essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
415914f | Dear Senator,
There have been multiple arguments on wether or not the Electoral College should be used for electing the President. Electing a President by the Electoral College is a better idea than electing a president through popular vote. Representatives know what is right for their country while most of American citizens would not make the right decisions, and sometimes do not even make any decisions at all.
First off, citizens themselves elect their own state representatives for the House of Representatives. They vote for them for many reasons. The representatives are well educated. The people vote for the representatives, and in return, they expect and trust the representatives to make the right decisions for them. Electing a new president is a pretty big deal and should be taken care of in the hands of the trusted representatives. According to Richard A. Posner's article
Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the P
resident, that trust is rarely betrayed .
As stated in reason 3 of this article,
"
[...]the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election." The Representatives are the most thoughtful voters. This is what the representatives do. It is their job. They dedicate most of their life to representing the people who elected them and making decisions on their behalf. They should be the ones doing the decision making.
Now if this were not to be this case and popular vote was the priority source of votes in electing a President, then the voting results would be completely biased. There would be a chance that majority of the votes put into the ballot were decided without true thought. People could easily vote on something important just by randomly electing just like closing your eyes and choosing a marble out of a marble jar. They could also vote for the canidate who their best friend voted for and not even think about their own opinion or why they even decided to choose that person in the first place. Another thing that affects the voting charts is the lack of participation. 15% of Americans do not vote. Every American citizen has the right to vote. It is their civil duty to vote during an election, and yet, 15% of them still choose not to.
What is better: A country run by people making uneducated decisions on major things or having the thoughtful people be the ones who decide on the course of this country? Unless America increases the quality of education and spreads the word on the amount of importance that it is to vote, important tasks such as electing a President should be kept in the hands of the educated Representatives of the Electoral College. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
An American Citizen | 4 |
415a9a2 | Is "The Face on Mars" created by aliens or humans? This topic can be very debatable depending on an individual's sate of mind. It may be seen as a natural landform or believed that it was created purposely. Some may even say it was the aliens who created it, while others may disagree. In all, this topic should be about looking at the facts than a matter of opinions. The Face on Mars may seem as though it was created by aliens, while there's proof of it being a natural landform on Mars.
To begin with, the Face on Mars is a natural landform. It became a priority, or an important task, to get a picture as soon as possible, to satisfy everyone's beliefs. On April 5, 1998, a NASA team, finally got a picture of it, 10 times sharper than the original showing there was no alien monument after all. To prove it once again, the NASA team captured another picture on April 1, 2001. The photo that was taken, was said to use the best quality, to show any mysterious unkowns. The Face on Mars wasn't equivalent to the name at all, it officially became an ordinary landform as such on Earth.
As continued, some will sate that it is an alien monument. There have been disagreements, even by scientist, believing it was an alien artifact. When first discovered, it seemed as though it was an Egyptian Pharoah. When photographs were taken, some argued that it was due to it being winter on Mars that the alien monument was missed, but as seen in the photographs, that is not proven to be the reason. The most recent picture was one taken to officially declare that there was no alien monument, using the camera's maximum resolution, which were used to show any objects surrounding it. As seen in the most recent phototgraph, it's equivalent to what a butte or mesa would look like.
In conlusion, "The Face on Mars" is a topic that can be seen with two sides. Depending on a person's beliefs or their state of mind, one may think differently. When looking at the facts, it is shown that it was mistaken to be an alien artifact when it really was just a natural landform. NASA's teams have been working on a way to prove it, taking massive amounts of time to get the right photographs revealing something equivalent to a butte or messa, but there will always be some who disagree. Some may say that it was NASA's fault for not showing the "real" unkown and hiding it to themselves, and taking it at the wrong time. "The Face on Mars" is well believed to be known as an alien artifact or an ordinary landform, causing many disputes to a person's beliefs and opinions. | 4 |
415c292 | How would it be to have driverless cars in today's time? Most people would love to have driverless cars becase now we are getting ot where everyone is lazy, and they might think it's just cool. There are some really good things about driverless cars, but there is also some bad thing to them as well. Good things would be things such as
I believe that there should be diriverless cars, but under some conditions. I think that if we would create driverless cars, there would be a lot of people going to sleep while the car is driving itself. I say this because you always can't just trust something with your life on the driverless cars hands. There will also be others that will try to be on their phone the whole time the car is driving instead of paying attention to the road and being alert just incase something happens with the car. They have already made some what driverless cars already. One of the examples of one is in 2013, BMW announced the develomet of "Traffic Jam Assistant." This vehicle can handle speeds up to 25 mph, but the driver still has have hands on the wheel. The human still must be alert to the road so nothing happens to them or someone else.
I think there would be no point of driverless cars if there still has to be a driver. Like Dr. Werner Huber said, "We have to interpret driving fun in a new way." So, I think they should have something entertaining for the other person in the car. They should have something entertaining but not too entertaining causing the driver not to pay attention to the road or get side attracted by the entertainment.
So there are good things and bad things about it. Just have to test them out and get a graph of injuries happened without driverless cars, and with them. It's a cool idea, but i just don't think it's safe in todays society. | 3 |
415da09 | I THINK YOU SHOULD KEEP THE ELECTORAL VOTE BECAUSE IT HELPS THE PEOPLE VOTING AND HELP THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO VOTE AND ALSO THAT THE ELECTORS STILL SHOULD BEABLE TO VOTE AND THAT IT WILL HELP ALOT OF MORE PEOPLE WHO VOTE
THE CANIDATES ARE ALL RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AND ONE PERSON HAS TO CHOOSE FROM THE CANIDATES HOW IT WILL WORK AND THAT THEY WILL PICK THE ELECTORAL VOTERS TO VOTE AND THATS HOW THEY WOULD VOTE THEY SELECT A PERSON EVERY FOUR YEARS AND THEY ASSIGN THEM FOR THE ELECTORS THEY ARE OFTEN CHOSE BY CANIDETS YOU WILL ALSO HELP THEM VOTE BECAUSE THEY VOTE AFTER EVERYONE ELSE
AFTER THE PRESIDENT ELECTION THE GOVENER PREPARES THEY WILL ALSO DETERMINE THE ELECTORS THE PRESIDENTS COULD ALSO PICK THEM THEY HOLD OFFICAL RECORDS AS TO WHAT IS BEING VOTED THEY COULD ALSO ARGUE ABOUT IT AND THATS HOW THEY COULD ARGUE ABOUT IT IT WILL ALSO LET THEM SUCCSED IN WHAT THEY WERE GONNA DO THE ELECTORS WOULD ALSO BACK UP THE OTHER PEOPLE. SO EACH EVERY FOUR YEARS THEY VOTE AND THEN THEY GET TO SEE WHO WINS.
THEY CAN GET 500,000 VOTERS AND THAT GIVES A CHANCE FOR THE PRESIDENTS TO THEY WOULD HAVE 55 REPERSENITIVES TO BACK THEM UP AND GIVE THEM MORE ELECTORAL VOTORS SO THE ELECTORAL VOTERS WOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO VOTE AND THAT THE ELECTORAL VOTERS ARE THE VOTERS THAT VOTE AT THE LAST MINUTE AND THAT THEY BACK THE PRESIDENT UP AND GIVE HIM MORE VOTES THAN THE NORMAL VOTER.
YES THEY SHOULD KEEP THE VOTERS AND THAT THEY SHOULD KEEP THE VOTERS JUST INCASE THE VOTERS DONT NEED TO COMPARE THE ELECTIONS AND THATS HOW THEY WOULD MAKE THERE FINAL DECISION AND THEN THEY WOULD MAKE THE FINAL DECISION WHO TO VOTE FOR AND IT COMES UP BETWEEN THE STATES.YES THEY SHOULD DO A FINAL VOTE DECISION AT THE END OF IT. | 1 |
415f088 | The world of technology is rapidly increasing. Along with this comes new inventions. One invention in particular is the driverless car. This car has both positive and negative affects on society. However, the driverless car is not safe and could be bad idea.
The driverless car could potentionally be a great thing. For example, this would be a fun or new way to drive and you could have in-car enterntainment. These cars can brake, accelerate, and even steer by themselves. Many people see this as a dream, but in reality it's a lot of pointless work.
At this point, driverless cars are not fully driverless. These cars need a human operator to get in and out of driveways, navigate through traffic and construction, and to go around accidents. The driver never really gets a break from driving like they would expect. The driver must remain alert while sitting in the car because the car is uncapable of doing everything itself. Some companies even stated that they would place cameras in the car to ensure that a driver is paying attention to the road. Not only is this an invasion of privacy, but it is unethical and strange. Another reason as to why this would not be a good idea is because all traffic laws would have to change regarding the use of driverless cars, and new laws would have to be written and enforced. An issue with this is figuring out who would be responsible in the case of an accident. This would either be the driver, or the manufacturer of the vehicle.
All in all, the driverless car would have to be a lot more updated if it was ever in full use. There are many problems with this idea, involving accidents, new laws, privacy, and the idea of still having to pay full attention. Many people would expect a whole new way of driving, but really the only thing a person would change is not steering and braking the entire time. | 4 |
4163451 | Hello reader I think that everyone should be a part Seagoing Cowboys program. There are limited spots on the team. We are reaching out just to you. Your pay would minimum wage but you get to see the world. We will supply the food on the trips. If you have any problem or questions send a letter back to us.
The pros are you get to go to places, you could discover new island, you see new animals that live in water. More pros you get to have a lot of time off from work. There are some cons but you may get sea sick, spend less time with your family, may not like our food we supply. One pro you can go fishing. An another pro become a better at drive ping a vessel. The final pro is how good Luke Bomberger life is now.
There are many pros for being a part Seagoing Cowboys program. The rele question is if you are going to be a part of are program. Remember if you have any questions send it by mail. There are limited amount of space on are team. We will be waiting for you. | 2 |
416fcdf | "All of our development since World War II has been centered on a car, and that will have to change," said David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America. To some or most a stament like this may seem outlandish or absurd. We use cars for daily life, to make it through this world, whether its to work, school, the store, it seems almost impossible to live without one. Vauban, Germany is an upscale community of suburban pioneers who have simply given up their vehicles. As many as 70 percent of Vauban's famalies do not own cars. Heidrun Walter, a resident and mother of two, says she is "much happier this way". So what it is that has caused many communites like Vauban to take the advantage of living without a car? Green House gases better known as smog, that is polluting our air that we breathe.
In some places like the beloved Paris, home of the Eiffel Tower, smog has gotten out of hand. Paris has even enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. After 4,000 drivers were fined and twenty seven had their cars impounded for their claimed reaction to the fine, the congestion was finally down 60 percent. Beijing, China, known for being the most polluted cities in the world the smog rivals. You might even see people wearing masks in Beijing for their own health and safety.
Bogota, Colombia has caught on and spread this idea to other countries as well. For the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis allowed for a Day Without Cars. Not even rain or shine stopped Colombians from traveling accordingly. Instead of being pessimistic about traveling alternatively most Colombian see it as a good opprutunity to take away stress and lower smog. So, imagine a day without cars in the bustling city of our own, maybe like Detroit. Well it seems that President Obama is catching on.
Recent studies suggest a drop in Americans getting licenses', buying cars, and driving all together as years pass. The number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and is dropping from there steadily. Could it be that Americans love for cars is simply not what it used to be? Or is it that more alternate and practical ways of travel are now being provided and accepted widely? Either way if our country keeps up the good work sociologist believe it will have "beneficical implications for carbon emissions and the enviroment". Meaning we are one step closer to riding our home planet of dirty air. | 3 |
417000a | In America, presidents are voted in by the electoral college. The electoral college is a process of electors from all the states that vote for the president and vice president. There are 538 electors, and you need 270 votes of that 538 to be elected. The electoral college is how we have been electing all of the presidents in America, but the president ought to be elected by a mjority vote of the people, not by some fascist in a room voting for us.
Furthermore, the office of the federal register gladly explins the process of the electoral college and it has some holes. Bradsord Plumer explains in his article ''The Indefensible Electoral College: Why Even The best laid defenses are wrong'' says ''at the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters.'' He goes on and exemplifies the fact that the way the votes are cast and counted could be in fact more individually based. Maybe Mr. Plumer is wrong and the electoral college is the best thing for us, but, most people would agree that if we could all vote and have every individual vote counted, we would have a fair election and the true winner would be voted in.
Perhaps in ''Five Reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the president'' by Richard A. Posner, an electoral college would be good to have because of run off and big states and so forth. But plainly put, if we could just count voters as people of one nation, not individual states, we could have an efficient running election. For example: say there is 300 million people in America and the president needed 150,000,001 votes to win, then the majority rules factor can be initiated and there will be no run off, no problems with big states, no problem with swing states, and the certainty of outcome of everyone's president will be decided by majority.
Last but not least, all of the authors of the articles have great arguments and have concluded as so. ''what have Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of commerce, and the AFL-CIO all, in their time, agreed on? Answer: Abolishing the electoral college!'' Bradford Plumer couldnt have summarized it better. If former presidents and other powerful organizations can can agree on abolishing the outdated electoral college then why cant we just get rid of it.
Finally, the electoral college is an old and untrustworthy system of lection currently used in the united states. perhaps if we could try the majority rules and have every legal voter counted as an individual, the election process would be more faithful. All in all, with time comes changes, and with chnges comes broad new spectrums of possibilities. But for the time being we should all be proactive in staying in motion with modernization, and every little change counts. Abolishing the electoral college is an innocent and small step in the right direction. | 4 |
4170511 | This is not a valuable thing to have in the classroom. This is not valuable because when we are on the computer we are not doing things that have anything to do with how we are feeling. When we are on the computer we are usaly writing esays, taking test, and reading articles.
Some times in the classroom we will wright esays. When we are righting esays they are usaly about books or historical people/events. These things have nothing to do with how we are feeling and when I am wrighting I never have a smile on my face even if im having a good day.
In class we will be taking test. When your taking a test its about what your thinking not how your feeling. Your not going to have a smile on your face if your thinking about the year J.F.K was shot are you?
when you are reading an article in class its rare that its funny or sad. Usaly there about politics or a historical person. You are not going to show to much emotion when reading those.
That is why I think that this would be pointless to use in a classroom. This is pointless because we dont do things that provoke emotion. We read article, take test, and wright. | 3 |
4170883 | Personally I believe that the idea of driverless cars is incredibly neat and could benefit different people in different ways. Advancements in technology are always exciting however, I feel as though this development just shows how lazy society is becoming by wanting to do the least amount of manual work as possible throughout the day. While these cars may be convenient, I stuggle to believe they are neccessary to our lives. Another negative outcome of driverless cars is diving will be a skill that nobody has anymore if it is used by less and less people over the years. Also, a car that does not need a driver would eliminate some jobs from the workforce, like taxi drivers or chauffers, which would be harmful to the economy.
Driverless cars are currently using sensory technology to give the ability to know surroundings and drive itself so a driver does not have to be bothered to drive the car themself. When this thought is taken into consideration, one could notice how the amount of work that is being put into eliminating the work of driving seems contradictory and pointless. It is arguable that driverless cars may serve purpose to the lives of disabled people who would otherwise be unable to drive themselves but even then, our current technology still requires a human to take over the vehicle at times in work zones, difficult traffic, or arouund accidents. Driverless cars are exactly that; cars without drivers. The slow decrease in people driving due to these vehicles will cause driving to be a skill that is eventually taken away by the hands of the future. Also, if "fleets of driverless formed a public-transport taxi system" taxi drivers, bus drivers, and other transportation vehicle drivers would have their jobs removed from the workforce. The jobs may not be lost right away due to the fact that the our current technology still "...requires human skills...", but eventually cars would not need drivers at all and these jobs would no longer be needed.
In my opinion, driverless cars are an interesting and exciting development in technology but they are not neccessary to our lives. These cars may be beneficial to some people, like disabled people for example, but could have negative affects on the lives of people whose income depends on the need of a vehicle to have a driver. For this reason I do not think that driverless cars should be what is the new normal for our roads. | 3 |
417a337 | While driveless cars a cooler driving yourself may be a bit more safer. Everyone knows a driveless car is awesome but has anyone ever thought about the cons of getting in a driveless car.
A driveless car are like a little computer so what happends when it fails on you.
Technology isn't always reilable. If the technology fails and some one gets injured who is to be blamed?
Cars still need human assistance for what they can't do. Some cars can steer , accelerate, and brake themselves , but no car can navigate you through work zones and around accidents. Why would we want a driveless car that can't drive its self? Traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times.
Although driveless cars are cooler for humans safety should be our first certain. We as humans have more of a say so of who protects us and technology isn't always reliable. They're alot of things that can go wrong if some one is injured but no one to blame. | 2 |
417d7f1 | In my personal opinion, I believe a computer that can read a humans's emotions by just the picture on their face, would be a great idea for children. " A classroom computer could recongnize when a student is becoming confused or bored" that detail would be exstreamly valuble, if it became real in the future. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instuctor". Can you imagine of how student problems can solved, now with this new piece of technology?
However, a good side may also have bad side. Technology is still growing and becoming more useful then ever, we use techology everywhere, for daily life plans,communicating,playing games even shopping. With those pros, come with cons, technology also has become a tool for unkindness like cyber bullying, not only that. But sick minded people, who find ways to spy on others inside their private homes through their computer cameras. Yes, their are simple remedies, like put your computer away with the top down, or when your on soical media. Don't give friends your password or post anything you know would be harmful, so a perosn can hack into it, connect to wifi's that don't allow EVERYONE to connect to them, because (it does'nt happen all the time) a person with the right system can see what your doing on your phone.
In a conclusion, my point is now, that scientists want computers to
"'calculate' emotions" . Hackers COULD find a stronger way, to make things dangerouse for people by reading their emotions through the person's private computer (unless this idea only stay in school sytems). Now, I know I may sound paraniod or even carzy, but if we're honest technology is scary. Not saying we should never use it or through it away, of course not ,it's become people's life blood now, we it for everything. More over, it's the people behind the techonogy that do the harm. Not the technology itself. I just really don't want to give more unkind people a better chance of physicaly or emtionaly hurting someone.
At the end of the day, I just don't want to give more unkind people like bullies,hackers and others be given a better chance of physiaclly or emitonaly hurting someone. It's great if scientists to come up with new ways to save people through techonogy, reading a perosn's emotions can fix things and not just for children but young adults, adults the elderly .Even people with specal dissablities, if their being tested, a computer can tell if they understand through the emitionals they give infront of the computer. I just want it to have a postive effact rather then a negitve one. | 3 |
417ecc3 | Venus is a planet that is impositble to discover the planet. Venus was also called the "Evening Star" in the brightest light in the night sky. Venus is the size of Earth but it also called Earth twin sister, and Earth neighbor is Mars. Venus is a powerful planet becaues, it had 97% of carbon dioxide, the temperatures is average to 800 degrees, had erupting volcanos, powerful earthquakes, and a frequent of lightning strikes. Scientist are willing want to discover planet Venus because they want to know how dose it form thourgh out light years. No man could survive this planet because the temperatures is very high that can burn you like your falling iinto a volcano. Venus could be a dangerios planet because it have so many bad disaster that could kill a person of 30 or 40 seconds. What if they made made a ship that could go around the planet insted land in the plant that coud be a easy way. Also they can't not study the rock, gas or anything else from the planet because, Venus is a challenge planet. Venus could be a challenge planet but it could also not. | 2 |
4180c40 | The Face, confusing and causing many arguements with others asking if it is a form of alien life, or just a natural landform. Many conspiracy theorists believe it to be an image of civilization of Mars. NASA, on the other hand believes it to be a natural landform. The Face is most likely a natural landform because of the formation, similarities with other landforms, and common sense.
The Face 's formation helps prove that it is a natural landform. A few days after the new photo of the face, NASA unveiled the photo with a caption reading," a huge rock formation. . . which resembles a human head. . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." This interpretation helped show that the Face was possibly a natural landform.
The similarities with other landforms also helps prove that it is a natural landform. Jim Garvin, cheif scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program stated,"It reminds me most of 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. Garvin is saying that it is very similar to another natural landfrom which would support the evidence that the Face on Mars is a natural landform.
The last distinct things that proves the Face on Mars is a natural landform is common sense. Many conspiracy theorists state that it is a sign of new life, but is that really what it is. In April 5, 1998, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of conspiracy theorists, and web surfers were eagerly waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing a natural landform. This proves that common sense can play a keen role in porving that the Face is a natural landform.
The Face has been puzzling many people and causingarguements over these past years. The Face is one of the hardest problems to debunk, whether you are a scientist, or an average person just wanting to figure out the problem. But after close examination from many people, it shows that the Face is a natural landform. The Face is a natural landform because of its formation, its evidence, and common sense. | 4 |
4183f2e | Many people have tried to predict what are other people feelings with a look on their face, but usually we are not always correct or can't even describe what are feeling. Well their is a software that can tell what people feelings are with just a look on their face, which is called Facial Action Coding System (FACS). This software can read different kinds faces in imagines and real people like students in classrooms. I think it is worth the value of using this technology to read students emotional expressions.
The famous painting of Mona Lisa shows no kind of actual emotional expression, but the software can pick up different kinds of emotions. " She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry, ( paragraph 1)." All of that, we could not describe without the machine and knowing that the machine works, they can use it on students. In classrooms, teachers don't usually know when students are confused, bored, or having other emotions, they can use those softwares in classrooms. " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, ( paragraph 6)." That way teachers know what do when students ethier confused or bored, that new technology will help teachers and students at schools. Usually students don't tell the teacher if he is getting confused or bored, and I think that it is a great way to use the value of that technology to students in classrooms.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) would help with teachers and students in classrooms to work more together. I do think that this new technology is worth to read students' emotional expressions. | 3 |
4185a2a | The Face on Mars is nothing but a natural occurance. On Mars, there are things called a buttle or mesa. Which in fact, is what this "face" really is. I know this because in the article, that was based off NASA's own research, "Unmasking the Face on Mars" it says, "What the picture actually shows is the martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-landforms common around the American West." We have these landforms on our very own planet, so its understandable as to how we can recognize one on another planet.
On top of that, we used top quality equipment to study and research the Face on Mars. This is backed up by how in the article it says, "Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. 'We had to roll the space craft 25 degrees to center the face in the field of view,' said Gavin. 'Malin's team captured an extraordinary 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 photo."
In the article itself it even says that the face is no alien monument. "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL website, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." With all that being said, with all the proof NASA gathered, its impossible for the "Face on Mars" to be anything but a natural occurance. | 3 |
41867ee | Looking at the factors of being able to visit Venus the author has some great points in the passage due to how dangerous it seems, The author is very correct on even asking why scientists are so drawn to visiting this unexplored planet for good reasons alone. The planet Venus has some pros and also cons. it may well once was a planet just like Earth a long time ago but that we only know. and some pros is that maybe that planet could possibly even help scientists with new possible discoveries.
Elon musk is one who is also trying something beyond of what we have ever set our sights on. he is trying to find a way to colonize mars!!, yet we also have plans to visit Venus. The Author also has some very good points on why its so difficult to even get close to the planet at all. When stated "Each previouse mission was unmanned, and for a good reason" in paragraph 2 is almost forshadowing the dangers of the plannet Venus.
Due to a very thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide that blanket venus is one of the dangers of the planet, so looking at the factors again on why the Author thinks why Venus is very difficult to set foot on or even get close to, We can just look at the planet from a safe distance. for now. | 2 |
418f0dc | Cars have always been known for their efficiency, and speed at which they bring their driver to his or her desired destination. Although, many people are aware of the causes of driving and the negative effects of a car, most never look at the possibilities. They don't know what they are being deprived of due to the simple, solvable problem of driving cars. As countries of the world experience a cultural shift in their daily lives, people are becoming aware of the significant advantages of limited car usage, including lower emissions, increased physical activity, and decreased stress, which in turn would increase overall pleasure.
With a change in one's daily life, the linear relationship between car usage and carbon emmissions, means that as car usage decreases so does pollution. In "The End of Car Culture," Elisabeth Rosenthal comments on the scientific opinion regarding this cause and effect relationship in America: "If the pattern persists-and many sociologists believe it will-it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment." Cars are a large contributor to the increasing amount of waste and toxins that make one's air water polluted. Therefore, with a drop in the usage of cars, people and land will be become healthier and cleaner. Emissions are also a problem in Europe where the "Day Without Cars" was used to promote "alternative transportation" in order to reduce "smog."(Selsky) Cars are often used get to specific places such as work or school. So why would two people drive two seperate cars if they're going to the same place? By using public transportation such as a bus or subway, one is killing two birds with one stone by using a smaller amount of gas and fossil fuels to delivery two people to their desired locations, a smarter and cleaner choice.
The limit on car usage has also caused an increase of physical activities within a society. The lack of cars has created the desire for outdoor involvement as Andrew Selsky suggests in "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" when he informs people of the "improvement caimpaign in Bogota" that has enouraged the "construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths." Since space is no longer needed for the creation of parking lots, people now have ample room to create the resources needed for activities such as bike riding. Just having things such as trails visible to the public, motivates people to be active. The possibilities of physical activity areas are also encouraged by a change in the transportation bill. In current years, a drastic "80% has gone to highways" whereas only "20% went to other transport."(Rosenthal) With a decrease in the demand for cars and similiar ways of private transportation, there won't be a need for large highways. Since more money is now available to be used elsewhere, oppurtunities for parks and sports centers are opening up.
Although many may not be aware, a decrease in cars also brings a decrease in stress. This is even hinted at by "Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza" when he says "'It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress..."(Selsky) Although people depend on cars for quick transportation, it can become a hastle when traffic comes into play. It also costs people lots of money when it comes to paying for gas, so an overall reduction of cars would fix all problems regarding stress. As a result of the reduction in car usage, several "new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up," as Andrew Selsky informs the public in "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota." With an increase of space to build malls and social places, people have a better chance of staying relaxed and stress-free. Not only do these places enourage relaxation, but they provide a place for one to spend time with friends and family.
From driving hazardous and waste-producing cars to saving money, riding bikes, and hanging with friends at the mall, limiting car usage not only creates a healthier community but provides people with oppurtunities to be better. All around the world people are working to change their daily habits that have created the dirty world one lives in today. Limiting car usage creates an overall happier environment to live in and an endless amount of possibilities. | 6 |
418f2bf | Dear Senator of Florida,
Citizens and residents of the state of Florida, or "Floridians" may have an issue with the Electoral College vote. The majority of citizens and residents of this state may ask a request to change the Electoral College vote to popular vote. The reasons to why they're asking a request may be either because they're tired of it, find it unfair, or they want to try how successful the popular college vote can be when it comes to electing their president, although they don't know if their expectations might go wrong and it will be a complete chaos. Well, I personally believe that the Electoral College Vote should be kept in the state of Florida because it avoids run-off elections, and it has been practiced for the past 2 centuries and it seems it has been a success.
To begin with, the Electoral College vote should be kept because it avoids run-off elections not only in the United States but especially here, in the state of Florida. This means that the Electoral College vote avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. In the article "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner Election" it states, "It can be argued that the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state... Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election". This quote indicates that the Electoral College vote equally distributes the states' votes to the corresponding candidate who's running for President and every amount of the state's vote counts.
I understand that the Electoral College may be consider extremely unfair and useless to some citizens and residents here in the state of Florida because of its way of processing the votes and electing the President. | 2 |
41a6642 | Studying Venus can be dangerous but,there are some times where it's not dangerous. Venus is the second planet from the solar system. No spaceship has landed on Venus for decades. Venus is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Astronomers have been intreaged by Venus by looking like an Earth-like planet.
Venus was covered with oceans a long time ago. Venus has rocky sediment which are valleys,mountains,and craters. NASA has an idea by sending by sending humans to study Venus. Venus has a ground condition that is 170 degrees Fahrenheit. Air pressure in Venus is kinda close to the sea level on Earth.
Venus has a dense atmosphere and you can't see it with light. Researchers can't take samples of rock,gas,or anything else. Researchers see taking risks as challenges. Researchers are using machines to study Venus to know the knowledge of Venus. The machines are made out of silicon carbide.
The machines has lasted 3 weeks. NASA has another project called mechanical computers which is old technology. They're first envisioned in the 1800s. In the 1940s,it played an important role during World War ll. Those kinds of computers used to exist in those days.
In conclusion,its still ok to go to Venus. Venus has a lot of similarities to Earth. Venus is not dangerous. Even though it has hot temperature,its still good. Astronauts can go to Venus. | 2 |
41b695b | Driving at times can be a really big issue to deal with. There are so many thing that can go wrong, a crash, then increase in insurence, you might even get your license taken away after that. When you don't drive, the world is an open book just waiting to be read. Walking or riding bikes can relieve stress and make you more fit and in shape. The gasses that come from cars are just aweful for the environment, and there would be such a largly reduced number in traffic jams if pleople would just get off the road. Once your on the road, anything can happen. It's dangerous, i sometimes even wonder if i really want a license.
When you drive there are so many traffic jams. The idea of never having to worry about traffic again is intriguing. Why worry about having to rush through traffic just to get to work on time, when instead you can simply manage your time correctly and walk at the pace you are comfortable with. Traffic jams cause accidents that put peoples lives at risk. In the article, ''Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Botoga'' by Andrew Selsky, he states, ''...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''. The car-free day in Colombia is working to perfection to promote alternative transportation, i don't see why we dont have this in the United States.
Drivig causes stress and tension and that's never good. A stressed driver is a dangerous driver, when you're stressed you become more careless and less aware of your surroundings and that is very dangerous as a driver it leads to wreckless driving and accidents. Being without a car relieves this stress for many people. In the article, ''In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars'' by Elisabeth Rosenthal, a quote from the article states, ''When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way,'' said Heidrun Walter. This shows that cars are a lot to handle and that most people just believe it is too much stress for one person to deal with.
The smog and pollution caused by all the cars that are on the road these days is another reason why it is best to stay off the road. In the article, ''Paris bans driving due to smog'' by Robert Duffer, he says, ''[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world''. The cities ban on cars on the road shows a serious concern in the saftey of the people because of all the smog that driving has caused.
Some people might argue that cars would be faster, but if you take a car you are going to be mor at risk of an accident, you're going to be polluting the air, and you'll only be stressing yourself out in the process. I strongly suggest that America does something to change our ways, because if we don't, we'll end up like Beijing and Paris with an extremly high pollution rate. | 4 |
41b88e2 | I think that the Electoral College vote is important because it is the government officals who make up that vote. They have experiece with governent matters so they could have better judgement than the majority population.
Now that statement it not one hundred percent accurate but I would guess that the people running the country would hopefully have a decent idea for who should run everything. Now this doesn't mean that everyone in higher power is smart and knows what choices to make. Some would argue that none of them have any idea what they're doing. I have slightly more faith then those folks. I think the Electoral vote is important, just not as important as it currently is. I think the Electoral college vote counts but I do agree that it shouldn't be the most important group of vouters. Voting should be by the people for the people. So the majority vote should be the primary source.
In conclusion I believe that the Electoral College vote is important but not as important as the majority population vote. | 2 |
41b9987 | Facial Action Coding System is a new software that has given computers the ability to identify the emotion of a person. It does this by constructing a 3-D model of the face. This new innovative software can identify six emotions of a human. These emotions are happiness, disgust, anger, sadness, and fear. This tecnology can be useful in many different ways in today's world. There are also some things that may not be so good about this either.
This software has many positve things about it that can help students and teachers across the world. The software can help inside the classrooms. Using this software to calculate and identify people's emotions, it would be very easy to see if a student is struggling. Many students who struggle keep it to themselves hoping to catch on. This may not be the case in every student, though. Dr. Huang predicts that, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." If this software can actually detect this, then it would make learning and teaching way easier. Teachers could try different teaching methods to help with the growth and progress of their students and help them understand what they're doing. They could aslo try something that is more fun and appesaling to the students. This technology could be lifesaving in the classroom.
Although this software could help many people everywhere, how does everyone feel about this? If used in the classrooms, some parents and students may not want this to be a part of their learning environment. Many students could be sad all of the time due to person issues and home life. Would they want their teacher to know that they were always upset? I think that it would be a good idea to first have recieved permission from every student and parent before allowing this into the classrooms.
I also think that this software could literally save lives. If it is able to identify these emotions, it could prevent students from harming themselves. The software can determine your emotion based on every little detail of your face. In pararaph 8 the author states, "Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius." With this being said, if you try to hide your emotions, the computer will still be able to tell. I think school counslors should have this tecnology in schools right now. Getting proper equipment to identify how a student is feeling could help the counselors talk to them about their problems because not all students will share how they feel.
With all the information that i provided, I definitely think that this technology is valuable. The software provides accurate results and it could eaily help students and teachers everyday in the classroom. What more could you ask for than a safe and reliable software that could raise test scores and possibly save some lives? This may just be the next big thing. | 5 |
41bb18f | I am against driverless cars. I believe that driverless cars, although they may change the world, are too advanced a technology, and some people wouldn't like them. Driverless cars would be run by computers, well who's to say the computer won't malfunction or get a virus, ending in the taking of a life? Paragraph nine brings in the same problem when it comes to the computer driven cars. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- The driver or the manufaturer?" Driverless cars could cause more accidents than preventing less.
Television and movies have always seemed to have an interest with self driving cars, as paragraph two put it. Look at all the cultural icons that have had self driving cars, Inspector Gadget, the Jetsons, and Batman being three icons. The self driving car seems a bit preconcieved for our technology today. I know how many viruses and crashes a computer has, and if that happened on a highway, going 55 mph, that would cause a wreck. Of course there are sensors,in a car, but they woukldn't be fast enough to come to a halt without a driver slamming the breaks. "In the 1980s, automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilick brakes. Sensors have became more and more advanced with technology, since the 1980s.
Smart roads, could have become more developed, if we had found a better way of sending the signals through to the cars. Cars now, have sensors telling you when you're going to back into something, and there's even cameras that you can put on the hatch of the trunk for a better view to back up with. The technology in the "Traffic Jam Assistant" requires a human driver when a problem occurs. The problem with self driving cars, is that they don't know where a recent accident is, or where work zones are. These cars are not the safest models out there, and I wouldn't allow myself to drive one.
Driving laws would have to change due to these self driving cars. Not all the states are allowing the self driving cars to be tested. Traffic laws woukld need to be change. There's also the insurance policy, who would be to blame in an accident? The car manufacturer for it malfunctioning, or the driver behind the wheel? These car that are driven entirely by themselves, seem to put others at risk. Many people could be injured from one small glitch in a command code being sent to the car.
I am against having self driving cars, because driverless cars could cause more accidents. More people would get injured, or even killed, in more automobile accidents than they already do. Television has sparked this idea of self driving cars, but these cars are still under development. Self driving cars need to be tested more, and proven more reliable, before being sold on the market. These cars are too advanced for the world at the moment, and with more work they may finally be reliable and safe to drive. | 4 |
41bd378 | The challenge of exploring venus is very risky because the dangers at the planets surface and around the planets atmosphere. Even though the planet shows lots of risks for us to explore it is still worth exploring our twin planet. The risks of exploring venus are the thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blanketing venuse. The clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmosphere.
The surface temperature averages over 800 degrees fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than what we experience on earth such an environment would crush even a submarine accustormed to diving to the deepest parts of the ocean and would liquefy many metals. The planet also has additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
But dispite the risky conditions NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface would be to float above the fray. A blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape . At 30 pluse miles above the surface temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees fahrenheit but the air pressure would be more like the air pressure at sea level on earth. These arent easy conditions but survivable for humans. | 2 |
41bdcef | I think it will be ok because it will be cool to see other painting emotional. Then people can know how she was during the painting. In classroom it could be ok but i think some students wont like it . Some students might not want what emotional there feeling that day but some would liek it. I will be ok with it. Also it will also be cool it painting a drawing then see it emotional.
They did this in Unversity of Amsterdam with Dr. Huang they developoing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. They use 3-D computer model of the face. It will show every emotional u are feeling when u are there. It called Facial Action Coding System or FACS. The facial expressions for each emotion are universeal. Humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day.
In conclusion it will be a good class to be in and will be fun. They should make a class for it so other students can see the new technolgy. Dr. Hung is smart for making this and the other people that help him. I would like to help him with the project that he did . The FACS will be good for every one that want to see his emotion. | 1 |
41c10b3 | Dear Senator ,
I personally think that the electoral college should not be abolished. Yes some things are unfair for example : voters don't vote for the president directly and the fact that voters can't always control whom their electors vote for . That's life though , life is unfair to everyone . Instead of shutting the whole electoral college down , they should try to improve it so the voters can be satisfied . The electoral college plays a big part in the voting process. Although there are many unfair things the electoral college helps. The president should be elected by the electors because they know more than the amount of people who voted for them so they could elect the president. I believe that the voting process is not as simple as it looks , it's more complicated then that , it might seem simple to us but complicated to others. The voting process would be harder without the electoral college and the citizens won't have anyone or anything to guide them. A lot of us don't really know about politics , the real side of the candidate shows when he become the president , the electors can already start to see the real side of the candidate even though he's not the president. The citizens need a group of people to guide them in the right direction so they won't regret the choices that they made . Yes the electoral college has a few negative things but it's for the best. In my opinion electoral college should continue because overall this process helps a lot. Instead of stating the wrong facts about the electoral college , we should all try to make it a better process so all the people who think it's unfair think otherwise.
I genuinely think that this process is for the best and I hope that you will think about everything I just said and try to improve this good process.
Sincerely ,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
41cfc2c | The so called "Face" on Mars brought an abundance of attention to NASA and the planet Mars. Everything from magazines, books, and a movie talked about how the Face was created by aliens. The Face was not created by aliens, but is a natural landform found on Mars.
The Face was reveald from a photo taken by Viking 1 in 1976. The photo taken looked like a face because the cameras where not as advance has they are today. The photo was taken with a resolution with 43 meters per pixel leaving out many details that could not be captured, therefore making the landform appear as if it were a face. When NASA took a seccond photo with a camera that had a resolution of 1.56 meters per pixel in the exact same location as the first photo was taken the image looked nothing like a face because it captured many more details than the first this show the distortion of the first caused it to look like a face. Also when the seccond photo was taken it was a clear day and there was not any clouds unlike the first photo which means it could not have been affected at all. Unlike the seccond image the first had clouds which could draken or lighten the image in certain places to give details that make it look like a face are not actually there on the landform.
In conclusion, the so called "Face" on Mars is nothing but a landform on the planet. It was not created by aliens, but the planet it self. It just happend to resemble a face because of poor resolution and clouds in the atmoshere. | 3 |
41d05c2 | Cars nowadays are a big part of our lifes, they take us to where we need to go and help us go to far away places. Even though cars are important in our lifes, there are alot of advantages to limited car usage. Some places such as VAUBAN, Germany have given up their cars. "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park--large garages at the edge of the development, where car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home." This results in less people owning or having cars and reducing green house gas emissions from tailpipes. "Passangers cars are responsible for 12 percent of green house gass emmissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States" (source 1). Private ownership of cars are slowly choking our cities, if we limit our car usage little by little it may have a huge effect in our ecosystem.
In continuation, there have been situations where the air pollution got so bad that they had to ban driving so they could clear the air. For example in Paris, "after days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global city"(source 2). The drivers were fined a 22-euro fine if they did not leave their cars at home. In the end the smog cleared and the French party recinded the ban for odd-numbered plates. This is one of the many examples that proves that just by having less cars driving around it eventually changes the way the atmosphere looks and cleans the atmosphere a little.
Smog is a sign of high air pollution, it indicates that the air is not healthy and this can be harmful to our enviroment. "It was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of 7 million. The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog." As indicated in the passage(source 3), "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", just one day without cars can reduce smog imagine if we go weeks without a huge number of cars driving around. This idea might sound crazy to some people but it has suprisingly helped the enviroment. This however is not the only advantage of reducing car usage. Some other advantages are that if we go to our jobs in a bike everyday or just go for a walk instead of a drive we are also being more productive and active, hence making us healthier.
Although some people might find leaving their cars behind is a bad idea, studies have shown that people who do so gets used to the idea and find less reason to resume the habit of car commuting. For example instead of driving to the beach we should ride our bikes or take public busses to get there. Without cars we learn to appreciate the beauty of nature more and notice things about the place were we live that we have never seen before. I have came to notice that when you are driving you really dont notice things because you are to busy focusing on the road, but when u have a walk around your neighborhood or anywhere for that matter you see things you have never noticed before and you leaarn to appreciate nature more. The idea of leaving our cars behind is hard for some people, but if you think about the effect it will have on the enviroment it is worth it.
In conclusion, car-free cities might sound like a joke to some people but it is helping out in clensing our enviroment increasingly. As indicated in the passage, "The End Of Car Culture", "If the pattern persists--and many sociologists believe it will--it will have beneficial implications for carbon emmissions and the enviroment, since transportation is the second largest source of Americas emissions, just behind power plants." We are responsible for how our enviroment is going to look like in the future years, wouldnt it be better for it to look like a beautiful clear sunny day or a foggy grey fuss? Quiting a habit like driving is very hard but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. | 4 |
41d63b7 | As a scientist of NASA, I can say that "The Face" is in fact a landform. We made this conclusion when we first snapped a picture 10x faster of the face, we also took a second look and picture, and it has simalarites like a natural landform from the Snake River Plain of Idaho on Earth. But, there are people that think our conclusion to this is a conspiracy theory.
In 1998 on April 5, for the first time, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia. A picture was captured 10x better than the orginal viking photos. they were later posted on a website for the public to see but for the people who thought it was a sign of life on Mars, they were wrong. Scientist's said it was just a natural landform.
For the second time, the scientist could yet again reach Cydonia once again to turn their conspiracy theory to fact. Others back on Earth said it was too windy and it made the clouds affect the picture. This time researchers used a maximum resolution camera to prove the theorists wrong. Yet again Garvin said, " If there were objects in this picture...you could see what they were."
Scientist said that the "face" was equivalent to a butte or mesa. They made this staement because there is something similar to it on Earth in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. These are found around the American West. Garvin said, " That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the "Face on Mars."
On the other side of things, there were many conspiracy theorists that questioned NASA's claim. Everyone wasn't satisfied with the pictures that were first taken people said it was during a cloudy season, that's why there was another trip with more advanced equipment. They also stated that the camera on board had to go through the clouds and dust to see the face so the picture couldn't been shown clearly. Another claim they made is that since there were wispy clouds the alien markings could be hidden in the haze and scientists just didn't look hard enough.
In conclusion we have the facts that we need to prove that " The Face" is just a natural landform. We have provided the public with two pictures. Plus we also made observations that it looked like a landform from here on Earth. As NASA, we would like to see the conspiracy theorists prove us wrong then they could state the facts for once. | 4 |
41d957f | There are many advantages to limiting car usage. The whole world has already figured that out. Many countries are now starting to limit the car usage. It is a good idea to limit the car usage because they damage our enviroment and cars are not needed for average everyday life.
First, reducing the use of cars would make the world a much better place in terms of the enviroment. In the article "Paris bans driving due to smog" written by Robert Duffer he explains how the smog caused by cars has polluted the air causing Paris to put a partial ban on driving. " Diesel fuel was blamed, since France has ... a tax policy that facors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France....". This quote by Robert Duffer explains just how bad the air must have been polluted because of the cars. They blamed the pollution on diesel fuel and that was 67 percent of the cars in France, which is a lot, and it was so bad that they had to make a partial ban to driving. We can already tell that our enviroment is not that good because of all the other pollutants that we have but by reducing the usage of cars that can make our enviroment so much better because that is getting rid of one major factor to the problem of pollution.
Next, many people do not even use cars that much. As stated in the article "The end of car culture" written by Elisabeth Rosenthal "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009..". In this quote it states that a lot of new people are not starting to drive anymore. Without new people driving we will just loose the amount of people driving continuosly becasue of people dying and no people to replace them. Also in the article "In German Suburb, life goes on without cars" written also by Elisabeth Rosenthal, it explains how the people don't need cars anymore because they can just walk, ride, or find another way to their destination. Therefore if there is no longer a need for cars then we can easily limit the use of them.
In conclusion, there is not a reason anymore to use cars. If we can compact some cities and make everything easy enough to access without a car then we could just get rid of them completely. Cars are only used for transportation, otherwise they just cause problems like pollution, acciedents, and being unhealthy. So it would be excellent to limit car usage to help the enviroment and to jsut get rid of them entirely becasue we no longer need them. | 4 |
41de9e7 | Cars are one of the main causes of air pollution is the United States and the world. If everyone would limit their car usage, one would see all the great benefits of not using a car as much. Limiting car usage helps keep our planet clean and people would be a lot happier.
To begin with limiting car usage would help keep our plant clean. In the article, "Paris bans driving due to smog", the author, Duffer, states "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." After this ban was enforced Paris' air was cleared in a less than a week. This proves that one doesn't even have to limit their car usage a lot, even just a little bit helps. In the article, "The End of Car Culture", the author, Rosenthal, claims that Bill Ford, chairman of the Ford Motor Company, wants to create cities in which "pedestrain, bicycle, private cars, commerical and public transportatons traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lowers emmissions and improve safety." This shows that even Bill Ford, the chairman of FORD MOTOR COMPANY, even agrees that limiting car usage would help lower global pollution.
On another hand, limiting car usage makes people a lot happier. In the article, "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", the author, Rosenthal, states "'When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two...." A normal person, a person like everyone else, claims that they're happier without a car, less stressful, imagine what just limiting your car usage would do. In the article, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", the author, Selsky, says "'It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as her rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife." This shows that limiting car usage for just a day, takes away stress and helps the planet. Wouldn't it be nice to have a stress-free day?
In conclusion, limiting car usage, even just a little, reduces pollution and causes happiness. One can help themselves, while also helping the planet. | 4 |
41dfd07 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present because the planet is like Earth's twin. According to the article Venus is the second planet from the sun, it's a very challenging place to examine, and humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this planet. Every mission was ummanned, and for a good reason because no spacecraft survived the landing for mroe than a few hours. Although, with all the challenges, scientists are still continuing to study the planet.
Venus has a thick atmostphere of 97 percent carbon dioxide. It is even more challenging because the clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The planet surface's temperatures average over 800 degree Fahrenheit, and the atmoshperic pressure is 90 times greater than what is on Earth. The conditions there is very extreme, for example, the planet is covered with oceans, it can crush a submarine when is dived into the deepest parts of the ocean. Even metals can be liquefied.
Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it is very Earth-like. Humans believe that it was once coverd largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has features that are like Earth. It has valleys, mountains, and craters. Someday, Venus could be opened as an option for a planetary visit but it is crucial due to the long time frame of space travel.
NASA has one idea of how we could send humans to study Venus. According to article, NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Just like jet airplanes traveling higher altitudes to fly over storms. A vehicle hovering over venus would avoid the harsh contact with the ground's conditions. The article states that, solar power there would be plentiful, and the radiation would not exceed Earth levels. The condition is not easy, but the planet is surivivable for humans.
In conclusion, Venus is a survivable planet for humans because it has many Earth-like features. Due to the ground condition, NASA has came up with the idea of hovering over the surface to aviod any contacts with the toxic groud. The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit, which most will agree with because it is proven that Venus is a survivable planet. It may have many dangerous situations, but luckly, we have scientists who studies things like this to make it possible for humans to go through each danger we might encounter, if we were to one day live on the planet. | 3 |
41e1988 | Think about how many times a week we get in a car to drive somewhere. I know I drive to school, to lacrosse practice, and to spend time with friends on a weekly basis. Some people may claim that driving is a possitve aspect of our culture because it allows us to get from one place to another and accomplish tasks in a timley fasion, but driving in excess has some serious consequences. Although some may argue that it is impossible to completely cut out an action that is essential to our daily lives, and that cutting down on driving would not be adventageous, limiting the amount of time we spend driving has many advantages. Cutting down on automobile use will decrease pollution in our air, and make us healthier and happier, which is why many legeslators and cities are reducing automobile use.
Beijing, China, is the most polluted city in the world according to Robert Duffer of the Chicago Tribune in 2014. (source 2 paragraph 14) This is due to the fact that Bejing's automobile use is extremly high. When the city of Paris was faced with a similar crisis, it issued a partial driving ban that allowed people to only drive on days that the government said they could in accordance to their lisence plate number, or they would face a fine. (source 2 paragraph 10-19). This revolutionary ban caused the air pollution in Paris to drop so much that the ban was lifted after only one day. The drop in air pollution clearly refutes the claim that cutting down on driving is not adventageous. Cutting down on automobile use is beneficial to the environment because, according to Elizabeth Rosenthal of the New York Times in 2009 (source 1 paragraph 5), "Passenger cars are responsible for 12% of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50% in some car-intensive areas in the United States." Limiting automobile use is crucial to cleaning our air and stopping the burning of fossil fuels, thus explains why is beneficial to limit our car use.
Although some might argue that driving a car to work is easier, evidence shows that people who limit their car use are happier and healthier. Rosenthal writes about the city of Vauban, Germany, where "70% of Vauban's families do not own a car." (source 1 paragraph 3) Heidrum Walter, a carless citizen from Vauban, states that, "When I had a car, I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." (source 1 paragraph 3) The concept of people being happier and healthier without cars is further proved in Bogota, Columbia, where, according to Andrew Selsky of the Seattle Times in 2002, "For the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in the capital city of 7 million." (source 3 paragraph 21) Carlos Arturo Plaza stated, "It's a good opprotunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,"as he rode his bike with his wife. The statements from Walter of Vauban and Plaza of Bogota show how limiting automobile use is advantageous to the overall well-being and happiness of people, thus we should limit our automotive use.
Limiting automobile use is so beneficial, that many groups and legeslators are supporting a society with less cars. The EPA in the United States is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act. (source 1 paragraph 9) David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America, states that, "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change." Sociology proffesor at Drecel University, Mimi Sheller, further elaborates, stating, "Different things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long-term cultural shift." (source 4 paragraph 35) The support for a "car reduced" society by the US government and the EPA is the cherry on top to all of the benefits associated with driving less, thus we should limit our automobile use.
Society is changing. A study last year found that driving by young people decreased by 23% between 2001 and 2009. (source 4 paragraph 41) Now is the time to turn off the engine, get out of the car, and take a bus, bike, or train to work. By limiting our automobile use, we keep our air clean by burning less fossil fuels, and we are happier and healthier, which is why organizations like the EPA support the reduction of car use. We need to act today to save the next generation of citizens from ecological destruction. The benefits of reducing car use are countless, which explains why we should limit our automobile use. | 5 |
41e75d6 | Dear,
State Senator
I believe that the way of voting for a president though the Electoral College is outdated. The popular vote should be deciding who becomes president. Some Runner-ups have had the backing of the popular vote and not won because of the Electoral College. Several things you should consider is people can actually vote though popular vote, the minority will have a better chance, and presidents have lost to the Electoral College.
First, People can actually vote, when people go to vote for the next preident or the returning one they arent actually voting for the president they are voting for electoral votes but some state wont even allow people to vote for that. Some states the electors vote for who they want and the peoples votes they are accounting for become nothing. They go out and vote for nothing. " Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana Legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors wiht new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy."(source 2) This is what cna happen when poeple can vote who they want and u have electors doing it for them they will put someone in the race that no one wants to really be there. But some poeple say that the Electoral College is there to help us and to help most states have the winner take all system. " The electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states."(source 2) which means that they won't visit every state because there is no reason to visit some.
Next, The minority will have a chance, If there ever is a deadlock in the campiagn the voting will have to go to the house which will be mostly filled with the majority side. So the minority won' have much of a chance." Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state." (source 3) that means a close election isn't so close anymore because of Electoral vote. But some people will say u can never get a tie. " A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes-538- is an even number."(source 3)
Continueing on that note, Runner-ups have lost due to electoral vote but have won the popular vote."According to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after Al Gore- tanks to the quirks of the electoral college- won the popular vote but lost preisidency."(source 2) Which means Al Gore would have been president and not the other guy. Which would have changed today in one way or another. Some people do say The electoral vote is for the better. " The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President." (source 1)But why do they get to vote for them and we dont.
In Conclusion, The Electoral College should be eradicated and the popular vote should take its place. The popular vote is better because people can actually vote, the minority will have a chance, Presidents loss becasue of Electoral Vote but win the Popular vote. In the end the Electoral College is outdated, unfair, and irrational. | 4 |
41e799c | Do you think that if you had a Facial Action Coding System (FACS) in your class that you would understand what is going on in that subject? I'll tell you that this is not the case.
First,the invintion of FACS created by Prof.Thomas Huang and Dr. Paul Eckman at the University of Illinois with help from Prof. Nicu Sebe of the University of Amsterdam is supose to recognize human emotions and he explains that "We can accually calculate human emotions like math homework". There are 44 major muscles in your face and the movement of one or more is called an action unit.Knowing this they can even detect a fake smile or frown ect.
Furthermore,The creators say that if the FACS machine was in a classroom that it could help solve any problems that a student has.The machine could detect if there was a ploblem a student couldnt understand,and that it could change and fix the problem if the student couldn't understand. I dont believe that it could because if one student doesnt understand and it changes the whole problem or subject I believe that it could throw off the other students as well. Also we never know if it could detect the right emotion or if it could malfunction and or distract others.
In conclusion, I don't believe that the FACS machine would be ethical in the classroom because, it could malfunction, detect false emotion,and or be a distraction to others. | 3 |
41eab0c | Dear State Senator, I strongly believe that changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United State. Changing the election may increase the hopes for more people to vote. From the passage one of my sources I choose is Source Three called In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner. My second source is Source Two called The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradford Plumer. I believe that sources two and three will get my point across of why changing the election by popular votes for the president of the United States be changed.
To Begin With, Source Three called In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner one of my example for picking this reason is because it tells us how a map shows a breakdown of the number of electoral votes given to each state. Meanwhile, the Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism a non-democractiv method of selecting a president. The Elecoral College method is not democratic in modern sense , however, it is the electors who elect the president, not the people. Another example of reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President is the Certainy of Outcomes. In 2000, a dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote was possible but, was less likely than a dispute over the popular vote. For example the 2012 election, with Obama received a 61.7 percent of the electoral votes compared to Romney vote 51.3 percent of the popular vote cast. The people should be able to pick there president and so forth. Electrol College dont have nothing to deal with the people on who should be president. The Electoral College stand on there on bases of being part of something that belong in the past not the present and just giving candidates plurality.
So Moving Forward, Source Two called The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradford Plumer one of my example for picking this reason is because Richard Nixon, Jimmy, Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that they all agreed on abolishing the electoral college, and adding that they are not alone, thanks to the quirks of the electoral college winning the popular vote but lost the presidency, over a 60 percent of voters would of perfer a direct election to the kind we have know. Whats wrong with the electoral college? Well, let me tell you under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. Who pick the first electors in the first place? I know the answer to that it depends on the state. Its sometimes the states conventions, the states party central committee, and the presidental candidates themselves. At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair voters because of the winnere take all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chances of winning and focus on the tight swings states that they may have a chance in. Its offical the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. This is why the electoral college system is wrong.
To Conclude, State Senator I strongly believe that if changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United State is due to the people choice and not the Electoral College changing the election may increase the hopes for more people to vote. Source Three that is called In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner, and Source Two called The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Bradford Plumer. I believe that sources two and three will get my point across of why changing the election by popular votes for the president of the United States be changed. | 3 |
41eb4a6 | I am againt the development of driverless cars. Driverless cars need a whole lot of sensors. Radar was a device on a hiltop that cost two hundred million dollars. We should be investing that money on things that are important. For example help people in need, feed the hungry ect. Why woukld anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't the drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive? we are becoming lazier by the time. Imagaine how much money the driverless cars will cost in the future. Most of of wouldn't even have the money to afford them. We will still buy them, why? Because everyone will have them and it will be the trend, we get carried away for what others get or do and we want to do the same. If technology failed and someone is injured, who is at fault the driver or the manufacture? We shouldn't trust in techonolgy, failure could happen. hese werer some reasons why I am againt the development of driverless cars. | 2 |
41ebc9a | Through out this whole article it seems like the author wants someone to go to Venus. He is giving reasons and facts throught the passege. I believe the author wants it explored.
Pretty much all of paragraph 8 explains it. "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead is into many equally intimidating endeavors." That whole sentece showed that the author was voting to go to Venus not against it. He supported his claims pretty well, after reading this I feel like it could become possible in the near future.
All of this article is scatter with facts and evidence on why humans could survive on Venus. I beleave the other is very set on the idea of humans on Venus. After reading this I feel like it could become possible in the near future. | 2 |
41ec8bc | Venus is really dangerous. All of "The challenge Of Explroing Venus" is about exploring Venus. If you go and explore it be ready to be hurt when your done exploring Venus. Nasa is trying to get a big blimp to hover over Venus so you dont hurt yourself inside Venus.
How Venus is really dangerous? People have been up their and said that there are really bad surface conditions. In Pargaraph 4 it is saying "long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth". Thats how bad they are saying it could be really dangerous inside of Venus. So to fix the problem of people getting hurt now NASA is trying to get a 30 or so mile blimp to hover over the roiling Venusian landscape. At the endof the article It says that they strived 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 endavors. At the end of all of this i would still not go because you dont know what is around it or in it to get you hurt.
The purpose of this essay is persuade people not to go to Venus beause its deadly. I dont kno if i would trust the inside of Venus or a 30 or miles so blimp floating of the landscape. Never go to Venus because of what can happen to you while your in it or out. | 2 |
41f185b | Gaining vast information and knowlege on the planet of Venus would be worth the dangers it pourtreys, because it is the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author explains that Venus is very valuable planet to scientists and NACA, even though all previous missions for exploring it have not lasted for no more than a few hours. "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system"(4). So it is very important to gain more information and data on such a unquie planet. By gaining information on Venus we may learn more about our own planet, Earth, which is worth the dangers exploring it presents.
While scientists and Astronomers would gain vast data and information if they were to explore Venus up close, exploring it is not an easy task. In the article it states that "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no scapecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours" (2). Also it exclaimed that the "temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet" and "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system" (3). So it is very hard and dangous to send any kind of big technology to Venus, without it getting destroyed; let alone sending a human and explecting them to make it out alive. Even if we were able to send a probe to Venus, the article explains that "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes" (3). While there are thousands of reasons for NACA scientists to give up on finding information on the planet of Venus, they still are trying new ways to make it up there, despite the dangers.
Scientists find it crucial to continue in their research, for several reasons. The main reason is becuase, "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of size, and occasionally the closest in distance too" (2). Which makes it important to use Venus to learn more about our own planet. "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters",which is one of the reasons it is so earth like (4). Also it is important to learn more about Venus becuase we currently contain little knowlege about Venus becuase "researches cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance" (6). For these reasons it is important for NACA and other scientists across the world to continue to try and gain a more vast arae of information.
In conclution, while Venus has presented many obsticles for scientists to get around, they find the prize of great value. Although Venus is extremly hard to explore because of its ruff teraine and extreme temperatures. Scientists find it to be of great value because of its Earth like appeal and its unknown information. Therefore, scientists and NACA will continue to atempt to gain more data on the planet of Venous despite the dificulties. | 4 |
41fa076 | Raither than using technology to guess on students emotions I feel that teachers should ask and be there for a student. Looking at a peace of art work and seeing that a child is unhappy is easy to spot. Teachers have a hard time conecting with their studens because they dont know how to comunacate with them. How can we say that this Technology will do a better job then the teachers that we have now.
Technology on the other hand is only guessing on if a student is upset or angry or even happy. Although the technology could see if a child is board or confused. That is a huge pluss espesly if that means the lession can be changes to make the children understand what they are learing. Every student learns a diffrent way. Not everyone will understand at the same pase or be able to comunacate that they are strugling to understand something.
By using this technology learning can be a hole new and exciting thing for a lot of students. If this technology works then a lot of stand off students can be more intuned on lessons they need to understand and know. | 2 |
41feba2 | Diverless cars I think could be a very good thing to this world. There are some down falls to them but if we put in the right time, i bielieve that we could make it a very useful tool in our enviroment. In this passage i am going to tell you why i bielieve that we should go to computer cars, or at least computer cars that give the human the right to driver, rather than only human conroled cars.
My first argue is that it could help us with drunk or tired drivers. For example if someone was out late drinking, or was intoxicated. They could easily get home with out anyone being worried about there safety or safety of others because the computer is taking care of all of that. There would be no more drunk driving and i think everyone agrees that would be a great thing to happen in this world.it would save many lives every year. Also with tired drivers, say that your on vacationand have a gery long drive ahead of you. or coming home from a very long day of work. and keep nodding off while driving. You could just flip the car into computer mode and have the car drive without having to worry about falling asleep behind the wheel. Also the driver wont have to worry about being distrcted by screaming kids, loud noises, your text messages popping up while driving etc.All those distracts gone. This is a computer is does not reconize any of those actions. It will only know its job, and that job is to drive the car safely
My second reason is i think it would be much safer in genral. imaired drivers or perfectly fine drivers.it doesnt matter who you take. Computers are smarter then humans they will not make the same dumb mistakes humans make like running a red light, or going above the speed limit, or driveing reckless in snowy icy conditions.The car will do everything it has to do to keep you and your
family safe. Also if everyone on the road has computer driven cars. no body will have to worry about crazy drivers everyone will be calm and okay. Because a safe device is in control of your.
My last reason is the police. I bielieve
that if these cars become a thing the enviroment will become a better place. Also there will be less police chases. And im not saying the police will be off the road completely but if they dont have to worry about reckless drivers as much, they will be able to go out and deal with much more serious crime, because they know that these computers will follow the rules of the road. Say one day there was a police chase though. These are computers here. the police should be able to hack into the car and shut it down completly before any harm is done to any one.
Those are my 3 reasons that i bielieve that computer driven cars would be a great resource to our community the police services, drunk or impaired drivers, and just safer driving in general. If you dont think that these cars are safe, i think you should change your opinion before they would be relased they would under go numerous ammonunts of testing to make sure that, they okay to be driven on the open roads. once again those are my 3 reasons. thankyou for reading. | 4 |
41ff99a | In my opinion, I think the author is right because if you do not get out of your comfort zone then when will you experience something fun and cool. Never right exactly if you want to do it then do it and don not let anyone stop you from reaching your dreams. What you think of yourself is better then what others think of you. Be you and if you want to try something new like studying Venus because if its a worthy persuit it can be good for you because you may learn new things you have never been able to learn. What if one day they send you into space or Venus to check out you can not be scared because there are times when you get scared and that messes all your plans up and you back out. That can be good and bad, it can be good when you know you will be doing something bad but it can be bad because you will not learn from your mistake. Do not regret things learn from them and thats how you move on in life. LIke the author said in paragraph 8 "Striving to meet the challenge" honestly if you want to become something you have to take the chance and not let anything or anyone slow you do. If you are happy with yourself and what you are going to do be confident and believe in your self ALWAYS. Strive for what you want and if one day you decide you want to go into space and go see Venus then do it because nothing is impossible you are able to do it like anyone else can. Be true to yourself and do what you want. | 1 |
4200326 | conspiracy or science ?
which one would you really believe facts or making wild infrences ?
would you think conspiracy because of all those scary movies you have watched or read about online
or would you think like a scientist observer . First
I
would start off by asking the other person questions ,
I would then find some facts on maybe how the face image could have been created . I would state logical reasoning fatcs .
I
would then
state this image is a natural landform , many things in space could have formed this image .
Maybe meteorites have hit the surface of mars creating an illusion .
I then would compare it to something on earth that
also appears to be
an illusion like how the passage states that the author says ,'' it reminds me most of the middle butte in the snake river plain of Idaho .'' thats saying it is basically not a conspiracy related image because something on earth is created or formed by natural effects .
My conclusion when putting together the evidence is natural causes has caused
this face image to appear on Mars . Their are many reasons and explanations to why this image has appeard . Until aliens are discovered or we have proof their existing i would then make conclusions on that half
but until then the image is based on natural effects . | 2 |
4204a15 | Have you ever tried becoming a seagoing cowboy? If not, I suggest that you consider joining the program. The job of a seagoing cowboy is to take care of horses, young cows, and mules which are sent overseas to people that need them. While being in the Seagoing Cowboy program, there are many positive things such as being able to experience adventures, visiting many unique places, and having the opportunity to help people in need.
A Seagoing Cowboy is able to experience many adventures. When Luke was a seagoing cowboy, he had the chance of experiencing a storm while at sea. Think about how exciting and adventurous that would be! Also Luke says that he found time to have fun on board, especially once all the animals were taken care of or unloaded. The cowbobys would then play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds, or set up different sporting tournements. Experiencing a storm at sea and playing many fun games on board are just two examples of the many adventures that could take place as a seagoing cowboy.
If you are a seagoing cowboy, you not only have adventures but you also can see and visit many unique places that an average person wouldn't have the opportunity to see or experience. In Luke's nine years as a seagoing cowboy, he was able to see and experience some pretty interesting things in Europe and China. He specifically saw the Acropolis in Greece, and thought that that experience was very special. On top of seeing the Acropolis, he also was able to take a gondola ride in Venice, Italy. There would also be many more places to go and people to see.
The main reason for becoming a seagoing cowboy would be to help people in need. Luke specifically helped people affected by World War II. The people affected by World War II needed food, clothing, animals, and more. Luke helped with the animals. Luke states that he was very grateful for the opportunity of becoming a seagoing cowboy so he could help people in need. He says that it made him "more aware of people of other countries and their needs."
Becoming a seagoing cowboy is a great experience and very beneficial. Luke says, "the cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy." | 3 |
4205550 | The author has said that NASA has three pictures from the red planet. In the pictures is a face, from three different years (1976, 1998, 2001). The last picture has a clear image of the face. It has a cracked eye and to the left side.
This is a rock that had just been formed like this. It had been forming to look like this for years. If it had not been discovered what would we think about the red planet. The planet would just be another planet close to earth.
If we could get a human on the red planet that would be great. We can't do that yet. It will not happen for another 400 to 500 years. This is a long wait time, but in the end it is all going to be worth every hour put in.
The red planet has many mysteres we will never know. This one will be around for years to come. The next generation will find out if life is out there. If they find it make contact. | 1 |
4215a86 | The author is right that Venus is a worthy persuit including the dangers that it
causes. The author want to examine it more closely but it will have some challenges and time. In the article it say that,"Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." meaning that Venus is difficult to be on. The planet also got clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. This meaning that the clouds are dangerous. The temperature average is over 800 degree fahrenheit and it is hard for a human to live on. Also the atomsperic pressure is 90 times greater than what we live on our own planet. The conditions that Venus have is greater than Earth. Venus have weathers like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting. Is hard to survive in Venus.
Venus once was the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Which is why scientitst want to even travel furture into Venus surface. In the past, Venus was covered with mostly oceans and could've form life. Venus is still like Earth. Some of the similar things are valleys, mountains, and craters. Venus is sometimes the option for a planetary visit since other planets don't got the conditions like Venus. NASA has a idea to send humans to study Venus which will take time. NASA came up with the jet airplanes. Which it can hovered through Venus and avoid it unfriendly conditions. Even though the degree Fahranheit would still be high, the air pressure will be close to sea level on Earth.
In the last sentence of paragraph 5, the author say,"Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." as in meaning that humans could survive Venus.
The author point is trying to prove that studying Venus isn't easy. In paragraph 6 is talking about how Venus have many challenges and researchers just can't study it. 1 exmaples is that, the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions. Another one is photos and videos aren't effective. Last one is, researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else. The researchers and scientists are trying to find another way to understand Venus and need to get up close. Researchers are also working on machines that can last long enogh to know more about the planet. The author put paragraph 6 in to show how difficult it is to study Venus.
The author point of writing this article was to prove how risky it is. The author say,"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." which means humans will stlll find a way to look into Venus because of how curious we are. The author have proven their point by showing evidence throughout the whole article about how Venus is hard to study. The author also say that technology from modern day could help but also can't help for extreme conditions. His or her idea of studying into Venus is worthy but risky was proven. | 4 |
421781f | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy despite the dangers it presents because Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains, and craters. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit on all those facts that we could learn despite on the dangers it make take to get there. The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive. There might be a lot of challenges to get to venus but it might be worth it on how we are going to get a lot of information from this expedition. 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. Altough it make take 3 decades to get to Venus NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus . The challenge of exploring venus might be one of the greatest explorations there ever was , despite all the challenges . | 2 |
421b60f | Taking a deep breath in a city filled with cars and buses, people would be inhaling all the emissions giving off by the heavy duty use of cars. Taking in smog is like breathing in dirt. Changes around the world are taking place to accomodate to the impacts caused by cars. In the twenty-first cenury, cars are a must to get from place to place. So, why is it that there is a decline in the buying of cars? Well, the less usage of cars creates no smog to inhale, would promote alternative transportation, and the culture in this society helps create less dependence on cars which leds to a better envrionment.
First things first, around the world something known as "smart planning" is taking place. This is a movement to seperate suburban life from auto use. One main reason this movement is taking place is to reduce emissions giving off by automobiles, that would soon lead to smog. According to
Source 2:
"Paris ban driving due to smog," by Robert Duffer, which states," After days of near-record polluton, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." This ban was necessary due to the over pollution cars create and because of it, air was able to become breathable again. Moreover, in
Source 3:
" Care-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota," by Andrew Selsky, Bogota tells the goal behind the car-free day, which states, "The goal is to promote alternative transportaion and reduce smog." Clearly, having a bus filled with residents is a better choice than having cars filled only by one or two passengers because one bus would not produce as much emissions than twenty cars.
Futhermore, the less dependence of cars would promote alternative transportation. Having a city filled with people walking, riding bikes, and taking buses would allow a traffic free city. In Europe, cities are taking the step forward by creating a city where it is difficult to obtain a car. According to
Source 1:
"In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars," by Elisabeth Rosenthal, explains the main motive why cities are making it difficlt to use cars, which is, "Its basic precepts are being adopted around the world in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accesible to public transprtation, with less space for parking." This means, that by making it a struggle to obtain a car, it would help promote others to use public transportation or another method, which at the end of the day, would benefit the environment.
Last but not least, the culture of the world is constanly changing day by day. In the twenty-first century, technology has taken over the lives of many. From apps to the internet, the changes are inevitable thanks to the breakthrough in technology. In
Source 4:
"The End of Car Culture," by Elisabeth Rosenthal, Mimi Sheller, a sociology professor at Drexel University, explains,"Different things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long-term cultural shift." Mimi is talking about the recent decline of automobile sales occuring which mean less and less people are buying cars. She believes the reason behind the decline is due to the culture in which involves technology. Moreover, she goes on to say," Likewise the rise in cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arrangements, including the evolution of shared van services for getting to work." Again and again technology proves to be a saving factor in this world to humans, and in this case it is saving humans from injurying the only home it has. With the easy access of calling someone up for a ride or searching up public transportation near by, allows the environment to be fresher and cleaner, as well as, it allows humans to interact with one another without having to drive to that person's house.
Movements take place to improve what seems to be a problem. It is obvious that the over usage of cars is a problematic case. Around the world, people are going around side by side, without depending on cars like they use to back a couple years ago. Improvements shown in places like Paris, shows how the limiting of automobile usage can greatly impact the envrionment to create a clean atmosphere. Not only would it help clear smog, but it would allow a stress free city from being populated by traffic jams and yelling individuals, who are experiencing road rage thanks to the taffic. A happier environment would be created when people are out rding bikes to places and walking with friends. In cocnclusion, the benifits of limiting car usage are as clear as water, it would reduce smog, promote other forms of transprtation, and would help our culture by creating a happier, cleaner atmosphere to live in. | 4 |
421d3f8 | There are a lot of advantages when it comes to limiting car usage. Car ownerships are allowed,but there are only two places to park. Cars owners have to buy space in the thousdands that means you are spending more money then you should be. Having a car is a lot to worry about the gas and car notes and things like that were if you didn't have a car it would be less stress on you. Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Stores have placed walk ways on main streets to inform people that walking is better then just getting in a car. The private cars owned by the middle class are choking the cities. This problem wont go on much longer the environental protection agency is promoting car reduced.
If a lot of cars drive at once it will produce air problems just like the one in paris they have ban driving to clear the air of the global city. It was a law everyone had to follow or they would be fined 31 dollars or your car could be impounded. Also in china the cold nights and warm days makes layer of air trap which causes car emissions which is why we are sorounded by smog but paris has more smog than china.
Some places like Bogota,Colombia have days called car free day where they could not use their cars thre hole day they took buses, biked, skated,or hiked to work. its a good way to take away stress and lower air pollution but this act didnt just start in the mid-1990s. It will be a good thing not to have cars for a day then everyone would be getting in space even the ones that don't wont to.
If you really look at it recent studies show that Americans are buying fewer cars and not as many people are getting their licenses as the years go by. maybe driving isn't all it cracked up to be in the end if you think about owning a car is a little stress all the things you have to make sure your car have just so you can keep it on the road and sometimes you also have to put a lot of money into a car to get it fix. maybe not having a car is not a bad thing anymore just think about it and you tell me. | 3 |
421ed60 | The claim as an imagine being able to detect exactly how other people are feeling, even trying tot hide their emotions. Perhaps the new software developed improvements in perceiving emotions of others.
It explains within facial expression for each emotion. By using the software as they use to do tracks and making it 3D realistic, it can identify mixed emotions. Each expression is compared against a neutal face which meaning no show of emotion. As an example, imagine a computer that knows when you're happy or sad, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen then a smiliar ad might follow but if you frown the next ad will be different. I know that its not true that if you make a confusion face in front of the computer screen it wont appear a confusion. Let's say you make of your own, using the computer to make a 3D of a person face which it could be anybody, you control and how you feel into it, it'll appear what you put in and it will show how you felt about it by loking of your final results on making the portrait.
For humans which they perform the same impressive "calculation" of how much emotions come into what you feel. As an example: you have a friend and you look upon their face, you wonder and can tell if their sad or happy. It's way different as they say on software than in person as a human. You can automatically describe how the person feel is by looking and talking to them. It shows a lot and you can define if they are good or not.
By knowing the differences on defining facial expression each on software and as a human, they are two completely different things and how it can be solve too. As being explained how they calculated by using technology and making 3D Mona Lisa, showing emotion to it collecting your actions. By how you make it as weighting the different units. In human which person per person, you can define their feelings and talk about it. There's no way you can hide away your feelings because sometimes you can sense it. It shows more out and can easily say what they feel than as software which is not believable or no comparasion. | 2 |
422e6e7 | "A new president, really, How many votes did they win by?" If someone were to ask you this what would you say, thirty electoral votes? The "Winner-Takes-All" system is flawed and needs to be either fixed or completly taken down, and here are two reasons why. First a president should be chosen by the people, seeing our county is a democracy meaning that we elect representatives to rule for us, a popular vote fits the sene a bit more than an electoral vote. Secondly if there was every a tie in the electoral college it would catostropic because intead if being in the peoples hand it be in the representatives hands, aslo known as the ones who already have power.
"At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. because of the winner-takes-all system in each state canidates dont spend time in states they spend no time in stats the know thy wont win." Some states can get no canidates out and its because the electoral college is unfair. "It`s official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best argumants in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct election ar spurios at best. Its hard to say but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college!" This Quote states that the electoral college is not fair and down right rediculus. You may say since its getting the job done and there has been no ties whats wrong? there are manny thing wrong startign with popular votes can lose to electoral votes, also some states can get on people to come and campagne.
" In 1968 a sift of just 41,971 could have cause a tie in the polls." in this article just that many people and the representatives could have chosen a president and the reason this is bad is because they will get a president that will do what ever they want. "If there were just 5,559 voters in ohio and 3,687 voters in hawaii that went the other way the electoral college would have tied making a representative choose." " in this article just that many people and the representatives could have chosen a president and the reason this is bad is because they will get a president that will do what ever they want.
So to finalize The "Winner-Takes-All" system is flawed and needs to be either fixed or completly taken down, and here are two reasons why. First a president should be chosen by the people, seeing our county is a democracy meaning that we elect representatives to rule for us, a popular vote fits the sene a bit more than an electoral vote. Secondly if there was every a tie in the electoral college it would catostropic because intead if being in the peoples hand it be in the representatives hands, aslo known as the ones who already have power. | 3 |
4232755 | Venus is the second planet. Sometime, NASA called venus the Evening Star, because it's one of the brightest light in the night sky. Venus is closest to earth, and earth has a twin. The differences between mars and venus is that sometimes we are esloser to mars and sometimes we are colser to venus, because venus is sometimes around the corner in space and human are sent to numerous spacecraft. No spacesraft has survived more than a few hours not a single spaceship has touched down on venus's more than three decades. When the spacesship trys to land it can't because venus is almost 97 percent caron dioxide blankets venus and the most challenging is that venus have clouds that are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venuss atmosphere. Venus temperatures average is over 800 degrees fahenheit. Not many people has land on venus because how hot the planet is and if they are up thirty plus miles above the surface it's still going to be toasty at around 170 degrees. The most importsntly, researchers cannot take samples of rock gas, or anything elae from a distance. The scientists to see the conduct to thorough mission is to understand venus they need to get close and personal despite the risks. A old technology called mechanical computers the devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and it played an important role in 1940s during the world war 2. It's danger to be on venus it's so hot we won't survived by trying to land on it it's 800 degrees on the planet. Venus might be the second to the sun but mercury is closer to our sun and venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, but merury is closer to the sun. The high pressure and heat vennusian geology and weather presen is like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes and the frequent lighting strikes to probes of seeking to the land on its surface. NACA try to challenge them self they been trying to find a way to land on venus and makes sure that the spaceship can land on venus. NASA are still working on a spaceship to land more than a few hours so they can see more things about venus that we don't know about. | 1 |
423355a | My position on driverless cars is that i beleive they shouldn't be made. People are lazy enough as it is. Driving cars isn't a difficult tast to do and the last thing we need is for the car to drive by its self. This will cause people to be dependant on the car to drive its self and will not be as alert in the vehicle and will result in a crash. Cars have always been made to be driven by a person, not a computer.
The driverless cars will be ran by automotive radar sensors, GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor among ther devices. Those things could break at any given moment and the passenger(s) in the car won't know and will assume everyhting is fine, but seconds later they are in a crash just because the car devices are broken. When someone is in the diverless car they could fall asleep or just could not be paying enough attention. Even though the seat will viberate when the person needs to take over, they could be a heavy sleeper and they won't feel the vibration. The car requires that the driver needs to be alert and ready to take over if the road conditions are too much to handle for the car to drive its slef. What happens when the person isn't paying attention? A car accident could and will happen.
So many things could go wrong with cars, so why add to the problem? The driver of the car needs to be alert. How will we know if we can trust that person to stay attentive to the car? By the time the car alerts the driver and the driver takes over it might be too late. The car could back into something or een swerve off the road and hit someone. Technology has glitches. If there is a glitch with one of the devices then the result could be life threatening. We won't know if we should blame the car or the person. Driverless cars are life threatening. | 3 |
4235b26 | Hi I'm Luke. If you have read my story good. If you havent you should you can fonf it at your local book stor. Now that you and I know this we can get starter on how you chould participate in Seagoing Cowboys. Now folow along with me.
In paragraph 1 I stated that my frenbs invited me to go to Europe on a cattle boat and I said yes of cores. I woulb sujest you invest in that right now. Dont tell me no! Ok let me trie to convinse you at lest. Well of you know I will relat to my story. Make sure you keep up.
First of all in my day their was a lot of war that just ended like states in paragraph 2. But as you know that did not stop me from going on this oportunity of a life time I it wont stop you. Bake to the story Seagoing Cowboys toke care of horses, young cows, and mules. Taking care of thies animals is hered but fun to I am sure you would like is. On to paragrasph 3 though 5.
You know how and wen they reseaaves their orders to go to Oreans. Oh lit me tell you the traveling is my beat part. You get to get away from the family. The vew is wonderful it almosts takes away the smel of fish. The way they travel the aninals is dificalt. But it works.
You will unber stand is I start hopping around because onistly some of this is easy to comprehend. In parigraph 6 though 9 it talks about how tong it takes. On the water it may seem long but it is not. Once you get on land or water it may feal weared but you wil get yse to it. It also talks about how long it takes on land to. I bont recal missing home because oh all the fun.
Well I know you wont to go cattel boating now. Hold-up I know you are lieng . Don't you go and lie to me know. Thank you for telling me the trueth know. Well I hop you have as much fun as I did. But I bont have to hope I know you will and you do to. By! | 2 |
423a7ea | The thought of a computer program being able to read emotions sounds very interesting at first. It almost makes a person feel like he or she are in a science fiction book set in the future. Though it may be interesting, that does not necessarily make it right. The truth of the matter is that though a computer program measuring how someone feels may be interesting, it is an invasion of privacy and teachers have no need to know a student's emotions while in class. The new technology, Facial Action Coding System, is not valuable to be used in a classroom because it is an invasion of a student's privacy and is not necessary.
The Facial Action Coding System is not valuable to be used in a classroom because of how invasive it is to a student's privacy. The text explained that the technology was able to determine that in the Mona Lisa painting the person being painted was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent happy. No one should be able to know to that great of a detail what another person is feeling without that person's premission. If a teacher wanted to know the emotions of his or her students, simply asking them how they feel is enough. Using that technology in a classroom crosses a boundry of privacy that many students would not be comfortable with. Many students would not feel at ease and safe being in the classroom knowing their emotions are being read.
The Facial Action Coding System is not valuable to be used in a classroom because it is not necessary. In the text Dr. Huang, who works with the Facial Action Coding System technology, says that most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. Students and people in general are already communicating their emotions to the level that their emotions need to be communicated. When someone sees another person smiling, he or she knows that person is happy, or if someone sees a person frowning, he or she knows that person is sad. The text says the technology could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored to support that the technology could be beneficial in a classroom setting. But the truth of the matter is, if a teacher wants to know when his or her class is becoming confused or bored, all he or she would have to do is ask. That is why most teachers ask after a lesson, "Does anyone have any questions?"
Not only that, but a teacher would not have to know if a student is happy or sad in the first place. The responsibility of a teacher is to teach and to ensure the students understand. A teacher does not need to know if his or her students are happy or sad. A school would be wasting its money to pay for a system that is not of necessity.
It is evident with all of the facts stacked against it, that Facial Action Coding System is not valuable in a classroom setting because of its invasiveness to student privacy and the lack of a need for it in a classroom. From the fact that knowing exactly everything students are feeling would make students uncomfortable, to the fact that a teacher could ask a student if he or she wanted to know how that student is feeling, it is clear this technology lacks value in a classroom setting. School administration and the community should ensure that this kind of technology never gets put in any classrooms. This would be a waste of money for the school corporation because of the lack of necessity for it. It would also make many students uncomfortable, which could in turn make it harder to learn. | 5 |
423d789 | Being a scientist at NASA is very hard because you have to make sure that you are correct when talking about something important such as the Face. Many people like to make theories about subjects but nobody knows about the real information. Not unless we share it to the public, we will not share things we want to hide from everyone. The picture was not made by aliens and we explain why it is just a natural landform.
If I were to be a scientist at NASA I would tell the person that the Face is just a natural landform. There are many conspiracy theorists that claim we are trying to hide something, such as saying aliens made the Face. In the article it says
" evidence that NASA would rather hide " , that is correct. If the aliens did make it then we wouldn't have showed the public the photos. We would want to keep it out of newspapers, magazine, tv shows, and movies.
NASA would also never want lots of people to see the picture of the Face if they were to hid something. We would make the picture an enigma to the citizens of the world. Scientist in NASA have studied these for years and they have all the information. Also in the third paragraph in the article it tells us that there are some shadows that make the the Face get the illusion of having eyes and a nose. The third paragraph says " The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars. " which is telling us that they want people to know more about Mars so we obvisouly wouldn't be showing the pictures if the aliens made it.
Although there were few scientist that believed the Face was an alien artifact, in paragraph seven it says
" ... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. " , NASA scientist take their jobs very serious. People continued to say the Face markings were made from aliens but the NASA scientist said it was just a natural landform and some of the pictures were made from the shadows. On April 8, 2001 it was a cloudless summer in Cydonia, Malin's team got an " extraordinary " picture of the Face because many people such as the theorists said maybe the alien markings were hidden behind the haze.
In the second paragraph NASA was excited to see if the Face was something sensational and the article says " Scientist figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia. " the only thing that made this one stand out was it has shadows that give it facial features such as a nose, eyes and a mouth. NASA soon showed the picture for all the people to see with a caption telling them what it was. NASA would not show the picture and make up something if the Face was really created by aliens.
In the very last paragraph the article tells us what the picture actually shows from what the scientist at NASA have gathered. Paragraph twelve says " What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa- landforms common around the American West. ". The scientist are telling us that the Face is just a landform, as a NASA scientist there is a lot of information about the Face and it was not made by aliens. NASA has got many photos of the Face and have also commented about what made it look like this. | 4 |
4246dc0 | Driverless cars are too expensive, trivial, and dangerous to be developed for public use. The development of these cars would require extensive funding, and this money could be much better spent. Some of these cars would only be partially automated and would still require a capable driver at all times, so what would be the point? Finally, driverless cars would be concerning from a safety standpoint - would these cars really be able to safely maneuver out of dangerous situations?
First, the development of driverless cars would be expensive. Automated cars require many sensors and cameras that regular cars do not need, and even with these sensors, the cars are not capaple of completely driving themselves. In order to achieve a reliable driverless system, all of our roads would have to have electricity or magnets installed, which even the article admits would be "too expensive to be practical". Furthermore, the money spent on developing these cars could be spent to help those who are less fortunate rather than creating new things for ourselves.
Another issue with driverless cars is the idea of cars that only assist the driver. These cars would drive most of the time, but they would, "notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents". These cars would certainly be helpful, but what would be the point of having a self-driving car if you still have to watch the road as if you were driving yourself? Some manufacturers talk of adding, "in-car entertainment and information systems," but if the driver were focused on these systems, would they be able to react quickly enough if the car approached a dangerous situation?
This question leads to what is probably the biggest issue with these cars: many developers of driverless cars claim that these vehicles would improve public transportation and, "use half the fuel of today's taxis," but what about the safety of the passengers? A truly driverless car would leave its passengers helpless in the face of an impending accident, and the addition of entertainment systems for part-time drivers would likely not give the drivers enough of a warning to react in the case of an emergency situation.
In conclusion, driverless cars should not be developed on a large scale. The huge amount of money that would have to be spent to make these cars safe would be much better spent helping those in need. Furthermore, cars that only partially drive themselves seem to defeat the intended purpose of the driverless car, as well as raising some safety concerns. It would be extremely difficult for the car alone to avoid dangerous situations, and the addition of entertainment systems would limit how much time a driver would have to assess and respond to danger. In all, driverless cars are far too expensive, needless, and dangerous to be developed or produced on a large scale. | 5 |
4247306 | Why should you participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program? This program sent people across the sea with animals, food, and other resources that other countries needed after World War Two. I have personally participated in this program. After crossing the Pacific Ocean multiple times and the Atlantic Ocean more than 15 times, I would say this experience changed my life completely for the better. Others should join this charity type program, it will improve you and your life.
Becoming a Seagoing Cowboy is a great experience to have participated in. You get to see many natural and man-made landmarks you otherwise would not see. You get to visit many other cities and countries you would never be able to go to if you weren't hired as a "cowboy on a boat". Luckily, you can easily become a seagoing cowboy to make your life so much more exciting. Also, since you've always wanted to sail the seas, this would be a great opportunity. You'll always be excited as you float upon an uknown section of the earth. It almost sounds like a fairy-tale, but you can fortunatley actually live it. During what will be the greatest time of your life, you won't be lonely either.
As a Seagoing Cowboy, it's a chance to be social and put yourself in a friendly environment. You can play games and sports with the other participants. Find someone with the same hobby and have a conversation with them, so you will have a pal to do your favorite hobby with. Just have a talk about the things you saw, what you did, what you were thinking before you decided that it was obviously a good idea to become a Seagoing Cowboy for the UNRRA. Play table-tennis with them, maybe baseball, or volleyball. Do some reading by yourself or wih your pal to keep your brain just as good as it's always been. Maybe you want to box someone, or help someone out.
As a Seagoing Cowboy, you would be helping a lot of people and even countries get back on track after the devestating World War, which is unfortunatley the second world war. It could be a way to contribute to a charity. By directly delivering food, animals, and help to those who are helpless. Now, when you think about how that's what you're doing by going out to the sea, it makes you feel good, doesn't it? Not only does it make you feel great about your own life, but it actually makes another countries inhabitants feel good about their life, that they have their life despite the ruins of their country and their world after the war. So, it's obviously better for everyone when you become a Seagoing Cowboy.
Since you'll be helping other countries, having fun with friends, and experiencing a lot soon, you may be second-guessing yourself and thinking, "What if I don't want to go to water, and I don't want to sail the seas?" Well, assuming you don't like the water, you don't go on a boat often. Since one main thing of being a Seagoing cowboy is the experince, you'll be trying something you haven't done or don't usually do. You may still not like the fact you are on a boat in the sea, but after that, there are more benefits than there are things you don't like, which would be only one con. So you should join and participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program, make your life better, and others too. | 4 |
42500f0 | Do you ever wonder how your friends are actually feeling? Well now you can find out how they are feeling with the Facial Action Coding System. People all around the world can figure out how someone is truly feeling with a computer by how they are looking.
I believe that this type of technology would be good in the classroom. First of all teachers can see if any of their students are sad, mad, or even depressed. This could help a lot of students because the teachers can help them out if they are feeling any of these emotions. It could possibly stop someone from comitting suicide even before it happens.
Second of all if the technology is on the computers at school then it could help out students while taking tests. As stated in the prompt, if a student does not know how to do a problem and looks confused it can change up the test a little bit for him/her. It will stop the amount of kids to fail the big tests and help them graduate.
Lastly it can tell teachers what some students might like to learn by seeing if they smile during some of the lessons. So it can also help teachers with their lesson plans and what they might want to teach in the future.
This type of technology can be helpful for a lot of things in school. It could also help out you with websites on your computers and ads.Therefore I am for the value of using this technology to read students' emotional expressions. | 3 |
425325f | Exploring Venus would not be an easy task, as mentioned by the author of this article, but the author believes that studing Venus is worth the dangers it presents. The author lists some reasons for studying the planet and many reasons why it would be dificult.
Venus is a very forboding place that is not kind to the human race. The author lists some reasons why Venus is hard to study, such as: the atmosphere is 97 percent carbon dioxide, and the clouds are of corrosive sulfric acid. The carbon dioxide atmosphere makes the pressure put on the surface 90 times greater than what is on Earth. The sulfric acid can eat throught many metals over time and will constantly erode anything we send there. The surface tempature of Venus is about 800 degrees Fahrenheit which is hot enough to melt tin.
The author also give some reasons why we should try to visit Venus. One is that Venus may have been like earth long ago. Venus once had large liquid oceans that could of supported life forms, and it has many geological similarities to Earth such as the surface being rocky, sediment buiding up, mountians, and creaters. Venus is also the closest planet at times and could be crucial to space travel as a stop along the way.
Many new technologies would come from trying to visit Venus. Some listed by the author are simplified electronics made out of silicon carbide, these components have been able to survive for three weeks in similar conditions to the surface of Venus. Another technology would be bringing back mechanical computers used in World War II and repourpose, and advance them. Mechanical computers may last longer int he harsh conditions, but lack the speed needed for complex computations.
The author gives several reasons why trying to study Venus would be benifical and backs up their claims with sufficent evidence. The author also gives several counter claims to let readers see the other side of the debate and lets them choose. Technology is another thing listed that dosn't have a whole lot to do with the debate but is more of a positive by product, so that could also be a reason why we should visit. Overall the author does a exceptional job in argurig why we should try to study Venus even if it is difficult, the human race will prosper. | 4 |
42568da | Think about a country without cars. You might say thats rediculous but there are many pros to not having a fuel running engine as your transportation all the time. There are some families that dont even own cars. automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs experts say, is a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically to reduce geenhouse gas emissions from tail pipes.
Passanger cars are responsble for more than 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States. There have been efforts in the past two decades to make sities denser, and better for walking, planners are now taking the concept to the suburbs. Basic presets are being compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for parking. Stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway.
Using to many cars for transportation isnt so good for any city, state, country for example France. After days of near record pollution, paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the city. Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france, after five days of intensifying smog. Most cars run on fuel so diesel fueal was blamed the majority of pollution in the air that cars produced. Delivery companies would complain of lost revanue, the exceptions were only made for plug in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers. Public transit was free of charge.
Its a really good opporunity to take away all the stress and lower are pollution. Cars are great for transportation but the days without cars can be part of an improvement all around the world. parks and sports center can bloom throughout the city, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up. If we persist with using car transportation as a resource less it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviornment, since transportation is the second largest source of America emissions. | 3 |
4258514 | Can you see the emotions in the Mona Lisa? A latest technology that can recognize emotions was the latest innovation from Prof. This technology claims it has the ability to read every emotion, even in pictures. Is this a reliable technology or is this something that isnt exact?
The recent technology on seeing emotions talks about how the Mona Lisa is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disguested, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. How can we know if this is true because we were not there to tell what her emotions where. Yes you can see some emotion in her painting, because it states that Da Vinci studied the human anatomy so that it would help him with painting facial muslces precisely to show emotion.
This technology can be good for some purposes. Dr. Huang makes a statement saying, "A classroom computer could tell when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human structor." This is a good factor, because this can help students with school so theyre not falling behind.
Overall this technology may have some pros, and it has some cons. If you put it to good use like for instince helping kids when theyre confused or bored it will show them other ways which is good. Then you have your cons. This technology might not always be precise and at some point this could lead to problems when trying to solve a serious situation. This technology is realiable at some points, theyre are multiple ways it can help and then there can be some disfunctions. Every technology has their flaws though. | 2 |
425a1cd | I think that the ability for computer to be able to read and calculate human emotions is a step towords the future and is a good thing. I beleve this will help us as humans in unlocking coads in old paintings to better understand them. I also beleve that this new tecnology will help prevent suicide.
For example in the atricle it talks about how they can unlock the Mona Lisa's smile and calculat her emotions. This is one way that the new tecnology will help us better undersand just who the Mona Lisa was. for years the Mona lisa has remaned a mistery to all of mand kind along with many other paintings. This is why I beleve that this new since of tecnology will expand our mind as far as history,knologe and also it will help us better understand ourselfs as humans and why we think and feel the way we do. This new form of tecnology I beleve is the step towerds a new begining. | 2 |
425a4b9 | Many people are wondering "should we still study Venus despite the dangers it presents?" People also wonder how are Venus and Earth are alike and why we call Venus or "sister planet"? In this article the author is telling the readers that studying Venus is worthy despite the dangers it presents. In this essay I will be telling you why the author this it is worthy to study Venus.
The first reason why the author thinks it is important to study Venus is because
Earth and Venus are very much alike. Venus could not only have humans livng on it's planet by animals too. Just like Earth. The article states that "Venus is covered largley with oceans and could support various forms of life." Much like Earth and how Earth has huges bodies of water that have fishes, sharks ect., living in them. The article also states that "Venus has a surface of rocky sediments and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains and carters." Earth also has plenty of rocky areas that people can live on."
This information proves that Venus can not only have humans living on it's plantes but animals as well and how Earth and Venus provied ways for humans to live on their planet.
We have idea that could be made for us to visit Venus and stay safe. Yes, Venus has weather dangers and tempreture dangers but we have the technology now that we can visit Venus and stay safe from all of those dangers. The article states that NASA has this idea of creating a vehicle that can aviod "all unfriendly ground conditions by stating up and out of their way." The article also states that Venus's temperature will still remain the same but the air pressure in the vehicle "would be close to that of sea level on earth." So that the person traveling in this object will stay safe and stil get all of the information he/she needs from Venus. This information lets us know that NASA has the idea of creating a safe way of getting information about Venus.
Overall, despite all the dangers that Venus has I personally agree with the author that we should still study Venus. If we never studied Venus we would have no idea why we call it out "sister planet." Or how a human could potentaillly live on Venus. So I think that it is important to study Venus so we know all of the answers to our question. | 4 |
425d8c4 | With the rise of technology and accesability, students in schools are bound to wonder away from the current lession and tred towards their phones in the face of bordom or general stress. How can we fix this you may ask, with emotion detecting technology. This technology can help schools in that it focuses on specific muscle groups, can detect false emotions, and can help students get beck to the task at hand, school.
First off, how does this technology even recognise emotion? Emotions are always displayed by body poster, facail exspressions, and speech. This technology primarilly focuses on facil exspressions. By focusing on 44 major muscles and a 3D model created within the software through a camera, can effectively distinguish 6 basic emotions. These emotions are happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the must move like human muscles....six basic human emotions-happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness." This technology works so well in fact that it was able to calculate the emotions on a painting. The one and only, Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci. In this instance of the painting, the software concluded that she is "83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." This being said, you can see all of these features in the painting with her smile; however, her smile is also seems to be hiding other small emotions that can be portraied as insecure but wholesome. If this technology can effectivly 'see' the portrable emotions off a painting, then it can most definatly can be used within the school systems.
What about the common conseption that students go to school with a smile but arn't really happy? It can do this too. It comes to that facail movements can be seen as true or false by the muscles that are being used in that moment in time. Such as the muscle group, zygomatic major, used in a genuine smile; however, in a false smile you also use the risorius. "But in false smiles...using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius." The usefulness of this technology doesn't stop at just being able to identify false smiles but teachers can use this information to more effectively connect with the students. When a student is a distracted by stressers, they can't focus, and when they can't focus, it makes the teachers look like they arn't doing their jobs properly by the test score of the students because of it. This stratigy however, is nothing new. In the eyes of an exspert, facail exspression tell your true intentions. "To an experts, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a 'smiling' politician or celbrity isn't being truthful." Thus, this late technology doesn't seem to far fetched to use in our schools.
As I breafly mentioned in the last pharagragh, students need to be able to focus in order to be seccesesful in school. With modern stressers that teachers sometimes don't see as big deal, students on the other hand may lead to distraction. With these stressers far and wide, how do we identify them? By using the facail recognition software. Say for instance a student as his or her mind elsewhere besides the classroom and is missing out on a major transition lession that is the key to the next few lession. They won't get it and will further lead into new problems. But say that the software picks up on the student and detects that he or she is feeling angered, depressed, or just has a lack of intrest. This software can then send the data to the teachers computer thus letting them know that they may need a recap or support in general. Thus further action can be taked by the teacher to strengthen the bond of students and teachers. "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. Another way that it can be used in the classroom as if the students is angered and frustration is building inside because their minds are in two places at once to only confuse them even more. The software can be designed to shut off the computer, alowing the student to take a breath and contemplate on what is wrong themselves before an intructer aid them in the personal mater before continueing on into the lesson as a whole. "For example, your frontalis pars lateralis muscles (above yours eyes) raises your eyebrows when you're suprised; your orbicularis oris (around your mouth) tightens your lips to show anger." In short, the possibilities are atronomical when thinking of incorperating them into a schools systems.
In short, the addition to facail recognitions systems into the schools is a great idea. Thus it can recogize emotions effectively, detect false emotions, and help students regain focus within the classrooms.
The entirity of this essay used "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto to form my response. | 5 |
42616c7 | Driverless cars are what some envision as the future. They picture a world where every car is automated, and where every kind of transport is regulated. Many very large companies have poured a fortune into creating technology that will enable the eradication of a need for drivers. However, there are a huge number of negative effects of this movement. I am completely against the idea of driverless cars, for reasons such as recreation, cost, and safety.
First of all, many people in support of driverless cars portray driving as it is now as a dull part of our society that simply wastes time and energy. However, many, many people enjoy driving, simply for the feel and the experience. If driverless cars were to be implemented, there is no doubt that after a while driving oneself would be considered dangerous, irresponsible, and would likely be outlawed. Not only is there no way to implement such as system, as there would be far too much backlash from the community that enjoys driving, it would be wrong to completely forget about and not consider their opinions as valuable as others.
Second, the cost of a system of driverless cars would be enormous, and quite frankly, insurmountable. People do not realize that these cars would not function well in a society with a vast majority of people driving themselves. For a working system, the majority, if not all of the cars on the road, would have to be replaced with driverless cars. There is no way that the government would provide the cost, and there is no way that everyone has the interest in or the money to buy a driverless car. Not only is it impossible to replace every car with a driverless one, insurance and settlements would be nigh impossible to figure out, as even the article says, there is no definitive blame to be made. The operator of the car could blame the manufacturers for a poorly made vehicle while the manufacturers could simply argue the fact that the driver could have taken control of the car at any time.
Finally, safety would be a major concern. One of the article's biggest faults is that it says that driverless cars will be able to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. Driverless cars are not able to mimic humans, and will never be able to mimic humans, unless artificial intelligence technology becomes equal to humans. People have the ability to consider moral possibilities and choices. For example, if in a case where the options are a collision which saves the driver's life but has a very large chance of killing another driver, or the choice to swerve off the road but result in severe if not fatal injuries to the driver, the machine would not be able to make that decision. Humans have the unique and intrinsic ability to think, quickly and effectively, through a situation. Machines, however, would be forced to make a decision based on a certain goal, whether that may be the prevention of collateral damage, the safety of the driver, or arrival at the destination.
For these reasons, driverless cars absolutely cannot be a possibility or a good decision. I believe companies should be working to help make drivers more safe by adding other safety features, rather than trying to erradicate drivers from the situation altogether. | 5 |
42620ae | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger well by telling the reader what happens in Venus and giving details about the benifits of Venus. In paragraph 4 the author used words to make the reader take its head off of Venus being an dangerous planet and how scientists are discussing futher visits to its surface. The author states, "astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planer in our solar system. The author mentioned this in the article because he wanted to let readers know that even the people who go on Venus come back to be suprised about the things Venus has in the solar system. Also another reason why the author supports the idea that studyimng Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is stating how NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. He states this because he wants us to know how focus these people are on Venus. He gives the people who are intrested in traveling planets details about what projects are being made, devices that are going to make the studies of Venus better and testing out Venus's surface seeing how long it was lasted. Finally, in the last paragraph, the author makes an influence about how audience shouldn't really worry about the dangers of Venus when traveling and look how good it could be. In the paragraph he said, " Our travels on Earthand beyond should not be limited by dangers an doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. In conclusion, the author uses great details about supporting the idea that studying Venus is outcomings of it that are benifical are good even with the dangers it presents. | 3 |
42658c0 | I am for the driverless car. I feel that these cars could make life easier. Lets think about some of the things that come with the car though. The car has features that are mind blowing. Some of those features are sensors for surroundings and a vibration of the seat etc. Also this car is almost self-driving, you hardly have to even touch the steering wheel. Also it could help you dramatically. This car makes a long trip a easy and fast one like your destination is right around the corner.
First, the sensors are important for the car. Auto makers used sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock brakes. But within 10 years those sensors has become more advanced to detect and help you respond to danger. The sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce the power of the engine, allowing a better control of the car than a human driver could handle. Also the sensors could be used for your surroundings. When there is traffic and the car cant handle it, it sends you a message to take the wheel. This could prevent accidnets by alot.
Next, this car a practically self-driving. This car can handle driving functions up to 25 miles per hour. The car also has special touch features to make sure if there is an emergency that you can take hold of the wheel. It can steer, accelerate, and brake all by themselves. But again the driver has to remain alert because the car may notify he/she when they need to regain control of the vehicle. Some of the notifications are heads up displays, vibration of the seat, or a sound.
This car could actually help you out alot. Say your a person who cant multi task very well. Its raining outside and you cant direct your hand to the windshield wipers nozzle while keeping your eyes on the road. See now thats where the driverless car come in. While the car is driving and its raining outside and the windows get really wet, you can simply turn the winshield wipers on hassle free. This car could make you life alot easier.
As a conclusion I have provided reason why I am for the driverless car. It has sensors to help me out on the road, its pratically self driving, and it could make my life alot easier. There are many other great reasons why I am for this car, but there was simply not enough space. Now I have one question, why wouldnt you buy it? | 4 |
42672b1 | The new technology called the "Facial Coding Sytem"is the best technology ever. It has a veriety of features like the 3-D model,the recognizition emotion face,annd the math homework app .
The 3-D model is one way why people should choose this technology because if you have a 3-D model computer then everything looks big and clear. This proves that now and days people like to watch thing and look at things big and clear. So that is why you should take this technology.
The recognize emotion is another reason why this is a nice technology. For example,this shows how you feel or the way you expressions look. The author says,"Using video imagery,the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements-in real life or in the painted face of Mona Lisa."This proves that the facial emotion can work on anything whether is a person or a picture of someone.
The math homework is the last reason why you should buy this technology. In fact this is also a part of the emotion senser like whether if you feel like doing it or not. For examle,in the text it says,"Hold on! Can we actually calculate emotions-like mathwork."This proves that the technology can tell if we want to do something or not. Emotion in the new technology can really determine a person.
In conclusion,The emotion,homework and 3-D computer are the best features to have on a technology and people would love it too if they had want to get one. | 2 |
426b7ff | New cars are invented almost everyday, some are larger than others and some are smaller than others. Many of them produce pollution that is not healthy for anyone, and by anyone meaning humans, plants and animals. In life there are disadvantages and advantages for everything but limiting car usage has more advantages. If people limit the car usage there would be less pollution and people will be less stressed.
To begin, too much pollution can be very bad for the world. If people start limiting their car usage then the air we breathe will be much fresher and cleaner. Also more plants will grow and more of everything will survive.
Furthermore, people all around the world will be less stressed. While driving a car people have to deal with everyone getting infront them and skipping lines or dealing with traffic, well if they start limiting car usage then that problem will me resolved. There would be less cars in the streets and everything would flow more. The lines to go pick up their children at school will reduce. Everything would go smoother and more fluently.
To conclude, it is obviously more comfortable driving a car than a bike or a motorcycle, but people have to understand that limiting it would make things a lot better. Less people would be stressed because they will not have to deal with others cutting in lines, and another very important detail, less accidents will occur due to that less cars will be around then the usual. | 2 |
426ddb6 | Electoral college is a process of electors and a poupular vote is by the people. In this argue it ask which one would i favor, i have read the artical and as i was reading i have seen that i would keep Electoral college. I have three reason. one of them it's easier for us understand how the prosses works. my second reason is some people dont care about who they vote for, and my third reason is the history of Electoral college.
My fist reason is the the way the process work. The process works as a number of electors. The electors are what count more thoes are what count to see who are next president is going to be they are the final vote. The electors get together and talk it out so see who wins the most votes. The number of electors are 538. About 270 electors are for the president. The election for the president is held every four years after the first Monday in november.
My second reason is | 2 |
427013e | I am against driveless cars becuase so much time and technology will be put into theses smart cars, when we could just drive them ourselves. I think people could invest there time in making something more safer for the enviroment and safer for humans, safer just by warning you when you need to stop and when you are in danger. Some of these vehicles could even have an automatic stop to help prevent a crash or could alert you when almost hitting
something.
Alot of money would also be spent on these cars making it harder for people economically.With so many wiring and technology put into these cars, You would have to spent a great amount of money for them to be fixed. These cars could also fail to give you a response when you need to take over or could just fail to work safely, as stated in the article
"If the technoloy fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacture?", This is also a good point because if these cars were to fail who would get blamed and if the manufacture was to, They would also have a great hit economically. They would not only have to pay for the cars but would also have to pay for the person who was injured. If one of theses cars was to fail, you also wouldn't have the benefit of knowing you're safe becuase if it happended to a car similar to yours might also fail. These might also make the jobs of other people why harder because it would affect a variety of people, Not only that but new laws would have to be passed for these cars to be able to be driveable on many streets.
I think we should keep our cars how we have them now and we should just invest some time in making them safer and better for the enviroment and for us as well, this will not olny prevent many incedents but it will also give us
time to imporve other things that could use it. Finally i think the technology on cars has improved over the years alot and i think we could get further thanwere
we are right now but we should do that when neccessary. | 3 |
4270df5 | Exploring somewhere new could be fun or could be a waste of time. Though their are many dangers in going to new places that you have never been before, it is akways worth a shot. So where are we actually talking about going? Venus, despite the dangers, is a worthy pursuit. I believe that it is worthy, because it is the most Earth-like planet in the solar system, it still has some features that are analogous to Earth, and it can be the nearest option for a planetary visit.
Firstly, I believe that Venus is a worthy pursuit, because it is the most Earth-like plant in our solar system. Scientist believe that Venus probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. You can find this is the text saying,"Astronomers are facinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth."
Secondly, I believe that Venus is a worthy pursuit, because it has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. Though Venus may have been covered in oceans or supported forms of life, it also has features that Earth didn't know could even be there. You can find this in the text reading,"Today Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters."
Lastly, I believe that Venus is a worthy pursuit, because it can be our nearest option for a planetary visit. Though traveling to Mars or the moon is what we usually set explorations for, Venus is the nearest planet we could visit. Traveling to Venus can sometimes be crucial when given the time frames of space travel. I have found this statement that allows me to believe that,"...recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel."
So traveling can be considered fun or a waste of time. What do you think? Are you travelling to Venus? Considering my following points, that Venus is the most Earth-like planet, it has features analogous to those on Earth, and it can be our nearest option for a planetary visit, I believe that Venus is a worthy pursuit, despite its danger. | 4 |
42721ba | The Face is just another natural landform that any other planet would have. NASA sent out the Viking 1 in order to look for a landing spot for the Viking 2 on the planet Cydonia. When taking pictures of possible landing spots for the Viking 2, it picked up a shadowy figure that resembled a human head. But, scientists just figured it was another Martian Mesa which was common on Cydonia.
There is no life on Mars because the Face is actully just a Mesa. Mesas can be found on earth also, for example in the Snake River Plain of Idaho there is the Middle Butte. The Middle Butte is quite equivalent to the Face on Mars. The formation of the mesa has caused shadows to make it resemble a human face. These mesas are common on Cydonia.
Conspiracy theorists believed that NASA is trying to hide the fact that there is life on Mars. The reality is that NASA would in fact benefit from currently, or once having life on Mars. There was no actual alien monument which was later discovered after having the pictures enhanced, when enhanced there would have been other alien monuments around it. The pictures taken only showed that it was just a Martian mesa. Not a monument created by aliens, but a mesa that is found on any other planet. Thus, further backing the fact there is no alien life on mars. | 3 |
4274e29 | Dear Mr. Senator,
The Electoral College is a unfair system used for voting the reprentative of our nation. Bigger states with a bigger population get more votes, and smaller states get less votes. Its not completely fair, but then again when is politics fair? If the majority of big states are all a certain paty (either democrst or republican) them the entire system is thrown off, unfair, and unbalanced. Its much more fair if the people of the United States vote amd the votes were to be counted as individuals and not grouped to see which has the greater percentage and then given a certain number of votes to that party's candidate.
Although the process I think will be fair does include greater numbers, the government has equipment such as computers to do the counting for each person. This system is rigged and unjust. It is the opposite of what America and its foundation is all about - equality. I would like yout to take this to washington and even if you get scrutinized and pestered, you should ride forth because lots of Americans think this system is corrupt and if we want our voices and opinions to be heard there is no one else we can tell but you. So represent us small town people of LOCATION_NAME, represent the nation in undergoing a process that will finally make our country one of equality.
Sincerely,
GENERIC_NAME | 2 |
428a9b9 | You should really join the Seagoing Cowboys progrom it will alow u to experience alot of things that you never did or been.You van experience that when you
are in
Seagoing Cowboys program u going to be going on alot a boat trips. Also u are going to be having a lot of fun with the others playing alot of fun games and sports while u on board.You not always going to working but when there nothing to do the Seasgoing Cowboys find ways to have fun.Also you are going to help other all around the world.
If you are in the Seagoing Cowboys Program you will be more aware of people of other countries and their needs.While you're in the Seagoing Cowboys Program you are going to be the most brave and helpful people around the world.Aslo , when you are in the program sometimes you will have to be served as night watchman.But being a watch man on a rainy day is very harmful. You have to be very careful going down the ladder.
It is a very important job of being in the Seagoing Cowboys Program. You will have to help countries and people all the time. | 2 |
42933d4 | The idea of having driverless cars is interesting. The thought of not having to worry about the dangers of being on the road, when your car is the one doing all of the work for you. There are many positives to having the driverless car, but there are as many negative as there is positive.
Sergey Brin, Google cofounds, envisions a future with a public transportation system. He imagines this system to become a form of a public taxi transport. Brin's idea allows the vehicles to use half the fuel that taxis use today and it offers more flexibility than a bus. Google created a car. Google has had cars that could drive under specific conditions and their cars have driven more than half a million miles without having a crash. Now, ideas of the driverless car were sparked up by the idea in movies. Companies have tried to make the driverless car work, but no one has made a driverless car that doesn't need the assistance of the driver, yet. Companies started to question if it wasn't the car that wasn't making their project work and maybe it was the roads that the cars were driving on. In the late 1950s, General Motors created a car that could only run on a special track that was embedded with electrical cables. The cables sent a radio signal to the front of the car. The smart road system worked exceptionally well, but the upgrade to new roads would simply be too expensive. There are many car manufacturing companies working on the progress of making driverless cars happen, but the cars still need the drivers to be on alert to watch out for pedestrians, other motorists and etc.
Our form of transportation is evolving right before our own eyes and its quite exciting to know that by the time I'm in college, driverless cars won't just be an idea that I thought would have been nearly impossible to accomplish. | 3 |
429a441 | The expressions would be a good tool to use in classrooms. There are a lot of things that can back this up. In the text is say " that you can tell how other people are feeling when they are trying to hide their emotions. The software can recognize, it was created by Dr. Huang.
The software can tel when people are having different emotions. A good thing about the tool is that a, teacher would be able to tell when a student is having a bad day or when you are having mixed emotions. An nother good thing about the software is that teachers would be a ble to tell when students are getting bored in class or are lost in class. The software gives off a prectage of your body by telling if you are happy, nice, mean, fearful, and being disgusted with people.
If I was a teacher in high school i would use this tool. There are so many ways that I would be able to help students in calss. If a student was having a bad day I would be able to know becasue of the software tool. I would be able to know if a student was struggling in class or that if a student was becoming bored in class. | 2 |
429eccc | Venus is one of the brightest shinning planet in the night sky, which is also refered to Earth's twin, easy say, Venus is the closest planet to Earth by the terms of density and the size. but not always the same, sometime closer than Mars the reason orbit rountine or spining of the Sun.
The prblem and issue is not even a spaceship has touched down to Venus's reputaion. have amlost 97 percent carbon dioxide blackets Venus. more challengng the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. 800 degrees Fahrenheit. pressure is 90 tims greater than what we experience on our own planet.
The reason scientists even disscussing futher visits to it's surface in Venus because it may be once in the whole like that resemble our planet
; Earth.
it's really worth it for explore Venus because imagine If there similar country in different, that would be awasome, and that's how we think in planet for it's the big event and challenge . | 1 |
429f1e2 | My opionion on Driverless Cars Are Coming is a goood idea because,when people are on the roads during traffic when they get off work most people are tired and trying to rush home.And sometimes people get in to car wrecks and they get injured real bad because sometimes they brakes won't work. And I think with this New Driverless Cars idea is good because the car is watching the driver and the car will not move if the driver is not paying attention on the roads and the Driverless cars has execellent brakes so if you murge in to traffic and another car was driving fast the car would stop.
The Driverless Car is also good for people when they are going out of town because there are a lot of people that get tired of driving and they want to go to sleep.The Driverless Car will take over and drive to your destination and the driverless car will also let you know when it is your turn to go back to driving .And the driverless cars also can drive without anyone being in there and they are really good on the road .And The Diverless cars are good because they don't take up a lot of gas and people would not have to worry about taxi's or city busses. And the driverless cars also have camera's in there so the car can se what you are doing at all times. | 2 |
42a21d9 | Are you thinking about joing the Seagoing Cowbows? If you are I got plenty of reasons why you shoud and also what you do in this program. Think to yourself what would you do in Seagoing Cowboys.
I think that you should join the
Seagoing Cowboys because it will allow you to expeirence and visit many unique places.
When you are on board the ship you can find many things to do and many games to play. Sometimes after the animals were unloaded the would play baseball and volleyball. In
On the ship there is many things tod o. Some people have to take night watch to stay up and watch the animals. During the day you have to feed and water the animals three times. If someone on that boat didn then those animals would be useless.
Luke was a Seagoing Cowboy and he did a lo og these things i said. Luke took night watch to watch the animals, that noght after ruturning his report in he fell down stair towards an opening of the ocean, but he caught himeself. Luke broke ribs so he could not work for a while. Also when he broke his ribs he found to have fun on the boat and off the boat. They could play games in the animals pen when they got unloaded. Like I said they could play games like Volleyball and Baseball.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy need s confidence and strngth, you oculd get picked to do any job but you dont know what it is. When your on the boat it is to late to go back becasue you are in the middle of the sea.
Joining the Seagoing Cowboys is an oppertunity to have fun make friends and explore. You can also go see new counties and got o unique places.
Some people can take that to heart.
Sometimes goi ng to a different country is like seeing something that you loved the most that you havnt seen in a while. That place you visit could be where your family originated from. Joining the Seagoing
Cowboys would be an amzing thin to do. Yes you would hae your ups and downs but you can always get back up. Just think if you join the Seagoing Cowboys you can do a lot of the things that you thought you could not do. That would be amazing. If I got the oppertunity to be a Seagoing Cowboy I would say yes because I like to push my limmits. | 3 |
42ad70e | Auto-mobiles have been used as the average use of transpotation ever since the
Was there any other reason to use anything other than a car after that, no not really but now there are. After so many decades there arrives three valid reasons to limit the average joes use of their motor vehicle. One, you can reduce the smog build up in your cities, two; as well as smog greenhouse gases heavy up on areas in the Earths atmosphere but can be helped, three; people use public transportaion more as well as riding their bikes and walking. if you can limit your selves on car use, you can create a better tomorow.
First off, reducing smog in your area. smog is generated out of the tail pipes of motor vehicles and is bad for the enviroment and atmosphere. with limiting your daily car commute you can remove a good part from your area. when Paris had ordered that only plates that only odd number plates could drive on the roads on monday their large smog cloud of 147 micrograms of PM per cubic meter smog was greatly reduce and lifted the following day. so just one day of cutting the daily car commute in half a city as big as Paris was able to lift a smog.
moving along, the green house gases. Green house gases a like smog is a by product of driving your every day car to and fro work. green house gases are dangeours chemical gases that eat away at earths Ozone layer letting in UV rays that can be very harmful to you and the rest of the ecosystem. Bogata recently had a car free day in which no one was allowed to drive motor vehicles except for buses and taxis. their goal was to promote alternative uses of transportation as well as lowering the amount of green house gases let into Earths atmosphere. doing something like what bogata can help cut down on all the harsh chemicals being let off into the atmosphere.
lastly, finding other sources of transportaion other than every day car. finding another way of getting around is great for the community, it keeps you healthy and the earth healthy. Vauban germany is actually a car free city, it does not have roads on which you can drive upon but only a main street. everything that is needed in the town is no longer a car ride away but a bike ride away or a walk down the road resulting in a very community both people and ecosystem. as well as that is also saves people money not haveing to buy or a car for that matter. now think on how it would be like if your city did this and how much it would benefir from it.
In conclusion, having a car free day or banning about half the cars from driving on one day is not a bad thing but instead a good thing. once again you can reduce the smog, you ca even help keep green house gases out of the atmosphere, and for the last time find other healthier ways of getting around. so to ask the simple question why would you not limit your everyday car use. | 4 |
42b1a61 | This is a natural land form and i'm here to tell you why. Its a landform becasue 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 time sharper than the original Viking photo. After reavealing. . . a natural landfrm, there was no alien monument after all. Another reason why I know it's just a land form because, when NASA actually gets a sceond look at the picture, it actually shows it is equivalent to a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West. Garvin said it reminded him from the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. The shadows gave the the illusion of the eyes nose, and mouth. so, it wasnt really facial features it just was the shadows making it seem like it. In conclusion, thats why I know its not a face those couple of reasons and It would have not been able to be showing that clearly, unless that incident happened recently. | 2 |
42baf0a | This face landform stucture found on Mars was not made by any living source. I belive nature took its course and it so happened to look like a face. Eyes, nose mouth it looks like a face no doubt about it, but it cannot be stuctured by living substances. Most scientists have been saying that this face was made by aliens, but I have to disagree. It just simply can not.
I belive that the face on mars is just a natural landform because we do not even know if aliens exist in the first place. There is no prove that aliens exist so why are we jumping into the conclusion, assuming that aliens made this landform. Prove to me aliens exist then we can start thinking if they had anything to do with this. If not then I do not even think that aliens should be in this conversation. Also even If aliens made this landform that looks like a face, how can they make it like that. It is kind of a perfect face, and I belive that you need some technology to build a structure like that. I don't know how they could do all that by hand. Another topic about this landface I want to point out is the three photos. Have you not have noticed how the face changed every couple of years? Well I do. It makes me belive that nature has built that landface throughout the years withe the wind and rain and the planet shaking at times. There is basically no evidence that aliens have built this landface.
Well If you still do not belive me and still think aliens have built this landface than I think you are insane because I gave you a bunch of reasons why there is no way and there is no evidence that aliens have built this landface. Everybody should be on my side and say mother nature has built this face, but untill there is prove aliens exist I don't think aliens should be in the topic about this. | 3 |
42be951 | What do you think made the face on the side of mars? I think it was naturally made others think that it was made by aliens. I think saying it was made by aliens is unreasnable.
25 years ago NASA says they found the face on Mars. While they were circleing mars with their space drone. It was a short lived suprised because it looked like a natual structure that formed over time. Then a couple days later NASA let the whole world see, if NASA even had the littlest idea that aliens then they would not have released it to the public. The face has become a pop icon that everyone likes. Some thimk that this is pure evidence of life on Mars but NASA's budget defenders wish there was because if there was life on mars then they would get tons of money from the discovery of extraterestrial beings on mars. Overall the face is decaying over the years if there was aliens then don't you think they would fix it at least maybe once or twice over the many years that "their creation" that proves that ali nes didnt make it. You can also compare it to narurally made landforms that are common around the western part of America. So if there were thnings that were made but non natural then they would be able t o see all the falts andpices you can tell that were not naturally made,because of how good the graphics are on the space drones phtos that are tooken in such great quality that you can see all the pixles. This creation really stood out to NASA because they can only see in 2.5km strips amd is mostly made out of Mars dust that surrounds Mars,they had to peer through the wispy clouds just to see it because of how cloudy it is on that side of the planet. Therefor it proves that these are natural land forms because there are things that on earth that may look like this.
In conclusion I think that the face on Mars was naturally made for alot of valid reasons . At the end of the day we might not ever know what made the face on Mars, we can only have our thoughts and oppiouns on Who or What made the structure. | 3 |
42c06b3 | Could you trust a car that drives itself? I know i could'nt and im going to tell you the reasons why. I think it is very dangerous and it would cause a lot of accidents. We'll see if I can change your mind about the driverless cars.
Now how could someone trust one of these things? It takes no energy to drive a car so how could people be so lazy to want a driverless car. Sure the car alerts you when your in danger but people fall asleep while driveing cars. So imagine how many people would fall asleep in a car that you do not have to do anything to operate it. Also imagine how much they would cost! A regular car is already a lot of money, so one of these cars would cost a ton of money. Also think about your kids don't you want themto actually learn how to drive? This world is already dependent on cumputers enough. It would also cost a lot of money to fix them beacause most ordinary people couldnt fix them. Wouldnt you rather have a car that you can fix yourself? If you know how to fix a regular car then it would save money because you wouldnt have to take it to a mechanic.
I hope I have changed you mind about these cars. I know they seem cool but they just would'nt be safe. Also it would cost a lot of money for one and a lot of money to fix one. | 2 |
42c494d | Think of how many car crashes a day steal loved ones away from us. Think of all the mothers and fathers, sons and duaghters, and friends that are gone as the result of someone's careless mistake. The resaons behind most crashes is plain old human error. Well, what if we removed human error from the equation? If we take the driver away from the wheel and put them in the passesnger side, imagine how drastically the rate of crashes would decrease.
In todays modern world of advanced technology, we already have cars that can nearly drive themsleves. As the artical points out, there are cars that can drive themselves except when complecations arise such as traffic jams and roadblocks. Google's Toyota Prius has multiple sensors that moniter the area around the car and allows the car to funtcion as if there was a driver behind the wheel. Sensors can also allow the car to brake faster than a human could in emergencies and reduce the power of the engine.
The laws reguarding computer driven cars are all concerned about saftey, as they should be. Although, if a company, such as googlel, could create a perfect driverless car, shouldn't those laws be changed instead to any driverless car must be thouroughly tested and cleared by an organization or group not apart of the company itself to make sure there are no problems whatsoever. Also, in the event of any accedent caused by the car, the blame should undesputibly fall onto the company. The risk of crash would be outweighed by the benefits of driverless cars, though. Even in the event of an unlikely crash, there would still be fewer crashes than ever before.
Another benefit driverless cars offer is the time saved. How many of us have been late to work, a meeting, or school bescause of traffic? Traffic is genereally cause by wrecks or roadwork. While roadwork cannot really be avoided, with driverless cars, there would be nearly no wrecks at all. Then no one would need to sit in a mile long traffic jam as someone else gets their promotion at work becasue they are not there. Also, no one would miss their turn or get stopped for running a red light and have to wait to get their ticket. As the saying goes, time is money.
Even thoug a toatlly driverless car has not been invented, we are very close. Along with the extra safety that comes with humans no longer driving, time wil be saved, along with money. Las wouold aslo be changed so that the passengers in the car would not be to fualt in the instence of an unlikley crash. With driverless cars on the rise, we have a safer, more adnaced future ahead of us. | 4 |
42c8dba | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author supports his claim by stating that the reasoning for continuing research on how to get to Venus's surface is, because it was once very similar to earth's surface long ago.
Astronomers claim that Venus probably had oceans and supported many different life forms just like Earth. The author states that the value of returning to Venus seems idisputable due to the fact that it is sometimes our nearest option. Since it is our nearest option and giving consideration to how long time frames of space travel are, this is a pretty good claim. So far the author's claims are, that it is our nearest option and it was once very much like Earth and habitable.
The only problem now is Venus's surface conditons. On Venus's surface the temperatures average is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than it is on Earth. However the author goes on to state that NASA has a possible solution to the conditions on Venus's surface. NASA's possible soolution would be to have a blimp like vehicle hover 30 miles above Venus's surface. Even though the temperature would be around 170 degrees Fahrenheit it is still survivable for humans. However researchers cannot take samples of Venus's surface by hovering in a ship safely above the planet. The author states that instead of looking at the problems as risks we should look at them as challenges.
The author claims that striviing to meet the challenges presented by Venus has value because human curiosity will likely lead us to many more equally intimidating endeavors. Also that our travels beyond Earth should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. So the authors claims for furthering research on how to get to Venus are, it's the nearest planet to us, it used to be very hospitable and much like Earth, and that we should see the risks as challenges and find ways to get past them. The author supported these claims very well. | 4 |
42caf8b | Have you always dreamed of a world with driverless cars? Your dream may become a reality. Google and automakers like Audi, Mercedes Benz, and Nissan have already started the process. Driverless cars have been discussed and shown in television and movies, and this may become an everyday thing outside of Hollywood. This could change the world and our future drastically, however, is this a positive or a negative change? In this situation, the outcomes turn out to be more negative.
One example of negative change is that the cars would not be completely driverless. What is the point of a driverless car that is not ALWAYS driverless? Drivers would always have to be anticipating their turn to drive, which could cause stress and anxiety. During this time of waiting, drivers could get bored and find something to distract themselves with, such as a cell phone. By the time the car needs the driver to take control, they may not be fully attentive or ready. This could result in a crash or unsafe driving.
Next, safety is key when it comes to automobiles. Right now, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driver cars. Only California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have legalized testing driverless cars. Although more states may follow, traffic laws are very strict, and even if they change, new laws will be made in order to cover liability in case of an accident. Technology can fail, and if that were to happen, who would be responsible? The driver or the automaker? This could result in disagreements and chaos.
Finally, this could be expensive. Google has a modified Toyota Prius that contains position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camers mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an intertial motion sensor. This technology all works together to produce a 3-D model of the cars surroundings. If this car is not even driverless, how much technology would be needed for a driverless car? It could get very pricey.
Driverless cars are a new and upcoming idea. The results turn out to be more negative because of them not being completely driverless, the safety, and the price. This could change the future if they end up being produced. Technology leads to new discoveries every single day, and in a few years, we may be accustomed to not driving anymore. | 3 |
42d5993 | Dear senator we know that there been many changes in the united states of america voter increase there equal right to vote for the president of the united sate. but does the electrol college work? yes becuase if there was not a electral college to vote we wouldnt have a president in the united state. We just need to follow the goverment step to consider there vote. but the electral college consists of 583 electors that means that everyone had the right to vote.
We all have the right to vote because many people dont have the chance to vote for the united sates president so do you think we would have the chance to vote. n and can imagrats vote to thier part of the state we have a big population of imagrant in the united sate they are hispanic, lations. we had save the imagrant because we all vored to come to the united state to serve a better life taht they coulnt have in there counrty. so we all have the right to vote in the congress constitution
Do we all to serve the right in the united even if they are not from the united sate .the population grows even more with the imagrants the reason we have to vote for them was becuase they need a better future to help there family. senator i would say not to change any of the decided thing you would want to do to the voter in the united states. | 1 |
42d86ef | Many people believe that driving makes everything easier since it gets you from point A to point B. But so does walking or riding a bike. There are many advantages to limiting car usage all over the world. Limiting car usage not only decreases the problem of smog or greenhouse gas emission it also helps give back to the economy in different ways.
Limiting car usage helps decrease any sort of problem with smog or greenhouse gas emission. As stated in Source 2, "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city"(10). Since Paris decided to enforce the ban, the smog had cleared enough Monday for the French party to rescind the ban on Tuesday. Thus proving the point that limiting car usage either through a ban or just a vehicle-free zone, as in Germany, it can reduce smog and/or greenhouse gas emission. Greenhouse gas emission can be reduced simply by either switching to a more economy efficient car such as the hybrid or creating a low-car surburban society. As stated in Source 1, "Passenger cars are resposible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States."(5).Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza asserted that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution"(Source 3,24) demonstrating that more than one person agree that lowering the use of cars is good for any society.
Economy may get better but it might just all depend on whether or not society begins to limit their car usage. As car usage is decreasing, people now have time to go out and be care free. As they stop limiting themselves from just driving from one place to another, more opportunities arise. Places such as "parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city"(Source 3, 28) because people now have the time,instead of being stressed,to go have fun. Now new restaurants and even upscale shopping districts have cropped up, these places are being placed because of the restriction on driving your car. Even though it may have "negative implications for the car industry"(Source 4,34) our economy will be boosted leaving the negative implications for car industry out of the question when it comes to advantages versus disadvantages. People will have stores within walking distance and since there will be suburbs with car-free zones it makes communication easier and faster, leaving driving places from stressing anyone out.
Everything isnt always dependent on time and if you have to work, with these suburbs containing car-free zones, stores are only a walk away instead of "along some distant highway"(Source 1,6). As mentioned in Source 3 "the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog"(21) and with limited car usage it is guaranteed that this will occur. Even though cars may be needed, there are many more efficient ways of achieving something without using your car. America has already joined in reducing their driving percentage by either using environment friendly cars or not receiving a license at all. Places all over the world believe the limiting of vehicles in their society supports their country thus a low-car society is what it takes to "conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety"(Source 4, 43). | 4 |
42e2c21 | Don't you think that the Face is a natural land form? The Face was a land form found on Mars.They took a picture of it using Viking 1 on May 24,2001. It was shaped and shadowed to look like a face. I believe that the Face is a landform because they have photos of it .
The face is a landform because they have pictures of it. It says in the passage, that on May 24,2001, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling the planet, snapping photos of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2, when it spotted the shadowy likeness of a face . An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the red planet called Cydonia. This except from the text shows that there was indeed a picture taken from the planet. This proves that the face was a natural land foom because since there are no living creatures on the planet, there is no way it could have been created.
So in conclusion, The Face is a natural landform because there are pictures of it. Pictures equal facts and truth. There is no other way it could've been created. | 2 |
42e3e86 | My view on driverless cars is completely negative. I do not believe that driverless cars will be a successful thing. Driverless cars will not be used as much as normal cars because people will not trust a driverless cars to get them where they need to go safely. These new cars can be unreliable if the sensors break while the car is driving there might not be enough time for the driver to react. If the battery in the car dies because of all the electronics running off of it then the car can't self drive and someone would get hurt.
The "Traffic Jam Assistant" is a car that can drive itself but the driver always has to have a hold on the wheel. If someone is using this car and they fall asleep and the car stops in the middle of the highway it would be disasterous. Also if the driverless cars are developed people are going to start feeling like they can do more things while the car drives for them. For example if someone is listening to music and can't hear when the car alerts them they would get in an accident. Those are all valid statements and also why i don't think driverless cars are a good idea. | 2 |
42e55d6 | The Electoral College is a cruel, pointless process that simply makes a percentage of votes, or all of them if you look at it that way, to mean nothing, and allows for circumstances like the 2000 election. There are plenty of reasons, and plenty of contradictions in "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to kep our despised mehod of choosing the President."
To begin, the winner-take-all system is very unfair to the voters. Voters in certain, dominated areas are supposed to know what they are voting for, yet get nothing to teach them? Not that it matters regardless, since every person within a state supports a political party, right, and, depending on your state's veiw, all Republicans/Democrats have no idea what they are voting for, correct? Like Bradford Plumer says, you shouldn't have to move to Ohio to be able to get a vote. There is also the point countered Mr. Posner's article, which is that those in party-dominated states will have a feeling their vote doesn't count, and he sais that one vote will not swing an election. Then why do you beleive an upside of the elecoral college is that those in more neutral states will feel their vote counts? Or do those in party-dominated states not matter, since those in neutrals think way more about their votes, and are the only ones you should trust, according to him? In practice, they are the only deciding factor .
There are also the many unwanted results from electoral colleges, such as the 2000 election's outcome defying the people. "What Is the Electoral College?" states you are voting for electors when you vote, but what is the point if they can simply defy you? It would be like if after the president was chosen, the Senate could overule him with a 1/5 vote. There is also the point in Plumer's article about the time Hawaii sent two slates, which forced the desicion to Nixon, who had to validate only the opponet's votes in fear of otherwise receiving bad publicity. There is also the strange way of resolving a tie, which boils down to the same thing as the winner-take-all system, except if more people support it doesn't matter. It would be like if everybody in the room wasn't alowed to vote, other than one voted, but everybody in the room agreed anyway for some strange, miraculous reason. (Of course, the one guy in the next room doesn't agree, and completely takes out your vote, regardless of the fact that there were 30 people in this one.)
Now, there is the gregarious amount of contradictory statements that can be found within Mr. Posner's article. One has already been mentioned in the winner-take-all system paragraph. He also conveintly provides a dispute that had nothing to do with a close vote in the Electoral College, and everything to do with what is wrong with this winner-take-all system, being the 2000 election. In the same paragraph, me mentions how an Electoral tie is highly unlikely- as if a tie between the millions of US citizens is. His reason #5 can be easily solved by simply giving the presidency to the candidate who receives a plurality of votes, rather than a majority. Reasons number 3 and 4 both contradict reason 2 as well, stating that everybody gets a vote, only swing states should get a vote, and only bigger states should get a vote (even when there is a 51/49 split, where 51%=100%, mind you).
Thus, the Electoral College is completely unfair to voters, and should be abolished. Voters should not have to vote for other votes which could very well defy their's, why not just have the Electoral Cllege do all the voting then? It is both redundant and unfair. | 5 |
42e95b4 | The author studies Venus the way some people study science and how others study math and English. The auhtor studies really hard on what he wants and needs to know. Some dangers that it persents would be that not all of Venus is safe and not all of space is safe either. Venus is a worthy planet because it does not have all of man kind on it destroying it or usig it. Venus is a place where some people go to see outisde of our world to see what space really does look like.
In parargraph 1 it talks about about of Venues is sometimes called the "Evening Star" and it is one of the most brightest points of light in the night sky. It is also known as Earth's twin because Venus is closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size. It says in paragraph 2 " Each perious mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.
In conclusion is states in paragraph 8 " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itslef, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into mnay equally intimidationg endeavors," Thoes words that came from paragraph 8 would probabaly be some what some danger but nit that much. | 2 |
42ea1c5 | In the artical "The Callange of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it has, but that won't stop the will and dedication of people completing there dreams.
The author supports this idea by explaining what dangers there are to Venus and why it is worthy to go to Venus. As it states, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmostphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater that what we experience on our own planet." This explains what the dangers are on Venus and why its hard to go there. As it is said, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." This explains why it is worthy to go to Venus, because it was like the Earth once which make scientist want to go study what happened there to make it a dead-like planet.
People are always trying to find ways to go to different planets, but it will be a long while before we achieve our goals. | 2 |
42f073f | Driving is often one of the most frightning things to many peole whether they are starting to get their permit, or if they've been driving for a long time. The idea of driverless cars came to the mind of Sergey Brin, the cofounder of Google. He even envisions a future where the public can have access to a transportation system such as cars that can drive themselves, and a public-transport taxi system that uses half the fuel of modern cars. In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author wrote about the positive and negative sides to these inventions. The article covers many things about them; however, it does not fully explain the true nature of such vehicles being available for public use. These cars should not be allowed to be bought and used by the public.
As stated in paragraph two of the article, it states that these driverless cars aren't fully driverless. These cars have no crash thus far, but how safe is it really compare to their rival brands? "Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents," What the sentence means is that these cars don't have one hundred percent control of how they drive. They require the driver to be full alert when pulling in and out of their driveways. Little do they know, that accidents can still happen when they have claimed they are better than any other car brand that uses the same radars and sensors.
Google isn't the first company to think of a smart car which isn't a surprise to those who have looked into different car brands. Companies like Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, Audi and Nissan plan to have driverless cars by the year 2020. In 2013, BMW announced their development of a car called the "Traffic Jam Assistant." The difference between the "Traffic Jam Assistant" and the driverless car is that BMW added a design to where the car itself notifies the driver when human skill is required. Another design element to the car is that the driver's seat actually vibrates to alert the driver when the vehicle is in danger of backing into any object. This choice of car is more safer than the driverless car as the Google car relies on the driver to focus on the road. Every driver has looked away from the road before, so it wouldn't be a surprise if an accident were to occur. Though there is another safety mesasure added to the Google car, a camera to watch the driver to make sure they keep their eyes on the road ahead. This could lead to some issues for privacy as people have been sensitive in the pass about their identities being shown to corporations. Not only could this lead to court sessions, but also lead to a possible debt for the company.
As stated earlier, the author did list both negative and positive things about the Google car. Paragraph eight shows the psychological side for drivers with this car, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?
We have to interpet the driving fun in a new way," Dr. Werner Huber stated. Manufacturers hope to do that by having entertainment and information systems that have displays that turn off when the driver needs to pay attention, an option drivers who want to use their electronic devices do not have. It is stated that this option is a safety feature; however it could be more of a distraction. The use of electronics has increased, and today's modern society is easily distracted by this. When the car needs the driver to take the wheel, how will the driver react while they're busy looking at a screen? Safety is a big concern, and so everything should be looked at and thought through.
States nationwide have already made it illegal to drive test computer-driven cars. Some states have limited the use of it, and it is because the safety of the cars are still not certain. If the car is proven to be of safe use, new laws will have to be made and so will the coverage of liability in a case of an accident. If most states have seen it as unsafe, why continue to research ways to make smart cars? Automechanics have focused on their work, and assume that these problems will be solved in the near future. How can we be so sure?
Technology everyday is improving little by little, and so is the need to travel. We have the technology to make whatever the mind wants to create, but some ideas should stay ideas. It's not a terrible ideas, but it could bring more trouble for everyone business to home workers alike. Safety to the public should always be the number one concern, not how high tech the car itself is. Instead of causing more accidents due to the car mechanics, we should let the drivers learn properly how to drive. | 5 |
42f54eb | Forida senator, I argue to remove the Electoral College and replace it by changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. Voting is not fair to the people because they can't vote for the President, only for the state electors, and even if the candidate that won the most popular votes, may not be elected. Also, the winner-takes-all system is not fair to voters because the candidates don't spend time in states they cannot win in or small states and mostly in swing states.
"Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a state of electors, who in turn elect the president." The passage stated in paragraph 10. Voting has changed over many years, but I think that people should be able to vote for the President and have that candidate win the election if they get the magority of popular votes. If the people want to have that candidate as the President, so be it. Although the Electoral College may help by not having a tied election and have a "Certainty of Outcome", but it should be what the people want and vote for. In my opinion, it would be better to not feel like you're putting in a vote that isn't what you wanted. The vote from the people go to state electors for them to choose and that is not truely fair to the people.
The candidates should spend time in all states to try to get their vote instead of the winner-takes-all system; therefore, it should be removed. There are people in the state that have voted for that candidate but they don't go to the state because they only focus on the swing states. I understand that they do go there to try to win the election and become president, but they should at least spend some amount of time in other states. "During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad." As stated in the passage in paragraph 13.
So overall, the electoral college should be replaced by having the popular vote be the decider of who gets to be president. It's fair to the people and to the country. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.