essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
539508c
|
Technology is rapidly advancing with each passing moment. Newer andfastertechnology is being used everyday making the world a better place. The world has also started implementing technology into the schools kids learn in today. The use of technology creates new ways of learning that can benefit students and make them better and brighter contributers to society.
The FAC or Facial Action Coding System can read emotions and put them into data. It has six basic emotions: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. The FAC does this by making a computer 3D model and makes all 44 major muscles in the face and makes them function. By doing this, teachers could read students faces telling what kind of emotional state they're in. By cataloging each student with their current emotion, we can find out wht makes them hesitant to certian problems and what we can do to fix it.
Since emotion is a key part to human communication, the FAC is very benefical to the classroom. The face generates all emotions into a language that most people can read. The new technology can show the depth of emotion over great distances. This can proove benefical to students who take online classes via computer. The teacher/professor can not only communicate with students but can now distinguish areas of study that might frighten people sothat lesson plans may be adjusted. The technology could read how happy someone is who received a good test score or personal goal that a student has reached.
The FAC tells us emotions but what can we do to change people's current emotion. Studies show that when you make a face, you feel that emotion you're pretending to be in. The FAC could possibly "prescribe" the user an emotion to help them if they are sad. The users could then be prescribed a joke or something that will make them laugh or giggle. The happier a person is, wouldn't they be less doubtful and more confidant towards more challenging tasks.
The possibilties for this technology are endless. The FAC could revolutionize the way people learn. The FAC could tell teachers where they should focus more and where they should direct their attention. The FAC can also give the teachers a way to see into the type of learner people are and how they truely feel about caertain subjects. Another good use for this technology could be to prescribe a dose of happiness to students tobrighten their spirits to help them during a test. The FACis truely benfical to students in the classroom.
| 4 |
5398e83
|
I am against driverless cars , because they are not completely drive less. What the point of buying a driveless car when you still have to control the car in times. I am against them because when i hear these cars are driveless im thinking i could be texting or doing homework on the way to school. Then they say these cars dont exactly drive by them selfs so what the point of having a smart car?
Imagine all the new laws we would have to make. If these cars drive by themselfs and they crash whos fault is it? Whos really to blame for the car crashing the owner? Or the company? This would cause a big argument and take a lot of time to make new rules and laws. For example would we need a driver license, or whats the age limit to be in a smart car?
Another thing is this would probably cost a lot of money. How are the cars suppose to stop at the stop light ? Im thinking they would change all the stop lights to put a type of computer or sensor that the car can connect to. Just by doing that saying the car wouldnt have any more things we would have to upgarde it would cost a lot of money. Who will pay for these upgrades ? The car company or are they going to take it out of our taxes and make us pay? If that was the thing its just another reason why i dont agree with smart cars what if i dont have one and they are making me pay for all these things.
I pesonally dont think that smart cars are a good idea. For some of the reasons i stated and for many more.
| 3 |
53a31e8
|
Do you thing the face on mars is just a natural landform? or perhaps do you think it is a face? Well guess what? Well from what the story says its a possibility that it could just be a natural landform.
first, in the story it says" its's not as easy to target Cydonia". This mean its not as easy just to pop up and see it. meaning theres a possiblity thats not it because it wouldn't of been that easy to find.
Second, most scientists think it was an alien. In the story it says" Although few scientists believed the face was an alien artifact, photographing Cydonia became a priority for NASA when mars Global Surveyor (MGS) arrived at tge REd PLanet in sept. 1997, eighteen long years after the viking missionsended". which means they never know what it is it can be a alien or an face but most likely just an alien in their case.
Last , you dont just see pass the face any other time. As it says in the story "We dont just pass over the face very often". With that being said its not some you can just see any minute its maybe once out of a blue moon or your just lucky.
Well with all of the information its possible that its just a natural landform. Its nnot so possible for it to be the face like some scientist said because its not the simple you have to work very hard to find one.
| 2 |
53a5927
|
In the article the challenge of exploring venus , the Author claim that altho it's dangurious and hard to explore venus, it's still worth the cost. Acording to this essay Venus is the clostest planet to Earth. It is very hard to go to Venus. It is a very challanging prostest, but the author said despite the dangers to go to Venus it's still worth it. Meatle melts when it land on Venus that is how hot it is. Every machiene that landed on Venus survive for only 3 hours.
The author still think it's ok to explore Venus. In my own opinion it is not woth it. You land on the planet, lets just say you survive the ride witch is imposible. I don't hear anything about water. All I heard is acid and hotness. Venus it the hottest planet in our solor system.
we are not talking about my opinion ok we are talking about why it's worthy to go to Venus dispite the danger and how the author supports this idea. The author is saying that it is worth the cost because, Venus is the clostest planet to Earth. In about 30 miles above the tempeature will be aound 170 degrees Fahrenheit,but air pressure would be close to the sea level on Earth. If you think about it it's still liveable.
The author supports this idea by telling us how to like up there. We would need some sort of flying object that would stay up there and not fall down. We need that so we don't contact with the ground that will cook you alive if you fall down. We need things like jets to fly through storms, like on Earth. It might soud imposible but, Venus might be the only Planet that humans could survive in if our world got distory. Even NASA supporth his claim.
So there you have it. Do you agree or disagree to the authors claim? I personlity dissagree buts some might agee. I might lack in knolege, I don't know. You might think that Venus might be the only opction. But what about Mars. Are we forgeting Mars here? If you think about it, anit Mars a better place. Mars got water, does Venus have water? It was once an ocean like Earth. Key word once.
| 3 |
53b3fb9
|
From reading the article "Driveless Cars Are Coming", I have figured out that driveless cars have been a long time coming. People have been thinking and working on them for years now. There are pros and cons to driveless cars. For the most part driveless cars would not be a bad idea to throw into the world. If driveless cars passed the laws, you would not have to do much work going places, with time the cars are going to get better and more high tech, and they seem to be safe.
Someone gets into their car and does not have to worry about touching the steering wheel, they just have to turn the car on. That is what it would be like if driveless cars come in the future. The family or a person can just sit in their car without paying attention to the road. On the other hand, a person does have to pay some attention to the cars actions because the car might need their help. For the most part, driveless cars would make life more easy-going. Some people dread having to drive long distances to get to the location they are going to but with driveless cars, it would be no trouble to hop in the car and sit in there while the car does it all for you.
The best part about technology is it is always improving. People are always discovering better ways to do things and improvements in how to do those things. With driveless cars, they can be doing many tests on them and trying out different ways til they get the driveless car reliable for people to trust. Everything improves over the years and driveless cars are one of them. In the future, people are going to find more advanced ways to put in the driveless car to make it a better, more trusting car.
Only a hand full of states are allowing limited use of semi-autonomous cars. Most states have concerns but some states are willing to work with the manufactorers. If more states allow their state to test computer-driven cars, it would make it easier to find ways to improve on the car. Driveless cars are a big deal and they need to be the safest they can be for the roads they will be on. So far the driveless cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves and it is only 2016. The future holds so much more.
Although there are many things that need to be worked on before they let driveless cars on the road, it is a good idea to keep improving the vehicles. If people keep working hard at it, no telling what the driveless car will be like over the years. It is important to make the best car possible. There is already so many great things going for the driveless car. If they keep testing the cars and finding ways to make it better, it will eventually make a very safe driveless car.
| 4 |
53b4b52
|
The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" has made their article over the progress of studies done on Venus, the "Evening Star" of our skies. They collected research and human planetary exploration of our solar system, and I'll be going over claims and their ideas of just how passionately they support their ideas of studying Venus despite dangers.
My evaluation of the successful writings the author had written is crucially on how they told about the difficulty of the mission would be on Venus, seeing as they inform us the tempatures on the planet average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, with atmospheric pressures there being a startling 90 times greater amount than our planet, and with all this there is little knowledge about what makes up the ground, water or gas of the planet. And with all the probes we've sent last only a few hours each within each landing. On our way to finding a way to overcome these challenges we found discoveries made on the way about future planet explorations that could someday be made by humans on Venus itself.
The author wrote that current discoveries made by scientists show that Venus also had a past of preserving life on its planet, and even having geological landscape features similiar to Earth. The planet's orbit provide nearby space travel making it a possible and easy route for planetary visits, which is crucial seeing how long space travel can take with our current modifications and technology. The article's author then backs this up on NASA's critical ideas and discoveries for sending humans to Venus for studies.
A solution the researchers have proposed for tells of a floating or a blimp transportation vehicle capable of carrying people over the potential dangerous landscape and acidic clouds for closer examination of the planet around 30 miles up in the air. Despite the distance, they would still be in 170 degrees Fahrenheit weather, with pressures close to sea-levels like on Earth, but solar power generation would be easy to obtain, and radiation levels are equal to the safe places of Earth's. Meaning for a difficult, but survivable enviroment for us humans to be in.
As invigorating as that may seem, They then tell on how undeveloped the idea still is, seeing as hovering over 30 miles would definitely avoid dangerous conditions, but also samples and direct contact with critical minerals and materials that could be discovered from below would make studies on the planet not as plentiful as it could be. Leaving options for a need to find ways for a closer, but riskier challenges to get the samples and materials they would need to make far by more accurate studies with the planet Venus.
They go on to tell us about machines capable of withstanding the tempatures capable of melting tin, which would be dire against tablets and cell phones we have on Earth, and how machines we've had designed in 1800's could survive with some modifications, or silicon carbide simplified electronics have been made to withstand the heat and acidic conditions.
I conclude my essay with the standpoint that the author successfully drew in readers, and did an incredible job of telling us the usefulness of missions to Venus would be if we could potentially land humans to explore the planet, and where the studies could take us as an intelligent species.
| 4 |
53b7354
|
Studying about space can lead people to wonder so many things. In a article called "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", it leads even the author to think deeply about space. In this case, about the planet Venus. Some may know that space has many dangerous in it. Venus might be dangerous to humans but it is worthy to study and that there are many features which human can reconsidered their beliefs.
The first reason why Venus is worthy to explore is that there are more solar energy in the planet than our planet. Venus is the second planet in our solar system. Even though Venus is closer to the sun then Earth, the solar power are almost the same. The solar power in Venus won't exceed the solar power on Earth. They are basically at the same level. Venus has a solar power that would be plentiful if humans live there. On Earth, we get solar power but not all the places on Earth can get them all. For example, like Antartica or Iceland. However in Venus, humans would get plenty of solar everywhere on the planet.
The second reason why human should change their beliefs about Venus is that long time ago, Venus was belief to be covered in oceans. Some scientists believed that Venus could support various forms of life just like on Earth. Venus has familiar features with Earth such as valleys, mountains and even craters. This features can make people believe that this planet can support not just human life but other forms of life.
On the other hand, sometimes Venus can be too risky. The planet's atmosphere is 97 percent carbon dioxide. Also the clouds are in highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the atmosphere. The average temperatures are over 800 degress Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on Earth. This temperature can also melt metals. This planet is pretty high in temperature.
Even though the temperature on Venus can be extremely hot, NASA are coming up with an idea where humans will float over the hot ground temperature of Venus. This would help humans because now the temperature would be at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit and also the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on our planet. Now, humans can have many plentiful sunlight and don't have to worry about the colds. Also, since Venus is one of the closest planet to Earth, we don't have to worry about how long it will take. It will take way shorter time than other planets in our solar system.
In conclusion, Venus does not seems as bad or horrific as some may think of. The planet has many plentiful sunlight and solar power. It also have Earth-like physical feature. For example, it has mountains, valleys, and craters. It was also once beliefed to be covered in water which can give various forms of life. Venus though is a hot planet with 800 degrees Fahrenheit and that 97 percent of the planet is covered in carbon dioxide. Even though it may be hot, we humans always think positive. In which NASA are coming up with ideas. Ideas where human would float above the ground and we would be getting many sunlight. Now, people can changed their beliefs that outer space can be dangerous but they also have a good side and many wonderful things to know and discover.
| 3 |
53b7652
|
I am personally for the development of these cars. Driverless cars can bring so much to the world. Impaired driving accidents would decline in numbers because of these cars. One of the goals of driverless cars is to eventually have taxis from driverless cars and use less fuel as they would be more accessable than buses. These cars would also provide safety to the elderly. Once these cars are produced at large rates it will change everything.
Impaired driving is one of the most talked topic on the news as they are the cause of many deaths all through the world. Driverless cars could decrease the amount of deaths from impaired driving as the intoxicated driver could select an option to tell the car that he is unable to drive. The car could then safely take them home without the risk of anyone losing their life. Other forms of impaired driving exist such as texting. Reducing the amount of impaired driving deaths could help many people.
The cofounder of Google envisions a world where these cars could function as taxis and lower fuel usage. Big cities like New York City could benefit from this as they have hundreds of taxis throughout the city. Lowering fuel usage in just New York City would save not only fuel but also help the enviroment. In smaller cities everyone would not need a car. They would call for a taxi and just go where ever they need to go.
Everyday people always encounter elderly drivers who just seem a little too oblivious. Special cars with some sort of elderly setting could make driving safer for them. Sometimes an elderly person just wants to get out of the house and drive around. Well these cars would enable them to do this in a safe manner. This way they wouldn't run a red light or ignore a stop sign and potentially risk someone's life.
In conclusion mass production of driverless cars would benefit thousands of people. No one would be in risk of their life taken because someone made a choice to drive while impaired. Lower fuel usage would help our enviroment. Elderly people could be safer on the roads. This technology will help many for different reasons and will make roads a safe place for everyone.
| 4 |
53b8296
|
The challenges of exploring of Venus can be the differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. It might challenge you in the that that you dn't have anything to help you get ther like astronoits. It can challenge you when you near the sun or when you trying to get to it, sometimes the sun can catch up on us. On the plnet's surface, temperatures verage over 800% Degree Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure id 90 times greater than what we experiene on our own planet.
The other scoholsr college don't be like where we at right now. Like some people or every human being can't breath on another planet. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temeperature of any planet in our solar system. Even though Mercury is closer to our sun. BEyond the high pressuure and heat, Venusian geologyand weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquick, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land and on its surface.
There's a lot of things that can challenge you from exploring to the Venus. You need something that you can fly with or even the things that are saty for ever like your astronoit should be full or have somehting that still can turn it on and the things that I don't know.........
| 1 |
53b8c98
|
I think there should be driverless cars. The reasons for this is, the future is always inovationg making life easier,it helps people with disabilities, and it is better for safety reasons.
Inovation makes life more convenent for us,and safer than it has before. Like how we have dryers to dry our cloths instead of hanging them on closth pins. Also, how we have vaccines to make sure we dont get diseases. Those are examples of things that have helped the world in making things easier and safer. So there is nothing wrong with a driverless car that is safe and convinent for the average houshold family.
In the passage it tells us in pargraph 7 that they are already invovating how a car will drive itself. Yes they say that it can not yet navigate itself through work zones and accidents, but they are still improving how to make it fully driverless which can be very helpful to those with disabillities. Disabilities such as paralysis,loss of limbs, blindness, and
Epilepse ,which is the cause of sudden seziurs, which prevents them fom driving. These cars can help them get around without the assistance of another person making them feel normal or indapendent in society.
Laslty, we should have driveless cars because,it actually is safer for every person. Say if a person was driving under the influence. That person could harm themselves and others, but with driverless cars you wont have to worry with that person causing an accident and hurting themselves and others.The only concern with safety is in paragraph 9,that if the technology fails there might be liability issues. These issues can be worked out by setting out laws and procedures for these types of situations to prevent them. which is what auto makers are trying to solve now.
Thecnology is always growing, helpin people out, and making it safer for us to live. The driverless car is one of those things.The driverless car gives everyone the equal opertunity to be independent and safe for future generations to come.
| 4 |
53b8ebf
|
Venus,sometimes called the "Evening Star," is one of the brightest poins of light in the night sky,making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot In our solar system,Venus is the distant but safe vantage point of Earth,it has proved a very challenging.In the Earth,venus, and
Mars,other times planetary neighbor,orbit the sun at different speeds.Thes conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth;such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.It said that "beyond high pressure and heat,venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes,and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
why are cientiste even discussing further visits to its surface? Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system.Today,valus can some features that are analogous to those on Earth.The National Aeronautics and space administration (NASA) ha one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to venus.Lmagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roilong venusian landscape.Solr power would be plentiful,and radiation would not exceed Earth levels.Not conditions,but survivable for humans.Ther is more importantly, researchers canot take samples of rock,gas,or anything mission to uderstand venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks.
NASA is working on other approaches to studying venus. Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers.The thught of comuters existing in those days may sound shocking, but these devices make claculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all.By comparison,systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure,heat and other forces.In our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and douts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innvation.
| 1 |
53bba22
|
Have you ever thought of going overseas to a different country? Well my name is Luke and I always wanted to go overseas for my entire life. When I wasm 17 years old my friend Don invited me to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Well of course I couldn't say no jto that because I thought it was a once in a lifetime opportunity.
You should fully consider joining the Seagoing Cowboys program. If you do, you can see so many new thing and experience many things you have always wanted to experience. While I was on my first trip when Don invited I almost died but only because it was a very rainy night. That doesn't mean you have a high chance that you can die, it just means you have to very very careful when it is a rainy night. It was 1945 World War II ended, and many countries were in ruins. To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. So then that is when Don and I signed up.
I turned 18 before arriving Greece, which meant I could be drafted into the military. When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service. I think the cattle boat trips are unbelievable for a small-town boy. Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing Acropolis in Greece was special. The next special thing I got to do was taking a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water.
In my opinion you should definetly consider joining the Seagoing Cowboys program. Next if you do end up joining it then you will have the best time or experience your whole entire life. The best part about it was if you don't want to go into the army and you turn 18 while you are in the middle of your trip you don't have to join the Seagoing Cowboys Program.
| 2 |
53be578
|
Are you the kind of person that is really interested in political stuff? Politics can be a subject that will start fights, but not everyone is so interested. You must know what the electoral college is. It is a system where when you vote for your president you are actually voting for a group of electors that will then vote for the president(Source 1). This means that even if there is a majority in the popularity vote from the people. The electoral college can over rule that and vote for the other. Some say the electoral college is good because it prevents ties or because it will make sure there is a winner. But if they can over rule your vote are you really voting for your president? I say the electoral college is a bad system and it needs to be extinguished.
There is no doubt that you should get to decide who your leader will be. And if the electoral college can over rule your vote do you really feel like it's your decision? In the 2000 presidential race, Al Gore lost because he recieved the most popularity votes from the people but the electoral college voted for Bush instead(Source 2). This means that the people thought Al Gore should be the president but instead they didn't get what they wanted because the electoral college thought otherwise. Do you think this is in anyway fair? The majority of the country ended up unhappy with the election because of ther electoral college. I say that alone is enough reason to abolish the electoral college. If it happens once it can happen again. Do you want to feel cheated and betrayed again? Let's get rid of the electoral college!
Some others may say that they support the electoral college because it can't have a tie. "Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality ina state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state."(Source 3). It is still possible to have a tie though because there are 538 total votes and since that is an even number then it can happen. And if there is just a stlight difference and instead the electoral college creates a landslide then that isn't representing the actuall number of the votes by the people. Once again you are being cheated out of your sya it the election. The hardest thing to understand is why people would still support something that doesn't support them. The electoral college basically throws away your votes and replaces them with theirs. And once again, it is possible for ties in the electoral college due to the even number of votes.
"Because each state casts only one vote, the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much to say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters."(Source 2). This alone shows that your votes are being represented equally. It is saying that 500,000 votes are equal to 35 million votes. Isn't it obvious that those two numbers are very different and they could have a very large effect on the popularity of each canidate that they are voting for? but instead they have they same effect and the 34.5 million voters that don't get their fair say could very possibly be unhappy with the turnout of the president. The people are supposed to be the ones that vote for their leader, not a group of 538 "qualified" polititians that can over rule the entire country's vote. It's ridiculous how the system works and you are crazy if you support it. I know i want my fair share of input and the electoral college won't allow that.
There are supporters who say that they support the electoral college because it avoids run-off elections. Because even if there is a tie in the majority votes from the people it is unlikey for there to be a tie in the votes from the electoral college. "For example, Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the electoral College..."(Source 3). In my opinion if there is a tie in the popularity votes then they should revote, it may take longer but it will still be a decision by the people. Just because it makes the procces faster doesnt mean it makes the procces better. They can create a better system in the event of a tie instead of electors over ruling the people and picking whoever they think is best. That isnt government for the people, by the people.
In conclusion, the electoral college needs to be extinguished for many reasons. those reasons are because it doesn't let the people vote for who they want and it over rules a notions votes. And because it doesnt show the number of votes as equall. Some may say that it is good because it prevents a tie but if there is a tie then I'm sure htere are better ways to revote. we need government for the people, by the people and that isn't what the electoral college is.
| 6 |
53c32da
|
When people think about their car, they do not think about making it drive them around. They tend to think they are in control and operationg in manually. This is not the case with driverless cars. The passage, "Driverless Cars Are Coming", gives very good reasons why they could work but they are not good enough. Driverless cars are dangerous, cost people enoumous amounts of money to manufacture and sell them, but they could aid in reducing the air pollution.
Driverless cars are controled by very advance pieces of technology. The people as a whole know that anything controlled by a comuputer or piece of equiptment can break down or have a malfuntion. The passages says in paragraph 9 that these types of cars are banned. States like Californina, Nevada, and Florida deam it unsafe to even test these cars. There are even laws passed against them. So, why produce something that could be potentially harmful everyone?
When trying to make one of these cars, no one ever stops to consider the cost. People are spending billions and billions of dollars to make and opperate these cars. To make a driverless car, it would require technology that no ordinary person has lying around. Not only does it cost loads of money and time to produce them, car companies would have a hard time trying to sell them. In the end, people should not invest in a driverless car because they cost enomous amounts of money.
Although driverless cars have many negative attributes, they can also aid in lowering the pollution in the air. The technolgy used in producing these types of cars is just like the workings of a smart car. Smart cars run on electricity and do not rely so heavily on gasoline which in turn plays a large part to the pollution in the air. Driverless cars can help to make these rates decrease because they would depend on gasoline to run properly. All in all, they could help the world in reduce the pollution and improving the atmosphere.
Driverless cars are a safety hazard, cost too much, but can aid in reducing the pollution levels. Although the passage have very good points on why these cars are great, these points are not enough to make anyone want to buy it.The idea behind driverless cars is amazing, but there is no real future in it. So, when buying a new car, remember to be concincious of your choice.
| 3 |
53c5224
|
The U.S. should change to popular vote instead of Electoral Collage to elect a president. Some reasons why are a persident can win even if he/she is not popular with the people and the electors of the Electoral collage can go against the will of the people.
The first reason we should change this is the persident could win even if he/she is not popular with the people. The president could win the popular vote but lose the Electoral Collage vote. A good example of this is the 2000 election between Gore And Bush Where gore won the popular vote but bush won the electoral collage vote. This means that in order to win presidency you must win the biggest states or the most states not the most people.
Another reason is that the Electoral Collage can go against the will of the people. The electors can vote for the oposite canidate than the people voted for. this is because the electors have free will when it comes to voting. Instead of who the people want for president the electors could vote for who they want.
These are only some of the many reasons that the electoral collage sould be Abolished. The whole system is just unreliable and makes it easier for politicians to sway the vote.
| 3 |
53c5a91
|
It is equivalent to a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American west. Garvin says that its just the shading of the area that makes it look like a face. Over the years the face changes it starts to change shape or crust over and because of that it makes it look like a natural landform. NASA wouldn't have sent it out if they really thought is was alien. Some people think that the face is a bona fide for evidence that there is life on mars, but NASA would hide that information. they only sent the image out to get more peoples attention towards mars. They most likely sent out on the web to stir up peoples thoughts and to make them nervous about if there really is life on mars.
In 1976 you can sort of tell that there is a face on the rock formation. In 1998 you can really tell that there is a face there, but you can also see a change in lighting which because of that you can see the face more. In 2001 there is no lighting like the first one but its at a different angle so with the lighting on the second one it blocks out the cracks so its ageing over time and that proves that its a rock formation.
| 2 |
53ca0ab
|
The face is a natural landform because as the years go by you can tell the landform just cracks and deforms the face. In 1976 the picture shows a landform that actually look slike a face but as the years go on the facial affects dissapear.
This landform is being know as the " Face on Mars." Many people at NASA dissagree that this landform is a face. The text states," What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This tells me that some scientists believe that the landform is just a mesa or butte. Each side of arguement had their facts and opinions.
This article had two sides of agreements. One side believe that the landfom was a face and another believe it was not a face. The side that didn't believe it was a face states facts about a mese or butte which are landforms common around the American West. The ones that did believe it was a face showed other pictures from different times that showed similiar landforms.
| 1 |
53cd66e
|
Cars are going to be gone in the near future. There have been talks and actions taken place to assure we limit our car usage. We as the
United States seem to have pasted our use for cars as independent owners. We have also started several different programs or actions around the world to assure we stop pollution with the use of cars. Another way we have stop the use of car is car free days in some parts of the world. Also cars are believe to be stressful to human beings.
In some parts of the world mainly Bogota, Colombia they have start to reduce the use of cars to avoid pollution and promote the use of other types of transportation. As it is stated in source 3
:
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota by Selsky " The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Violators faced $25 fines." This quote goes to show how we are starting to try to limit the usage of vehicles in this world. Also stated in source 2
:
Paris bans driving due to smog by Duffer "Paris enforced a partial diving ban to clean the air of the global city. On Monday motorists wit even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day." this shows that Paris even supports the limiting car usages by humans.
Therefore us as the United States we have shown that even we are behind in our glory days of driving cars. As stated in source 4
:
The End of Car Culture by Rosenthal " recent studies suggest that Americans as buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." So with that have been said we need to understand we drive no matter what but slow but surely we will stop driving in general. Due to the fact of that we do need to decrease our carbon release a pond the world. As it also states from article 4
or source 4
"If the pattern persists-and many sociologists believe it will- it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind the power plant." This quote shows how it will affect us and also how it will benefit us as well.
Although driving feels amazing it gives you tons of stress to an individual. Not only that but it also makes you sometimes want to hurt someone. As well as feeling upset and sometimes wanting to cry due to a lack of funds to pay for gas as well as the worry of other drivers on the road. As stated in source 1
:
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Rosenthal a man states "when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter. This goes to show us how we are affected by riving and even a little time away from the wheel can benefit us greatly. Another point on driving is stressful a man states in source 3
:
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota he states It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." said Carlos Arturo Plaza. This goes and show a lot of people are in support of this act or idea.
In conclusion limiting car use will benefit us in many ways but barely affect us at all. The main idea is to limit car usage and we can do that by the law that forces us stop car use in general. Another way we can accomplish this is by being an average teen in the United States. An added bonus is that we have loads of stress by driving. The limiting the use of driving is a way we should use to benefit us as human and to be more joyful.
| 2 |
53e4b2e
|
Can you imagine a world with free personal transportation? A world where there's not a need to own a car,becsuse the public tansporation is free and reliable. Public transportation such as the city bus is a common mode of travel within the city,but replacing independent driving with automatic cars is a controversial subject.
In my opinion,driverless cars are a wonderful invention. As it is commonly known,there is a ridiculous amount of c02 polluting out air. I think that lower amounts cars out driving would improve the air quality and the health of wildlife in the area. Drivers may become bored more easily when driving because they are not focusing on driving but in my opinion even this is a positive factor. I say that its a positive factor, because people tend to get distracted while driving which could cause crashes. Car wrecks are completely avoidable,and I think should make changes in technology to prevent occurences like that.
All in all,I think that self driven cars are a positive innovation. I hope to see them on the road soon.
| 2 |
53eb232
|
There was a world before cars. One without polluted air, green house gasses, and holes in the O-ZONE layer. Transportation was done the old fashioned way, with your two legs. Aside from your legs, we now have other methods of transportation aside from legs and motor vehicles, such as bikes. Technology is on the rise.. But are cars on their way down?
A new trend is starting, and like all good trends they have hefty price tag. An excerpt from "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" written by Elisabeth Rosenthal in the
New York Times . In paragraph two it gives an example of the expensive lifestyle to live if you would choose to live with a car, "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park--large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for 40,000, along with a home." Not going green comes with a price tag. Residents of this new community are pleased with the cut down on motor vehicles. Less stress, less pollution. According to the text in paragraph five "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe." 12% may not seem like much, but if you look at the big picture, its quite the amount.
Another issue that is caused by motor vehicles is smog. Smog is what happens when there is fog and a mixure of gasses created by the exhaust in a motor vehicle. Pollution in Paris is at its all time high. In an article from the
Chicago Tribune by Robert Duffer, "Paris bans driving due to smog" in paragraph eleven says, "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars ar home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to the odd-numbered plates the following day." This ban gives people the opportunity to cut back on fuel by car pooling, taking public transportation, or riding a bike. Many drivers did not cooperate and approximately 4,000 drivers were fined. Consistency is key, will Paris continue the cut back?
Around the world officials are working to cut back. Bogota, Colombia has the car free program which bans all but busses and taxi's and leaving anyone who doesnt obey to pay a 25$ fine. In an excerpt from "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky written in the
Seattle Times paragraph twent two says, "The turnout was large, despite gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota." This shows although there is bad weather people are still set on reducing motor vehicle transportation and decreasing smog. Along with the reduction of car usage Bogota is encouraging sports and outdoor play. Sidewalks have been enlarged and smoothed with leaves way for walkers and bikers. Parks have opened up as well as sports centers.
Are use of motor vehicles really decreasing? In an excerpt from, "The End of Car Culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal from the
New York Times in paragraph 41 shows evidence, "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009...." Car culture is ending, and going green has just begun. Around the world from Paris, to Bogota, to the United States we are all cutting back on motor vehicle use. This will be a project that takes many years to finish but with the team work of the world, most definately anything can happen.
| 2 |
53ece1b
|
I think that driverless cars are great. you dont have to drive when you are trying to put on makeup or do other things that u dont have time to do when you are in the house. It would make it easier when you have to go somewhere and you do it feel lke driving. There will be self driven cars in the future. It is a big negative on having self driven cars to one messup in the cars system and it can take away lifes. It could be a tragic accident from jus one messup. There is many things that can go wrong but not alot of things that can go right.
Having driverless cars have its pros and its cons in all I think it would be a good thing. If something goes wrong thought the dealership could have alot of legal problems. Then te us will have to change some of the laws if they make driverless cars. I think that druverless cars could be the next big thing if it becomes a sucess. there become a great what if factor if they go through with the driverless cars. What would be the point if you still have to hold the wheel when you have the so called driverless car about bmw.
I think that driverless cars will be and great thing its will help with everyday driving. It can be just as bad as good . In the long run i think it will be and great thing and people will love it.
| 2 |
53ee71c
|
In the article called " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggestst that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents because the author sugguest NASA to study beaucse the author is calaming that Venus is just like Eearth long time ago.
The author is suppoting his claim by using geographic regions such as rocky surface of the planet venus, valleys, moutahns, and craters. In paragraph 6 the author says taht " More importantly, researchers cannot tatke samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from distance.Therefore, scientist seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risk." From all of this we can realy see that the author is intrested in studying Venus, but it's too risky for human to go to go inside Venus atmospher because it's almost 97% carbon dioxide.
in conclusion the author trying to persuiding NASA to study Venus. The author is doing this so later on the other people will try to study Venus. The author claming that Venus is similar to Earth, the author want more peole to intrest to NASA or to study Venus.
| 2 |
53ef2d4
|
Dear,Fellow Scientist at NASA
I have heard you belive that there is a face on mars that was created by aliens... this is false. You may wonder why it is false? It's false, because with the new imaging system(Mar Global surveyor or MGS).We now have the ablity to see the surface of Mars with greater detail. Due to this the new images we found we can compare Cydonia to Earth physical features as well as the previous images. After a little time,we have found this feature on the surface of Mars to be almost the same as a butte or a mesa on Earth. Both of these land forms are found in the Western region of America. Dr. Garvin even stated,"It remind me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho."and he also said,"That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."
This common mistake was possibly because of all the conspiracy theorists. As well as Hollywood making films or book or even magazines over the image. So it's no suprise even some of us made the mistaken that it's an Alien made object. I wonder have you seen the new images of Cydonia ?That may be a reason why you thought it was created by aliens,but in the image it shows a dried up river or a small valley that placed on a hill. So,it would be best to go look at it.
Just to remind you we have a meeting at noon over the image of Cydonia... again. So don't be late.
From,Your Co-worker
| 3 |
53f4206
|
Dear State Senator,
My name is PROPER_NAME and i am an American Citizen. I already know about The Electoral College and its process. I know it has 538 electors and 270 of the electoral votes are needed to elect president. Along with that, I know that our founding fathers developed it in the constitution and their chosen by the candidate's political party. But i do not know why so much people bash The Electoral College when its a good thing. Based on my research, The Electoral College should stay and should be used everytime in an election for President.
To Start off, most people think of The Electoral College as a non-democratic method of selecting a president based on Source 3: by Richard A. Posner. Its is a non-democratic method because its the electors who elect the president not the people. Based on Richard however, "each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee and that trust is rarely betrayed". Its possible to win the electoral vote but not the national popular vote. It happened in 2000, with Gore when he was running. But that was the first time since 1888.
There are some flaws of The Electoral College however. According to Source 2: written by Bradford Plumer, voters vote for electors who elect the President not the people. No one really knows the elctors and they cant be seen holding public office. It depends on the state to pick the electors and voters cannot always control whom their electors vote for. In addition, as Bradford said "voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidates". These disadvantages may want to make people disapprove of The Electoral College disregarding its advantages.
There are five really good reasons for keeping the Electoral College. Based on Source 3 the first is "certainty of outcome". This basically means if the winning candidate's share of the Electoral votes is high most likely his popular votes will be too. The next reason is that its everyone's president. Like Romney he only focused on benefiting the one region and the Electoral College had no favor in that and as a result he got no gains from them. The third reason is "swing state" like Richard calls it. The "toss up states" are the ones who really decide the election. Voters in those states pay more attention to the campaign since they are the ones who will decide the outcome. The last two reasons are the big states and avoiding run-off elections. A large state gets more attention from Presidential candidates in a campaign then a small state does. The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candiates receives a majority of the votes cast.
These five reasons make the electoral College what it is now. Most voters dont watch the Presidential campaign's and chose whoever. The Electoral College is fulled with educated people who actually take the time and watch and study the campaign's so their vote is the vote that makes a difference. Despite the Electoral College's lack of democratic pedigree its still should stay.
| 4 |
53fb427
|
Driverless cars may seem like a good idea now , but they really are not . Driverless cars could possibly be more dangerous than regular human driven cars . Or eventually grow to become more dangerous than human driven cars .
Driverless cars should not become a thing in the near future because they could malfunction , and encourage innapropriate behavior in the car .
Driverless cars should not become a thing in our near future because they could malfunction or have a technical difficulty which could lead to an injury or misunderstanding between the driver and the car manufacturer . For instance , in paragraph 9 , it says " If the technology fails and someone is injured , who is at fault-- the driver or the manufacturer ? " that quote is saying if there was to be an accident , they wouldnt know who to put the blame on ; The driver who bought the car or the manufacturer who encouraged the driver to buy the car . All of that could easily be avoided if we stick to regular human driven cars instead of driverless ones . Also , driverless cars could lead to an injury if the technology were to fail . As said in paragrpah 7 , while the driver watches the road , the car watches the driver . If the car is watching the driver instead of the road , it could lead to an accident .
Secondly , driverless cars should not become relevant in the near future because they could encourage and or lead to innapropriate behavior . For example , if a group of the wrong teenagers got a driverless car they might feel encouraged to do something they arent supposed to be doing because the car is driving for them . They would feel like they could be laid back and relaxed in the car even though they really should be paying attention to the road ahead of them . In paragrpah 7 , it says " The Google car simple announces when the driver should be prepared to take over . " and that isnt necessarily a bad thing , but if the car will tell the driver when they need to take over , the driver would be doing his or her own thing , not paying attention to the road because the car is driving for them .
Some may say that driverless cars should become popular in the near future because it is " actually a safety feauture , and safety is a big concern " ( as said in paragraph 8 ) but i would have to disagree . Its true that safety is a big concern , but having driverless cars couldnt guarantee a decrease in safety issues and i know that human driven cars arent decreasing accident rates but with human driven cars you would know for sure how the accident happened . With driverless cars you couldnt be sure if it was you or the car . Also , in paragraph 9 it says " Presently , traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times . As a result , in most states it is illegal to even test computer driven cars . " That quote is saying most states doesnt even think its safe to test the cars with a test dumby in it . And if they dont trust it enough to test the driverless cars with dumbies in it how could they trust it enough to let them take the place of human driven cars ?
In conclusion , driverless cars shouldnt become a thing in the future because they encourage innapropriate behavior and they are a safety hazard . If a teenager has a driverless car , he or she would feel as if they could be laid back because someone is driving for them and they wouldnt have to actually drive anyway until the car told them they had to . Driverless cars are also a safety hazard . Technology has malfunctions all the time . What if one of the cars were to malfunction with a baby in the backseat ? Or with anybody in the backseat for that matter . You can never fully trust technology and thats why driverless cars shouldnt become something of importance in the near future . Almost anything could go wrong .
| 5 |
5400dbe
|
"Hold on! Can we acually "calculate" emotions, like math homework? And how can a computer recongnize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel." This was a qustion asked in the article "Making Mona Lis Smile" by Nick D' Alto, well its true, a new technology called "Facial Action Coding System," enables computers to identify human emotions. What do people plan to do with this technology? You may be asking, well according to the article people would like to use this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom. I disagree with this, students will lose a lot of their privatcy becaues of this technology, there are a lot of students that would not want others to know how the are feeling. Next this could lead to more bullying in schools, becaues other students could make fun of them becaues of what their results are. The technology could fail, what if there is something wrong with the technology and it gives out the wrong result, and everyone can see what the result was. However this could be really helpful to someone like a mental therepist, they could use the technology to their adventege by being able to see how people are really feeling, but this tecnology would not be helpful in a classroom where all kids are doing is learning. In conclusion this technology should be used in places like in amental tharepist office, but not in a classroom where there is no need for it in there.
| 3 |
54081d1
|
I am strongly against having the technology of driveless cars just for the reasonable fact that it is very hazardous and you will not learn the skill to have fun and driving on your own. Also it isn't a good aspect upon life because we as people want to feel 100% safe, and to trust technology is not a good idea. What will happen if the car disfunctions and dosen't stop on time in an accident?
As it states in the article, "why would anyone want a driveless car and still need a driver," because the manufactures of this driveless car company knows that it is not a 100% guarantee that the car will stop on time or keep you save from accidents. Even though it wouldn't be one as of driving on your own, because you can't help the faults of other drivers on the road, there still would be more accidents with a driveless car than it would be on our own, because you have full control of what you want to do with it. And this where the big question falls in, "If technology fails and someone is injured who fault is it the driver or the manufactuer?" It would be the maunfactuers because they say even with a driveless car the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation rquires for them to get into an accident.
Even if the google car announces for them to be prepared and when to take action, don't you think instead it should prepare itself to disregard getting into an accident. Before they even though about selling these cars and having people ride in them, they should've did a better investment and more use of technological differences to actually help citizens out. They could've even had the installation for the car to teach student learners how to drive with a person to test them in the car, because this technology of a driveless car is just not good enough. The manufactures also didn't even have a thought to actually care for other citizens out there driving the car because if they did they would've had to car do everything needed to precaution itself from hazardous situations.
In conclusion, this is why i strongly disagree for the manufacturing of driveless cars because it could tend to be very hazardous and it's not good to belive in technology will save you. Also if it's a driveless car why should you still have to have somebody in the car and have them still steer and take over in dangerous situations? Just think, who are you to blame for getting into that one accident, will the company pay for your damages and utilities you have to handle on the car? It's not worth spending thousands of dollars on a unreliable investment.
| 4 |
540e96c
|
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I believe that if driverless cars became legal more accidents would occur and thousands of perople lose their jobs.
Driverless cars have almost every part of the car controlled by a computer. So, what happens if the car's computer lost power because it has been on to long, or it overheats because the computer is working to hard? In all these situations the car would most likely stop functioning correctly , and quite possibly hurt a pasenger. What if an essential part of the car breaks while on the road? The google car has a special piece of equipment called a LIDAR that keeps a constant 3-D model of the area around. If that piece of machinery fails while on the road the driver is required to take control of the car to keep it from driving into any people, buildings, or other cars. In all of the situations above the driver would need to take control of that unique situation, or else fatalities could occur. These are only a couple examples of what could happen if a driverless car malfunctioned while on the road.
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," it says that the current taxi system would be taken over by driverless cars. this would put hundreds of thousands of taxi and Uber drivers out of a job. There are also some jobs that cannot be replaced by driverless cars. A job like the trash collector would require the driver to get into the driveway, and get in the correct position to properly and safely collect the trash. Emergerency response vehicles like ambulances, police cars, and fire trucks would also need drivers to get them through traffic quickly, efficiantly, and safely. These examples show that hundreds of thousands of people would lose their jobs if driverless cars were to take over. They also show that some jobs can not be completed without a driver behind the wheel.
Since, driverless cars are driven by computers that means they are suseptable to hackers or other harmful people. If a driverless car has a computer that is connected to the internet hackers anywhere in the world could hack into the car's computer, and make it do whatever they want. There are also people who could damage the car physically by damaging essential external parts of the car. There are also unforseen events that could happen through nature. The car's camera or LIDAR could be covered up acciddently by a leaf or a bug. The car could hit a bad bump and jar the sytems computer. These are things that are possible in the realm of driverless cars.
These reasons that I have stated show that there will always be a time when cars will need a driver to take control of a unique situation. Whether it be a faulty computer or broken camera; drivers will always be needed.
| 5 |
5413de8
|
A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves is a program where you get to go on many adventures and visit unique places, but you also get to help those in need. Many countries were left in ruins after World War II, and to help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, nations joined together to form UNRRA. You sign up and can help take care of horses, young cows, and mules.
A good reason to join this program is if you like helping people in need. The countries were left in ruins and lots of their supplies and animals were gone. You would get to help recover all of these things and help take care of animals.
Another reason to join is that you are allowed to experience many adventures and travel across oceans. Some of the Seagoing Cowboys had the benefit of seeing Europe and China. You would get to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and make your way to China. There are many other countries to visit, one including Italy.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy can be more than just an adventure. Sure you get to tour many great countries, but you also get the benefit of getting to help all those that were affected by World War II.
| 3 |
54154e6
|
I believe that driveless car are not good at all because we will have nothing to work for. But at the same time there are postitive effects and negative ones as well . Driverless car would make a huge change in our world today. There would be alot less bad things happening if they were driverless. People wouldnt have to go through the trouble to push the gas to make the care go or anything.
The postitive effects of turing to driveless cars are very high. People want this to happen so they are going to try to find all the positive thing about it and let other people know. The cars that Sergey Brin are creating would use half of the fuek that todays taxes and offer more flexibility than a bus. The cars have been driven more than half a million miles without crashing but the thing about that is that google care arent truly driverless. The cars still alret the driver when they are pullin gin and out of driveways or dealing with traffic suchas getting aroung roadwork and accidents.
The good thing right now is the cars are not completely driveless becuase you can steer, accelerate, and brake themseleves, but they are still designed to tell the driver that the road ahead requires them to something like get through work zones and around accidents.
There are many negitive thing to having driveless cars as well such as making sure that the automatic will happen at all times. What if what its suppose to do doesnt work out and then you do something else and you hurt someone or yourself.
The person would have to stay alert at all times just is case it doesnt do what its suppose to do. Even though its a drive less car you still have to keep your hands on the wheel at all times so you could not do anything that you wanted to do. They said that you had to take over when the car gets into situations and i dont think that is fair becuase its suppsose to be all driverless.
Some thing make me think that driveless cars are good but I don't agree at all. I feel like you have to put in just as much work as you do now to dirve the "driveless" car. You shoudn't have to keep your eyes are the road at all times because its suppose to do what it is suppose to do when its happening. The article said that it will cause less wrecks and i disagree becuase if people are doing what the are suppose to be doing you can get in a wreck so easily. I think that we should be able to control it whenever it is needed. If people dont want to us the "driverless" car they should be able to have an opition to turn it off and on.
| 3 |
5415b21
|
Here, in the United States, birthplace of the Model T,driving has proven to be part of our history and culture. However, with recently uncovered developments in our environment such as global warming and pollution, it is time for us to re-evaluate our "car culture". Overusage has proven harmful and limiting alternatives that reduce stress, are just as effective in getting us from point 'A' to 'B' and are more eco-friendly.
Our excessive car usage is dramatically hurting our environment. In fact, "...Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States" (5). What people use for our short term convenience is actually proving inconvenient for us in the long run. In Paris, there was "147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.9 in London" (17). The culprit? Diesel fuel emissions from transportation (cars). To underscore the severity, the smog in Paris is so bad that French Officials had to limit car usage in a smog cloaked city that "rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world"(14).
This issue is mirrored in Bogota, Columbia, where the government has also stepped in and established a car free day in which perpetrators get fined in order to " promote alternative transportation and reduce smog" (21). Efforts such as these can be effective in aiding our environmental crisis. After France also instated a limit on car usage "the smog cleared" (19). By limiting our car usage we can actually make a difference in reducing pollution and make our living environment more pleasant and healthier.
The switch is facilitated further not only by the inclination toward a better worldy environment but a less stressful social one as well. In the city of Vauban in Germany, residents have " given up their cars"(1). Here although car ownership is allowed, "70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move [there]." (3). Do the residents regret their decision? According to Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two: "When I had a car I was always tense, I am much happier this way"(3). In Bogota, a business man, Carlos Arturo Plaza who participates in Bogota's movement to reduce car usage says that the absence of cars is an "...opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" (24). These are two individuals on different continents with families and busy lives who find the lack of cars to be not a handicap but actually a source of stress relief. In France, after the restrictions of car usage the streets also became less stressful for people who have to drive (like taxi drivers or public transporters) because of a "60 percent reduction in traffic congestion" (14).
For those who do decide to make a move to help the environment and themselves by reducing their car usage, their are more and more alternatives that are making their switch worthwhile. In Vauban, you can hear the sounds of viable alternatives in use. The "swish of bicycles" and the "chatter"(3) of walking children is audible in the streets. Carlos Arturo Plaza rides the car-free streets of Bogota on " atwo seat bicycle with his wife"(24). For those who don't feel comfortable with walking or cycling other options such as carpool exist and governments are now making more of an effort to make other alternatives such easier and more available ( i. e. public transportation). In Bogota, in order to support the movement toward less automobile driving wide sidewalks have been made. In Vauban the whole city has been constructed with the goal to make everything compact and easier to access by foot or bike. This is good news for those who make the early morning busness commute as their job is closer to where they live and more convenient to walk or bike to than other suburbs in which commuters are forced to take the high way because of the distance. Also, the more people who take advantage of whatever public transportation available to them will make the demand higher and cause more funding to be placed on public transportation. Before "80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to high ways and only 20 percent to other transport"(9), but with more usage, this can change.
Essentially, the sacrifice of some of our car usage is far outweighed by the positive affects on our environment and attitudes. Plus new systems that cater to better alternative uses make the switch easier than ever!!
| 5 |
541f93c
|
The wheel was the first step that took society into the making of the mobile car. Today millions of cars are made each year to help humans transport around the cities and streets around the world. Every vehicle that is powered by gasoline emits carbon dioxide, this gas is very harmful for the enviorment, it causes the ozone later to slowly dissolve and it also causes acid rains. Traffic jams is one of the many effects of having too many cars in a certain populated area. Debt has also been an influencial part in the quantity of cars around the globe. Car usage and production should be drasticly reduced to ensure a better future for all living things in the Planet Earth.
Furthermore, Global warming has slowly made its toll on Earth, most of which has been produced by the Carbon Dioxide gases in the atmosphere, this gas is a mayor green house gas. Over the years cars have been more exstensivly used and have a great percentage in world contamination, As stated in article 1 pharagraph 5 "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of green house gas emissions in europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensove areas in the united states". This being, if car production and usage are reduced, Earth will have positive reactions to this change. The levels of global warming will also be reduced all around, this will help us conserve our north and south poles for a longer period of time, keeping safe all the animals related to that area like penguinzs and polar bears.
In addition, Traffic jams arent the most pleaseant place to be, due to the fact that they're unpredictable and in most cases highly annoying. Information from passage 2 pharagraph 14 states that "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france", this was due to oderly assigning days in which certain cars with certain license plates can drive through the cities of france. Less congestion means higher percent in mobility all around, this can greatly effect a 3 hour traffic jam to a simple 20 minute ride. Coming and going from places can be a brease, and this will also facilitate extra time for other potential activities. Reducing car usage and congestion can also lead to less accidents and car crashes.
Moreover, Leasing or buying a new car can come heavy on the pocket. Financial debt has been arounced ever since a currency started, debt is unpredictable sometimes and can happen to any individual. Having the latest model of a car can be a luxury only some can afford, the individuals who try and cant afford it ussually end up in debt, as reinforced in article 4 pharagraph 32 "Cash- Strapped americans could not afford new cars, and the unemployed werent going to work anyway". Ussually some individuals "bite more than they can chew" and this can harm not only one indivual, but the economy as a whole. Reducing the mayor debt that can come from car leasing can improve a counrtys economy and benift milliones of individuals.
Concluding, many reasons show society to reduce the usage of cars. One being that gasoline and petrolium powered cars can contaminate the planet Earth, melt our poles, destroy the ozone layer and cause harmful weather effects. Also, the reduction of cars can lead to the de-congestion of cities in which indiviuals can more easily and freely move around adding time for them to use as they like. Lastly, the economy can have a mayor boost if car reduction and usage from leasing can occur. In conclusion, the reduction of car usage and production is a great benefit for every individual who lives on Earth, and can lead to many great outcomes that will help members of society enjoy a better life style and have a safer future.
| 5 |
541fe37
|
Driverless cars are the next representation of the future. With the new and improved technology, 'hands free' cars are the latest, and greatest inventions. Hands free cars can navigate themselves through almost any obsticale, and by 2016, some cars will be "capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time"
The idea of technology driving itself, is a debatable topic. Is it safe? Am I in danger? The questions are endless, but in my opinion, this car is a major improvement in the car industry.
How can this car navigate itself and not crash? The answer is simple, sensors. Their sensors are located around a large portion of the car, and some sensors are capable of spinning all the way around to get a three hundred-sixty degree angle. For example, the text states, If the car is in danger, the sensors will quickly send the car the information of it's surrondings and depending on the situation, it will apply the breaks on certains wheels, and reduce the power of the engine.
The "driverless car" can steer, break and acclerate by themselves. The car itselfs, will alert the driver when they need to apply human skills. For example, when driving down an interstate, you suddenly come upon a crach scene. The scene backs up traffic for a total of two hours. The car will then alert the driver, they need to take over due to the clustration the accident has caused, and the moving the car needs to do.
The problems automakers are currently facing, are believed to be solved shortly. The car itselfs, has "driven more than half a million miles without a crash." I believe this car is safe, and an improvement in the car industry. It offers many opportunities, and can go far in the field of automotives.
| 3 |
54215a2
|
"Unmasking the Face on Mars"
Unmasking the Face on Mars tells us about the face that was on Mars. Everyone think it is created by aliens.I think it is just a natural landform. I say this because in the story "Unmasking the Face on Mars" in paragrapgh 1 it said "When it spotted the shadowy likeness of a human 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".
I feel like they just spotted the photo in just took a picture of it. Other people think it is alien movement going on up in Mars.Ithink that because in paragraph 6 it said " ALthough few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact photograpghing Cydoina bacame a priority for NASA when Mars Global Survyer (MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in Sept. 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended." They are saying some of the scientists do feel like it was an alien movement.
I think some of the scientists are trying to tell other peopleit is a alien movement to. In paragraph 5 it said " The " Face on Mars" has since become a pop icon. It has started in
hollywood flim, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years! Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspireacy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an civilization on Mars.
I think it is a landform because they just took pictures of it. They didnt see any type of movement. In when people are sent to out of space they would have seen aliens, but they didnt. Now people are trying to bring up all the aliens things. If we had aliens we would have known by now. So, I don't see why people are trying to say we have aliens on Mars. If there were aliens they would be in a label testing right about now. People would know. Everyone tell and say things on Facebook so it would have been going around by now. We don't have aliens. I say its just a natural landmark. They just took pictures of it.
In paragraph 7 it said " And on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydoin for the first time, Michael and his Mar Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times shaper than the oringal picture Viking photos. Thousand of anxious web surfers web site were wating when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing. . . a natural landform. There was an alien monument after all." So, they are basically saying there wasn't a alien after all.
Also in paragraph 9 it said " In fact its hard work." " Mars global Surveyor is a mapping spacecraft that normally looks striaght down and scan the planet like a fax machine in narrow 2.5 km-wide strips." "We just don't pass over the FAce very often," he noted. H is basically saying they don't go over the face very often.They went over it to prove to people it wasn't a alien movement.
| 4 |
5422580
|
Prof. Thomas Huang, claims that the Facial Action Coding System (FACS), is able to detect a person's emotions by percentages. I believe that this system is foolish and is not accurate whatsoever. Although doctors and professors show that it is true, they do not truly know what that person is going through just by looking at their face. Some may say a raised eyebrow means somebody is suprised, but you never know if someone was born with that raised eyebrow and could possibly be sad or happy. This system does not seem to be accurate and should not be used in the future.
When figuring out somebody's feelings, only that person knows what they are feeling on the inside. By looking at someone's expressions, this does not do any justice, but listening to what they have to say and their tone of voice does the job. When hearing somebody's tone of voice, you can hear and feel their emotions. Also, some people may show their emotions by their artistic skills. Some may draw, write, build, etc. for they may have a hard time describing how they truly feel. Listening to what a computer has to say about someone does not seem accurate and just flat out sounds unreal.
Psychologists know the artistic technique as well. Some may even suggest to their patients to write in a journal or to draw how they feel. They can also know somebody's feelings when having a therapy session. They know when somebody wants to continue a conversation or put it to an end. It is all in that person's voice and they are professionals when doing this. Facial expressions may help in certain situations, but that is rarely. Somebody could come off as a wild and lively person, but on the inside they can be heartbroken and lonely.
I think by going up to someone and having a conversation is what is best to do, in order to see their emotions. Someone may look sad or even mad, but by going up them and talking to them, they could be the happiest person you know. Conversation is key and it is such a nice way to not only get to know somebody, but to also see how someone is feeling deep down.
| 4 |
54244e4
|
Driverless Cars good or bad? Google Cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a time when no one will buy cars anymore because of public driverless cars. He believes it would change the world we are living due to less fuel use, not spending money on automobiles, and more flexibility than buses. We have often seen such a thing on tv or movies but will it ever play a big role in our generation of time.
The idea of even testing a driverless car started in the 1950's by General Motors. GM started with a car that had a "Smart Road" designed for it, the road had electrical cable giving radio signals to the car leading it too its destination. The smart roads was a great idea but it was just too expensive for all roads to get upgraded. The smart roads wasn't in the budget so the cars had to get smarter? Google's first modified smart car was a Prius with many sensors but the biggest sensor of all was on the roof of the LIDAR it used lasar beams to give the car a 3D model of its surroundings.
The smart car has its goods and bads to it, one bad is that cars will never truely be driverless because in case of an emergency the driver must take over. What will happen if a driverless car causes an accident or injury? Who will take the blame, the owner or the manufacturer of the vehicle? That's a huge WHAT IF . The cars still don't know how to drive thru or around acidents or construction zones. My position on driverless cars would have to be NO until we have laws for the driverless cars such as who to blame or if no one is paying attention while the car drives. Engineers must take their time on these smart cars so they are reliable, safe, and Intelligent enough to drive through obstacles on the road. What I'm trying to say is that perfection takes time and the engineers are rushing the cars right now, so companys will make money. We are not ready for Smart Cars.
| 3 |
54255da
|
"Hey Gary, did you read the draft of "Unmasking the Face on Mars" that NASA sent us?" I asked my friend who I work with in editing NASA's articles. "Yes I centainly did! And I think that the Face on Mars is clearly an alien artifact." he replied. "What makes you say that? There's not much evidence to prove that theory and I did not expect that from you Gary, you're such a logical person! Cleary you should think an alien made artifact is not logicly science! Right?" I asked. "Well... what do you think?" Gary asked daringly. "Sure, let me try to change your mind!" I shot back.
"The first picture of the Face was taken in 1976 when cameras and technologys were not that advanced yet. And the article says that a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." The article states that it was formed by shadows which gave the illusion of the face.
But people began to think that it was an alien sculpture. So on 1998, NASA
sent MGS to the Red Planet to take a better shot of the Face, the picture revealed a natural landform of Mars. But people like you, Gary, weren't convinced because it was winter where the Face was located so the alean markings were hidden.
Then in April 8, 2001, MGS flew to Mars on a cloudless day to get a better look at the Face. The camera the team used was a high reselution camerica, each picture spaned 1.56 meters. So if there were any alien like artifacts, it would have appeared in the picture. But it actually showed landforms that were common around western America."
"So what do you think now?" I asked after my speech. "Hmmmm, maybe you're right for once. You've stated your prespective reasonably. I never expected such a logical and scientific answer from you" He said. "Well thank you." I replied. "No, thank you." He said. "Because of your explenation, I will think of other interesting facts differently."
| 3 |
54260a3
|
There are many harsh conditions and atmosphere on Venus and NASA still tries to land on Venus. It is because Venus is a planet that is closely related to earththan any other planet. Venus is a worthy pursuit because it could have information about earth and fragments from the meteor. The planet could have valuable minerals or bacteria on the surface.
Venus could have been similar to earth billions and billions of years ago. This is a prediction due to the size and shape of the planet. In the article, the author says, "Often referred to as earth's "twin", ... in terms of density and size, ... closest in distance too." Since Venus is the closest in relation to earth, then the planet should be able to sustain life again. Many experience to try and land on Venus's surface, but many failed due to the harsh conditions preventing them from landing.
There have been many attemps to land on Venus, but the planet is harsh. The planet can become extremely hot and has a thick atmosphere. The weather is another obstical that prevents astronauts from landing. In the article, the author also says, "These conditions are far more extreme ... an environment would crush even a submarine ... and would liquefy many metals." NASA have tested many metal that can survive Venus and have succeed with silicon carbide and has lasted for three weeks. Scientist are still striving to make Venus more sustanable for human life.
So far there has been litle success to see which metals can survive Venus. People are driven to explore Venus is due to their curiosity because it is similar to earth. Even though is is dangerous due to Venus's surface, people still try because it could have critical information on earth or valuable minerals or bacteria.
| 3 |
542ea94
|
In the story the challange of exploring venus the author says that we should keep studying venus or even if there are alot of risks well right now nasa has been sending robots and alot of other stuff to venus to take picture so they can see how the planet looks like which helps them decide if the planet is even safe or humans if it is safe to live on and the dangers are real and the cost of all this does take in this the risk is that maybe the thing they bulit does not end of working you wasted money right there and in the the story a spacecraft has come back umharmed and it only takes the spacecrafts only a few hours to reach venus nasa only does this becuase no human can last that long in space for humans it would take years to reach there and the for nasa the risk is high no wonder they do not not risk it ad they would have to pack so much food and who knows if they will last and studyig venus is not easy beucase the spacecraft has to go around the whole planet takeing lot of pictures and those pictures go start back to nasa where thhey check out the planet to see if humans could liv on that planet and that risk is very high the weather in venus is waymore diffrent then the weather here on earth and the weather there is 90 times greater then it is on earth and there is high presure heat there no human could stand that and then people ask if the planet is so inhospitable well they say venus used to be just like the earth but now not really but they could be a possibe way it could and the space travel there is less then mars and any other planet but who knows when a human is actually go to venus it will take some years to see if we actually go there but nasa is working on other ways to to study venus they can use computer and alot of other stfuff which will help them study more and technolhy will help and by the time you know it we will be sending to venus and they will be going but who evens know if we will the risks are high lives we wil be on the line the dangers are rea but it will the onlly way we will know about venus but there is also a strivring challenge and venus does have value and the nasa team will get there someday and then we will go and explore the whole solar system.
| 2 |
5430e30
|
In today's world there is a lot of amazing technology. Technology has come a long way than what it used to be. The technology that we use today is way better and hytech than what it has ever been before.
In this article there was a lot of talk on how computer here and their can do Facial Action Coding System. The Facial Action Coding System was created by Dr. Paul Eckman. The FACS (Facial Action Coding System) is designed to pick up every movement in a humans face and can determine different emotions with those sudden movements. There are six basic emotions, happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. Each and everyone of those emotions are determined by ones muscle movement in the face. I think the FACS is a very valuable piece of technology that can be used in the classroom for many different purposes. Some of the purposes are learning and just to have fun and mess around with each other to see what your emotions are and how you can change those emotions. The most important purpose for this new piece of technology is the learning purpose behind it. It can be used to learn many different things in a humans body and can learn the different muscles in ones face and how they differ from one to another. The article states that the facial expressions for each emotion are universal, which means that different emotions can go to a different muscle movement in the face.
I think personally that this new peice of technology called FACS (Facial Action Coding System) is a very valuable thing for the classroom. It has many different learning objectives behind it and can be used for other activities besides learning purposes. Yes, also the technology that is around us today is amazing and is amazing what it can do.
| 2 |
543cd49
|
Venus does share similarities with earth,being like "earth's twin". Venus shares many similiarities with other than density and size,some often call it "earth's twin" because of their similarities. But unlike earth, which has an atmosphere is mostly oxygen,little carbon dioxide and also very little nitrogen,Venus has 97 percent carbon dioxide. Venus can be considered more extreme than our own world. Other than atmosphere differences,earth and venus also have differences in atmospheric pressure and in temperature average. Earth's temperature average barely even makes it into the 100's,Venus on the other hand, has a temperature average 8 times more than what we get on earth. Up to 800 degrees,which would be close to the melting point of metal. Earth's atmospheric pressure burns up anything during entry into the atmosphere. But Venus' atmospheric pressure would be 90 times of what our atmospheric pressure would be. Venus also sets the record for having the hottest surface temperature on any planet in the solar system. The reason for Venus having the hottest surface temperature would be, because it is the 2nd planet closest to sun. If scientists are planning on making an approach to study venus. But all attempts have failed, as far back as the 1940's,during world war 2. I think the author supported his idea very well.
| 2 |
543e550
|
Drivless cars are coming! Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation system. He envisions fleets of diverless cars form a public-transport system. He believe such cars would fundamentally change the world. Although everything seems good, there are some bad things about these cars too. Questions like who would be responsible if they crash, what happends when dealing with complicated traffic or road construction. Driveless cars is it really a good thing?
Driveless cars may act all good but are theu really? Driveless cars would put way too many jobs out the window, taxi services, truck driving services, limo services they would all lose their jobs. Everyone would be out of work. They would all get replaced by technology. We would have a big unemployment rate. How do you know they might not malfunction and crash, you are putting your live and everyone in the cars life on the line too. The cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but still need human skills.
Traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. Many states will not test computer-driven cars for saftey reasons. If the technology fails and somoeone is injured, who is at fault? The car, the car should have the newest technology to drive anywhere and to be safe. Releases for a car capable of driving on autopiolet 90 percent of the time. What happends to the other 10? These cars arent safe.
Driverless cars good or bad thing? Cars without drivers is a bad thing. So many things can go wrong the technology can fail anything. This is why we have laws to say it is only safe for a human driver to be drivng at all times. People who make them will need a lot of responsiblity to make these cars not have any problems so they don't ruin lives.
| 3 |
5440f90
|
On May 24,2001, something very interesting happened on Mars. About twenty five years ago a space craft took a photo of the land, that looked like a human face. This picutre was take by NASA's Viking one spaceship. It happened to be taking these photos to find places for the Viking two spacecraft to safely land. When it came arcross this uncommon sight it snapped a picture.
When the image appeared on the monitor most of NASA were surprised at the image that lied before them. Scientist soon figured out that it was just a Matian mesa. Which happened to be very common around Cydonia. Most people argue saying that this could be a sign that there use to be life on Mars.
When NASA revealed the image for everyone to see, people started to think it wasn't just another rock or land marking. People saw the face and thought aliens were found on Mars. Although, that wasn't the case. Only a few scientist thought the Face was an alien artifact. The other scientist thought it was just something like a rock that happened to look like a face, because of the shadows.
After a lot of research another spacecraft was sent to Mars on September ninteen ninty-seven. Eighteen years after the photo of the Face was taken by the Viking one. The Face was then photograph again, so that it could be examined more closely. "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 tentimes sharper that the original Viking photos."
Thousands of excited people were waiting for the image. "It first appeared on the JPL wedsite,revealing... a natural landform." There was no sign of anything Alien about the photo. Therefore, it was not an alien aftifact after all.
Many people were unsatisfied. They claimed that since the picture of the Face was taken in a cloudy area it might explain why no one saw life in the first place. Scientist took this theory into thought. Mission controllers stated another spacecraft to send again.
On April 8,2001, it happened to be a cloudless day in Cydonia. Scientist took action. The Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. What the picture actually showed "is the Martian equivalant of a butte or mesa- landforms common aroung the American West. Garvin a man who was leading this expedition says, "'That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated messa about the smae height as the Face on Mars." There fore the face on Mars was not a sign of Alien life.
| 3 |
5446002
|
The United States is a democratic country where the people decide on a leader through voting, or so it's supposed to be. We Americans use something called the Electoral College, where a state is worth a certain amount of points, and when you win that state for your party, you gain those points. I find this to be unfair, because you could win by popular vote, but lose because the opposing party won the states with the biggest number of points. I think that the Electoral College should be removed and replaced with popular vote only. It would make elections more fair, and it would make peoples' votes feel like they change something.
When you go to vote, you don't actually vote for the candidate, you vote for a group of people who in turn vote for the candidate. I find this to be ineffective, because the people you are voting for are still able to switch there vote to the other party, and humans aren't the most honest things on Earth. Also, there is the feeling of being important that you get when you think that you could tip the scale, it makes you feel special, and in control of your own country. What's the point of voting if there's a chance it might not matter, because the other party just won California, the state with the most amount of points, 55, and you couldn't do anything because you live in Idaho or North Dakota, with only three little points. Popular vote would make you feel involved, and happy to help.
As I stated before, each state has an amount of points based on the population, which in turn affect how much you help your desired party. Seems reasonable, right? You would think that the more the population, the more impact it has on the election. That's right, but it's also unfair because states that have noone living there could all vote for one party, but it wouldn't help that much, unless the points were close and that state tipped the scale. But big states, like California, Texas, and Florida have some of the most points, so if you were to win those, you already have more than one hundred points. Candidates would try to just seek out those jumbo prizes and systematicaly try to win the largest behind "the Big Four". If someone was reading this and wanted the Electoral College, they could say that the big states would still have an advantage with more voters, and that is right, but they wouldn't be as big of prizes. So the election turns from a voice of the people, speaking up for a new leader, and turns into a mad chase to get the biggest prizes before the other party, like a game of Monopoly. In Monopoly, you buy areas with your money, and when someone lands on that space you own, they have to pay you. The places ath the end of the board have the priciest cost, but the best outcome. You can also build property on spaces to make the enemy players pay more. If you were to buy those, you practically win the game. On the other hand, the spaces at the begining are basiclly worthless, costing about 100 dollars and giving you about 1000. Those are like the small states, that have almost no value to the election, and the big states are worth a lot.
In America, the people should be able to feel responsible for their country's future, and not feel as if their state doesn't matter. My own words might not be able to change peoples' minds, but I'm sure the votes aren't tied.
| 5 |
54504f2
|
In my opinion, I do not think that the electoral college should be abolished, but I do agree with some of the points that Mr. Plumer claimed. Mr. Plumer stated, "The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." While it is somewhat unfair and outdated, the electoral college is needed in a sense of today's society. Everytime someone who is African American is murdered or killed, people always think it's a racial matter. Take a look at the incidents that were going on in Ferguson. Michael Brown, an African American teenager, was shot and killed by an officer, who was a white man. The people of Ferguson were literally rioting in the streets over a matter of a cop defending himself. So if that kind of society were to directly vote for our next president, it would be extremely biased. If another African American were to run for president of the United States, most Blacks would vote for him and say things like, "If he doesn't win presidency, then this country is racist!" To me, that's how American society is and that's why we should keep the electoral college.
In addition, the electoral college is needed to keep balance and fairness among the country. If there was no electoral college, and the votes came straight from the people, there would be problems regarding the states and the population of those states. For example, California would have a huge advantage at deciding who the next president is over a small state like Maryland. The electoral college is meant to keep balance among most, if not all, the states.
Another reason to keep the electoral college is that it requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal, according to Mr. Posner. He states, "No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. If there was no electoral college, the votes would heavily swing one way or the other, because of regional culture. People in the South would generally vote for someone who is white and Republican, where as the North, or states like Florida and California would vote for someone who is democratic, and since race is a exponentially large matter in today's society, people who are African American would vote for the runnning candidate who is African American or of black descent.
A vote straight from the people could work if racial perspective wasn't a huge factor like it has been since the civil rights movement. But right now, this country needs an electoral college because without one, votes would be based on race, state size, and culture.
| 3 |
545470a
|
In the passage "The challenge of exploring venus", the author talks about the studying of venus and it's worthy pursuit despite its danger. The author evaluates and supports this idea by stating facts . He talks about the planet and gives examples.
While giving examples he asks questions for you to think about while reading the rest of the passage.
The author supports his idea that exploring venus is a challenge by stating that no person who has landed there has lasted more than a few hours. Which is proving why it is a challenge because it is dangerous . Although it is the closest planet from earth the passage states that "not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades". Venus is 800 degrees Fahrenheit and a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. That can kill you at any moment because you can burn to death and you are breathing in bad air.
The author states that "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals".
The author is saying that yes earth is dangerous and that we could die here but going to venus is a bigger risk and could kill everyone that went. But, if we only send two or three people up they could see how dangerous it is . If they survive they would be able to tell us what equitment we would need to go back up there and study safely.
"If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?" The author is stating that scientist are putting peoples lifes in danger and are not finding diffrent way to study this planet. The author also states that "The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?" The author is simply asking if they will try and come up with a safer way to study venus than just keep sending people up who obviously are not going to make it.
NASA has been studying different and safer way to study Venus. It may be able to help scientist study Venus a safe way and not kill multiple people. In the passage it states "For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venuss surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." This supports the author by saying that the challenges are bad but there is also can also be a solution is people try hard enough. It also can help scientist study Venus the safe way.
| 4 |
545a0f3
|
Luke Bomberger had a friend who asked him to tour Europe with him, he knew he couldn't turn it down.
World War II had just been in Europe, but was now over. Many comturies were left in ruins. These contries needed animals and livestock to survive. The UNRRA hired seagoing cowboys to take care of the livestock on the boats when they were being shipped to a certain part of the world to another. Luke and his friend wanted to care and help, so they signed up for seagoing cowboys program.
Luke had turned 18 upon the first trip, which meant he could be drafted for the army. His draft amnagement company had learned he was in the seagoing cowboys, and they told him to keep doing what he was doing, because it was a form of help.
Sometimesthe weather was bad upon the boats, and sometimes it was good. When it was bad, members upon the boat would participate in watching the storms. One night Luke had watch, he got into a bad accident that left him without work for a couple days due to broken ribs. When the weather was good, and all the chores were done for the day, the men upon the ship had time to play games or travel to see things. The animals are what kept Luke busy though.
When Luke had quit the seagoing cowboys, he had successfully completed nine trips, the most trips a seagoing cowboy has ever done, delivering animals to people in need of them.
| 1 |
545ac34
|
In retrospect, people use to be able to live a happy carefree life before cars were invented. Cars were just something people used to be able to get to places quicker, and to be able to leave when ever we wanted to. A car used to be a luxary item, and now a car is a nessecity for most humans. Some countries are helping"But America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling,"(Source #4) the cause. The benefits of limiting car usage are it will help the environment, it will reduce most citzens stress levels, and it will regulate money in different way.
The benefits of limiting car usage is that the evvironment will be a lot healthier. According to experts "[Automobiles are] a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tail pipes,"(Source #1). The environment is very important to keep healthy. Cars are very polutefull "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city," (Source #2) towards the environment.
Also connecting to the benefits of limiting car usage helps relieve stress. According to Heirun Walter, a media trainer "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,"(Source #1). Without cars more Colombians "In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a care-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily deviod of traffic jams,"(Source #3) were more active. When you exericise it helps you to relive stress.
To most people money is very important. Now without having cars our money get regulated thru a public bus or subways. Losing revenue is not a bad thing "Delivery companies complained of lost of revenue, while expectations were made for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers,"(Source #2) for everyone. Overviewing it "It was the thrid 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. Violators faced $25 fines,"(Source #3) we could make more money off of violators.
Cars are very umbigitious in most countries. Cars are not a neccesity of life. Acccording to recent studies "Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by,"(Source #4). Citzens who used their car less were saving money, less stresed out and were more evironmentaly considerate. The benefits of limiting car usage are it will help the environment, it will reduce most citzens stress levels, and it will regulate money in different way.
| 4 |
545be4c
|
Being a Seagoing Cowboy is a great experience. You don't only help people, but you also get a benefit of seeing amazing places. If you love animals you can take care of them. You get to have fun and know that you're doing something that helps others.
Luke was just a small town boy and he got a great opportunity. First he had two part-time jobs at a grocery store and a bank. Luke was invited to be a Seagoing Cowboy by his friend Don. He accepted it and knew he was going to have a lifetime opportunity. Luke had a benefit of seeing Europe and China, saw the Acropolis in Greece, took a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, toured an excavated castle in Crete, and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China.
This job may be fun, but it still is a life changing experience. You see more than you could see just from home. You also know you're changing other people's lives. Luke may have had a wonderous adventure, but it also made him more aware of the needs in other countries.
| 2 |
545d121
|
Some people may believe that a driverless car would be the best invention since sliced bread. Others may argue that it would be the worst occurence to happen to man. There are always two sides to each argument. The pros and cons. They are always there continuing to make an argument interesting and decisions harder. The pros may not outweigh the cons, and the cons don't always so-so the pros. At the end of the day it is your decision. Are driverless cars better? More efficient? Or are they simply a dream of the future?
Since the first car ever came out, people have been wondering and wanting to make a car that could drive itself. Almost have a mind of its own. Google has created a car that can drive by itself. Kind of. The car is mainly and mostly independent, but when it comes to doing really hard work, like manouvering around accidents or rather bad traffic issues, the cars instantaneously become like normal cars again. They are once again dependent on being controled by the driver. That isn't very convenient. If one is going to make a driverless car, then why would it need help navigating through certain issues? And if it were driverless, than why is there someone sitting behind the wheel? It almost makes people useless for these cars. And lazy.
In the later 1950's the brilliant engineers of Berkeley had made a car that had certain magnetic fields in it that would sense postive and negative changes in a certain kind of ground that they also created. The car and road fairly well together, much to the suprise of the engineers. So they had figured out a wonderful way to create a smarter, driverless car, but repairing roads is already very expensive, and these cars needed an entirely new and different road system to be put in. That would then increase the cost of taxes, thus resulting in angry people. Is it really worth it to put in a new road, pretty much everywhere, raise tax expenses, just to be even lazier? No it isn't. It wouldn't make much sense if that actually happened.
Even with brilliantly smart engineers creating and designing new ways to create smarter, driverless cars, there are laws in all states that don't allow the testing needed to prove whether or not these cars are beneficial. There are exceptions, however. States such as California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia, do have the limited use and testing of partial driverless cars. These laws were put into place for a reason. To protect the people testing the cars, and everyone else. For example, the car is driving down the road, when suddenly all systems are failing. You, as the driver, must regain control, but with systems shutting down and failing, you cannot. The car crashes thus resulting in your injury. Who is to blame? The person behind that wheel? The company? Manufacturer? Or the car itself? There is an easy way to prevent this. Stop trying to make driverless cars.
In conclusion, driverless cars may not be the best way to go. They may seem like the greatest invention ever, but refer to reasons above. Is it necessary to compromise safety, economy, and tax payers dollars, just to be 'cool' or lazy? It is not. Not at all. The process is expensive, and in the end, could result in more crashes, injuries, and even deaths, if the car doesn't function properly. It is a big risk to take, yes, but it is not worth it.
| 4 |
545ddff
|
I would favor changing the election by popular vote for the president of the United States. The president is more important than the electors. Who knows if the electors are being paid to choose a president? The people vote for what they want and need. The people should get what they want, not what the electors want. The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational.
To begin with, the electoral college is not fair! For example, you can have 500 people voting for you, but then your opponent has 55 electors voting for him. Then most likely your opponent would win you but why should he win you if you had more people voting for you? That is really unfair. Also its like a winner-take-all system.
Therefore, the electoral college is out of date. We are in the 2000's, not the 1960's gentlemen. This system is very old style, it was even used back in the 1960's when segregationists almost replaced the Democratic electors. This electoral college is a disaster factor. All it does is makes things harder and worse for the state.
All of these reasons is why we should get rid of the elecotral college and change the election by popular vote for the president of the United States. The electoral vote is just not fair to anyone. It is so old styled which should be changed. Its a really bad system thats hould be removed. The electoral college should be changed to election by popular vote for the president of the United States.
| 3 |
54605eb
|
Technology to read the emotional expressions of students could be valuable. Using technology to read students' faces could greatly effect how and what they learn, for instance if a student is stuck on a problem the computer would recognize that and tone it down. But that may not be benificial to all of the students, some students may be better at learning hands-on, visually, or by sound, a teacher cam provide all of that. What a teacher can't do is fulfill the needs of multiple individuals without wasting a lot of time. This new technology could immediately know that the student is frustrated or having a hard time. In class the student may not understandwhat's being taught and won't speak up, but with face recognizition there's no hiding your emotions.
Aside from learning, the Facial Action Coding System could help with mental problems, for example, if a student had a significant amount of sadness or anger , the teachers would know that something's bothering them.
Facial recognizition coudl potientially help with more problems than I could think of.
| 3 |
546556b
|
the author using specfic details from studies and historical records to create a claim about how exploring venus is hard due to the harsh conditions kn the planet but he also comes up with idea of exploring venus from the sky in blimp like vechile to avoid the harsh ground enviroment. solution to the hostile conditions "
"on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, "
"the challenge of exploring venus"
the author also descripes how the the in human condions such as the lack of oxygen, high pressure, extreme heat and erupting volancoes, powerfull earth wuakes and frequent lighting strikes are the reasons why no manned missions to venus had, are , or will ever take place.
" A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venuss atmosphere. On the planets surface, temperatures average 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 anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
Challenge of Exploring Venus.
| 2 |
5466263
|
I stand with the makeing of these cars and the possiblities that come with in our society. The cars would be able to open new doors to health benefits, lowering crash ratios, and much more. The driverless car would be a great achievement in human curisosity and invention. These cars would better many different levels of society if made and used propely.
Drverless can be an innovation within our cumminties and cites. These cars could protect more lives and lower the amount of human recklessness that could be done at the wheel of a regular driven car. If made fully driverless, the amount of intoxicated accidents, killing and pull overs by the police would be lowered substancially. These smart cars could detect when their driver is not keeping a minimal amount of focus on the road and alert them to any dangers that could obstruct their path or cause harm. Only increasing the level of safety and efficencess that it would be used for.
The support of the driverless car ,though at the moment is not completely driverless, could keep many citizens safe and out of harm. The public eye sees these cars of dangerous because they do not wish to relinqiush their right of control over to the car and also they do not know what would replace the fun of driving in its stead. The makers have a few ideas on how to make the trip fun, but still lawmakers are trying to decide whether to trust that these cars are really that safe and how big their laws would ned to change for traffic, and the last big question who will take the blame for a crash that may happen. The safety issues are slowly being proven to the lawmakers on that it may be a better option then regular cars, but the other previously said descions have yet to be acted upon, except for its questioning.
I do believe driverless cars if thought through and corrected for mistakes can become a valuable asset to modern day community. These cars could lead to a increase in driving, and traveling for families and could also lead to the question of what can we do with this technology now? I feel that these questions are a very good thing in the advanceing technology of this age and that the still developing cars should not be frowned upon, but seen as a step forward into atoumating our country.
| 3 |
546770c
|
There are many efforts from different countries to reduce car usage. Countries like Germany, France, Colombia, and the United States are trying to raise awareness and get people to not use their car as much. These countries are raising awareness for example by having car-free days, banning driving for a day, turning suburbs into car-free communities, and rasing awareness about how cars affect the enviroment. These counrties are making the efforts to reduce car usage because they know that there are great advantages if citizens limit their car usage.
In Vauban,Germany, low-car suburban life is their motto. Car ownership is allowed , but with a price. As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move to Vauban. Heidrun Walter says that she is happier without a car and when she did have a car, she says she was always tense. Vauban is an example of the efforts and new idea that Europe, United States, and elsewhere have to reduce car usuage. Some advantages of this low-car concept is that now stores are being placed in walking distance and malls and resturants are also within walking distance and close to each other.
Because of air pollution and smog due to cars, Paris had to start banning people from driving certain days. If you were caught driving when you weren't suppose to, a fine was inforced. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined according to Reuters. Diesel fuel was the blame of the smog because France perfers diesel over gas. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France according to Reuters. Paris has more smog than most European capitals. This is really hurting the enviroment. While Paris was banning cars, congestion was down 60 percent. Besides car congestion being down 60 percent, other advatages to this car banning was that non-hybrid car companies lost revenue while hybrid and plug in cars were not. This shows how people are aware of the pollution of cars. Also, because of the reduced driving, the smog in Paris was cleared enough to stop banning certain vehicles from driving.
A big event in Bogota, Colombia is their car-free day. Only buses and taxis were permitted. Violators of the car-free day faced a fine. The turnout was large even though there was rain. "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating", said the Bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus. Citizens of Colombia were happy participating in the car-free day.
"It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution", said buisnessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode his bike. Municipal authorities from all over the world came to see this event. The city's mayor also says that the day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid- 1990's. The advantage of the car-free day has made parks and sports centers more popular to go to and other advatages is that the old sidewalks are being replaced with new paved ones. The traffic has also reduced.
In the United States, President Obama goals are to curb the United States greenhouse gas emissions. The Enviromental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities. The efforts to reduce driving is paying off. A study found that driving by young people has decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Mr. Sivak's research shows a large drop in the percentage of 16- to 39 year olds getting a liscense. In New York, there is a new bike sharing program and that can help people to choose to take bike instead of riding in a car.
All these efforts are helping people make the decision to limit their car usage and based on the facts, there are alot of advantages if you limit car usage. This is only a start to raise efforts to reduce car usage, but I feel in the future we will be seeing a lot more people walking and biking than riding their car.
| 3 |
546947f
|
Dear Senator,
The Electoral College is not what it used to be, its not the most effecent way anymore. The people should decide this time, I am not saying get rid of it. But we should change it.
There are many people who agree with me. Over sixty percent of the vters would like a more direct system of voteing (according to a Gallup poll in 2000). And so did Ritchard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and AFL-CIO.
The main reason why people want a change is for all the qurks in the Electoral College system. For example, if you lived in Texas. And you wanted to vote for John Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electoers. Witch in most cases would be O.K., but they could betray the party and vote for whom they please. It doesn't always happen but the possibility is real. And people, like the segregationists back in 1960, could have gone agenst their party and pick electors to go agenst Kennedy.
All we want is a change, it deosn't have to rewrite the Constitision. But the Electoral College must go. We can make it happen.
| 2 |
54697bd
|
Exploring Venus clearly has it's challenges. The exploration of an unknown area always has benefits with the information that can be uncovered, but it is almost never easy. Planets in general all hold many barriers for studying done by scientists and researchers. The author of this article suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by proving that Venus may have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, and that Venus is the nearest option for a planetary visit. The author also claims that The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a solution to make visiting Venus safer.
First of all, the author says that Venus may have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. In the text, it says, "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." Venus is or once was clearly somewhat similar to Earth, and that will help scientists to be able to find out information about our own planet along with another planet that may seem the most reasonable to study. In the text, it also says,"Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probabnly covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. 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." All of these characteristics of Venus make the planet more interesting and reasonable for studying. Considering the fact that the planet is very similar to Earth, the planet may also give us insight of our own planet, with the similarities that can and have already been drawn.
Secondly, Venus is the nearest option for a planetary visit. In the text, it says, "Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." This clearly proves that studying Venus is worth the pursuit because it is not going to take as long as other planets will to get to. Traveling in space, as the author said, can take a very long time, and that makes Venus a lot more accessible than most other planets. Studying Venus cuts down a major barrier that scientists and astronomers would have to work around for many other planets, and that is time.
Lastly, NASA has a solution to make studying Venus safe. In the text, it says, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray...At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." NASA's solution solves many problems with studying Venus. The many factors like air pressure, heat, and radiation are lowered to survivable numbers for humans. Without this solution from NASA, the conditions of Venus are not survivable for a time period long enough to actually gain any information about the planet. In the text, it also explains that scientists and researchers would need to get up closer in order to actually gain insight about the planet. Although this is true, NASA is working on other solutions like simplified electronics made of silicon carbide that can last for up to three weeks in the conditions of Venus. All of these solutions can help to make studying Venus less risky and dangerous, and therefore worth the risk.
In conclusion, studying Venus provides a true challenge to scientists, researchers, and more. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" provides evidence to researchers and scientists that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because Venus is or was very similar to Earth. The author also says that Venus is accessible because of it's distance from Earth and the time it would take to reach it. The author also provides NASA's solutions to the dangers of studying Venus. The advantages of studying Venus have been proven, but much must be done before any up close studying will occur.
| 4 |
547172d
|
Car's. Relyed on by many people. Used to go anywhere and everywhere. They are comfortable and cool to look at, but are they really as great as everyone think's they are? They pollute, they cause accident's, they destroy the enviornment and they cost a lot of money and sometime's it's more then people have. Yes, car's make everything easier for you but what happen's when there is a bad traffiv day and you are already late to work. Sometime's car's arent alway's a great thing.
Gas. The first thing I think of when I hear about car's. They put so many toxin's in to the air that can kill everything around them. In the article it talk's about Paris banning car driving due to the fact that the smog or gas coming fromm the car's was becoming unbareable. Congestion was down 60% due to the fact that the smog had intensified. Beijing, China happen's to be the one of the most polluted citie's in the world due to car's. The fuel in car's is pushed out the exhaust pipe when the car is driving which then pollute's the air which make's it hard for thing's that need air such as the surrounding animal's, plant's and human's such as our self's.
Another thing that cause's problem's with car's is the fact that traffic jam's and accident's that are just waiting to happen at any moment. Someone who doesn't know how to drive very well hit's someone else and it cause's an accident leaving people hurt. Not to mention the stress and the road rage that driving put's on people. Going outside and walking to work or going to the park with out all the problem's of being stuck in a car and enjoying the fresh air is a great way to start any day. On the day that Bogota, Colombia decided to have a car-free day people had hiked, biked,skated,and walked. These are thing's that I'm sure people wouldn't have done if they were still allowed to still drive their car.
How would car's drive if they didn't have the road's that we build? How do the road's get there? They get put down where there used to be tree's and land. People destroy and take apart the earth and the put down road's and building's. What do people plan to do when they have taken down all the tree's and used all the space that the earth has to offer? There will be nothing left. Car's are great and all, I understand that they are fast and they make life simplier but people are getting lazy and they are starting to not care about their surrounding's and it's sad.
Car's are not cheap. They take time and money. When a car has a problem or break's down you have to pay to get it fixed. You have to pay to put gas in your car and depending on how much gas your car need's, it can put a hole in your wallet. Car's. We use them, rely on them to take us where we want to go, use them for entertainment such as Nascar and Monster Truck's. One day all the car's will be gone and then what will the world do.
| 4 |
547205a
|
To explore or to not explore. The exploration of the planet Venus is a debated topic. Both positives and negatives present themselves, but still leave room for doubt and interest to hang in the air. The author of this article does a very satisfcatory job in presenting the worthiness of the space exploration of Venus. He presents the dangers of the mission with honesty, highlights the fascinating elements of Venus to build interest, and provides the inventions and accommodations to make this space exploration possible.
The author begins by presenting the dangers of the exploration on Venus. He describes the "highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere" and the "erupting volcanoes, powerful eathquakes, and frequent lightning strikes." This honest approach allows the reader to see reality, and the author's understanding of the opposing side. This also sets up a platform for the author to state positive reinforcements.
Now, the author has an opportunity to present the beneficial aspects to exploring Venus. He includes many details to do so. The author says that Venus "may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" and that "Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." He also includes that Venus is "our nearest option for a planetary vist, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." Fascinating details about the planet build interest and curiosity. By presenting a few positive elements the planet has to offer, the author does an excellent job at supporting his personal claims that Venus is a planet worth exploring.
Lastly, the author includes solutions to potential dangers of space exploration. He mentions "NASA's possible solutions to hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." He also presents the idea of "a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions." One final detail he presents is that "simplified electronics made of silicon carbide" are being produced, and have been successful under a simulated Venus environment. By stating these accommodations and inventions, the author does a great job at providing posible solutions to dangerous conditions, and allows the reader to see the real possibility of a prosperous journey to Venus.
The author of this article presents the aspects of Venus exploration with clarity, and satisfies his claim by providing intriquing facts about Venus, and the inventions that can make it all happen. The author is not manipulative, but simply states information of all aspects, and encourages the reader to expand their imagination. Because of the author's organization, clarity, and positive reinforcement, the audience is inclined to agree with him.
| 4 |
54765c3
|
The face that you seem to see on Mars is just a big misunderstanding. Many conspiracy theorists have made up stories about this face in order to get money and popularity. Even though it is actually just a mesa in the middle of Mars, located in Cydonia. There are many mesas in the western United States and aren't made from any alien race.
This article states that the Face is,"formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." This illusion is what conspiracy theorists use to make it viral. It also proves how there is no face at all. It is all just a big shadow of a mesa in Cydonia.
On April 5, 1998 the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia. Michael Malin and his team used the Mars Orbiter Camera to take photographs of the face. These photographs were ten times sharper than those of the previous Viking missions. They revealed that is was just a natural mesa and there wasn't anything to do with aliens at all.
April 8, 2001 was a day that completely changed and confirmed that there was nothing more than a mesa in Cydonia. The Mars Orbiter Surveyor can take pictures with one pixel being 1.56 meters, while the early Viking photographs had pixels that were 43 meters. This high definition camera took a picture of the face again. Being able to zoom in up to 3 times larger than the normal picture, the team found out there weren't any structures or figures on the face.
There is plenty of evidence that can prove there isn't anything wrong with the area in Cydonia. Going from high defintion photographs with modern technology to zoom in and spot out evidence or old photos showing shadows of the mesa walls. There are plenty of conspiracies that have been proven false by these photos and research of the NASA workers. This has proven that the Face on Mars was never actually a face or alien structure, but a normal everyday mesa.
| 3 |
54772a9
|
In the story "Unmasking the Face in Mars" it talks about a lanform looking like a human face.
It had eyes, a nose, and a mouth formed by shadows.
Some people believe that it was put there by aliens but somepeople believe it was a natural landform.
I belive it is a natural landform.
When they first found it they figured it was just another Martian mesa with unuasual shadows to make it look like an Egypian Pharaoh.
While conspiracy theorists believed there was an ancient civilization.
So when NASA got a chance they took another picture of the landform.
When they did they revealed that it was in fact just a natural landform.
Although NASA proved that it was a natural landform not everyone was satisfied.
They said that NASA took the picture on a cloudy day so you could not see the face through the clouds.
Then NASA took a picture with an even better camera and found that the face was a natural landform they even compared it to one on Earth.
Garvin said "So, if there were objects un this picture like airpkanes in the or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, your could see what they were!" So it was just a landform.
The conspiracy theorist think that the face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars evidence that NASA would rather hide then share.
But NASA wishes that there was a civilization on Mars and if it was then they would share it.
So NASA has all of the facts to say that is just a natural artifact and it was not created by aliens.
While conspiracy theorist do not have an real facts that aliens buit it.
So in conclusion " The Face" was just a natural landform that happened to look like a human face.
If it weren't for shadows to make it look like it had eyes, a nose, and a mouth it wouldn't have looked like a face at all.
Conspiracy theorist beleived that there was an ancient civilization but the have no facts to back them up.
So they are not very acurate.
I belive that "The Face" is just a natural landform because we have facts to back us up unlike conspiracy theorist.
| 2 |
547a912
|
In the artical "making Mona Lisa Smile" the auther talks about the new technology called Facial Action Coding System. The new technology would be helpful in the classroom to identfy if students are bored or becoming bored. This passage states "A classroom computer could recongnize when a strudent is becoming confused or bored," "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor" people understand human facial expression, computers need to know the same,because many hours of our lives are spent behind a computer screen.
Is facial expressions a science? Dr. Paul Eckman "has classified six basic emotions happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness" these are all emotions we can see in person and we all respond differently when we see these emotions. In paragraph five "For instance, you can tell gow a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." This states the us as human beings notice and feel emotion linked to others in our lives."Dr. Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for human and computers to communcate" In the artical is states "For ecample, if you smile when a web ad appears on your screen,a similar ad mkght follow" This shows that the computer notices the smile and links that with happness or enjoyment.
In conclusion the facial expressions read by humans everyday should be put into computers. In paragraph six it states " "Most humans communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," notes Dr. Huang" This is showing that people do not always talk about their feelings. "so computers need to understand that,too" said Dr. Huang
| 2 |
54922dc
|
In the article "Driverless Cars Are coming" the author presents both posititve and negative apects of driverless cars. In my opoinion I am against the development of these cars. I think that this cars are not safe, and would be to expensive.
Firstly, the driverless cars in my opinion are not safe. I think this because technology can always go wrong no matter how much time or money is spent on it. You just never know when it can go wrong. For example, in the article it is stated that traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safest car has human driver control at all times. So it is insane that people are trying to develop a driveless car when by the law it is proven to not be safe. Another example is in the article it states that if technology fails and someone is injured who would the fault lie on. So this shows that with driverless cars technology will fail at any time, and can cause accident on innocent people who in the first pplace where never in support of driverless cars.
Secondly, the driverless cars should not be developed because they are to expensive not only for individual people but for the country. For example, in the article it states that the smartroad sytems work surprisingly well, but that they require a massive upgrades to exsisting roads, that was simply to expensive to be practical. Driverless cars would require the upgrade of not only a part of Indianas road but the whole U.S. and the world. Which is a tremendous amount of money that would be needed to upgrade all the roads. Driverless cars do not only need upgrades in road to be safer and work better, but the car itself needs alot of expensive technology to operate correctly and safely. For example, a driverless car needs spinning sensor on the roof, dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form constant updating 3-D model os the car's surroundings, and so much more is needed for the driverless car to mimic the skills of a human at the wheel.
In conclusion, driverless cars are not and will not be any much safer then a human at the wheel, and the cars are to expensive and would be a waste of money for the country. Driverless cars will fail at some point because tehcnolgy fails, so why risk the life of innocent people. The cars are to expensive, so why waste so much money on driverless car. They are not needed but are only a desire of human imaginaiton, inclsuive a luxury for many.
| 4 |
5493121
|
yes i think the use of the new technology called the (Facial action coding system) would be a good use because of they way they use it because that way you can tell and know the way a person really feels about you. Like for example like if your in class and you wanted to see like if you were the student you wanted to see how the teacher really felt about you, Just like if you were the teacher and you wanted to see how all your different students felt too and it would let yk the exact way how that perticular person felt at that time. You would also know if that student had something really wrong with them like if something was going on outside of school or like at home or like if they just had something really heavy they needed to get off their chest and they probably just needed someone to talk to and you could be that person that could really help them out and be the one to lift their sperit up.
| 2 |
549c5cc
|
Should the electoral college stay! well this is my responds on this topic,Let get started. I think the electoral college should stay because 1 major reason is to let the election have a fair fight. Another reason is that it in our constitution!!.Another important reason is that with out the electoral there would only be 1 side of a vote for ex it just be the congress voting. With the electoral the want it to be equal so nobody goes home felling down cause he didnt have a fair ruling or a fair election. For my 3 reason they help select how many elector on how many state could have witch for ex the 23 amendment of the constitution they allowed columbia to have 3 ..I dont now much but that sound like alot.
4 reason is that each state has his or her on elector. If u havent notice i have said yes they should be hear to do there job as a elector and to do there job as a guy/girl to do there jobs rights. I understand why elector are trying to stay there trying to stay to have a sucessful carrer and do good in life and not be a bum that live on the street or working at mcdonalds. Another good reason is that if it turn into a tie then the house or representatives come into place and they put the thoughts into. A reason to be it unfair the electoral collehe get no credit for what happens they should get alittle for all the hard work they put into. Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for president, but for a slate of electors, who turn elect the president. Who are the elector? They can be anyone not holding public office.
| 1 |
54a0093
|
Wouldn't it be cool to be able to relax while driving? Personally, as a driver myself, I do know that driving for long periods of time can be very tiring. Your feet get tired and your legs become ressless. If you were able to just sit back and relax while the car was being driven, and you only had to be attentive when a problem occured, is that an experience that you would want to partake in?
I believe that driverless cars could be very convienent for drivers, and I think that they should be put to use. They would become very popular because as it says in paragraph two, "Television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves.". Many people would want to own one for themselves, and be able to get the experience. Everyone would know about it because the media would make it be very well known, and the companies that would be selling the driverless cars would make lots of profit.
Many people might say that it is dangerous and could cause a tragic car accident, but in paragraph seven it states " In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completley driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navagating through work zones and around accidents." With this being said, drivers must be attentive and remain alert and be ready to take over when a problem like this was to accur.
Another point that may be brought up in discussion is what if the driver's attention is not able to be grabbed when the car is in need of the driver's assistance? Well, in paragraph seven, it says that "GM has devleoped driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object. The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over. Other options under concideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays.". These are all things that could be put in place to ensure that the car is able to quickly get the driver's attention.
Peronsally, I believe that the driverless car would be a great help to every person driving. They would be able to relax more, and they would not have to take so manys stop breaks between round trips . The driver could simply be more at ease while driving, and not have to be so cautious. The driverless car would be more safe for people inside the car, and outside the car such as pedestrians. The driverless car is a great idea.
| 4 |
54a3fb9
|
You should participate in the Seagoing cowboys becuase you could visit alot of cool places.
you could go anywhere you wanted to.
Its also good if you like to help people.
If you love helping people then you should participate in this program.
another thing thats good about this program is that you can do it with a friend.
If you like to hangout with your friend alot then you should participate in this program.
Another thing great about the Seagoing cowboys is that if you like helping animals you should do it.
You get to take care of and look after all the animals on the boat. feeding and looking after animals is a great to do with a friend.
even if you dont like animals.
The seagoing cowboys program is an unbelivible opportunity for somebody to go across the ocean and see places people dont get to see everyday.
I had been to europe,china greece and have even crossed the ocean 16 times!
The favorite place ive been to was venice,Italy,a city with streets of water.
Theres also so many places you can go.
Ive been to China,Greece,Europe,Venice,italy and even crete.
There I toured an excavated castle.
This program is the perfect opportunity to visit any place you want to.
There are some flaws to this program.
Its very dangerous.
I almost slid off the boat in the middle of the night.
your also going to be in the ocean for hours until you reach your destination.
But all in the end its a really good program.
| 3 |
54a4c00
|
In "The challenge of Exploring Venus" I say the author makes good points for both sides. I would say he is going with it would not be a very good idea to try an explore Venus.
He says " A thick atmosphere of 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus". This is one reason it would be very hard to explore Veuns. Also becuase on the surface of Venuse the temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit."the pressure is 90 times grater than what we experience on our own planet". This is saying that this enviroment would crush a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans on earth. Also venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our sorlar system. With it being that hot it would liquify the metals we have on earth. This is why I think that the mission or challenges needed done to get to Venus are not worth the risks of loseing money or more importantly the lives of good people on this earth.
In conclusion the fight to see whats on Venus is not worth it. They have no way to even set foot on this planet. They would imeditaly be either crushed by the 90 time greater pressure than we exsperince. Or die to the 800 degrees fahrenheit that the planet has to offer.
| 2 |
54a4e88
|
Untill now we have never had a very clear picture of what is exactly that thing is. With the new high-resolution images the give us a better idea of what we are looking at. What this face on Mars is acually ia A mesa.
This human like face is nearly to miles in length and seems to be staring back at the camera. NASA was using the face on Mars to attract attention to Mars. While some say that the Face is bona fide evidence of life that NASA would rather hide. Defenders of NASA say that they wish there was an ancient civilzation. If there happened to be an acient civilzation on Mars just think about all to stuff that scientist could learn from Mars that could help describe all of the other planets.
The picture captured by Global Surveyor was ten times sharper than any of the other pictures ever taken. As the world saw this picture for the first time revealing a natural landform and that there was not alien monument after all. Some still belive that the face on Mars is an acient alien civilzation, but proven by scientist this Face is just a natural lanformation.
| 2 |
54b547a
|
I am against using the value of technology to read students' emotional expressions. I'm not saying that this type of technology is bad though it isn't good either. I feel like this type of technology has no purpose what so ever.
In paragraph five it states that "you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by looking at their face." If I could do that why do I need a computer to tell me that they are happy, sad and whatever else. Just by looking at the Mona Lisa painting you can tell that she is somewhat happy but also doesn't seem like she cares about being painted. Why do we need to calculate emotions to know just exactly how a person is feeling?
In conclusion we don't need this type of technology just to see what a person is feeling. It mostly feels like a waste of time at least to me.
| 2 |
54b7156
|
I tend to have a negative aspect on driverless cars . I believe we will always need people to operate a car. New cars can do all sorts of stuff like, trafic jam assistance ,they can steer, accelerat ,and break themselves. All of these designs have one thing in common and that is to notify the driver if there is about to be a colision or anything. I also belive that you need human contact when in a car. Would you like to sit in the back of a moving car without a person in the front seat. If there were to be something that the car cant see or feel ahead a fewmiles like a flood how would the car know to stop when it clearly cant see it .how is it soppossed to know what to do. Like if a woman stared to have a sesure or a diabetic or anything like that what would the car be able to do about that. Also i do believe you should always follow the law but in a state of emergencey what if u needed to speed or anything of the sort a car that drives itself could not be allowed to do that surlly it would break rule regulations.
I would not get in a car without a human being behind the wheel I would not put my life in the "hands" of a car. a person has feelings and you cant give that to a machine.
| 2 |
54baae1
|
According to the article, fellow citizens are imformed about the advangtages of limting cars. As it says in the artcle "As a result, 70 percent of Vaubang' familes not own and 57 solid a carpercent throw a cow."I'm much happier his way" "All of our development since World War 2 has been centered on the car, and that will change" says David. Not only were they focused on the car, that was all that mattered at the time. Not only were the people trying to make a change "An offical of Transportation for America, fast- growing coalition of hundreds of groups in the United States, who were promoting new communities that are less dependent on cars. Mr. Goldberg added "How much you drive is as important as whether you have a hybrid." in the United States, the Evironmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities"
Not only are they trying to reduce and/ or limit car useage "After days of near car pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Cars are not the only ones taking act in this "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plaes were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day. Backing down wasn't an issue because according to the article "Almost 4,000 drivers were fined, according to Reuters. Twenty-seven people had their car impounded for their reaction to the fine". The article also states "Diesel fuel was blamed, since France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline." Buses and taxis?"It was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and textis permitted for the Day without Cars in capital city of 7 million. The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog"
The article not only states "The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Begota in the mid-1990s. it has seen the contruction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to Mockus, the city's mayor." but it also states the end of the car culture. "New York's new bike-sharing program and its skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those a new pirorities, as do a proliferation of car- sharing programs across the nation. A study last year found that driving by young people decresed 23 percent between 2001 and 2009"
| 3 |
54bd71d
|
The abilitiy to read the emotion of a student in a classroom is a posotive thing that might come about in the future. There are multiple reasons why it would be a good thing.
Some reasons are benefits to students and some are benefits to the teacher.
For the benefit of the students wouldn't it be great if the teacher could tell if someone was confused. If the teacher could tell that then the teacher could offer some one on one help or have a classmate explain it to them. If a student was having trouble with something and they were contemplating just giving up the additional help could work to push them forward. If the student is a high school student and they were strugling in class and got some help and things became clear maybe that would motivate them to try more resulting in better grades and that would lead to possibly scholarships. If students realized something and then it became easy and possibly even fun for them they might find what they want to do in life. It would aslo help to lower dropout rates if students enjoyed what they were doing.
Now moving on to the benefits for teachers. If a teacher could tell that a student was bored with their class they could try to add some fun to it. They might play kahoot to review which would make the students happy and also maybe seeing the students happy would put the teacher in a better mood. If the teacher could tell someone needed help they could step in and provide that help and possibly change the course a student was on. This could help the teacher to feel as though he changed a student's life and make them feel great and like they're doing the job they were meant to do. They might realize that it could work for more than one student and that could improve their teaching skills. If their teaching skills improve so does the experience of the students. This would also help to show someone what they should do in life and also help keep them motivated and in school.
So in general the idea of a technology that could read a students emotions is a promissing prospect. It will have many benefits for both students and teachers. It might help to cut dropout rates and increase the amount of people getting college degrees. It would help to improve the lives of many people and the increased amount of educated people would improve the country. So yes if the technology to read emotions ever becomes available we should use it in our schools.
| 4 |
54c06cf
|
If you were told on some days of the week that you are not allowed to drive your car to work, or even use your car at all, would you be glad or happy? Many people don't like it at first, but then grow to like the changes and outcome of not using your car as much, or not having a car. Some people say they are less stressed by not driving, or owning a car. Also people are happier that they are saving money. And they are helping the environment because it is not so polluted and smogged.
First off, when you have a car and drive it around all day, and sit in it all day, its stressful. When you are rushing yourself out the door in the morning so you're not late to work, and then you have to sit in traffic for 30 minutes or so just to get to work, is very stressful. Then on your way home from work is very stressful too. You are coming home in what is called
"rush hour"
where everyone is getting off work around the same time (5-7pm) and you just have to sit in more traffic every day! It is less stressful to not have a car, or use your car that much because you can then walk, or ride a bike. So its more relaxing and you get more time outside and excersizing. Also when you are not using your car, or do not own a car, you become more responsible and have a better track of time. So that just helps out with not being as stressed out!
Another reason why people like not driving or owning a car is that people are saving money. If you are not driving as much, then you dont need to go out and pay for gas as often. If you don't own a car at all, then you don't have to pay those monthly bills of owning that car, plus you don't have to pay for gas at all! Also by not driving as much or not owning a car does not tempt you to go out and spend the day at the mall, or always go out for lunch and dinner with friends. In todays society, many people want to save money. Many people try to save money, but don't know where to start or how to start. And with this way, just may be a helping hint to it.
With not driving as much, actually helps our planet and environment. It may not seem like it, but it does. Your not polluting the environment, and youre just being one more person to help make it a healthier environment and planet. If we had atleast 50 maybe 100 people from each city across America to not use their car 3 days a week, can make a big major difference in todays society in the multiple ways. It would help out in ways like not being as stressed, saving money, and helping our environment too.
There is many reasons as to why not driving as much or not owning a car can help out yourself, and the environment. Just by not driving as much or owning a car can make you a better person by not being as stressed out, you save lots of money by not driving so often or owning a car, and you are also helping our environment and planet by becoming a better and healthier place.
| 4 |
54c9a20
|
Have you ever wondered if there are any other living things in the universe? Maybe some where in a far away place, maybe on our neighbor Mars. A picture surfaced during 1976 showing what looks like a face on Mars, people were saying that it is in fact a fact of aliens on Mars, but it could also be a landform.
First of all, the face in 1976 is much more noticable than it is in the most recent picture from 2001. Also, if it were a face were is the rest of its body? Is it just a huge head sitting in the dirt. As well, how would such a huge person fit on the planet? The picture's pixels come in at about 46 meters per pixel. Could a face really be that big. Conspirests can believe that it is proof there is other living things on Mars, but wouldn't finding something on Mars benifit NASA's budget?
NASA could be getting millions if not billions of dollars if they found other living things on Mars. Goverments would be preparing journeys and preparing astronauts to go investigate the face. Also, if NASA was hiding it from the public, the would lose more money because they could start fundraisers to help send people and robots to Mars. They would be credited world wide for their findings. The people who controled Viking 1 and 2 would gain publicity from their findings as well. Why would NASA hide something that could put so much money into research? They wouldn't, it cannoto be anything else other than a landform. Plus, wouldn't we see many other things surrounding the place.
If the face was really part of an extra terestrial civilization, why would they have just a face and no other things surrounding it. Wouldn't there also be a little person or something walking around the place. Some may say that they are all inside teh face, but then shouldn't there be a visible way of entry into the place. They can't just breach a wall and rebuild it every time they want to enter the place. The camera pixels in the most recent 2001 photo is 1.56 meters per pixel. That is shorter than most teenagers, The photo would cleary show some sort of person or another form of transportation in the photo. I personally doubt that the face isn't home to other people who live on Mars. I maybe wrong, but until I can see actual information showing that there is and photos, I don' t believe it.
Maybe one day there will be a voyage to this face on Mars, but until then I belive that it is just a landform. Other people may believe what they want, but it looks exactly like a landform to me. There isn't enough facts to support it is something else, but unless there is a voyage to this place, then it will continue to be just a landform to me.
| 4 |
54d0c9d
|
If I were a scientist at NASA and I was disucussing the Face with someone who doesn't think the Face was just landformation I would say, it is because of what other scientist in NASA believe it was a landformation that looked like a real human face.
The Face was just something formed by the planet because the artical says, "huge rock formation... which resemles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Which means that is was just a rock that was formed a different way to look like it was a face. Although few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact, but there were more scientist to prove them wrong. Another piece of evidence was when they were taking pictures Garvin said, "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," he added. "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" What the picture actually shows is the Martin equivalent of the butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West. This evidence goes with my argument because if it was some type of alien siglnal the camera would of picked it up and they would of seen what it really was, but they didn't all they saw was a landform like the ones around American West.
In conclution it was not an alien signal, or artifact, it was just a piece of land formed differently. Now you all know it wasn't from aliens. All it was, was an illusion that looked like a real human face with a nose, eyes, and more. Don't assume everything on other planets are always from aliens because for now we don't have proof aliens exist.
| 3 |
54d26d4
|
If it were me, I wouldn't have technology to read students' emotional expressions. That would be very creepy and computers break down all the time. Let a computer get a virus see what happens... It's just a mistake waiting to happen.
People should use technology to better our education services and fix up the hoods. Those would be better causes. Another great cause that technology could be used in is to invest in disease cures and control. Those four things would benefit the United States tremendously with our technology in this day and age behind it. Now on the other hand, using this technology to read students' emotional expressions would be successful, but it is also an invasion of privacy and wouldn't really benefit the World or let alone this Country in comparision to some of the other things i mentiontioned.
Me personally i dont feel like it would be a good investment. I feel like there are better things that you can use technology foroppose to reading somebody's mind. Although, it does have it's benefites.... It is not something that i would look into. It's a invasion in privacy. I just feel that its creepy and if a kid is going to talk to you about something he will!
| 2 |
54d39cc
|
My argument is going be about why other poeple should join the program. The program " Seagoing Cowboys " is about getting animals to other states in a boat. They will take care of the animals l;ike feed them.
Why i feel that other people should join this program is because they help animals . They will help people , meet different countries ,states . For example , Europe , Canda , and even Italy. They can also meet other persons in the world , kids , maybe even famous people .
Luck bomberger joined the Seagoing Cowboys program and had a good time with his friend Don Reist . Luck and Don both went to Europe in a cattle boat . They took care of horses , young cows , and mules. Luck said " the day the pacific war ended." " They got their seaman's paper's and boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster , headed fror Greece ." With a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them.
That is my arguement about why other people should join the " Seagoing Cowboys " program. I hope that incourged you to join the Seagoing Cowboy program and help animals in need .
| 2 |
54e201a
|
The author of this passage seems to support the idea of traveling to Venus but also seems to have his doubts at the same time. In paragraph 4 he says "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even dicussing further visits to its surface" That statement from the passage doesn't seem like it would come from someone who supports the idea.
The other reason I personally believe he doesnt really support this is because when you read passages of people supporting ideas, they dont really go into the negative things that could happen. The author of this went well into detil of the hazards and dangers that can occur on venus. In paragraph 5 he says " Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." He is saying that even after NASA figures out a way to make it to Venus, it would still be extremely difficult but you probably won't die.
My conclusion of this passage is that the author does not fully support the topic he is writing about and for many reasons. Yes, Venus may have had a good enviroment that could have sustained human life in the past but it doesn't anymore. I think we should stop trying to explore somewhere that could harm you.
| 3 |
54e4e14
|
The Challenge of Exploring Venus
The author supports this idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents, because he himself has human curiosity that it should not be limited by danger to learn new things in this planet. In paragraph eight states"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself,..". He wants to find new things even though there are risks to get the information for Venus. In order to do that he has been working with NASA, has infromation on Venus, and some same features.
The author has been working with NASA because he want to know more about this sister planet Venus. He like exploring new things even though despite the danger ahead. They have tried sending unmanned on pervious missions on Venus because they knew humans or living things can go to Venus yet. In paragraph two states "Each pervious mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no sapcecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours.'. This shows that it is not safe to go on the planet but how to get study examples to research it.
NASA has already some infromation on Venus to start with on thier research. Since the spacecrafts won't last at least few hours on this planet surface. Also Venus has the hottest surface even though knowing this it still helps improve the next spacecrafts to last longer by doing experiements on thier labs. In paragraph seven states " NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of siliconcarbide have been tested in a chamber simulating...'. Venus has a thick atmosphere that is hard to breath like if you are in deep sea level. Humans won't be able to breath in that type of envormint unless you have oxygen on you.
Venus has similliar featuers like on Earth that makes you to go Venus yourself. The astronomers are fascinated by Vanus is Earth like plane in the solar system. It has some rocky sediment, valleys, and mountians that we have on Earth as well. It will help NASA so much if they got a better closer look at Venus and would help scientifcally productive. In the paragraph four states "Long ago, Venus was probably coverd largely with oceans and would have..'. This planet is nice to go and get the detailes and right information.
It is risky to study Venus but it is a planet yet to be discoverd by new things inside of it. That means it is better to make a better spacecraft and improve the mission with the knowledge they already got to explore that planet. He has been with NASA, having small information, and Earth like features.This helps or make the author to explore more in that planet.
| 3 |
54e97f5
|
First, Venus is the closet planet to Earth by the size distance and density. Although the sun is very close to Earth, Venus is closer and is also the hottest. It has a temperature of over 800 degrees. Visiting this planet can be absolutely risky, but it could be worth it , because of the simple fact that it has not have had a visit in 3+ decades. From scientists view, it is very possible that Venus could have a planet like Earth.
On a second thought, this hot and dangerous planet is worthy to go be viewed , because this can possibly solve questions for people. The beneficial part of this comes in where maybe all these theories are true or false. The author tells us how postively this visit could be. The fact that a human can maybe land for longer than a few hours.
Furthermore, this planet could've and possibly currently be a planet like Earth, but because of the dangers going in could effect and reject people from entering. The similarities between Earth and Venus is the valleys and mountains. Both Earth and Venus have other rocky sediments that are similar too .
Lastly, Venus have yet to have a human on there. Scientists and people around the world are curious and focused on Venus, getting there, and how long can a mission land and survive. Landing and being able to investigation on Venus could be done, but with alot of effort. The heat and pressure could cause serious problems. Venus is the closest and one of most unknown planets in our Solar System.
| 2 |
54eb1cc
|
In this essay I will be describing why it's important to study and pursuit Venus despite the dangers that are involved. Scientists know that sending human life to Venus is just out of the question right now and it shouldn't be done, but they are working on ways around that. Scientists have sent spacecrafts to Venus unmanned, but they only lasted for only a few hours.
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 with oceans and could've possibily supported various forms of life. Today, Venus is still like Earth in some ways, there are valleys, craters, and mountains. There is no way Venus could support life now because of the conditions of the planet. 97 percent of the planet is carbon dioxide and the average temperature of Venus is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit.
Scientists are trying to figure out and solve different ways they could find information on Venus. NASA has come up with one pretty reasonable idea for sending humans to study the planet. They came up with the idea of having a blimp-like vehicle that would float 30 miles above the planet's surface. The temperatures at this height would still be hot, at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. The conditions wouldn't be easy, but humans would be able to survive.
Being 30 miles above Venus's surface would be hard to get information on the ground conditions, so NASA is coming up with new ideas. One idea they have is to use mechanical computers which haven't been used since the 1800s. These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Using the computers we have nowadays would react terribly if we exposed them to the heat of Venus. If NASA were to use the mechanical parts, they would be more resistant to pressure, heat, and ther forces.
With time and a lot of hardwork, I think one day we could discover what Venus is really like. It would be a good idea to keep pursuing Venus because you never know, we could have life on that planet someday. We all know that this mission is dangerous, but we can't let that hold us back.
| 4 |
54f2887
|
My name is Luke Bomberger and I made nine trips as a Seagoing Cowboy.
Would you like to go on adventures just like me?
You should become a Seagoing Cowboy.
You help people in need and still have time for games and sightseeing on your way!
As an addition, you can be a Seagoing Cowboy as your military service.
There are so many perks to being a Seagoing Cowboy.
Let me tell you about some.
As said in Paragraph Two of this article about me and my adventures as a Seagoing Cowboy called "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves", "It was 1945, World War II was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins.
To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration).
UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas."
My friend Don Reist and I joined.
We were to take care of the animals on board the ship so that people that need them could be helped.
But it wasn't all work.
I even said myself, as this article states, "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China."
Taking a gondola ride in Venice and seeing the Acropolis in Greece were both truly amazing.
Paragraph Eight of this article tells all about the games we would play on the ship.
It reads, "Luke also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded.
The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed.
Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also helped pass the time."
This is all very true information.
The cowboys and I would always have so much fun.
You can do all of this when you join the Seagoing Cowboys!
Yet another perk is being able to be a Seagoing Cowboy as your military service.
This article qoutes me in Paragraph Four, and I said, "When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service."
In conclusion, there are many perks to joining the Seagoing Cowboys, from simply helping people to sightseeing.
There are already many Seagoing Cowboys, and all of them would be so grateful for more members.
We all encourage you to join, and hope you do.
Think back to all that I have said, and I am sure you will want to join the Seagoing Cowboys!
| 3 |
54f33a8
|
In the passage ," The Challange of Exploring Venus " , the author names multiple amont of details according to why studying Venus is still worthy to pursuit despite the danger that it may present. In the passage the author lists off a bunch of facts about Venus including details such as Venus being the second plant from our Sun. He also mentions Venus being the "Earth's "twin". The Earth and Venus both share the same terms such as density,
size and occasionally the closest in distance too. The author begins to mention things about how the not one single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades as it states in the passage. In paragraph 3 , it beings to state the thinkness of the atmosphere is Venus. The author beings to compare the tempertature of the Earths surface with the surface of Venus. As we countine the passge, the author beings to tell us all this and more including the reasons for us to keep studing this plant called Venus.
NASA, has started working on other ways to study Venus. As one of the examples mention in paragaph 7 ,
"some simplified electionis made of silicon carbude habe been ytested in chamber simutlation the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasyed for three week in such conditions". In the same paragragh in states another example , " looking back to an old technology called ,"mechanical computers". The computers mentioned were first envistioned in the 1800's and played an important role in the 1940's which was also during World War II. The devices made calculations by using gears and levers . They did not require electronics at all. Which may be shoking that there were even such devices during this time. In modern day , computers are enormously helpful. They are extremly powerful , flexble and quick. The only problem is that they are way to delicate when it comes to
extreme physical conditions. For example, in the heat you phone may alert you that you may no longer use it until the heated phone has gone back down to an acceptable temperature. So if you can imagine how much sun you get on your phone to say you are not longer able to use it,
your electronic devices wil not be able to stay together and end up into acid or heat capable of melting tin.
In conclusion , NASA and many others such as the author of this passage belive that studying Venus and keep pursuing the adventure despite that the dangerous warnings and the many risk it may contain. There were many examples and many good reasons on why doing this could be a good thing. This can also be a bed thing concidering all the risk that it may bring. Some being leaving family behind. The biggest one of all would have to be the hesitance between if youll end up back home or if youll end up dead somewhere and not being found. Either way , some will take the challange one just for the adreniline that may come with it and some will not take the risk of dying and not being able to get a chance to say they lived. Many might say "well why? whats the point of killing yourself after spending millions of dollars just to go and not knowing if you will return ". Not many will think twice and just waste over millions of dollars just to be remembered either the one who tried of the one who lived and countinues to live the story. Either way , the challange is worth it despite of the dangers it presents.
| 4 |
54f35f7
|
People have loved the fact that there could be cars that can fly or hover over water, but one thing is for sure is that people would like so see a self driving car. Many companies around the world like Mercedes Benz,BMW,Audi, and Nissan have planned to create a marvelous autopilot self driving car by the year 2020,but there are some pros and cons that could affect the future of these invention.
Lets start with the positive side of this arguement. some good ideas that would be perfect for this invention that could change everything forever is that driverless cars will not just help people on regular basis, it could also help other terms like heavy work or abulances or police force. In the last sentence of the text it says " The road to hte truly autonomous car streaches on ahead of us, but we grow clsoer to the destination everytday. In my opinion driverless cars should also be used as tools that we could need to build something better.
Another pro that could help people would be cars programmed to help the disable people who have lost an eye, or its legs. It would help millions of people around the world and counting. maybe it could drive by itself completly but it could assist the people while person waits on its destination. In paragraph 7 of the article is says that BMW has relased a cars that can asssist people with the brakes,steer,and acceleration but beyond that the person can also take over the car at anytime.
Well we have talked about what are the good things about having a driverless car and its factors, but now let's talk about the negative things the cons. One thing that is in people's mind is that when driving this type of car or buying one in a dealer is their safety and their safety for their children or famliy members on board of a car that drives by itself. If the car that the person bought is not well ajusted or even well tested that is safe to use then why buy something that dosent even have a 100% full perfect function. That is why in the text it says that most states in the united states have no allowed for auto pilot cars in their streeets is because they are not well ajusted or not very updated as it should be.
Another con that is kinda bothering me is that people are trying to get more and more reliable and used to the fact that they are more dependable to technology now in days. In my opinion peole are sometimes lazy and huge companies are showing and introducing cars like this to people they are affecting they are affection skills of people and its way of being depedent.
Therefore those are the good and bad things about having a future car that can actually might or might not help the future more foward or turn back in time.
| 3 |
54f7632
|
Cars that drive them selves shouldn't be developed. These cars shouldn't be developed because the cars they have now aren't completely driverless. All the "driverless" cars now can't navigate through any work zones or car accidents. Only thing these cars can do is steer, accelerate, and brake by themselves. What good are they if they can't manuever through things by themselves?
If someone was texting and driving in their driverless car and they let their car take over and their driverless car failed to drive by itself and a accident occured who would be to blame? Would the driver or the creators of the car be at blame for the accident? Safety would be best achieved by alert drivers. There is going to have to be new laws will be needed to cover liability of an accident. They say "We have to interpret driving fun in a new way." What fun is driving if you can't do it manually? Driving is a previlage why let you're car take the previlage of you driving?
Fully driverless cars shouldn't be developed. The automatic steering, acceleration, and braking by themselves are okay for a car. But completely driverless? No us drivers can stick to driving cars manually. Not wanting to drive is pure laziness anyways. People should enjoy being able to drive. There's no reason to not enjoy driving.
| 2 |
54f8ee6
|
I think this techonology that reads the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because it could help others understand someones feeling.
These expressions are coming from the muscles in your body especially your face if you are using a lot of expression. "Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crows's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius. To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful." This shows me ways you an figure out someones face expressions if they are serious or not. And it helps you out if they need any help. You could also tell by their muscles if you want to believe them or are they lieing just to get people to like them.
This technology could also be helpful because it could tell in school if you actually get it or you don't. "If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." The same techonology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-- for video games or video surgery." This makes more sense why this techonolgy also could be helpful. This helps students more help and effort on their school works by using this techonology to notify a teacher because a lot of students doesn't want the whole class to know that they don't understand something.
This expression technology could help us understand our family or friends around us. "Humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by thr look on her face. Of course, most of us would have trouble actually secribing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc. Yet Dr. Huang observes that artists such as da Vinci studied human anatomy to help them paint facial muscles precisely enough to convey specific emotions." This shows me that this techonolgy can help you around your family or friends because they might be feeling a negative way and you should uderstand that by suing this techonology so you can understand more and make them feel better; same as if they are feeling positive you might need to continue having that positive vibe and you know that by using this techonology.
I agree with this technology because it shows someones feelings by telling through their muscles. You can tell if they need help or they aren't feeling good you can tell through a technology and you could help them out. This technology is a lot helpful in schools because it makes teachers understand more if students get it or not and they could help them out.
| 4 |
54fd7fc
|
The future for cars is expanding over the course of the years. Driveless cars should not be delevoped in modern day society. This is because one, it does not make any sense, two, you would have to make too many changes in society for the cars to work properly.
Driveless cars would cause many problems in modern society. For instance, " Presently, traffic laws are written with assumption that the...liability in the case of an accident" (9). In other words, the laws for driving were made under the cricumstances that a human would be behind the wheel at all times so in order for a computer to be in charge of a car the government would need to shift the laws around to make that possible. The government should not change the law around for a computer that is not liable because techniqualities can happen at anytime on the road. Also, " Why would anyone want a driveless car that still needs a driver?" (8). This is to say that, the car that the manufacturers make is supposed to be "driveless" but it still needs a driver behind the wheel to guide it. Specifically, what is the whole point of making a car that is supposed to be controled by a computer but still needs human help, its like making a purposless car. There is no need for a drivless car if does not neccessarily drive itself.
Driveless cars should not be created in today's world because it will cause serious confusion. Depending on a computer to take the wheel of a car is a bad idea and then making it a "driveless" car that still needs assistants from humans does not pursuit the purpose of making the invention. Therefore, this creation needs a little bit more work to be a life changing experiment.
| 3 |
5500c06
|
The author of this article, " The Challenge of Exploring Venus," he starts off by telling us about the planet. He included some fun facts like it is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. But later on he gets down to his main point studying Vensus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author then stating numerous of challenges and risks that Venus gives like corrosive sulfuric acid, a thick atmosphere of 97% carbon dioxide that blankets venus, how the average temperature reaches 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and that the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Earlier in the article the author states to us how, " Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spaceraft survived the landing more than a few hours."
Further on in the article the author starts to support his idea progressively more. Starting in paragraph 5 he starts to use evidence on how big space administrations like The National Aeronautics and Space Administration or further known as NASA is coming up with more ideas and technology that will create a more safe supporting conditions that will with hold the hostile conditions that Venus holds. A little bit into paragraph 5 the author claims how they invision a blimp like vehicle that hovers 30 or so miles above the rolling Venusian landscape. This invention will not allow us to be able to touch Venus's surface and will only be able to provide limited sight on the ground conditions but will avoid all the unfriendly ground conditions. At the end of paragraph 5 the author states to us that " Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy, but survivable for humans." From that last sentence right there it proves to us that it is survivable for humans, but it is not easy. After hearing that sentence that the author used to help support his idea. I thought that the sentence was something that really affected how he supported his idea.
All in all I will say that the author did very well in supporting his idea on is Venus a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. To support my evidence that I supported in evaluation on how well the author did supporting his idea, I looked at the very last sentence in the article in paragraph 8 and when I read that, " Our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." that is when I knew he did a good job supporting his idea with evidence in the article.
| 3 |
5508737
|
The use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is smart and could be usefull but, it could also be a bad idea. Being able to know everything that the student is feeling can help teachers understand them more. If a student was in danger and didn't feel safe the teacher would know and be able to help them. Teachers will have to ask their students if its okay to read their emotions because peoples emotions are very personal.
A teacher being able to uderstand students through their emotion can help teachers know more about how to work with them. For example, in the article this is said by Dr. Huang "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". According to this part of the text computers know how to change a lesson based off your emotion. That means that teachers being able to know your emotion can do the same.
I also feel that this is invading someones personal space. If someone wanted you to know what was going on in their life and wanted you to know how they are feeling they will tell you. Thats why I think asking for the students permission is important before updating their technology. Another thing is why understand computers, in the passage this is said "developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate" but why? I dont think computers and humans need to communicate but, I do think humans need to communicate with other humans. I feel that you don't need technology to know how someone is feeling because you could just talk to them if you think something is wrong or if they arn't understanding the lesson that you are trying to teach them.
| 3 |
55130fa
|
Would you agree with me if i told you I value the use of technology reading students emotions in class? You probably wouldn't. imagine a computer reading your facial expression. The reason i agree their should be this type of technology
in a classroom is because, I think it would make lessons funer, it would avoid kids from falling asleep, it can stop kids from ditching class.
The use of this technology can take any type of class to the next level. "The computer can easly tell when your getting confued or bored," Dr.Huang predicts. It could modify the lesson to make it easier for someone to understand and make it funer for someone who is getting board. Like for instance say someone dosen't understand a math problem but has a passion for a sport. The teacher can then use the sport the student has a passion for and help him understand it better.
When a lesson is boaring a kid thinks that sleeping it away can make it go by faster. I mean it does but then your strugling when it comes down to having a test on it. By this device telling the teacher a students emotion of the lesson can help the teacher understand how to explain it without making it boaring or long. The teacher can then think okay todays lesson was kinda long how can I get straight to the point and make it fun. By a lesson being fun it makes the kid look foward to the assignment causing them to stay up.
When a student ditches a class its most likely because their class dosent have a fun assignment to look foward to. Or because they dont understand it, and their to shy to ask for help. They may also ditch a class becuse they dont see a point in going to class.
Have you gotten our anwser of what you think? would you like to have one of these computers in your class? We all have that one class e dont look foward to. this can help teachers understand why kids ditch their class, fall asleep, or even why they dont show intrest because they get board or confused.
| 3 |
5514a27
|
Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit deprite the dangers it presents. Not only will we learn more from this Earth-like planet, but we can also see what it once was, and what is has become.
Venus has been considered as Earth's "Twin," because Venus is the only planet that is the closest to Earth, not only in density, but size. Every spacecraft that has been sent to Venus, doesn't make it out, because the atmosphere of Venus is too strong of carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid. The temperatures alone average over 800 degrees. Too much for any human to survive. By studying Venus, we have learned the weather consists of errupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to any probes that are seeking land on the surface of Vennus. Another example of what has been found is Venus may have had a form of life, just like Earth, once consisting of large oceans and forms of life. The planet today still consists of a rocky sediment, featuring and consisting of valleys, mountains, and craters. By working with what we know, NASA has been creating prototypes that could soon once carry humans to study Venus, at a long distance to keep it safe. Studying from our first resources, we have learned the safer distance humans can be at to observe Venus. It may not be an easy task, but it is survivable for humans.
From gathering information from space probes that have attempted to explore Venus, we can make prototypes to test around the atmosphere, before we send any humans to observe Venus from a distance. We have learned how to make observations from this Earth-like planet possible, and we have an insight of what this planet once was, and what it has become today. The exploration of Venus may hold a few dangers and set-backs, but researchers are doing the best they can to create a safe way to observe Venus from a distance.
| 3 |
5517825
|
My position on driverless cars is i personally believe the idea is crazy! I say this because you never what could be the outcome of of this car. Another reason i say this is because these cars still have a driver. There is alot of what if's with this idea. I personally would not a take a chance, and put my life in a cars hands, and i dont believe others should either.
The articles gives give reaonsing to have these cars, and bad reasoning to have these cars. I agree with thwe article on some the good reasonings such as fuel. Sergey says the car he forsees would use half of the fuel of today's taxis, and offer far more flexiability than a bus. This is just a car he forsees, this does not make this a fact about a driverless car. Sergey believes these cars would fundamentally change the world. In my opinon these cars could harm the world.
Google has cars that has driven more than half a million miles without a crash. These cars are the cars that are not completly driverless. The google cars have alert the driver. I personally think this still does not mean anything. I say this because a person may lose their life in a split second, with this being said this car could be a few seconds late to alert the drive and the driver was not paying attention then BOOM! Theses cars have alot of what if's, and i definitely will not be looking forward to find out one.
Inconclusion these are my reasons i believe this idea is. This is my opinon and you never maybe these cars will revelousionize the world, but theres always a chance that these cars may cause damage to the world as well. As you can see i dont believe these cars will be very useful. I also dont believe these cars will as Sergey saod fundamentally change the world. I could not put my life on technology. If i dont ride roller coasters why should i ride in a driverless car?
| 3 |
551b327
|
Venus is the second planet from the sun. They are often referred to as Earth's "twin" since they have so much in common.
The planet Venus is worthy studying because it's still considered and plays an important role in our planet and in our solar system. It is also worth studying because people, even from today, are still very curious about Venus. Besides the ninety-seven percent atmosphere of carbon dioxide and the temperature being eight-hundred degrees Fahrenheit, Venus and Earth share characteristics as "sisters." Astronomers thought that a long time ago, Venus was possibly covered with oceans and supported life just like Earth. Still today, Venus provides all sorts of features that Earth has, like mountains and valleys. It is said in the passage, "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for planetary visit." NASA has made all sorts of plans, ideas and studies for visiting the complicated planet. They have built all sorts of machines for it to survive. There was this machine they built and did some testing and experiments about them. It was highly manageable and "survivable for humans."
In conclusion, Venus is worth studying because it plays an important role for our solar system despite the lack of density of Venus's atmosphere, scientists today still continue studying and researching about Venus. Nobody has ever survived coming back from Venus but that doesn't stop the researchers at all.
| 2 |
551b7f5
|
A UFO lands in your front yard. Apart from the screaming, you hear beeps and boops. You turn to the side and see an Alien standing in your doorway. He opens his mouth and a loud alarm sound comes out. You open your eyes and then realize it was all a dream. That's the only reasonable explanation for you seeing a UFO or an alien. To this day scientist have not encountered signs of life on any other planet. So what makes you think aliens could have created the face on Mars?
Two decades and a half ago scientist discovered a face like shape on Mars. It was about two miles long. Scientist claimed it was staring at the cameras, but there was nothing surrounding it. No power tools, or hammers, not even a few sculpting tools. How would aliens create such a thing? With alien-y tools? Magic powers maybe? No, because it was a natural formation. Scientist figured out it was just another Martian mesa, which are frequent around the Cydonia. According to the article the only thing different about this one was that it "had unusual shawdows make it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." Which made people go wild.
When Mars' face started its fifteen minutes of fame it became a beloved "pop icon." It was featured in movies, books, and radio talk shows. It "haunted grocery checkout lines" for years. That is when people, mostly conspiracy theorists, started thinking "What if aliens formed it?" Some scientist even started to believe that it was an alien artificat. So more research was done. Scientist took more pictures, which were ten times sharper than the first ones, and stutdied them. Discovering, the obivious, that it was a natural landform.
There was dissapointment all over the place, not only for the people, but scientist too. It was a mesa, a natural landform. It was even compared to the "MIddle Butte in the Snaler River Plain of Idaho". Since then the popularity of the face has gone downhill. Maybe one day it'll resurface on the social media as a funny meme that teens will talk about for two weeks. Tragic.
| 3 |
5520857
|
In the article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile.", the author discusses the idea of using Facial Action Coding Systems in a classroom. The Facial Action Coding System is a software that allows computers to read expressions of faces. For example, this program was able to detect that the Mona Lisa was, "83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." ( D'Alto 1-2) This technology could have a great impact on children in school. Putting computers with Facial Action Coding System in classrooms, in order to help read student's emotions and make the lesson more appealing to them, is a good idea.
The Facial Action Coding System would be very beneficial in classrooms. In most classrooms now, there are 20-30 students and only one teacher. This is a great responsiblity for a teacher to take on. With computers as help, learning in a classroom could be much more affective. Dr Huang states, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like and effective human instructor." Many children in classrooms can fall behind without one on one time with a teacher. However since classrooms are so big, it becomes less likely that a child who wants help actually gets the attention they need. With computers like these in classrooms, kids who need a little extra could get the practice without a teacher.
Although this technology could be life changing in many ways, it has its flaws. For example, we are still a long ways from being able to put these computers in every classroom. Also, the cost of this techonology is unknown. This could add to extra fees famlies have to pay when sending their child to school, some of which may not be ablee pay for this type of computer system. Even if the cost of these computers were low and they were able to be in every classroom, would they work properly all the time? Technology is not perfect and if the Facial Action Coding System is unrelable, then are they really worth the money?
Yes, these computers are worth the money. Despite all the possiblities that could go wrong with this technology, they still have great potential. Children would be getting a better education. Some students are ahead of others, and need more of a challenge. The Facial Action Coding System can help those who seem bored in class, which gives the children the oppertunity to learn more in a regular classroom setting. It also makes everyone in the classroom equal. While everyone is on the computer, it doesn't seperate those who need help from those who do. This will boost children's confidence and teach them to like school more while getting a better education at the same time.
There are several benefits to putting the Facial Action Coding System in classrooms in order to help read student's emotions and make the lesson more appealing. This system can help provide more challenging material and a oppertunity to learn more for the students who need it. It can also provide more help and extra lessons for the students who are behind in class. Overall, the Facial Action Coding System would help out teachers who have big classes. It would provide more one on one time for all students which would boost the rate they learn at, proving it is a good idea to have these types of computer systems in a classroom.
| 5 |
55214d4
|
Can you imagine a world where no one has to ride the city bus or try to get a taxi? This could happen in the future if companies like Google continue to try to upgrade their driverless cars. This idea is just in the very early steps at the moment, but with more regulated test-drives and advances in technology this could be a reality.
There are many questions like: If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault? If this technology was put into action before it was ready for every possiblity then the blame would fall upon the manufacturer and the government for it's approval. The only cars that are close to completely driverless still require the human to be in the driver's seat and remain focused at all times if needed to take over in certain situations. Computers do not make mistakes, humans do. If not laced with the best programming and top of the line technology, this car could be a failure.
Everything falls back on the maufacturers. If they can provde the world with a driverless car that is reliable and keeps humans out of harms way it would be amazing. Until the driverless cars are perfected they should not be used by the public. The blame if something goes wrong should only be placed on the maufacturers who were relied on to make a safe and easy alternative to human-controlled cars we use today. riverless cars is an idea that can soon be achieved with the right research and testing.
| 2 |
552ae9a
|
The technology called Facial Action Coding System to identify human emotions should not be developed for a classroom environment. First of all, this software is still technology and can't always be accurate. There is also the problem where this technology would be too advanced and expensive to produce for most computers. Humans can also do a better job of telling emotions of others more than technology could.
The Facial Action Coding system cannot always be accurate. According to the article, humans make a variety of faces to show expressions everyday. The article explains this by saying, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression (like not smiling as broadly)." This shows that human expressions are not always the same and can vary depending on the individual making it hard for technology to detect the exact facial expression. This serves as a big problem when it comes to how the technology could work.
Other people could usually tell how they are feeling more easily than a computer could. The article states that friends can usually tell how they are feeling by looking at their facial expressions. "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." This shows that humans can usually tell how they are all feeling simply by looking at eachothers expressions. Others might argue that some people have a harder time seeing what their friends feel and that this software would help them undrestand better.
A computer has to look at millions of other peoples expressions and try to tell how they are feeling,while people can usually tell what individuals they see everyday are feeling.
The technology and money needed for installing this onto school computers would be way too expensive. The article even states this by saying that home computers would not be abke to handle the algorithms needed for this software. "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." This quote shows that the average PC would not handle what is needed for the software to work. To get the computers needed, you would have to replace all the school computers with newer ones that could handle the capabilities.
What is needed to produce these has far more negatives than positives. For example, you would have to replace all computers with newer more advanced ones to help with the lack of computers that can handle this software. Further more teachers would not have to figure out what students are feeling by themselves making it harder for them when the software breaks down. Also the teachers could more easily tell what their students feel without the software as technology is not always accurate.
| 4 |
552af61
|
In this article, the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit, despite the seemingly impossible conditions of surviving on the planet. He/she supports this claim multiple times in the article, saying that,"Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This proclamation suggests that Venus was once like Earth before becoming so inhospitable, implying that scientists could understand a great deal about Venus's fate if it was studied. This understanding of Venus's transformation into the wasteland it is now would help scientists make predictions about the causes of Venus's destruction, allowing them to warn humanity to not make those same mistakes.
The last paragraph in the article states that, "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 endeavours." What the author is proclaiming here is that overcoming the obstacles associated with analyzing Venus is good practice if we want to achieve similar undertakings with Mars and possibly even planets that are even farther away, like Mercury and Jupiter.
Another point the author makes is that there are multiple ways to safely study Venus without risk. The first would be utilizing a blimp-like vehicle capable of floating 30 feet above the ground for extended periods of time, allowing the crew inside to bypass most of the hazardous ground conditions of Venus and analyze the surface. "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so mile above the roiling Venusian landscape...a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way." Not only that, but NASA has been testing how silicon carbide electronics react to the simulated chaotic conditions of Venus's surface. NASA has proved that the electronics can survive for about 3 weeks under those conditions. With further testing and refinement, it's possible that more complex electronics could survive for up to a few months, allowing more time for further data extraction from Venus's surface. "...some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions."
| 3 |
552b6ba
|
Have you every heard of a seagoing cowboy, if you haven't well today is you your lucky day. I hope you will want to be one someday because you get to travel the world on a boat and water, and get to ship cargo etc., yes you may get sea sick, but in the end I know, and you know you'll start gettig use to it.
A seacowboy is a person who get's to go on cattle-boat trips which is an unbelievable opportunity for small-town boys. You could possible end up seeing Europe, maybe even China one day. It usually takes about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United states, and a month to get to China, but hey it's all up to the water and weather. Being a seacowboy can be very dangerous, because with all the storm that you could get cought in can be REALLY dangerous, and very unsafe, but in the end it is really fun, because you get to see all kinds of different thing like wild life, different countries, etc.
So if you ever want to be a seacowboy i wouldn recomend bringing a wetsuit, lots of water and food, some extra cloths, and a camera to hold all of the memories for when you go to go on a work trip. So get those pen, pencils, paper, etc. because i think your going to go to college for a very special, and amazing job. :)
| 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.