage it states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This explains the importance of astronomers exploring Venus because it could have some various styles like "covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The significant thing about this is that numerous factors see Venus as a challenging planet for humans to learn more about, despite the dangerous obstacles it brings among us.
One of the many obstacles of traveling to Venus is "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system" This proves it's way difficult to even step a foot on Venus without even getting your foot molted by the boiling temperatures of Venus's surface. Another reason that's a risk to vist Venus is that "A thick atmosphere of alomost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." This conditions show highly extreme pressure that is 90 times greater than what we experience on Earth. This shows more extreme than anything humans have encountered here on Earth.
In conclusion, Venus is a highly caution area for humans to counter but luckly scientists (NASA) have discovered unique ways to overcome there problems by inventing a vehicle hovering over the surfaces to avoid such bizzare surface that could potentially end their lives. Not only are they creating vehicles but also mechanical computers that have the ability to "make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all." The significance is that scientists and researchers are developing unique machanics to out come the problems to enter or step foot on Venus. These brave people have showed "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." | 3 |
4015682 | The technology to read the emotional epressions of students is very unecessary. i believe its unecessary because, that would be too much information to be giving a computer. a computure dont need to know students faces & emotions, its used for technology only.
The first reason why i say no because the computer already holds enough information about students like their full name, birthday, location & more. Students feelings & emotions shouldnt go on a computer. In the article, the author mentioned that the computer will study your face muscles too see if you are confused, happy, sad, etc. That would be holding too much information about a child or teen & you never know whats going on or whos waching behind tha computer screen.
Also, Its not a computers business on how a student is feelings. its a computer, not a person. its no llke the computer can do something about their emotions. Thats a teachers job with seeing how a student is feeling, not a compters.
Though it is a good idea to come up with, i will still disagree with this invention/idea. a computer should not have that much info on someone period. also, you never know who may be watching behind the computer screen. | 3 |
4019327 | This essay is on if I think the use of technlogy to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable . I believe It is valuable and heres why .
I believe the use of tehcnology to read students expressions is valuable because as a studnt myslf i know how it feel to have to do a computer assignment and not get whats going on or its moving to fast so u get frustrated or angry .If they were able to put that in school computers i feel more kids will do better in school . Like if my facial exprassions are showing a teacher some they cant really get it because they are humans ad they cant really read faces s good as a computer could . Now on the other hand you have this computer that when i look confused it is willing to slow down or break things down more simplier for me and me only .
I feel sometimes thats all kids need is extra help because honestly im a student that needs extra help thats only a little bit of the reasons why i think that is valuable . Students facial expressions show everything you need to know you just have to get something to catch them . Of course they are going to have to make sure its spot on . What if i completely understanding everything and then they start to break it down then what ? Because tehcnology is not perfect .
That is a counter arguement someone can make . What if my facial expression is showing one thing but im feeling a different way . Technology always has a bug or something that nees to be fixed . So whoeer makes this needs to make sure that it is perfect .
Thats why i think this ablility to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable . | 3 |
402835b | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", the Facial Action Coding System is introduced. It is a new technology that helps computers identify most human emtions. This tehcnology could be of value for students. The Facial Action Coding System can be beneficially useful to read the emtions of students in a classroom to provide insight on how students feel about specific classes and how they react to challenging subjects, and to change the way classes are taught.
According to the author, in paragraph four, the Facial Action Coding System can identify various emotions. The software can even identify mixed emotions when people have an expressionless or neutral face. The FACS software has the proper anatomical information for the human body. It can easily identify what a person is feeling even if they have several emotions present at once. In paragraph six Dr. Huang states that a classroom computer with the FACS software could recognize what a student is feeling, whether they are bored or confused. If a computer can identifythe emotions of students in a classroom, then this can be used to make modifications to the lesson or maybe the whole class. For example, if a student is struggling in a certain subject and the computer were to identify the whole classroom as confused or bored then the teacher would have to make improvements to the lesson. This would benefit the students who are feeling lost or bored.
If the FACS software could identify the emotions of the student, then this can be used to find improvements for certain classes that students struggle in. In paragraph six, Dr. Huang says that most human communication can be nonverbal. If a student was in a difficult class and was to embarrassed to ask for help, the FACS software has the capacity to identify the precise muscle moevment for the expression of cofusion in that student. Paragraphs seven and eight of the passage describe the small muscle movements made to convey a true smile. The author then goes on to say that these muscles can be spotted to prove whether or not someone is displaying a sincere emotion. Paragraph nine also explains that making a certain facial expression can cause you to feel that certain emotion. The FACS software is advanced enough where it could idnetify if a student is truly confused or not and it can help find new ways to teach by determining the sincere emotion of every student.
The article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" introduces the Facial Action Coding System, FACS, that helps identify human emtions. This software can be beneficial in many wyas, such as in a classroom. The Facial Action Coding System can be used to read the emtions of students in a classroom to provide information on how students feel about certain classes and topics and challenges, and to provide on how classes can be taught differently. | 4 |
402c653 | Limiting car usage can be an advantage for every city. While there have been efforts in the past who decades to make cities denser and better for walking, planners are now taking the concept to the suburbs. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six year federal transportation bill to be approved this year. All of our development since World War ll has been centered on the car and that will have to change. As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move here.
Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global city, Diesel fuel was blamed, since France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Dieseles make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, according to Reuters. Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven, pitten sidewalks, rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic, and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.
President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from incipient shift in America behavior. Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. The sociology professor at Drexel University and director of its Mobilities Research and Policy Center said that differents things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long term cultural shift. Demographic shifts in the driving population suggest that the trend may accelerate. There has been a large drop in the porcentage of 16 to 39 year olds getting a license, while older people are likely to retain their licenses as they age.
In conclution it has beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment since transportation is the second largeest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants. It also has negative implications for the car industry but America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling, the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily thereafter, according to an analysis. | 2 |
4032f7c | The Electoral College is a system of appointing electors. These electors vote upon who will be the next president. Citizens/voters believe that they should be the ones able to decide who will become the president. People claim that this system should be changed to the "popular vote" system. This system is based on the people's votes. Even the smallest of states get their say in who will take the presidency. This form of electing should be put into play. The Electoral College should be abolished. It is interfering with citizen's rights. It is irrational, and should be changed.
Untrustworthy is a word used to desribe the Electoral College. It can not be trusted. In some cases, the college is said to have chosen a candidate based upon themselves, not their state. An example of this appears in the election of 2000. In this election, 17 states were said to have never even seen the candidates. Voters said that they didn't even see campaign ads. This could have been caused by the college. The Electoral College is unjust.
A new case appears on 1960. In this case, Louisiana tried to recieve new electors who would go against J.F.K. Their electors weren't going with their beliefs. This is just one example of the injustice. Voters everywhere feel the college is unfair. They would like to have a greater role in the outcome of elections. They wish to feel more a part of this country.
Others say that the Electoral College should stay. They believe in five reasons for the acceptance of the system. One reason is the "certainty of outcome." The second reason is "everyone's president." This is saying that the college needs a presidential candidate to have appeal. This means that candidates need to not only campaign in popular states. Doing this makes the other states feel discouraged and feel as if their votes are not important. The next reason is due to the swing states. This is saying that they need to focus their campaigning on small, "toss-up" states. Next reasoning is due to big states. They say the college restores and manages political balance. The last reasoning is that the college avoids when no candidate gets a greater amount of votes. This is saying that the college is able to break any ties between candidates.
Despite the reasonings given by the opposing side, the college causes problems. It is limiting voters' freedoms and rights. The voters want to be a part. They want to help their country. They want to be there to partake in the election and to choose their president fairly. The college is unjust and confusing. With the college, you do not know if you are getting the candidate that your state had voted for. The accuracy of your vote could be questioned. For these reasons and more are why we should change the system. We should remove the Electoral College system and replace it with the "popular vote" system. With this change we are ensuring the accuarcy to our voters. They will be able to take full part in the electoral election process. They will be able know for sure who and where their votes are going to. | 4 |
403b099 | Technology can make people mad in happy its just how you use it in how you do it like you can look up things that you know that will make you happy. But in this story its saying that the computers know when you happy or sad or even confused but then it can help the person because it say it can modify. Its a lot that the technology it can't look you in the face in see that something is wrong with you. The story is saying they want to know how people are feeling even when they are trying to hide it i think that is personal and the person will tell you if the person wanted you to know. But technology is good in so many ways but its bad in so many ways to. I think your emotions shoud stay to you if thats what you want and not base on if the technology want to know. | 1 |
403b7f6 | The author suggests that studying Venus is worthy enough even though it is very dangerous. The author mentioned that on the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet . His solution to survive this weather that is dangerous to us humans is to allow them to float above the fray. A "blimp-like" vehicle hovering 30 or so miles would help avoid the unfriendly ground conditions . At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. So not easy conditions, but survivable enough for humans. So this would help make the mission capeable of completing.
He also mentions how 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 penertrate the dense atmosphere making it hard to take photographs . They also cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance. So many reaserchers are working on innovations that would allow their machines to last long enough to help gain some imformation of Venus.
They are working on other ways to study Venus such as simplified electrnics made of silicon carbide that have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface . So far they have lasted for 3 weeks in these conditions which is more than enough time hopefully for them to be able to grab enough information. Their other project that they are working on is using an old technology called mechanical computers. They are powerful, flexible, and quick. Systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces.
He feels that studying Venus even though its dangerous is valuable because of the insight they could gain about the planet itself but also becuase "human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors."
I think the author supported his claim very well he explained why he thought it as nessary to go even though it is dangerous and he gave solutions to some of the dangers on Venus such as sollution to the heat and ways to actually help gain evicence and imformation on Venus. | 4 |
40403c9 | Dear Senator,
The debate regarding the necessity of the Electoral College and it's validity has aroused some tension among the citizens of America, and the government as well. This process is not only used to decide the President of our nation, but to ensure the equality of the voting. By establishing our county as a democracy, we made a promise to maintain a systematic balance between the government and it's people. Without the existence of the Electoral College, where would this balace be? The Electoral College is the basis upon which our country is built, and is vital to uphold the balance and equality between government and people.
The Electoral College has many benefits towards the nation that many people are unaware of. For example, in order to do well, a candidate must have connections nation-wide. In source 3, line 19, it states "The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal." This means that no candidate is guaranteed a win if they only appeal to one area or region. This creates an overall balance throughout the nation, and makes sure only a portion of the country doesn't have all the power. Also, this allows the people to have a clear understanding of who they're voting for, and what this means.
Equality is key, and without this equality, where would our nation be? By continuing the use of the Electoral College, we have decided to be the best we can be. It says in Source 1, line 1 "The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and the election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens." This provides valid information to support the necessary balance of people and government.
The Electoral College also produces a winner inarguably qualified due to the amount of votes received. This is clearly described in Source 3, line 22, "The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast." Due to the use of this process, the election of a President can be efficient and simple. The President can now be
Some may argue that this process does not clearly represent the people or their votes. This is because some may vote for a "slate of electors" as opposed to the president. However, this belief can be decidedly rejected due to the lack of valid evidence to support the claim. How are voters expected to vote fairly if they are not given the support to do so?
Overall, it can be declared that the Electoral College plays a vital role in maintaining the internal balance of our nation that the citizens inhabiting it are so reliant on. Choosing to reject this process would be deciding to injure our nation, its future, and its people. | 5 |
4049cd4 | In the article the author believes that we need to try to see more of Venus, however, going to Venus is very dangerous. Many people believe that the trip to Venus would be too dangerous given the real dangers on the planet. The author gives us both sides of the argument as to if we should keep trying to go to Venus or if we need to stop and focus our time on something less dangerous. We do have the chance to see what Venus holds because of the technology we have in todays world. It would be a very major accomplishment if we could get a person to land on Venus.
Venus is a dangerous planet, we do not know what is under the "carbon dioxide blankets". The author of this article says that although Venus is 97% covered in a thick atmosphere, we still hve a chance to see what is under it. One way the author included was to send a hovering vehicle to Venus and have it take pictures of the planet 30 miles abover the land. Although they do say that because of the thick carbon dioxide you would not see anyhting because the lights we have will more than likly will not be bright enough. Yet the author still believes there is a soultion to that problem and all the other ones I might add.
At the end of paragraph 5 the author says "Not easy conditions, but suriviable for humans." you see the author says that it is "around 170 degrees Fahrenheit and the air pressure is close to sea level on Earth " and it seems unlikly for a person to be able to handle the 170 degree heat let alone the air pressure. Then the author goes on to tell us that we can use a hovering car, still it is a good idea but again the pictures would not be clear at all, which would defete the idea of a hovering car. There are many good and bad things about sending things up to try and get a look at Venus, and the author seems to think there is more good than bad. They do tell us that NASA is working on taking new approches to study Venus, like he said " some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chos of Venus" and if that is true then we may be taking a step in the right direction.
Winding down the author says that " striving to meet the challenges presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also becuase human curiosity will likly lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." this quote proves that we are going to want to try and see more planets but if we can not get close enough to one of the closest planets around us, how are we supposed to get any further. The author makes many good points in this article, we should try to go to Venus, maybe not send a person up there right away, but we need to see what Venus has in store. The universe is bigger than just our solar system, if we can not even find a way to see Venus how are we going to go anywhere else. The author shows us both sides of the argument and the good that could come from going to Venus is just amazing. It could even be the greatest accomplishment in a long time. | 4 |
4051e5d | Cars have become a part of everyday life over the years. We depend on them for transportation from one place to the next. Have you ever thought about what it would be like to live without a car? Well, globally, changes are being made. There have been car bans and even a community that completely quit using cars. There are advantages of limiting car usage.
Limiting car usage can lead to a less stressful life. The residents of Vauban, Germany, have taken a huge step. They have given up their cars. As stated in the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars. A statement from a local resident, also found in the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", says, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". The limit on car usage has allowed the residents to go back to a simpler life. A life where everyday noises such as children playing and bicycle wheels rolling along the pavement can be heard.
Limiting car usage impacts the environment greatly in a positive way. The article titled "The End of Car Culture" states, "...transportation is the second largest source of America's emmisions, just behind power plants". Cars are a leading cause of air pollution around the world. For example, the smog in Paris, France, had gotten so bad that they had to put a temporary partial ban on driving. Due to this rule, congestion was down 60 percent. Cutting back on the usage of cars would have an incredicle impact on global air pollution. A simple step in the right direction can change the environment is a positive way.
Being happier and decreasing air pollution are only two advantages of limiting car usage. There is a lot that can come from taking cars out of our daily routines. It may be hard to adjust at first but the impact it would have on the earth would be worth it. Taking responsibility and care of our earth is a change that needs to happen. It is a possible and reasonable solution to our pollution problem. | 4 |
4057621 | Using technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is just wrong. People are already feeling like they are being watched through their technology as is, and this would only validate that we don't have any privacy.
Technology just keeps growing and getting more advanced. We have robots that can cook, and cars that can drive themselves. While all of this can make our lives easier, you have to wonder where what these robots see goes. Today, there is a huge issue of privacy from the government. Almost all of our devices have cameras in them now, and we might not be the only ones who can see through them. With this facial expression recognition, it would only prove that we are being watched. I'm sure that some, if not all of the computers data gets observed by a human at some point, which means that you don't really know who is watching your every move.
Not only is this technology a threat to just your personal privacy, it could end up being a threat to your life. If someone has access to see through your computer, who knows what else they can access. So much of our lives are put on our computers with us trusting that noting will happen to that information. The article says that the technology can react to your face when you see certain ads on websites, which means that they are most likely able to see what is on the screen. Say you are logged into your bank account and switch over to another website that has an ad on it, while your bank tab is still open. Someone may be able to see that bank account information and rob you of your money. This example can be applied to many other things as well, like your credit card infomation if you buy anything online, or social sercurity number. At any time i'm sure this technology could also pinpoint your exact location, and if that gets put into the wrong hands by chance, yous ands your friends and families could potentially be in danger from an in-home robbery, or even possibly a murderer. Even in classrooms, the school's information could be hacked and threatened, so is it really even worth the risk?
I can see the positive side of this technology. The artuicle talks about how it can react and change ads based on your face, and even modify lesson plans for children in school, but unfortunatley the bad outweighs the good. There is too much of a risk of what can be seen, and who has access to that information, even if it is used in classrooms to help students. | 4 |
405f294 | I believe driving should be in the hands of humans along with the assistance of a machine.
Having autonomous care can enbale us to do different things while driving.
With the extra control over the car, we can make the roads safer while we multi-task on the road.
Semi- autonomous cars can help us get to a hospital if we are sick or injured and are unable to drive.
If a parent needs to take care of a child in the backseat, she can reach back and take care of the child without having to worry about the road as well.
These systems can also teach people how to drive behind the wheel; and if there is a problem, the car can take control and keep others safe as well as the driver.
Kids that are working to get their liscense could have more experience driving alone since the system in the car is there to help in case of a problem.
But that wont completely destroy the purpose of needing a liscense to drive becasue people will still need to know how to drive since the car is not always in full control.
In conclusion, fully automated cars may not be the best thing due to their inability to judge and react to situations.
Semi- autonomous vehicles can assist us in the vehicle, but can still be controlled with our quick reactions in case of a problem.
Instead of giving all control to the machine, the driver and the car should work together to preserve the safety of themselves and others around them. | 3 |
4061085 | Driverless cars seem new and exciting for technology and safety when it comes to driving. These cars that are talked of have systems put in them that are above genius. I believe that these driverless cars are a great idea and that they should happen.
These driverless cars will have, "a whole lot of sensors" and be a lot safer than a human driver. People can only see so much when driving and with radios and phones as a distraction, safety on the road has plummetted. Having sensors and video cameras "mounted near the rearview mirror" and other places, will allow the car to see what a human driver cannot. Having a "dubbed LIDAR that uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings" is something a human can never do. The car will be fully aware of what is above, below, to the right, to the left, behind and infront of it. It will be able to notice split secoind changes that could help save people from car crashes and bad road conditions.
Some people believe that technology is going to take over and there will be no need for human labor anymore. I do not know if that is true or not, but I do know that these cars can help everyone in one way or another. they may be taking over the place of human drivers, but these cars could allow disabled people to get from one place to another without having the need for someone else to take them. The driverless cars will also help taxi customers, for they will not have to deal with taxi drivers. Taxi drivers are not always the niciest or cleanest people to deal with and they are strangers, but with a driverless car you will not have to worry about any of that.
Driverless cars could also help with traffic. The cars will be able to take care of the speed limit so you will never be behind a slow driver or be constantly worried that your will get pulled over because you accidentally went 3 miles over the speed limit. The ability the cars can have will help safety by letting parents rest assure that their children will be safe while driving. They will not have to worry that they are texting and driving for the car will drive safely for them.
The idea of a driverless car is an amazing one. Their are upgrades to these cars that can help everyone. Whether you are a worried parent worrying about your teenager driving or a disabled person wanting to go somewhere on your own; these cars can help all and are safer than human drivers will ever be. | 4 |
406731a | The electoral college system has been part of America for many years. At times, this system has proved to be a good thing for our country, but in most times, it has not. I am in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. I am in favor of changing to a popular vote because of the unfairness, faulty aspects, and electors in the electoral college.
To begin, the electoral college is fair in some ways, but mostly not. One may understandably say that "The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no canidate recieves a majority of the votes cast" (Posner, 22). The electoral college has proved to be a balance to the political weight of the large states, but regardless of the size of the state, it should be a citizen right to vote directly for their president. "Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states" (Plumer, 13). This quote shows the unfairness to the voters, those in the smaller/more insignificant states don't even matter because of the electoral college! When voting, citizens also become confused with the electors, and potentially vote for their opposing party. Not only is the electoral college unfair for the voters, but for the presidental canidates as well. We as citizens vote for electors whom we must entrust to vote for the party's nominee. This trust is rarely betrayed, but "...it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral bote will not win the national popular vote" (Posner, 16). In 2000, the election with Al Gore and George Bush, Gore won the popular vote, but did not win the electoral vote. The people wanted Gore to be the president, but he did not win, due to the unfairness of the ellectoral college.
Another reason I am in favor for the popular vote, is because of the faulty aspects of the electoral college system. A counterargument may be that the electoral college has held our country together, making the voting system a lot easier. But in my opinion this is not true. With popular vote, the citizens would just vote for the president, and whichever canidate recieves the most votes would win. But in the case of the electoral college, states cast only one vote for the entire state! ".. the single representative from Wyoming representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California" (Plumer, 12). The reason this is such a big deal is because, let's say that 10,000 people voted in Wyoming. 5,001 were republicans, and 4,999 were democrats. The electoral college would pick the elector representing the republican candidate. Thus, Wyoming's vote goes to the republican canidate. Without the ellectoral college though, those 4,999 votes would count, and would go toward helping the desired canidate win. Voting is an individual effort, and the electoral college does not allow for this.
As well as this fault, another fault is the fact that the electors could be anyone. "They can be anyone not holding public office... Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always" (Plumer, 10). Although in most cases the electors vote for the correct party, an elector still may not be trustworthy, or loyal. They may even be bias and vote for a different candidate. The electors do not campaign. Only the presidental canidates do. When we vote for the president, we are actually voting for the electors. Voters normally know little, to nothing about the electors. This makes for an even faultier voting experience.
To conclude, electoral colleges are not the way the voting system should be. With popular voting, there will be an assurance that the right candidate will win, the unfair ways of the ellectoral college will be diminished, and there will no longer be any faulty aspects of the voting system. Citizens vote to be heard, and with the electoral college, the people aren't heard as loud as they should be. Voting is a right and priveledge of an American citizien, and popular voting will ensure this right. | 6 |
4067a1e | Personally I think that kind of technology is very valueable. The fact that we have that kind of tech is amazing and by advancing our schools with the rate
of technology we could make us a smarter country as a whole. For many teachers it can be very difficult to get a student to understand and like the material that is being taught to them. Even if they do, the emotions of a student can change and while some teachers can see a diffrence others can not. Brining this kind of technology into the classroom can help students start to want to come to the classroom and ingage in their education because the computer can recognise the kind of learning thechnique is need for each individual student. Instead of having only one teaching method that might only work for a small percent of the class.
This computer and its algorythms can identify if a student is getting bored or being unattentive ,so it can change its technque of teaching in the matter of seconds. For many people that can be extremly difficult to detect. More so if the student only changed its facial expression by just a bit. Although this could possibly be expensive it would be a good investment as a whole because in the long run the country or even around the world could benifit from smarter more attentive students.
In conclusion although it might seem like a bad idea we should imploment this kind of technology into the classrrom to further engage our students into good learning habits and a better more personal kind of education. | 3 |
4078d22 | I think we should use this technology because it say in the article that "a classroom computer cand recognize when a student when a student is becoming confused or bored". This technology could make the lesson easier, some people don't like to ask for help from teachers for certain reasons, with this new technology you won't have to and it will make life so much easier.
They use video imagery the software tracks the facial movements. The painted face of mona lisa by tweaking diffrent units the computer can identify mixed emotions. every expression is compared against a face, The demonstration could bring a smile to your face, for example. If you smile when a AD appears on your screen the computer will bring up another AD that is similar to the AD your looking at right now. But if you frown the next AD won't be the same. According to the facial feedback using your facial mucsles doesn't only express human emotion they also help produce them. | 2 |
4078d46 | I am a scientist member of NASA. I am here to tell you that the Face on the region called Cydonia was not made by aliens, and that it is just a natural landform. With new high-resolution images and 3Daltimetry from NASA's Mars global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa.
Because of NASA's budget we wish that there was an ancient civilization on Mars, but there is not. On April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. The photo revealed a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. This so called Face on Mars is just a huge rock formation that resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose, and mouth.
On April 8, 2001-a cloudless summer day in Cydonia-Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look, and capture an extraordianary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size. 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. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West.
The Face looks similar to the Middle Butte in the Snake River PLain of Idaho. A lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. So as you can see, the Face on Mars is nothing more than a large rock formation, and is not a face at all. | 3 |
407f52e | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" gives many reasons on how and why humans should explore Venus despite it's many dangers. A reason that the author provided in the article on why humans should explore Venus, was that Venus use to be just like Earth. Going along with this, the author also gives ways of how humans could study and possibly live on Venus. The last big way that the author shows on why humans should push torwards studying Venus, was that discovering Venus would allow humans to "meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." In this article the author provides many ways of how and why humans should study and explore Venus despite it's dangers.
In paragraph 4 the author provides information from astronomers saying that Venus use to be just like Earth. In this paragraph the author states that Venus use to be covered with large oceans and could have also supported various forms of life. The author also states many other facts on how Venus use to be like Earth. Venus use to have many features that where very close to Earth. Venus use to have many valleys, mountains, and craters. In this article it states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". With these many facts about Venus the author also says that one day humans may be able to even live on Venus.
A huge reason why the author thinks that Venus is worth exploring is because one day this planet could be habitable for humans. In paragraph 5 the author provides information on how humans could live on Venus. The author states that the way humans could live on Venus would be by floating above all of the harsh conditions on Venus's ground. By hovering at about 30 or so miles above Venus's landscape humans would be able to avoid all of the planets dangerous conditions. An example of this theory that the author provided in the article was that "Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many stroms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfreindly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way".
The most important reason that the author thinks that humans should study and maybe even live on Venus is becuse the oppurtunites it would open up for humans. In the last paragraph, paragraph 8, the author provides many reasons on why discovering and living on Venus would be so extravigant. In this last paragraph the author states that by studying and living on Venus it would allow humans to "meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." This quote from the article shows just how great it could be for humans to take the time and effort to study Venus.
In the article the author shows that studying and possibly living on Venus would be worth taking on the dangers of Venus. The author even provides many ways on how humans could avoid those dangers. These facts that the author provides supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. This is easily true because the author even goes ahead and shows why we should at least try to learn as much as we can about Venus. Overall the author supports the idea of living on Venus and doing as much research on the plant because scientists have come up with many safe ways of doing it. | 4 |
408b7f2 | Humans must continue to study Venus as it is know to be the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. With NASA stating that it is possible to send humans to Venus, we must do it to gather information on how Venus use to be like Earth and then how it became impossible to live on. The author uses logos to inform the reader on how to get a human to Venus. If a human were to go to venus he/she would stay about thirty miles above the surface where it is about 170 degrees Fahrenheit. The pressure is normal and solar power would be very useful. With these conditions it is possible to send a human to Venus.
Although Venus can be accessed by humans, the information scientist really want is on the surface. Sending a human to the surface is death but, scientist are working on a machine made of silicon carbide. The silicon carbide material can withstand the awful conditions of Venus for about 3 weeks. 3 weeks is enough time to gather rocks, dust, gas, and other objects on the surface. All of this information that the author says is building a compeling reason to study Venus.
The author does a great job pursuading the reader into wanting to explore Venus. He/she uses the rhetorical strategy pathos when he/she said that Venus is the most Earth-like planet and that the misson is survivable for humans. That gets the reader wanting to see how it all ended for Venus and also, makes the reader feel excited in wanting to learn more. The author also states strategys to the process of exploring Venus which gives the reader hope that it can happen. | 4 |
408e427 | To the
Senator of Florida ,
I am in not favor of the
Electoral College , because the
Electoral College is made so the political people have the say so
NOT
the people. The last time I checked it was By the people, For the people. I believe that the American people have the right not a berucratt sitting on his butt all day doing
Nothing other than voting with the Electoral Voting.
Thanks to the Electoral College Mr. Barack Obama got a second term in office and now the country is suffering from it. Even us students thanks to Mrs. Obama we are not having nice lunches like we had before the Obamas got elected. The Electoral College joined the anachronism club after President Obama join his first term in office. Also the Electoral College gave Obama plurality. There are 538 people in the Electoral College(according to "
What is The Electoral College?
" by the Office of Federal Register) and there are at least more than 4 million people maybe 5 million in the United States of America. There are more of American people than Democratics and Republicans in the Senate. So actullally we out number all of you slick polictions.
Yeah sure Florida is one of the top 4 states that give out the major electoral votes but it is only a number 29 its not that big of a deal unless the people you have counting votes cannot count over 538, then ok those are some pretty stupid people you should send them back to school. My grandpa at age 70 can count much better than that.
Answer me this. Is America still for the People, or is it for the slick polictions with there Electoral College? Which one is it? Just face it the Electoral College is old school and for the polictions not for the people. Get Rid of the Electoral College and Let the actual living American people vote. | 3 |
4094224 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author gives us the idea of positive and negative aspects of driverless cars being invented and usable to others. I am against driverless cars, although, good ideas about it are stated. Google cofounder, Sergey Brin, believes that these cars will change the world by lowering the amount of gas used that is polluting the air, and using technology to invent better things for everyone.
The invention and usage could indeed lower the amount of drunk drivers, but the percentage of accidents would remain about the same. Since smarter cars will be made out of pieces of techonology, such as motion sensors, it could always be broken without notice, and not work correctly. The article stated that "touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." The question is, what if the touch sensor is broken, or what if the touch sensor can detect a different item being placed on it, to give the effect of a driver holding the wheel?
The article states, "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing up into an object. The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." Yes, an additional vibrate to the driver's seat can notify the driver about something happening, but they would be unsure of if it is a sign for the driver to take over, or a sign that tells a main part of the car is not functioning properly.
I believe that the law in majority of the places on Earth will deny the allowance of driverless cars, but that is fully on THEIR opinion. Driverless cars should not be trusted because it will make humans more lazy and less productive, like they already are now with recent technology releases. People currently driving with their full actions are actually being motivated to use human skills, and at the same time, learn from driving. Driverless cars can lead to teens uneligible to drive, take action and pretend that they are driving, when they have no prior knowledge or license/driver's permit. Driverless cars have a possibility of encouraging teens or younger adults (who look older than the age they are) to become rebellious with their family member owning this type of car.
I would have to agree when the article is stating "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" The driverless car driver could always make an excuse of putting the technology at fault, and asking the injured person to let it slide, when the other driver is obviously hurt. You cannot detect if it is the companys fault unless they inspect the car for the driver being guilty, or the manufacturer.
Driverless cars should not be permitted to be invented due to it's fundamental change in the world, stated by Sergey Brin. The techology of the car could be damaged without the driver's notice. The driverless effect can cause other people without a license and/or knowledge to become "drivers" of their own. The truth will be hard to spill out during an accident on if it is the driver's fault or the manufacturer's fault. | 4 |
409951c | As human beings we must care for the earth that was so kindly bestowed upon us, meaning we must do all in our power to prevent it from self-destructing due to our carlessness. One way we seem to have recently discoved we can make a difference is that the limiting of car usage is an enormous step towards our goal. Cars have been a topic of contriversy worldwide, as it seems people refused to stop the usage of such a helpful tool in todays society, but as time goes on we have opened our eyes to a world of better choices. Citizens from all around see that car usage can be cut down, and it will be an astonishing change for both humans, as well as the earth. The limitation of car usage will provide a more healthy enviornment for the earth as well as those who live on it. Cars are a simply a machine in which we have allowed ourselves to believe that life can not go on without it. Here we will discover how truley wrong we were.
Although we all understand that these vehicles allow use to save much time by getting us to our destinations quicker, it does alot of harm to our planet as well. As stated in the article, "In German Suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars", cars are responsible for 50 percent greenhouse gas emission in certain areas of the United states. The fuel we use to power our cars is released into the O-Zone layer, and into our atmosphere which creates a greenhouse affect and slowly, but surley destroys our enviornment. However, we have the power to protect the planet we live on for we have so many different choices of transpertation that causes way less harm. Cutting down on driving is a simple task in which we can all participate in.
Next we focus more on how car limiation affects ourselves. Driving take a toll on us because other forms of transportation do so much good towards ones self being, but as humans we seem to always take the easy way out. If we didnt always use cars, and took a walk for instance it would improve health as well as many other things. In an artice written by Andrew Selsky it states that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." The less smog in the air, the better we can breath which will improve our health, and walking is good for that as well. We don"t need cars to live our lives. Life goes on without the use of a machine.
All in all cars we must care for this world as well as ourselves, and this is the first step towards this goal. Some fear that this change in society will have horrible consequences because we are so use to cars in our life, but these vehicles dont control us. By use limiting car usage we are providing a healthier enviornment for both human beings as well as our earth. Lets take the steps toward making this world a better place to live for us as well as the many generations to come. Don't you wish to live in a clean, and healthy world? | 4 |
409ca29 | In this passage the author claims many ways and benefits of visiting and exploring our sister planet venus. He claims that venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density, size and it is the closest to Earth in distence. He also claims that even thogh it will be dangerous and difficult to explore venus there are already many scientist trying to figure out ways to make it safe and less of a risk.
The authors claims in this passage does support the idea of studying venus despite the dangers. Through out this passage the author describes how simular venus is to earth. In Paragraph 4 he states that venus may have once been just like Earth a long time ago. The author states that many Astronomers beleive that Venus could have once been covered up by large oceans and could have supported various life forms. Venus has many features that Earth also has. Venus has features like valleys, mountains, and craters like earth. The author claims that venus can be our nearest option to visit when space exploration is possible. It would be better to visit a place that could have once been just like Earth that is close.
The author claims that many scientist are already finding and testing new and safe ways to get close enough to Venus to explore it. In Paragraph 5 the author states that NASA
has a possible solution to the hot temerpatures of Venus. NASA would make it so scientist would be able to float above Venus from a distence. The temperatures would still be around 170 degreed Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be like the sea level on Earth. They would not be the easiest conditions to work in, but a human would be able to survive in these conditions.
In conclusion, the authors claims that the idea of studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is a good idea. The author backs his claim up with many facts such as Venuses simularites to Earth. The authors claims do support his ideas thoughout the passage. | 3 |
409deea | Back when Viking 1 took the original photo of the Face on Mars, people have thought that it was an alien symbol. NASA as since debunked this theory. With the improved pictures from the Mars Global surveyor, it is very clear to see that it is a natural landform, just like those on Earth. The Face on Mars is easily identified as a natural landform. The Face on Mars cannot be an alien artifact because it has been proven to be a mesa by photographs, is thought to be alien because of movies and magazines, and was created by shadows.
One of the best ways to prove that things exist is through pictures. This was shown to be true by the most recent picture of the Face, back in April 8, 2001. By this most recent picture, it is clear to see that the "eyes and nose" of the Face were created by shadows casted by the rock formations. With the 1998 picture, it was thought that something might be hidden behind the clouds present that day. Since this most recent picture was taken on a clear day, there is no way that it could be confused for something else, or anything could be hidden.
Along with clear photographs, the Face is only relevant because of theorist and popular culture. Like the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" says, "The Face on Mars has since become a pop icon." The author goes on to say that it has starred in a movie, books, and magazines.
If the Face hadn't become so famous, it is possible that theorist wouldn't even have claimed it as alien artifact.
The final reason that the Face couldn't be a face is because it was created by shadows. If the face had been viewed by the Viking 1 on a different day, it is possible that nobody would have thought that it was a face. As can be seen by the different photos, which were likely taken at different times of day, the shadows are much less prevolent on the mesa. It is still recognizable as the Face, but only very slightly. Along with that, there are also many also possible landforms that, under the right circumstances, looks like a face because of shadows.
Based on all of the evidence, it is impossible to think that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. Even with all of the pictures taken, and most references being from the media, and how the creation was based on the time of day, it is difficult to believe that people still believe this. While some people might still believe this, there are many ways that this has been proven wrong. These are just a few of them. | 4 |
409efc0 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a challenge that is worth the risks. The author does this by comparing the atmosphere of Venus to those on Earth. The author also includes how exploring Venus will benefit scientists despite the risks. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author does a well job by persuauding the reader that Venus should be explored because of the positive effect it may have.
The author shows that the conditions of Venus are possible by comparing those to the ones on Earth in "The Challenge of Exploring Venus. The author includes the comparison to show how the conditons will be possible to undergo because they are similar as to those on Earth. I am able to identify those comparisons when the author states, "Astonomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" (The Challenge of Exploring Venus). The quote shows the reader that Venus is much like Earth according to astonomers by using the phrase "Earth-like." By including "Astronomers are facinated by Venus..." the author is using the support of others to support his suggestion about studying Venus as well. Another way the author compares Venus to Earth is in the fourth paragraph where he states, "...could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." This phrase has a positive connotation to show the reader the postive similarites about Earth and Venus. The phrase "supported various forms of life" has a postive connotation because the author wants to give the reader hope that it is possible that Venus may be able to do the same "just like Earth."
Another way the author supports the idea that Venus is worth exploring is by showing how the explortation will benfit scientists. By showing the benefits that exploring Venus has, the author is able to say that the benefits will outweigh the risks. One way the author shows the benfits is by stating, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float about the fray." The quote studying Venus would possibly further our technology, while benefiting scientists as well as us. To further the author's idea of exploring Venus, the author then provides the reader with a comparison of flying over storms to flying over Venus. This comparison shows that the author thinks the conditions will be just as easy as "flying over a storm." The author shows the benefits by stating, "..scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks." The author restated his support, which was a good way to get the point across to the reader. By using the choice of words the author used, the author made it seem as though studying Venus was more of a need than a want. He did this by stating "would need to get up close and personal..."
The author did a sufficient job at supporting the idea of exploration in Venus in "The Challenge of Exploring Venus." The author was able to show his support in various forms. The author compared the conditions of Venus to those of Earth and used the support of others as well. The author shows how exploring Venus would benefit us as well as scientists. As a reader, the author was able to convince me by providing the reader with all the postive comeback that would be recieved by exploring Venus, as well as the similar conditons that would be experienced. | 4 |
409fa65 | The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. One reason why I thik is valuable for a classroom is because it can see if you happy, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. Another reason is " a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Lastly, teachers can communicate with their students better and understand them, if she knows the way they are feeling. Can this app be spread through all teachers in schools?
First reason is because it can see if your happy surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. This can help students to be more kind to their friends because they know how that person is feeling. It can also help them selfs to realize the way they are feeling because sometimes you don't even know how you feeling. It can help students to change their emotions and feel better about themselfs.
Second reason is "a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. This can help teacher to know when students need help. It could also help the teacher see if they are bored and make the class a little more fun for students. Teachers can learn more everyday about her students and see her kids have any problems at home or in school.
Last reason is teachers can communicate with their students better and understand them, if she knows the way they are feeling. The teacher could help the student by giving him space or time alone and not be so hard on him. Teacher could communicate with the student and help them get their feelings out and make them feel better. Teachers might start giving their kids more leassons abou how to feel and how make themselfs get up when ypu feel like the world is against you. Students might start coming to class more happy.
The use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom it can be valuable. For teachers to know students feelings. For teachers to also make the classroom more fun. For teachers to communicate better with students. This could be really helpfull for teacher the most. That's why this could help a classroom with students. | 4 |
40a2276 | I dont think that the electoral college should decide the president of the united states, i think that the overall vote of the americans should determine the president of the unites states. I have certain reasons, and a good explanation of why the popular vote matters way more than the electoral vote first is why would they even have a popular vote if there not gonna go by it? Also the popular vote has mostly everyone in the united states voting on it, the electoral vote has only a couple people, they are way outnumbered. And lastly its not fair at all to the american people.
Firstly, why would you want the whole united states of america to vote on something if what they vote, and what they say isnt being heard. Whats the point of it? in my opinion what the people say how the president should be determined. If they want it any other way why would they not have changed it by now? no one really likes having to take time out of there day to go vote, if there votes arnt even going to be seen, or heard by people? whats the point of making them do that?
Secondly, the united states has billions of people in it, and the electoral college only has a few people in it. You think thats very fair to anybody ??? everyone votes, results are in, you think you have a winner, then all of a sudden theres no winner, you know why? because of the electoral college!!! these extra people make the final decision and thats not right. If thats the case of it to me it seems like they have the answers, and no one can decide but them, so why even have a vote? its really pointless the author states that most states like the idea that the overall vote wins, theres only a couple that dont like this idea. So by rule they should just make it the popular vote wins the election, and thats who tthe president becomes. Why they havnt done it? I have no idea!
And my final reason of why popular votes should just determine who wins is because they go out and vote and they feel like it doesnt matter. Because the electoral college decides then the united states gets really mad when they vote and the popular vote doesnt win! Of course they get mad, who wouldnt? there votes mean nothing at all. And they need to change this electoral college policy, more people want it gone thaen the people that dont. And thats mostly why america is usually never satisfied with the president of the unites states. Because of the fact that the united states didnt put them and the votes first, they put the electoral college ahead and thats not how it needs to be!!! They should make a vote for the united states saying that who wants to keep the electoral college and who doesnt! i bet that they will say that they want it gone. Because its already been voted out before so why will they keep something that no one is satisfied, or pleased with? Hopefully they will see this soon enough!!!
In conclusion, this electoral college stuff just needs to go, and the people need to be happy with there vote that they want, and they should be! they have been living in the state there whole life, if not most of it. And they want to make sure that someone they like, and know and trust will be there leader and wont let them down, and will change the problems that are in america. So go ahead and keep the electoral college even if barely any one likes it. Cause that doesnt make any sesnse!!!! the people need to vote on there counties leader not a few people for each state, and or place. its not right, and no one really likes it. So this should be a change in America!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | 4 |
40a9a69 | In the world, there are people who believe in aliens or supernatural beings, while some do not. The face on Mars is an example of an occurance that causes people to believe in aliens or supernatural beings. Even though this is true, there are still many people who think the landform is a natural occurance. There are ways to prove that this theory for the landform is true. Reasons such as the landform being compared to natural, earth landforms and it has similar characteristics as earth lanforms help prove this is true.
The landform was compared to a butte or a messa. This means it is quite similar to earthly landforms and may have occured due to something that happened on Mars. The face on Mars is comapared one main earth landform that was mentioned. The landform is Middle Butte, which is located in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. It was a lava dome that took the form of an isolated mesa.
The face on Mars had the same look and height as a Earth landform, a mesa. It is true that there is an unusual shape to the face on Mars, there are similar occurances that happen on Earth. Though this happens on Earth, people don't say that these Earth landforms were made by aliens.
This landform is just like other occurances on seperate planets that resemble Earth landforms. Even though the landform resembles a human face, it doesn't mean the landform is an alien's doing. Just like landforms on Earth, there are more ways than one to prove the reason or the starting place of a landform. | 3 |
40a9cd9 | If you were asked, "do you think there are aliens on Mars",what would you say? Would you bring up the topic of the famed Face of Mars, if you said yes? Well stop, because that is false information. Just read this short essay and change your mind about the subject of aliens.
In 1976 the Viking 1 sent a picture of a supposed face. NASA, shortly after getting the image, then made a false testimony stateing that an alien carved face is on Mars. The now famous image of Mars took a name The Face. Now twenty-two years later NASA tries again at a picture of The Face. The picture turns out good, but a cloud blocks a part of the image. The people aren't happy and they get NASA, three years later to get another picture, and it it shows no evidence of an alien carved face. The talk of The Face soon dies down.
So to sum up what happened, in 1976 the Viking 1 sends a picture of a "face". NASA states that this is an alien's doing. The image recieves the name The Face. Twenty-two years later NASA tries again, and gets a good picture, but a cloud blocks the right side. The people aren't happy. Once again NASA takes another picture, and there is no face. So after reading this you still have your opinion, or you just changed it, but I firmly believe that alien life is a hoax. | 2 |
40aaa0e | What's wrong with the electoral college is that voters do not vote for the president, they vote for a slate of electors who, in turn, elect the president. The electors can be anyone not holding public office. To be picked depends on the state, some have conventions, sometimes the state party's central committee, sometimes the president pivked the electors themselves. The disaster factor is when we vote the electors can change their mind, "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for who ever they pleased. I feel changing to election by popular vote is better because if a president wins, its because more people voted for him, not an elector.
The electoral college is unfair to voters because the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in state they have no chance of winning. In an event of a tie, the election would be thrown to the House of Representives, where the state delegations would vote on the president, and the Senate would choose the vice president. In 1976, a tie would have occurred if a mere 5,559 voters in Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hwaii had voted the oter way. The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe. The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. | 2 |
40ab3ee | Limiting Car Use
Many cities are now switching to become "car free". The more that cities do this, we are seeing a decrease in pollution, less automobile related deaths per year, and more resources being conserved.
When cities switch to become car free, the pollution levels instantly decreasesd. Due to the smog and the carbon monoxide emmitions in the atmosphere from cars, there is a hole in our Ozone layer in the atmosphere. Now that people are banning cars in cities there is much more heathy air to breathe and it is much safer for our environment. Also when there was more pollution in the air, and it rained, the rain turned in to acid rain causing erosion and killing several plants/animals. If we could ban cars in more cities in the USA and all around the world, we would be living a much healthier lifestyle.
Also, the car free idea makes people much safer, as far as automobile accidents. Because as the autombiles are banned from the city, the accident rate will go down more even than it already has. Also Heidrun Walter said "when I had a car I was alwyas tense." Not having a car, and not having the concern of crashing can relieve your stresses. It is scientifically proven that when people are less stressed they get more sleep and have less angerment problems. If cities switched to being car free, people could start living safer and happier.
Lastly, being car free, saves vital resources, and fossil fuels. It takes millions of years to make oils, and gasses in the Earths crust, which we are wasting everyday on automobiles. If we were able to save these resources, we could perhaps use more in rockets or space travel and maybe find another planet that can sustain our life. If we were able to achieve this goal of saving resources, we could also all save money. Imagine not having to pay for gas anymore. You could be a millionare. If we stopped using fossil fuels the world could become a much better place.
My point is, if we become car free, we could live safer, happier, and more wealthy lives. If your community went the the mayor and state officials, it could happen for your city. You could be the start to a revoulution and, start the journey to save humanity. Not only would you get the bennifets of living safer, happier, and wealthier, but the whole world would be living in a much better place. Please take this into consideration and make an effort to become "car free". | 4 |
40abe90 | The Facial Action Coding System is a very valuble computer software that I think could help save the lives of many students who are suffering from depression and thoughts of suicide and also students who are struggling with school and here is why. According to Dr. Huang, "even though individuals often show varying degrees "( like not smiling as broadly). Also according to the article, " Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements- in a real face or in a painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighting the difference units, the software can identify mixed emotions ( as in da Vinci's masterpiece)." The article also states " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." And that's how I think the Facial Action Coding System is a very valuble software that could many students suffering from depression and thoughts of suicide and also those who are struggling with school. | 2 |
40ac432 | In many areas of the globe countries are trying to limit the use of cars for tons of reasons. Elisabeth Rosenthal explains in source 1, "in German suburbs, life goes on without cars. In source 2, Robert Duffer explains that, "Paris bans driving due to smog. In source 3, Andrew Selsky tells us, "car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota. As for source 4, Elisabeth Rosenthal also talks about "the end of car culture," in the United States.
Source 1, in Germany, residents of the Vauban {an upscale community} are subrban pioneers, they are giving up their cars. Rosenthal says "street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in tihs experimental new district on the outskirts of Feriburg, near the French and Swiss borders" they only have two large garages for car-owner at the edge of the development, but they must pay $40,000, along with a home. 70% of Vauban's families do not own a car, and 57% sold a car to move there. She qouted someone by the of Heidrun Walter sayed, "When I had a car Iwas always tense. I'm much happier this way." Meaning he gave up he car so he did not have to pay so much money to keep it and a home with a garage. She explains how, "automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs, where middle-class families from Chicago to Shanghai tend to make their homes."
In source 2, "Paris bans driving due to smog," says Duffer. Paris enforced partial driving ban to clear the air. Duffer says, on Monday motorists even even-numbered licecnse plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31)." On the next day odd-numbered plates would do the same. Nearly 4,000 drivers suffered this fine. As of the 27 other peoples' cars were impounded for their reaction. "In the capital of France 60% congestion were down," explains Duffer. Days when was "cold at night and warm in the day were causing the warmer air to trap car emissions. Diesel fuel was blamed, since France has [] tax policy that favors diesel over fasoline," explains Duffer. Diesel is 67% of vehicles in France, compared to 53.3% average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, according to Reuters.
Andrew Selsky tells us about, " car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota." Bogota, Colombia has a program that's set to spread to other countries. Millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or even took buses to work during a car-free day. For 3 straight years cars have been banned with only buses and taxis premitted for the "Day Without Cars" in this capital city of 7 million. Selsky says, " the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Violators faced $25 fines." Even when it would "rain it never stopped people from participating," said Bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus. For Carlos ARturo Plaza, a businessman, said "it's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." The day without cars is an improvement campaign that there in the mid-1990s. Many parks, sports and businesses bloomed throhtout the city. | 1 |
40ad316 | Studying venus would be really interesting but venus is hard to study because it´s dangerous and it has really high pressure.
Venus is sometimes known as earth´s twin because venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. Scientist have tried to get to get numerous spacecrafts on venus but no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Venus is one of the hardest planet to study and research. It´s hard for astrounauts to go to venus because temperature is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what humans experience on our own planet.
If NASA sent humans to venus it would be really hard for the astronauts to land because it has hostile conditions on the surface of venus. When the humans would land on venus the air pressure would be close to some of the levels in the sea and the temperature would be toasty.
In conclusion, venus has challenging things it presents and it would make it very hard for people in NASA to put human life on a planet that has very high air pressure and temperature that we are not used having on earth. | 2 |
40ae87d | In my opinion, the Facial Action Coding System is not something I would want in my classroom or in my home. There is no need for computers to read human emotion espcially in schools where security is a big issue. Having this technology in school laptops and larger organizations could potentially be a security issue becuase it may make it easier to hack or break into computers. This technology has a potential to bring much more harm than it does good.
I know that teachers in my classrooms can very easily tell when someone in their class is bored or is having a hard time paying attention, there is no need for a computer software to tell them how all of their students are feeling. In the text, it states ""A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored."" All teachers are doing their best at their job and have seperate teaching styles, we can not base their ability to teach off of one or two who are feeling bored becuase they have a short attention span that day.
While I think technology is amazing I also think that it should'nt be such a large chunck of students lives, especially in school. Relying on technology could make it easier for potential threats like hackers or people who may want to harm students or to get into schools, installing something like FACS could make it even easier to break in. In this day and age, I think we rely too much on technology and its abilities, we have no need for a facial scanner that can tell our emotions when humans can already do the same. In the text, it says" Can we actually "calculate" emotions." Humans can already tell what a person is feeling by lloking at their face.
All in all, this technology doesnt seem worth it to me. There are too many cons and risks and they greatly outweigh the pros and rewards. Classrooms are not a place for a program like this and neither are organizations like hospitals or any other place. It could be a potential security risk to all who use it. This Facial Action Coding System should'nt be supported by any schools or progress beyond a simple idea. | 4 |
40aea3c | In "The Challenge of Eploring Venus," the author supports the idea that Venus is a worthy planet for exploration. Even though it is very dangerous to explore he/she explains how Venus might be one of the planets humans will want to vist because it could hold secrets to our planets birth and death. Then they tell in full detail how we could possibly vist Venus safely. These few key details help the author build and support the suggested idea that we should vist Venus.
First we must know that going to Venus will not be easy for humans to do. In the text the author writes,"A thick Atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highy corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." This further proves that Venus is going to be a serious challenge for man kind to vist because of the crazy condtions humans will have to face.
In order to vist venus safely we need to be able to plan a way to survive Venus's extreme conditions. In the text the author provides examples of how humans will do so such as,"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our Jet airplains travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying out of their way." This futher proves that traveling to Venus in the furture is possible. Also that scientists are coming up with ways on how we can safely get to Venus's surface.
Most importantly Venus could help us understnad more about space. In the text the author writes,"If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further vists to its surface? Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This point further proves that Venus is a place humans should want to explore because it could hold answers for Earths begginings and how it might end. Also Venus could hold secrets about our universes beggining and end.
In concusion the author proves that Venus should be further investigated because even though it faces many dangers it is possible to vist. Also visting Venus could give humans valuble information on our planets life as well as unlock keys to how our universe could have begun and is going to end. The author does more than an perfect job at telling why humans should go to Venus. | 4 |
40aedc0 | There are many advantages of not using a car. Its a good opportunity to lower air population, reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes. In addition everyone is getting active instead of using a car to transport them where they need to go.
Passangers are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in europe. 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the united states. Not using cars can lower air populations. Congestion was down 60 percent in the capitol of france after 5 intensifying smog. The smog rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most populated cities in the world. after baning even numered license plates the smog cleared enough.
Another advantage in not using cars is everyone getting active. Instead of everyone driving everywhere millions of people hiked, biked, skated, or took buses. People are interacting with each other. many people have said that it has releaved stress and lowered air population. Pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into connected network to save time, coserve resources lower emmissions and improve safety.
There are many advantages to not using cars. no air population and many other things. The question is what are you gonna do to help? | 3 |
40b5365 | New technologies are always interesting and beneficial towards any aspect of life. The FACS (Facial Action Coding System) measures your facial muscles to calculate your emotions. Because there are characteristic movements of muscles when expressing different emotions, the FACS can recogonize the muscle movement and record the emotion. This newly discovered technology has great potential to be useful in several areas, such as understanding facial expressions, animating facial emotions, and commercial use. However, the use of FACS technology is not valuable in the classroom.
First, the FACS's ability to read emotions is not useful in the classroom. It can tell when students are bored, or when students are unhappy with the teaching method, but it cannot change the students' emotions immediately. The best it can do is notify the instructor to change their lesson, as stated in the passage. This itself is not a huge benefit, and is not valuable enough to justify the use of the FACS technology in every classroom.
Secondly, the FACS is very recent, advanced, and expensive. As stated in the passage, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile" (D'Alto, 7). If a home PC cannot run the FACS program because of its complexity, how would an impoverished school be able to provide this technology to every classroom? The cost of this technology to be placed in every classroom is a waste of money and time. Instead of being used in classrooms, this technology could play an important role in the study of art, such as Mona Lisa, or the creation of expressive virtual faces to be put in use for video surgery or virtual reality. The very limited benefits the FACS brings in the classroom does not outweigh the cost and effort of providing it.
In short, the FACS is a newly designed program that has potential to be applied in many different fields of study, but is not practical for the classroom. The ability to read students' emotions is both unimportant and eerily disturbing. The FACS has many benefits, such as recognizing emotions in art and creating virtual expressive faces, but none of these can be applied to the classroom. | 4 |
40b6251 | The age of cars has come to a grinding stop. Atleast, That's what the general consensus of these 4 articles seems to be. Although current youth do not see car buying as a major thing in their lives right now, it is highly unlikely it will remain as such because of the structure of an average american lifestyle.
Cars are a massive staple of the world and hold many things together and allow for fast, easy, convenient travel. The young people of today do not currently have to use cars to get where they are going because of many factors such as friends with cars, human powered forms of transportation - such as bicycles, skateboards, etc.-and parents with cars. Once these children move away from home to a college or to a job elsewhere they will need a car to maintain a normal lifestyle. We are currently in a second baby-boom, this means that there are many young people that do not need cars and thus do not have one, swaying the data away from the "car culture". While it is true that some people are trying to reduce their "carbon footprint" by driving less and using public transportation, the number of them is very small and irrelevant when compared to all people in the world. Cars maintain a large amount of appeal that cannot be found in any other form of transportation: This appeal is that it is your vehicle, to do whatever you want with and be free, it is also easy and convenient to get from place to place, it is a place to hang out with your friends and/or a significant other, it is also faster than any other form of transportation short of a helicopter or plane. Cars have so many benefits that people will not just quit driving because of increased carbon emissions, most of which is not entirely the fault of cars.
While cars do put out a large amount of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, that amount is inconseqeuntial compar3ed to the massive amou nts of carbon dioxide emitted by volcanos and by other human creations. One volcanic eruption emits around the same amount of carbon dioxide in a few hours as the entire country of America does in 10-15 years. Cars are not the true issue here, the main reason carbon dioxide is on tthe rise is because of the lack of trees and worldwide deforestation. All plant life can convert carbon dioxide into oxygen during photosynthesis, this means that more plant life equals less carbon dioxide. Instead of trying to reduce the number of cars in the world and make life harder on many people, the focus of the world should be to increase the amount of vegetation in the world so as to counterbalance the number of cars in the world.
Cars have long been an important factor in the world social, political, and economical structure. Before the second World War, Fuhrer Adolf Hitler decided that his people needed a cheap, basic car so as to increase Germany's economic prowess. Due to this vision Volkswagen, The people's car, was started. Volkswagen marked the start of cheap, affordable cars for everyday people. Although Germany lost World War II, their technology and ideas diffused to much of the world thanks to American and Soviet research. Their idea of a people's car spread around the world and the 1950's marked the start of massive sprawling suburbs that relied on personal vehicles to get to and from work, the store, school, or anywhere outside of the suburbs. This was a totally new type of lifestyle; It wasn't urban life where you could walk or ride a bus wherever you needed, and it wasn't rural where you made everything by hand and didnt travel often. No, this was something entirely new that was brought about because of the advent of cheap affordable personal transportation. Now everyone can get to work relying on only themselves and not bus drivers or train operators, people have a new sense of freedom afforded them by this magnificent new machine, the car.
The same ideas and principles that made cars such an important part of culture and life in the 1950's still remain in our lives today. Cars will remain an important part of world culture until another form of trasportation is easier, more convenient, and/or cheaper. A car gives its driver a fast, freeing, and flexible form of transportation unparalleled by anything today. Car use should not be limited, it should be encouraged.
?
?? Triforce, illuminati confirmed 187? 185? 186? 187 ? 188? 200? 201? 202? 203? 204? 205? 206?
cars are the vehicle of the future
???
? ?
???
? ?
? ?
? ?
? ?
? ?
?? ??
?
?
?????
???
? ?
???
? ?
? ?
? ?
? ?
? ?
?? ??
?
?
????? | 4 |
40b7257 | I am for the use of this technology becaus it would help kids who are confused in a way that they don't know what to do on the assignment or how to begin working. This technology will put the words in a different way for the student to learn the material after the computer learns their emotion and know what to do about it.
When adults or young teens plan on getting jobs that envolve on sitting at a dest they might get frustrated and don't know what to do and the computer would be able to detect thier emotions and take a different approach and help you undertsand the work faster. By getting work faster this will emprove the work production and people wouldn't have to stay for late hours to get work done.
This will help computers understand the different emotions that are going through people and the computer will react to it pretty quickly. I think this will be very helpful in the future to child to adults. While the computer still learns different emotions they will help people around the world and education will be a higher percentage of students will go to college and stay in school because of this technology. | 2 |
40b78eb | "It is definitely an alien-made structure!" And with that, I must disagree. My coworker at NASA believes deeply that the face on mars, a formation on the Red Planet in an area named Cydonia, is made by aliens. I, on the other hand, do not agree. of course they asked me for my argument, and I will give one as requested.
The Viking 1 spacecraft caught a very blury image of the formation. It did resemble a human face, and with a second picture taken in 1998, it still represented just that. The 1998 picture was clearer, but was still missing the detail needed to point out anything proving the alien relations. Not everyone was satisfied with that image either, so there was another search, and an image taken at very high quality in 2001 shows absolutely not relation of alien creation having to do with the formation. It is shown just to be another mesa, simply like the coincidental structures we have here on earth.
My argument is simply that with what material we have, all things point to another mesa, not an alien creation. The final photo in '01 has high quality, and without showing evidence of alien relations, there is no way that I am to believe it was formed by aliens. | 3 |
40bdb19 | Why should we limit our uses on car usages, some people se the limiting of car usage as less tense. " When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" said heidrun Walter, a mother of two. when you have a car you'll have to find space for it as well as a house to buy. There are only two places to park at the edge of a development, where a car-owner has to pay $40,000, along with a home. passenger cars are responcible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in the United states. with less cars people have the advantages of being a walk away from a store instead of a highway. With less cars that give off gas emissions the less our ozone will deplete. More and more people are using hybrid cars because they dont give off as much gas emissions than regular cars that take diesel. Depending on the weather of the night and day could really effect the greenhouse effect of our planet. If ther was a cold night and a warm day this could help the warmer layer of air to trap the car emissions, which depletes the ozone layer that is protecting our planet.
Paris one of the most leading countries in the world with the car emissions ended making people stop using their cars because of all the smog that was being created. People who used their cars were fined $31 and if they complained about that their car would somethimes be towed away. While the rule of no cars was in effect the traffic jams in france were down over 60 percent. Think about what this could do to the United States. The smog had cleard so much that Paris eventually allowed odd numbered plates to drive again on Tuesday. " 'It's a good oppourtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution' said Carlos Arturo as he rode with his wife on a two seat bicycle" ( Andrew Selsky, Source 3). The no car rule is sweeping over the nations, because of this rule there has been over 118 miles of bicycle paths in Bogota, Colombia.
" Municipal athorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were enthusiastic 'These poeple are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders' Said Enrique Riera, the mayor of asuncion, Paraguay. As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly down by 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January of 1995. Part of the explantion lies in the recession, because cash- strapped Americans could not afford new cars, and the unimployed weren't going to work anyway. These people could not afford cars but they could have afforded a bike if they wanted to. They could have rode to work on a bike or could have tried to find a job on a bike it's that people are starting to get to lazy to do important things like ride a bike. With cars theres gas you have to pay for along with the insurence, that's a lot of money.
Lucky for us Americas love affair twords vehicles seem to be coling down. When the number of child growth grew, the number of miles driven dropped steadly down in 2005. With cars the rodes are more dangerous anything could happen to anyone or anything. The percentage of 16-39 year olds that are driving dropped, while older people retain thweir licenses as they age. A study last year was found tha driving by younger people dropped by 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Bill Ford proposed partnering with telecommunactions industrys to create cities in which " pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improive safety". In Germeny the banning of cars resulted that 70 percent of families donot have cars, and 57 perecnt sold a car to move there. In doing all of these thing this could help stop the greenhouse effect on our planet and start saving it insted of killing it. | 4 |
40cba9a | This article is abaut the platent of venus that are sometimes called Evening Star this is the secon planet from our sun,this planet is one that tje people can see from a large distance it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. this is the most dangerous for the people because the sun is like the fire the people can`t see and touch this in a short distance the sun and they light can be beautiful but is it most thing that is dangerous in the universe.
Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size ,and occasionally the closest in distance too, venus is a planet visit for the people,venus have many things that are interesting the people vistit this place for know somethings that they don`t know but they need know venus is one planet that are close with mart and earth venus is study for the humsn science.
A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon blankets venus. On the planet the temperatures average can be over a 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is like 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet,the conditions of the this planet can be more extreme than anything humans encounteron the planet earth venus is the only planet that have hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system,the other planet that are closer to the sun is mercury , beyond high pressure and heat.
Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting of volcanes powerful earthquakes and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to a lang on its surface. venus have nomerous factors that contribute reputation as a challenging platent for humans to study,despite its aproximity to us, venus should have a sulfuric acids in the venus atmosphera
In all of this we have a question Why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface.? Venus is a fascinated planet for the astronomers because it may wellonce have been mthe most Earth like planet in the solar sytem venus is a planet know for the rocks and gas that there is. | 1 |
40d1fe4 | This "face marking" on Mars is just a natural landform. Scientist discovered Mars many years ago and they did not see no signs of life on this planet or this face was not see on this planet. How can a "face" just natural appear of Mars when no one is on there?
Why would NASA hide a big discovery of something like this to the people. If NASA found out or new there were any signs of life on Mars, I would expect there to be a newcast of that or somehting else in that matter.
Some Scientist believe that it is alien made structure, but other scientist believe it is just a land formation. It is just a land formation because, shadows are making up its nose, eyes, and mouth. Others believe it is a butte or a mesa, which are land formations around the American West. The image of the "face" looks just like a hill or rounded very small mountaion top. The "face" even has changed over the years. Many things change by erosion or the weather,so i believe it is just a mesa that has changed over the years. The markings were not hidden by some kind of an "alien haze" it was simply the weather. Planets other than earth have diferent kind of weathers also. There is something in the United States that is simulaur to the "face", it is a small lava doom and it is the same height as the "face".
Scientist believed that there is somekind of an alien face on Mars, but there isnt it is just a mesa or a butte. Which is a small landmass. If there was an ancient civilization or still life on Mars, we would be able to see it, unless they are just great at hinding. Even if there were civilzations on Mars wouldn't we be able to see more artifacts? The land mass has also changed in the pass years, probably by ersion or wether. There is also shadows that are reflectind over the land mass, to show its distinct characterristics, like the nose, mouth, and eyes. | 3 |
40d42ad | The "Face On Mars" is getting talked about a lot lately. Many people have different opinions about the face. If you aren't familiar with the "face on mars" then you're probably wondering why there is an argument going around. You're probably wondering this exact question: "Why is there a big argument about "The Face On Mars?" The folllowing details and information will be informing you exactly why scientists and theorists are having different opinions about the peculiar face.
Some scientists are saying that the face up on the moon was not created by aliens because of all the research they have done with and about it. One example that tells you why it isnt an alien artifact is the shadows. The only way the messa (face on the moon) was able to have facial features was because of the shadows that was cascading down upon it. The shadows gave an illusion of eyes, a nose, and also a mouth.
Another example, would be the pictures that the scientists have taken. The first picture that was taken was taken on a cloudy day. The picture was to blurry to be able to make out any details. In 1998, Michael Malin and his MOC team took another picture that was ten times sharper than the first. One of the cameras they had contributed greatly to the search, since that camera was so sharp they would have easily been able to find any markings from extraterrestrial beings.
Also another detail helping the scientists was the weather. The weather took a massive part in this study. Since it wasn't a clear day at all and there were "wispy clouds", like in paragragh eight, the MOC team could not get a clear picture. When the team comes back to take yet another picture it is a clear day and with that clear day they are able to pick out any details from the "artifact" if there are any to pick out.
A final example, is how they compared the face to a formation on Earth. The scientists compared the face to the Snake River Plain of Idaho because of how similar they are. They are similar in a way because of the isolated messa, height, and landforms.
Theorists are saying the exact oppsoite from the researchers. Here is an example fo why they thought it was a true artifact. A few scientists themselves thought that is wasn't just a landform but something more. Since the scientists believed many people instantly believed too. They didn't think about the research that was done, but they chose to believe the few scientists.
An example that would support the idea of them believing, is that there were many movies made about the face. Many people believe everything they hear and what they see on T.V.
A final example is, how the skeptics thought it was created. "If the aliens didn't create it then how did it form?" That question was most likely going through their mind, trying to figure out if they should believe science and research or they should believe movies and others.
Yes, i understand how skeptics actually believe that the face was made by aliens because they dont know how it was created. They don't know who created it either. Scientists are proving that it was weather that created the formation and maybe even astroides. Theorists may also thinking that the haze prevented the scientists from seeing the alien's markings. If weather and haze prevented that then why didn't the scienists see the markings on the next photo that they took. That photo was even ten times shaprer.
The examples I have lsited help inform you why there is an argument going on about the face. Science clears and explains a lot more phenonmon than opinions and belifes do. | 4 |
40dade9 | As a young American citezen here an Florida alot of people use cars to move around from their house to there jobs or to travel to other states to visit people. but in other states like new york people dont use cars like and many other countries like france,Colombia and many other South American countries.
To begin with here an American there was been a large drop in the percentage of 16 to 39 years old getting a lincens while older people are likely to retain their licenses as they age mr. sivaks research has found. study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. As of april 2013, the number of miles driven per personj was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995. part of the explanation certaintly lies in the recession,because cash-strapped Americans could not afford new cars, and the unemployed weren't going to work anyway. Michael sivak said ''what most intrigues me si that rates of car ownership per househoild and per person staretd to come down two to three years before the downturn. many socialogists believe it will have a beneficial implicantions for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants. but in France diesel fuel was blamed since France has a tax policy thatt favors diesel over gasoline. dieselsmakes up 67 percent of vihicles in france compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of western Europe. while in america millennial generation will start buying more cars once they have kids to take to soccer practice and school plays reamins an open question. | 1 |
40daf82 | I think that if we ever did find aliens on Mars or even a civilazation we should stay away from it. The reason why is because if we ever did find a other planet we never really be called the only planet in the universe. In the article we found out that we have a new way to find people. We never really thought that their was ever a civilazation on Mars.
As we found out that we may have found a way to a other civilazation. I just recently told you that we should never go near Mars. The reason why I told you that is because we don't now their lifes, their ways, or even if they were freindly. When NASA told us that we have a way to find people we should never talk to them. Yes it does show that we had images of planet Mars or even that their might have been a culture.
I have said that we should never really go to planet Mars because if we did we would be the only planet in the universe. This article was very interesting, but I think we should never go near Mars. | 1 |
40e315e | First off , In my opinion I think that there is no face on the moon. Some of NASA believe that some aliens made the face on the moon years ago. I believe that there is no face and that is beacuse there are no aliens. If there is a face on the moon it was probably made by an astroid or a meteorid that crashed there a few years ago and it was just now starting to form more into a face. If it were aliens who created the face on the moon, why didn't they come back time after time so the humans could see them. Honestly, who is there to blame for this mysterious face on the moon? Many people may ask, what should we do to figure out if there is a face or not. Well in my opinion, I think we should have NASA send someone or some people to the moon and see whats really going on. NASA also doesn't have evidence that there are aliens that did it. They just assume that there are aliens basically. Maybe there is really no face on the moon. I really think that maybe NASA should either just let this go or they should just send someone to space to chck it out. I just don't like how NASA has no evidence that there are asliens who made the face. I think maybe NASA should just go check it out for themselves.
Second, 25 years ago when Viking 1 snapped a photo of the face on the moon, it didn't really look all that good. Even when they took the photo from 1998 and 2001 the pictures still didn't look as nice as they should. People could always just snap a picture and rearrange things in the photo and then make it seem like there is an object there when there really isn't anything there. In the paragraph it even say's "new high-resolution images and 3D altimetry from NAA's Mars Global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa." That could possibly mean that when they were looking at photos they could have saw something else but rearranged the photo to see another thing that they didn't see but they wanted the world to belive them that a face wa on the moon. That is my opinion on if there is a face on the moon. | 3 |
40e6472 | Debates are going on about whether driverless cars should be developed. I support the development of driverless cars because they're safer, more affordable, and will be more effective than today's transportation.
To begin, driverless cars will be much safer than normal cars because they don't cause accidents. Paragraph 5 states "Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers". Another reason as to why driverless cars are safer than the ones we have today is because they keep the drivers alert, even when they aren't driving. Paragraph 8 says "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern".
Driverless cars are also way more affordable than the cars we have today. Sergey Brin, Google cofounder, sees a future where driverless taxis use half the fuels that today's taxis use, as stated in paragraph 1. Since driverless cars are much less likely to get in a car crash, they are more affordable for the customer as well. Paragraph 1 also states that driverless taxis will offer more flexibility than a bus, so owning a driverless car will be more affordable and get you to your destination quicker.
Not only are driverless cars safer and more affordable, but they can also get you to your destination sooner. Paragraph 5 states that sensors have become more advanced and will respond much quicker to danger, such as out-of-control skids or rollovers. Paragraph 2 states "Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash". Also stated in paragraph 1, the author stays that driverless cars are more flexible and efficient than buses or taxis.
Even though driverless cars are proven to be more efficient and safer, people debate about whether they should be developed. I believe that they should be developed because they are cheaper, safer, and more effective than todays transportation methods. | 4 |
40e6f7f | I think others should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys Program because you get to help others recover their animals, you get to see many remarkable and unbelievable sights, and get to pass time having fun and playing games on the boats.
The first reason why others should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is becasue you get to help and care for others. For example, In 1945 World War 2 was over in Europe and it left many countries in ruins, and to help these countries 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA(the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). They hired us, "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. This helped the countries recover their animals. So, one reason why others should join the Seagoing Cowboys Program is to help others recover their animals.
Another reason why I think others should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is to be able to see the remarkable sights that you get to see while over sees. For example, I have seen many beautiful sights while overseas. I have seen the Panama Canal and got to take a tour of a excavated castle in crete. I have also gotten to see Europe, China, and Italy. So, another reason why I think others should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is because of the unbelieveable sights you get to see.
My final reason why I think others should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is becuase of all of the fun you get to havoe on board the boats. For example, you get to play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where the animals are housed after they are unloaded.
Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, are also examples of what you can do overseas to pass the time. So, my final reason of why I think others should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program is becuase of the fun you get to have on board the boats.
So, in conclusion, I think others should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because you get to help and care for others, you get to see some incredible and unbelievable sights, and you get to have alot of fun on the boats while you are overseas. | 4 |
40ff095 | I think everyone should be in the Seagoing Cowboy Program. Everyone should be in the program because it helped me more aware of other countries and their needs. It also helped open the world . This just may help you feel the same way it made me feel, greatful, and I want you to have the same experience I had.
Everyone should join the program because it helps awareness. Also because it is a opportunity of a lifetime, you would never want to miss. In the process you experenice a lot of unique thging's. Some cool things that you will experience are: the Pacific war ending, traveling over the Atlantic Ocean, China, and more. This would be a life time opportunity you wpuld not want to miss.
Some more reasons why you should join the program is because you would have a lot of fun. Some things you would do are: play baseball,volleyball, table tennis, boxing, and more. These things would be a lot of fun if you get your friends and some family to also come and join the program. You would do all of these fun things but also do some work. Everyone would have a job and be put to work. Don't worry, your job won't be that bad.
In the prgram you will also go on cattle-boat trips. Every cattle-boat ride is an unbelievable opportunity. On the cattle-boat you will have the benifits of seeing Europe and China. Every cattle-boat ride is not only an opportunity, but its an adventure. Its and adventure you can't miss.
This about everything you will be doing in the program, and maybe even more. A lot of people have done this, including me. All of these things helped me open up to the world. I hope everyone can join the program have almost the same, or the same experience. This is an opportunity you can't miss, dont pass this up. You will bed missing one of the best experences in your life. | 3 |
4104399 | When it comes to the future everybody starts to thinks about flying cars or driverless cars. Well if you didn't know we aren't that far from driverless cars. In fact Google has had driverless cars since 2009. You probably haven't heard about that but it is true. These cars aren't 100% driverless. Every once in a while there is going to be a time where the car will need a human to take over. Everybody seems to love these ideas that we will have driverless cars soon. Personally I don't like. I feel like nothing is going to change. In fact I feel like there is going to be more crashes happening. I am against the development of driverless cars because people will get distracted easily, people won't have fast reflexes, and people will crash more often.
I am against driverless cars because people will get distracted easily. People, especially teens will be on the phone the whole time. This means that they will not be paying attention to the road and watching in case they have to take over the car. Also they will be falling asleep. The driver will start to get bored by just watching the road. Then they will start to fall asleep. This will risk themselves and if they have passengers too to crash. Also if they will be talking to someone. They might have a passenger with them that is a close friend. That friend could be telling a story to the driver that makes the driver not focused on the road but focused on the story instead.
Another reason why I am against the development of driverless cars because people won't have fast reflexes. The driver could be eating while the car is driving itself. The next thing they know is that they have to start driving. The driver is going to take a while trying to put the food to the side and next thing they know is they will be crashing into some other car. Also they could be taking to a friend. If that friend is making the driver laugh the driver won't be ready if they driver has to drive the car himself. Lastly the driver would be on the phone. They'll think that since the car is driving itself that it is fine to be on the phone and they won't have to worry about anything. Well maybe out of nowhere the driver has to drive themselves, they won't be ready to take over while being on the phone.
Last reason why I'm against the development of driverless cars because people will crash more often. If they crash they can cause death of course. The driver thinks that sinec it drives itself then it won't crash at all. Well that is wrong and stupid to think about. Also they will blame the car. This means that they will say it was the cars fault for not warning me or something. When the driver clearly knws that it was their fault for crashing. Lastly they will say they "lost control." Most of the times when there is a crash it's because someone was on the phone.They always say it won't happen to them.They have to be really careful when it comes to taking over the car when they have to.
It's crazy to think that you will crash, but one small mistake and it could happen.
As you can see driverless cars are a big risk. If car companies really want to make these cars then they have to really think about the risks that they are making too. I really don't like this idea because of the risks that are going to happen. I am against the development of driverless cars because people will get distracted easily, people won't have fast reflexes, and people will crash more often. If these casrs do manage to become future cars then people will have to understand the responsibilty to drive these cars. | 3 |
4105c60 | After World War II many countries have beebn left in ruins and in need of supplies. To help these countries in need, 44 nations joined together and formed the UNRRA. The UNRRA Hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to go overseas and help deliver supplies to the other countries.
As a Seagoing Cowboy it is your job to take care of the horses, young cows, mules, and other animals kept aboard the ship that are being brought overseas to the countries in need.
It will take about 2 weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean and about 1 month to cross the Pacific 0cean.
Caring for the animals will keep you very busy, they will have to be fed and watered about 2-3 times a day.
The animals foods will have to be brought up from the lower holds of the ship and their stalls had to be cleaned. Besides just takijng care of animals and helping people you will have the added benefit of seeing places like Venice, Italy or Greece or other places.
It wont be just all hard work you will be able to see places you might have not seen before. On the way back there is plenty of fun to be had, like play games where the animals were held. You will be grateful for taking the opportunity ot do this, it hopefuly will make you more aware of the people in other countries and their needs. It will surely open up the world to you. | 2 |
410ccee | I think that schools should use this techonlogy to tell when a student is going through a tough day. If schools had that technology schools would be a lot safer and we wouoldnt have to worry about
violence on school property. In the story it state that “A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,” Dr. Huang predicts. Can you imagine how sage schools would be if they were able to detect how a student how has his head down with his hood up or the kid that doesn't speak??
With this software cops could see if a suspect is lying or not by just decoding their expression. The author states that
“The facial expressions for each emotion are universal,” observes Dr. Huang, “even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression” I mean of course it would be to decode a actor or actress's moods since they get paid to use various of mood.
Now with this oftware you detect if your girlfriend is angery,upset,disgusted, fearful or happy without getting on her nerves by asking . When I first read the article is against it because that's kind of personal but theen I began thinking about how helpful ad useful this could be to put an end to school shootings.Now if we have this technology we could detect who isn't happy and could make sure they get to feeling better and make sure nothing happens the could be detremental to society even for the kids 12-21 .
Lastly, this technology could improve the crime rate a lot more by being able to have access to this techology police departments can find out if a victim or suspect is lying.
In conclussion I would like to see to see the Facial Action Coding System in schools and within the use of police deparmnets across the nation. Farther more with this technology in schools i hope to see the number of school violence decrease with the use of this software. | 3 |
410ce9c | Driverless Cars should not become a thing. Sure, it is nice to think we can make a car that is a public transportation system that would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus. But today driverless cars are still not completely driverless. These cars alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents.
Cars can do all sorts of things for us these days including, rear view cameras, park for us, GPS, and even stop for the driver before it hits something. If something were to happen who takes the blame for the accident, the driver, car company, or who? The last thing we need to do is trust a car with more than just those four tasks. If people are too lazy to drive then they will be too lazy to jump back on the wheel when the car needs assistance. Drunk driving is a large issue in America and those drunks will try to drive and blame it on the car that is supposed to drive itself. The laws about no texting while driving will go away because people will rely on the car too much. If we cannot trust cars with driving by itself rather than driving and assisting then I cannot trust it at all. These new cars would also need sets of laws, rules, and regulations for people and the manufacturers to follow.
If these cars do get into a crash, who is liable, who's insurance is it on, and would the car companies get sued? How could anybody prove who's fault to why the accident happened. Although car companies say they have plans to drive themselves in the future I do not believe them and I do not trust them. I hope that driverless cars do not become a thing in my lifetime. | 3 |
410ef58 | You may think that the landform that resembles a human face is proof that there is alien life on Mars, but it actually does not prove anything. There are many reasons that the mesa could be there, and alien life is the least likely. Mesas are common around the area that the face was found, and recent pictures have proved that it is just a landform. Even taking the picture on a cloudless, sunny day proved nothing. It is simply a landform, and nothing more.
You might argue that it is unlikely that the landform is a mesa because it isn't natural, or that it looks unnatural. While it does look unnatrual, they are actually very common around the area that the face was found. Saying that it can't be a mesa because mesas aren't common simply isn't true. Cydonia has many mesas, the face included. There are plenty of mountains on Earth, and we all know that those aren't man-made. No one talks about one certain mountain that is man-made, while the rest aren't. Why should Mars be any different? They are all natural landforms, there isn't one that's just man made.
You may also argue that the first picture was taken on a day that was cloudy, or that the picture was unclear. You would be correct, which is why NASA went back eighteen years later and took the photo again on a cloudless, clear and sunny day. The picture was taken in summer, which is generally pretty cloudless in Mars. There was practically nothing that might obstruct the view of the "face", and what did we find? Nothing. We found a landform, just like we had found eighteen years earlier. There was nothing to obstruct the view. That means that when we did look and find nothing, that there was nothing there.
You still might not be convinced. You might say that we simply weren't close enough to find any strange alien markings, or that camera's quality wasn't good enough to see any of the strange alien markings, but that would also be correct. We took a picture of the mysterious "face" three times. Once in 1976, once in 1998, and finaly in 2001. Each time the picture was taken, the camera's quality was better. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to the 43 meters in the 1976 photo. With the image being that detailed, we would have been able to spot things as small as shacks next to the mysterious "face". We didn't, however. We found nothing except for the landmark, which proves that it is nothing more than an unusual landmark.
In conclusion, there is countless proof that the "face" on Mars is nothing more than an unusal mesa. Mesas are common in Cydonia, which is where the landmark was spotted. We have taken three photos, the quality better with each, and each time nothing other than the landmark was spotted. We even went back to take the photo on a cloudless, clear and sunny day with our best camera yet, and we still found nothing. That is all the proof that I need, and it's all the proof you need. There is nothing on Mars other than an unusual landmark, that happens to look like a face. | 5 |
411a4c6 | in my opinion using technology to detect if someone is happy is way to overrated for the subtle classroom. most teacers can tell if someone i shappy or little bit sad or completely sad it doesnt need facial coding to describe how someone is feeling at the oment in the time. Some people coud use it to detect it in other studies as in this case on a painting. but to detect someone emotions you dont need technology to describe what normal humans can detect in a person just by looking at them. i could help in a classroom but not on other students or in real life people. if they were examing emotions like foor a therapy class it could work. they could look at a picture and try to desribe what they think that person is emotions are and what that person is feeling. and then use the facial coding to describe it and ifigure it out and grade the students on how close they scored to the emotions and if they scoreed the right ones and percentages. facial coding could help in classroom but only in certain cases where describing someoens emotions come into play and help them describe what that person is felling.
In conclusion facial coding could work in a classroom as long as the class is learning facial expressions and how to detect people emotions. in other cases no it shouldnt be in a classroom that isnt design for those special classes. | 2 |
412350e | The views of having cars that drive without the driver actually having some sort of interaction is crazy. Three main points im going to discuss are, what are possible promblems that we'll face, what would happen if the vechile is involved in an accdient, and where would the cars today go.
What are possible promblems we could face? Some problems are could face are that where would we get the pieces to fix the car. Where would the car work best on the cement road or does ot have to be a specific road. What if someone cant afford the car. I'll be honest i think the cost fir a vehicle so well advanced and luxurious would be hard to keep maintained. Its already hard enough for us to keep our vehicle up to date. Just imagagine a typical Audi that is normal, leather seats, back up camera, and bluetooth. That Audi would only cost
bit over $25,000. Now imagine an Audi with those same features, the cost may go a nit higher. In conclusion i think its redicuolis for a car to cost a lost more fo the same features except it drives its own self.
What would or may happen if a driveless car gets into an accdient? I would think that the car would have the fault because it should have sensors that should detect where and when the vechile is in danger. It also shouldnt make the driver accontable for what happened. If the vechile crashed thats on the manufacturers part. They should be aware of whats happening with the vechile beforenhand. The driver purchesed the vechile because they trust that the manufacture knows that the specific vechile has been tested in every element and that its been proven safe for any human being to drive. All in all my point is that if a crash happens it should be the manufactures fault because the vechile should be safe enough to drive.
Where the cars from today go? If the cars that are driveless come into the picture of the future would cars from today still be around for those who cant afford it. They would still possibly be around but they would have a seprate lane for them. Which isnt really fair but still. They wouldnhave some sort of sticker indicating what kind of car they are, but why would you want to have a sticker that indetifes what specific car you have. I would think that the cars still look the same but instead have some sort of indificton saying what kind it is. I hate how they would do something like that. It propstrious . In my words nothing not even cars should be judged.
In conclusion no matter what ends up happining in the futue lets just hope that all those things listed above happen. It would be cool if something like that happen. Will it? I have no clue but what do i personaly think of this whole topic. Well it sounds like an interesting idea of this happening and if it does happen it would have its flaws and it would have its amazing outputs. Ill be honest something this exciting, interesting, and cool would be interesting to have. | 4 |
413d044 | The use of driveless cars can be defined as a statement of stupidity in your world today. They are not the way to the future as what this article say it is. All people need to have complete contorl of the wheel at all times. We learned that at a very young age and it needs to stick with us.
My position on this blanketed idea is that we in America should not have this type of car. There are many reasons for this ordeal. In the use of a drivelss car, many people would think to not even have to worry about driving the car since it can do it by themselves. So what happens if the car malfuncitons and the driver is asleep, then what happens, a crash, a death. That is a one reason on why we should not have these cars.
Another reason would be, the income and cost on these cars. The article doesn't state this material, but in order to make these cars so that they are drivelss, it would cost a lot more money than making an ordinary car. And the manufature has to sell it, so people are going to spend a lot more money than they have to on a car that they can drive by themselves. The money is not worth the risk.
Also google has stated that the car is not in complete control, a driver in needed. So, by this statement if a driver is needed then why do we need drivless cars if a driver is needed. Do we need them so people can text and call when they please, we have bluetooth cars for those situations. Also GM has pointed that, that in order for a car to be in complete control of the wheel, it needs roads that can read it's binary code. The government will not settle for any smart-road system because of how much it would cost.
The best reason out of all of them would be, who would be responsible for the crash, the car or the driver. If there were no such thing as driverless cars, then the situation would be taken care of right away, there would be no contraversy. Since now that we have these cars the quesiton is thrown up into the air, was the driver driving at the time of the crash, or was the car in it's automotive estate. In later days, this brings up court ruling and huge contraversy in which no one wants to be apart of. Just another good reason why we should't have driverless cars.
These cars today, that the world is making, that are driveless are absolutly dangerous in lives of the people. Injuries could come way to often with malfuntions inside the vehicle. Also the cost of roads and the car itself is extremely high. No one wants to pay for that unless your rich. And also, contraversy between the car and the human involving a crash would bring up big headlines. The world needs to stay with a human driving a car. It is safer, less expensive, and also easier to handle by the law. | 4 |
413fa86 | Imagine visiting a planet like ours, maybe it was just like ours at a point where it could have living animals, water, and maybe even trees. Venus has the type of look because it the only plant that looks more like our planet the Earth.
First, on paragraph two of the article called " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it says that "Venus is often reffered to as Earths twin, its the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size". This shows on how cool it would be too going into a planet that we havent been to and maybe it can be like ours, its a worthy try even though dangerous thing happen because we never know what we could find.
Also, because in paragraph 4 it states that "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit" this shows on how close it is to Earth and its worth a try trying to go there.
Lastly,it would give out new oppurtunities to go into other planets, because "venus is the second planet from the sun" and this shows and how dangerous it could be, but if we make it we can see stuff like the sun and notice stuff we cant see thru a camera. also, it would give out more conficence of going into space and going into a diffirent planet.
In conclusion, People should go into Venus because it show on new opportunities and find new things we didnt know about. | 2 |
4143c54 | I'm against the value of using this technology to read the emotional expressions on students becuse by being able to detect exactly how other peole are feeling even when they are trying to hide thier emotions. That new technology for that software would be wasted the people in this world don't care about how they fell.Like last year i read science found out why people get mad for the littiest and the dumest
thing in the world it becuse peolpe got no real probles to be mad about
to me it look like people get dumer every year. Becuse
how
people be do the dumest thing by just wanting people to look what they are doing then
they do the same so back to the technology that make you see emotions
it sound like good idea and people well see it on the news but
the nology would be still be wasted people will start to care but later on no wouldn't care like all ways all so becuse of that you would loose money and time.So all that work will be for nothing. | 2 |
41446e4 | To whom this may concern,
The "winner takes all" system we've been using doesn't work. Less power is essentially being given to the people, and, some are even being ignored.
In cases such as Al Gore's, the people said yes, and the College said no. And, voters didn't like this. According to a Gallup poll in 2000, after Al Gore lost the race, "over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now", meaning, Mr. Senator, it's time for change. In addition, this system easily allows for a tie. In this event, the results of the race would be decided by the House of Representatives, which we all know would swiftly put in a vote for the Republican canidate. And, since the Senate has also been recently dominated by Republicans, they too would choose one of their own, resulting in two branches of the government dominated by one political party.
Moreover, with this faulty system, many people are being ignored. As you may recall (or not), "During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the canidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad."(Source 2, Paragraph 13) [(Although not seeing the ads might not have been a bad thing. (I'm just kidding.)] Why is this important? Because the people need to see and meet their canidates, but due to the electoral collage, people are being ignored. If the majority of the votes are known to be going to one canidate or the other, they will most likely not be visited by either side, because whom that state's electoral votes are going to are essentially locked in. The only states that recieve any attention are the "Swing states" (Source 2, Paragraph 13) that are pretty equal on both sides and can be easily swayed to pick one canidate or the other.
The only evidence to refute my claim would be that "Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of proportional representation" (Source 1, Paragraph 7), which actually might work; however, this would require all the states to change their policies, which we all know won't happen very easily.
So, in summary, Mr. Senator, the way things work is going to need to change, we are being ignored and elections are being thrown. If you don't help us change this, the power of electing the president is going to remain with our, faulty, college.
I hope you consider this,
PROPER_NAME | 4 |
4145491 | Over the course of time, NASA has developed the technology that is capable of taking pictures of landforms found on other planets. Recently, NASA unveiled an image of a landform on Mars that looks like a human face. Some people believe that it a real face of an alien and make conspiracy theories about the face and spread it throughout the public. Even though that the "face on Mars" is just a rock landform shaped like a human face.
Firstly, humans would not be able to survive on Mars. The gases and lack of oxygen would kill them. The reality is that the picture is an actual human or alien face is just made up by conspiracy theorists . NASA has revealed this to the public so that they could some attention to mars."The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars (3).They just wanted conspiracy theorist to make people think that there was some sort of ancient civilization on Mars or some kind of aliens. Which was proven not to exist.
After NASA getting all attention on Mars from the "Face on Mars" debate, they went back upto space to see if they could capture more photos. NASA was using high-tech cameras to prove their theory of seeing a human face. "MOC team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when then image first appeared on JPL website, revealing... a natrual landform(7)." The face is just a landform not an alien monument nor a human face.
Later on, after taking the pictures of the proven landform on Mars, the topic started to quite down. Some conspiracy theorist still spread their theories to the public. This is all how NASA researches foreign landforms on other planets. They take their camera satillites and capture a picture of the landform and continue to study it. NASA uses the knowledge they have about Earth to study the landforms on other planets. "It reminds me most of the Middle Buttle in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, say Garvin. That's a lava dome that takes place from an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars (12)." The process just starts all over again.
After looking at all the scientific knowlege, you can conclude that the "Face on Mars" is just a landform. NASA does this so that they can get public attention about their research, until the theory is proven wrong. It is just like any other buisness that wants publicity. Aliens are currently proven to not exist, so most people like to try to change that theory whenever they find a small peice,of what could be eveidence. Even though it is proven to be a landmass. | 4 |
4146edb | I believe that driverless cars will be a great product and will be built in the near future. Driverless cars can help prevent a lot of mistakes of drivers. One really good mistake it can prevent from happening is a driver passing out while they are still driving, the car could either take over or vibrate during a event when the driver needs to take over and can wake them up. The author mentioned in the article that most states don't allow the practie of driverless cars because they believe they're not safe. But how would they know if they're safe or not if they won't allow manufacturers to test them? I believe that the states that won't allow the testing should build special places so manufacturers can test them out.
Self driving cars would help car crashes from happening. Most of the cars that manufacturers are making is called smart cars and they are starting to build their way to driverless cars. Many of these smart cars that the manufacturers are building contain many sensors, in the 1980s automakers used speed sensors at the wheels to create antilock brakes which can prevent drivers from backing into other objects.
In 2013, BMW released the development of a car that can handle it's self up to 25 miles per hour, but special sensors make sure that the drivers keep ahold of the wheel at all times. Most of the cars that have been developed are far away from being completely driverless. But the author mentioned in the article that some car companies are planning to release self driving cars by the year 2020. I believe that this will happen because technology just keeps increasing and will help manufacturers find a way to completely model a self driving car.
The author also mentioned in the artilce that Google has had cars that can drive independently under special conditions since 2009. These cars that Google has created have driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far Google has yet to make a car completely driverless. Like everyother company the car still alerts the driver when they are need to take over the wheel.
With all of this information from the article I believe that driverless cars will be built soon by lots of manufacturers and will be a great product to have. The article had plently of good things to say about driveless cars, and I believe that driverless cars will be built in the near future and will be a good product for drivers to have. | 4 |
414784d | The invention of the car was a revolution in itself, developing a new, faster way to get to far away places. However, the more people use transportation the more it seems to affect our everyday lives in both positive and negative ways. Transportation can cause a lot of pollution which could in later years really affect how people live their lives today, but a new car-free revolution could be just what the world needs to delay that probable outcome.
Pollution comes from all different kinds of things like cars, factories, and even smoking. Right now this is the only world in which is sutible for people to live on and all these things that pollute the air could risk how much longer people get to have it. Andrew Selsky says that in Bogota, Columbia the 7 million citizens have dedicated a day in which no personal car transportation is used. This one day has not only helped reduce the pollution, but also benefit the town in many different ways. Such as new parks and stores have been able to open, sidewalks have been re-paved, rush-hour restictions cutting the traffic down, and also the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths. This "Car-Free Day" has also reached out into other countries as well and according to Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay, "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders."
A businessman named Carlos Arturo Plaza says that the "Car-Free Day" in Bogota is, "a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." Just one day without having to drive and worry about the risks of driving can take a weight of stress off of some peoples' shoulders. In Vauban, Germany there are no residents that own a single car. Elisabeth Rosenthal described the city saying that, "Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district..." Some of the towns residents said that having a car would always have them tense and they were much happier living in a "no car city". Having to deal with every day stress is hard enough, but when you have to deal with additional driving stress it can really take a toll on some people.
"Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fower cars, driving less and getting fower licenses as each year goes by," says Rosenthal. America has long been known as one of the world's prime car cultured countries in the world, but since the peak of miles driven in 2005 these miles have been steadily decrreasing with every year. Studies have shown that there has been a big drop in the percentage of 16- to 39-year-olds who get their license. The percentage of young drivers getting their licenses has decreased by 23% between the years 2001 and 2009 in America alone. A decrease in people owning their own vehicles means that there could be a decrease in the pollution that cars burden the earth with every year.
Bogota, Colombia is a great example of a new revolution soon to come. This hopeful revolution will not only decrease pollution, but stress as well. A decrease in the popullation of young people getting their licenses could also greatly affect the way in which the world transports people from place to place. Transportation can cause a lot of pollution which could in later years really affect how people live their lives today, but a new car-free revolution could be just what the world needs to delay that probable outcome. | 3 |
4148241 | Venus is a planet that catches the attention from stargazers to people who work for NASA. Venus can also be seen eassily by amateur stargazers because of it's brightest points from the light in the night sky. Venus can be called Earth twin becasue we have the same density and size in terms.
National Aeronatics and Space Administrations has sent people in space ships to Venus for studies of the planet. Also studying if Venus if it had harsh conditions like, temprature level, radiation level, life forms, and Etc. If hovering or orbiting Venus above safely you can see visable ground and some conditions. Space ships can't fully land on Venus because of density.
Old technology has been big impact on society, inventors, and innovators. mechanical computers help during World War 2 doing caculations by using gears. Now computers can be used for games, research, and personal uses. The same thing when the first moving transportation came it inspired people to innovate more ideas like buses, different cars, planes/jets, space ships, Ect. As you can when the future gets better maybe we can fully discover about Venus. | 1 |
414918c | Dear. Mr. President,
I feel that we should change the Electoral collage to a direct vote. As the author states in source 2 "Under the Electoral collage system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors.." I believe the people should have a better say in who gets to run the USA. We should aboilish the electoral collage because people need to be able to vote for the president himself not his slate of electors. Also some electors don`t actually vote for who they are representing, And the electoral collage is just not fair.
The people should have a better say in who their president gets to be. They shouldn`t be voting for the Slate electors, but should be voting for the president. Sometimes the votes get overulled by the popular vote. The electors really only focus on the swing states. That`s just not right at all.
Belive it or not some of the electors dont even vote for the president they are representing. It doesn`t make any sense to do that. The electors should be voting for who they represent. That just increases my points value. The people should be able to vote for who they want.
The electoral collage is just unfair. The state legislators pick the electors, and some of those electors could always defy the qill of the people. It is unfair to the voters mainly because of the winner take all system, They mainly only focus on the swing states. Sometimes people get confused about the electors anf vote for the wrong canidate.
Many people can`t figure out if they want to get rid of the Electoral collage are keep it in place. The Electoral collage should be gotten rid of because the people should have a say, and some elecotrs are not loyal and can go agaisnt the will of the people. In the wise words of Bob Dole "Abolish the electoral collage!" | 3 |
414ff8a | In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. After personally reading this article, I believe a driverless car would be a positive impact on the road today. The article mentions many positive things including fuel efficency, crash proof, advanced safety sensors, and an understanding computer that knows when driving is too difficult for its self. I believe that driverless cars will become a positive impact due to extreme environmental safety, driver safety, and intelligent computer understanding.
In the first paragraph, the author states that, "The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of todays taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus.". In our environment, we have had many mishaps dealing with cars and the pollution they cause to our environment from the day they were made. When the author states that the driverless cars would use half the fuel as that of a taxi, it brings hope for the environment that so far no popular vehicle could provide. The cars will not only be protecting the environment, but also humans.
The author informs us that the driverless car has gone "half a millon miles without a crash"(P2) which is a major factor when it comes to the health and well being of humans on and around the roadways. The author continues to talk about Google's modified car that, "needed a whole lot of sensors"(P4) and "had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids"(P5). To a beginning driver like myself, a car can be very overwhelming with everything and one you must beware of. The driverless cars are decked out with sensors and cameras to do exactly that. All of the sensors and montiors will help the driver and passagers continue driving without the worry of an accident unlike how driving is now. The driverless not only have smart sensors, they also have smart minds.
The driverless car comes with an extreme amount of sensors for protection but the car is also so smart, it understands when driving is beyond it's ability and that a human must drive in this area. The author tells us just how smart these cars are, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents."(P7). The driverless car is not exactly driverless yet, but it is due to the important promise that anyone in or around the driverless car will be safe.
In conclusion, the driverless car is more fuel efficent and environmentally safe compared to the vehicles we drive today. Not only is the driverless car safe to the environment though, it is also safe to all passengers and pedestrians. The driverless car has many sensors and cameras so that when it is driving, it is as if an aware human is driving instead. The driverless car does have its limits though but it is not afraid to admit it. When roadways become too difficult of the car to drive its self, the car informs the driver when his/her turn is to drive. The driverless is a fall proof, safe car to be driving on our roads today. I am personally excited and very supportive of the newest autopilot car to arrive this year in 2016, and so should you. | 5 |
4151723 | The Face is a natural landform not a structure created by aliens because scientists have confirmed it. Many people still don't belive it's a natural landform. I have the following three reasons why I know that the Face is a natural landform. Reason one: the Martian mesa is a common landform around Cydonia. Second reason: after the picture was uploaded to the JPL web site they confirmed it was a natural landform. Last reason: what the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms.
First reason: the Martian mesa is a common landform around Cydonia. As it says in paragraph two " The face appeared on their monitors but the sensation was short lived." Also on paragraph wo it says " Scientists figured it was just another Mrtian mesa, common enough around Cydonia." Cydonia is a red planet with an abundant amount of Martian mesa's.
That's why i know the face is just a Martian mesa but confusing enough to be taken as an act that aliens might of done.
Second reason: after the picture was uploaded to the JPL web site they confirmed it was a natural landform. On April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia the people waited anxiously to see if it was alien made or a natural landform. On paragraph seven it says " Thousand of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." On April 5, 1998 it was confirmed that the face was just a natural landform not an alien monument as people thought.
Last reason: what the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms. On paragraph twelve it says " What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms common around the America west." It also says on paragraph twelve " It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." For those reasons I know that the face is a natural landform.
The face is a natural landform not an alien structure because scientists confirmed it. I know this for the three following reasons. Reason one: the Martian mesa is a common landform in Cydonia. Reason two: after the picture was uploaded to the JPL web site it was confirmed it was a landform. Third reasom: what the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms. For those three reasons I know that the face in Mars is a natural landform not a monument created by aliens as people belive or want to believe. | 4 |
4152101 | Smog, backed up traffic ways, and stress seem to be the main factor contributing to the decrease in car usage. Although these seem to be very negative factors, there are many advantages to limiting car use including helping our Planet Earth and less costly factors.
To begin, when we look at studies we find that when people use their cars immensely, there is a harmful effect in our atmosphere, also reffered to as The Greenhouse Effect. France has been a major component to this harmful gas, as explained by Robert Duffer in the passage
Paris bans driving due to smog
"Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals..." In addition, Duffer continues to provide evidence to this claim by further emphasizing and comparing "[Last] week Paris had 147 miocrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London," By including this simple sentence, we are fully aware of just how much harm pollution has done to the environment due to car uage in Paris. Moreover, the smog in Paris was so intense that "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Although almost 4,000 drivers were fined, the smog had cleared enough by Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday. This movement is also spreading to places such as Bogota, Colombia where they have a day free of cars with the exception of taxis and buses; for example, in the article
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota by Andrew Selsky, businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza explains "It's a good opputunity to take away stress and lower air polution," Many ideas are being formed to show that people care about what their harmful ways have done and are looking to find solutions to minimize the pollution and undo what wrong has been done.
Buying cars over the years has become quite an expense to everyone and has become somewhat burden-like. By limiting and even canceling out the use of cars people have cut down expenses greatly. Public transportation is getting on board with this idea and trying to accomodate those who have made this decision by making public transit "free of charge from Friday to Monday," according to the BBC in the article
Paris bans driving due to smog . As also mentioned the importance of car is no longer such an immediate thought to people more recently. Elisabeth Rosenthal solidifies this in the article
The End of Car Culture when she includes "recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." This clear and simple states that people are not considering their cars as such an extreme item and more considering it as a means of transportation only when absolutely necessary such as when "Bay Area Rapid Transit doesn't work." As well costs not only personally so much as federally are being affected dramatically. Elisabeth Rosenthal author of In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars explains "In previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport." By intorducing this idea, people are aware that the advantage is personal and is in the everyday common person's favor.
Not only are the advantages of limiting car usage subtle however they are also direct and can have immediate positive effects on people. By making sure people do not overdo the amount they utilize their cars, they become less stressed, have a healthier environment, and save money. This issue is worldwide however, the solution is becoming worldwide as well creating exceptional results and care from car drivers and people are really thinking outside of the box to make magic happen. | 4 |
41549ae | In the article, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute despite the dangers it presents." I agree with this, I think that venus is worthy enough to study even though its has many dangers to the planet.
One claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people send many spaceship to land on Venus, but no spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "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 ths issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This supports my claim because Venus is a challenging planet for humans to sutdy because we can't get a spaceship to land without it crashing after a few hours. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
A second claim that sudying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is presents" is that although Venus is much like our planet, we may not be able to survive in Venus. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenhiet, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own panet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encunter on earth." This supports my claim because Venus has the hottest surfface tempature of any plant in out solar system. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
A third claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people trying to study cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anythng else, from a distnace unless they get up close. A piece of evidence that supports my claim says, "Hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmospere." Another piece of evidence from the text says, "Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus woud need to get up close and personal despite the risks." This evidence from the text supports my claim because, people trying to research Venus have a hrad time doing it unless they could get up close to the the planets surface. Many researchers are working on ways to make the machines last longer despite the risk it may have. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
Overall, I support the authors suggestion that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents." Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents because researchers hve a lot to learn from this planet and what it has to hold. Just like it says in the text, "Our travles on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." I believe that when there are things that may be difficult, there will always be a way of getting throuh to it, There will always be someone willing to get through to it, despitte the dangers it presents. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.