essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
int64 1
6
|
|---|---|---|
58a9eed
|
"How Humans Can Travel to Venus"
Venus, commonly known as Earth's "twin", is the closest planet to have almost the same size and density as Earth. When people first hear this, their minds quickly wonder if humans could ever live on Venus. Any time NASA conducted an experiment for Venus, they have always sent an unmanned spacecraft, and for a good reason. Each time the spacecraft landed or was close to the planet, it would last up to no more than three hours. What does this mean for humans? The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by introducing Venus's features, NASA, and technology.
Astronomers fight the question as to why they keep studing Venus by providing the information they have found. Venus is discovered to be a planet that used to have many Earth-like features. "Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long frames of space travel" ("The Challenge of Exploring Venus"). The author explains that Venus is the nearest option for humans to visit because of how close it is on the orbit. Scientists conclude that Venus might have had large bodies of water and could have supported other life forms, like on Earth. Venus also has features Earth has, like mountains, craters, and valleys. Since Venus already is a planet with very similar structures like Earth, it makes scientists think whether or not to take a little visit to Venus.
According to scientific research, Venus's temperature can go up to 800 degrees Fahrenheit, which is 90 times greater that what humans experience on Earth. Although the temperature on Venus can go up to bizarre numbers, NASA still comes through with an idea on how to send humans to Venus. "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" ("The Challenge of Exploring Venus"). NASA concludes that if humans are to go on Venus, they would have to be in a blimp-like vessel and be about the ground to resist the scorching temperatures. The temperature woul still be at a high degree, almost at about 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but humans could still live and function at that rate. The air pressure would be close to that of Earth's sea level, which is survivable for humans.
NASA's idea of a blimp-like vehicle allows humans to start a journey to Venus. The technology made makes the trip to Venus possible for humans in the near future. Technology in the past has been able to make it close to Venus without humans, but it would always be destroyed in less that three hours. NASA and their scientists work everyday with technology to make it anyway easier to travel to Venus. Despite the dangerous temperature zones, the chances of destruction by the planet's impediments, and the very high pressure, technology can make it easier to adventure to Venus. "For example, 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" ("The Challenge of Exploring Venus"). NASA has been already testing products with their technology to see if it would be compadable with Venus's climate, and the product has been able to adapt to the climate for three weeks. This means that if NASA starts to get the right technology for Venus, travel there wouldn't be as dangerous as they thought.
Venus's features, NASA and technology all support the author's statement as to why Venus is a worthy pursuit despite all the dangers. Since Venus and Earth share similar features, scientists found that Venus also might have had large bodies of water, which may also bring other similarites to Earth. NASA has been studying and making plans about how humans will be able to travel the constant hot temperatures and climate at Venus, and found a way for humans to travel. Technology has made it easier to widthstand Venus's features and made ways for humans to be able to adapt. With all these changes, it makes it easier to let humans hop on board and travel to Venus, despite all dangerous remarks about the planet.
| 5 |
58b20f6
|
Being a Seagoing Cowboy is a very neat thing to do. I think that everyone should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because you get to travel over water. By traveling over water you can see fun things like sea animals and you can also visit cool places.
If you like animals or if you take care of animals then this is the thing for you because you get to take care of animals so that way they can get to where they are going safely. Plus if you have never done it before, it would be a pretty cool experience because you also get to feed the animals on the boat ride and you get to give them something to drink.
This would also be a fun and creative program because you get to do cool thing like watch dolphins and fish and all of the other sea creatures swim. The way that this would be a creative program is because you could make up names for the animals. In the text it says, "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy." So in that sentence, it proves that being a seagoing cowboy was a fun experience.
| 2 |
58b61cc
|
While the idea of using a Facial Action Coding System in the educational process would certainly be interesting, I do not think it is nearly advanced enough to be able to be used in modern schools. While the technology may be able to find the hidden emotions behind the famous portrait Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci, that does not mean it is in a position to help students learn. Simply put, the Facial Action Coding System does not have the viability, efficacy, or privacy needed in order to supplement learning.
Even if we allowed camera's to scan the faces of students in school, we would not be able to decode their emotions in a speed befiting our educational system today. At the seventh passage, the author states that, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile," suggesting that the majority of modern computers do not have the power to actually run the software. The PCs that schools buy are almost never more powerful than the ones bought by consumers for household use, and would thus also not be able to process the data, making the technology rather useless in an educational setting. Even if a school had the funds to buy a computer that could process the data quickly enough to be useful, there are simply too many students for that one computer to process, which would make the entire system useless.
If we were to simply put that first fact aside and instead look at the ability for this technology to assist students in an ideal setting, we still find that students can fake their emotions in order to cheat the system. In the third passage of the artice, the author states, "Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness ... and then associated each with charactersitic movements of the facial muscles," meaning that the software associated voluntary or involuntary movements of the face with emotions. The problem with this system is that students can change the look of their face quite easily, and can thus convince the computer to produce desired results, making the system disfunctional. There are quite a few reasons children, especially young ones, would want to make the software not work, including tricking the computer into moving from the original learning program into a more desired one and them simply wanting to see the program fail through their abilities.
The idea of being able to find out the emotions of all of the chidlren in a school on a whim also rises privacy concerns that would need to be addressed before any program including this software would be implemented. The information gathered from students could be used for selfish purposes, as explained in the sixth passage of the article, "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," showing that companies have use for this technology to better their businesses. If ad companies managed to get this emotional information from students all across the country, either from the government itself or through illegal actions, they could use that information to make new products and ads that would try to exploit the emotions of children. Because of this and the added concern of giving the information to the government itself, many parents would oppose a system that tracks and records the emotions of children.
Because of the lack of availablity, the potential cheating of the software, and the privacy concerns involved, the Facial Action Coding System is not able to be used in its current state to benefit schools. While this technology could be used in the future to help students, for example students with mental disabilities, it is not able to do so as it is now. It will be interesting to see what this and similar technologies grow to be, for better or for worse.
| 6 |
58ba0d2
|
I think driverless cars are not a good idea , beacuse there are so many more wrong things than could happen with this than right. As a teen driving is very important to me. I have been driven around by my parrents up untill this point in life. I cirtainly do not want to be driven around by my car for the rest of it.
If there really was an accident who would be at falt, the drivers for not paying attention? They say "thus far we have made cars that can drive themselfs, but require the drivers attention". well what would be the point of having a car that can drive its self if you're going to have to watch the road the whole time as if you were driving. The point is to have the car drive its self right?
to let us be hands free, but how many of us instead of watching the wheel would be texting or sleeping?
There are so many things that could go wrong like rerouting in the wrong places or times. what if you get lost, or get stuck somewhere? what if the car fails to find your destination ,and you run late to a meeting all these questions, frustrating questions. Most people I know get comfort from knowing we have control over something we are puting out lives into.
What if the car were to break down?
I dont think people just have money just to spend buying new parts for their self driven cars. That seems like it would be more of a luxry expence, at least. there are so many reasons why having self driven cars
would be a problem. That is why I disagree on self driven cars.
| 3 |
58c1aed
|
Do you like to help people in need? Well, if you do, join the Seagoing Cowboys! It is a great opportunity to help people! They don't even have homes, please join today or whenever you have time!
World War ll just finished, someone wins, but someone loses. We are trying to give the people that had everything destroyed food, shelter, and animals, because they no longer have that stuff. All you have to do is just sign up, and sail over seas to help people.
What if you were in this situation? Your home was destroyed, running low on food supplies, and most of your animals are dead. Wouldn't you want help? Join today and you will help thousands of people.
Even if you just like sight seeing, you should join. When you are on the trips, you see many beautiful sights. You are sailing around the world. If you love animals, you should also join. You get to take care of a lot of different types of animals. Sometimes when there is extra time, you can play volleyball and baseball in the empty holds where the animals were. There are a lot of good things about being a Seagoing Cowboy.
If you ask someone that was a Seagoing Cowboy is it fun to be a Seagoing Cowboy, they will say it was one of the best things in their life they had ever done. Luke Bomberger ( a Seagoing Cowboy ), says it was the opportunity of a lifetime. So if you need something to do, join the Seagoing Cowboys!
| 3 |
58c1bd1
|
I think The Facial Action Coding System should be put into classrooms. The Facial Action Coding System is a system that enables computers to identify human emotions. This a real system that actually works it scans your face to see what emotions you have.
In order for this to work the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. I think the use of this in a classroom is going to workout great for the students and the teachers. If you have the Face Action Coding System in the classroom the teachers can scan the faces of there students will the teacher is teaching them a lesson. After it scans the faces of the students the teacher can then see if the students are enjoying the lesson or if they aren't enjoying. This could change the way teachers teach kids by doing stuff creative different days so the kids will enjoy what they are being taught. Instead of being upset about what they are learning.
This is also a good idea for teacher as well to see if there students are having a hard time or if they are upset about something. Some kids don't like to talk about what they are upset about unless someone ask them first. The face scaning decive will be a helpful thing to put in a classroom. plsu while your face is geting scanned you have to make a happy face therefore the experiment will make you slightly happy. I think they should start putting these in the classrooms now.
Having these in the class will make kids want to learn and the teachers will be able teach the kids because the kids will be focused. It will be a great thing to have in a school it's always good to see the emotions of the kids in the classroom. Even for the teachers if the teacher is uspet the students can see his emotions with the face scanner. All in all i think they should start putting them in classrooms. I am for the use of this technology as me being a student i think something like this would be a cool thing to have in my school.
| 3 |
58c42d8
|
Did you know that in that in 2016 a projection was made by Tesla for the release of a car that can drive by itself with no human assistence 90 percent of the time driving? Many car companies are considering this new technology for their own car brand, but is it really in the best interest of the drivers? Driverless cars are a dangerous creation because driverless cars are not soley driven by humans, the technology of the car is not guarunteed to be cooperative at all times, and there is the danger of law suits going against the people who manufacture these automobiles.
Automated driving is projected to be driven by the technology that it is equipped with most of the time. This is an unsafe idea because technology has proven to be faulty with many other inventions. This technology also encourages texting while driving. Not only is this against the law, but it is creating detromental habits for the drivers of the car. The car is in autopilot, but if the car malfuntions the driver may be too distracted by their phone to correct the mistake.
The technology of the car is the same as any other technology. New drivers may learn only how to drive an automated car. This can lead to carelessness and irresponsibility. If the innovative technology were to suddenly stop working, run down, or go into hyperdrive it could leave the car completely abliterated. This new technology is in no way completely trustworthy and will require many tests to prove the sucess. The technology of the car will also more than likely come with an extremely high price which few will be able to afford.
Lastly, the dangers of this car are high. Not only are they high because of the safety gear price , but it may also come with a price for the manufactureer. There is the chance of large lawsuits and sueing against the companies creating these cars. If a human was to gets injured in an accident created by the car, or if the car was bought with faulty technology, these companies could be facing extremely large law suits with multidigit numbers in cash.
Overall, driverless cars are an unsafe idea. This car could leave a lot of damage to many. Driverless cars a bad idea because they are not soley controlled by humans, the technology of the car is not guarunteed to be cooperative at all times, and there is a danger of lawsuits going against the people who manufacture these automobiles.
| 4 |
58ca596
|
Driverless cars could truly change the world. They are some very small problems that could easily be fixed with a small amount of time and effort. The benefits of driverless cars include, public transportaion for everyone, half of the fuel consumed, and more flexibility than a bus. That is why driverless cars are the best option to keep progressing out technology today.
Energy consuption is a big problem in our time's right? In the text it says the cars Google founder Sergey Brin foresee's, use half of the fuel that today's taxis use. They would also have more felxibilty than a bus. Not only will this save energy and money, it will help everyday citezens with transportation.
Nevertheless, there are some few problems to this innovation. In the text it talks about waiting for the law to change traffic laws. What if the technolgy fails and someone is injured? Will the driver or the manufator be sued? Well this problem has many solutions and ther is no need to hesitate to find one. The solution could range from some special driverless car insurance, to the manufactor to pay all the cost since it techincally is his fault.
In conclusion, driverlees cars are definetly the future, why are we hesitating? Is it because they are some small legal problems that can not be fixed? We have solved much more complex problems ranging from solving a Rubik's cube to big political ones. This is our future and we should pursue it.
| 3 |
58ce1cc
|
Luke joined the Seagoing Cowboys program to help countries that were that were left to ruin. People should join the program to help countries like give them animals plants and food to eat or sleep. Joining this program will help many countries that are left in ruins or getting destroyed by helping them get some food.
I you join the program you will go places that you've never been to like go to Greece like how Luke went to Greece and had exciment going over there. Many people think this program is useless beacuse they think it a waste of thier time,but it's not sense you're helping others in need. The program is a way to help the people in need while going Barack to get animals you can have fun like read,playing volley ball,tennis and many other activities. Luke joined to help others and he didn't quit and kept on helping even when he turned 18. This program is a good program sense you're helping others in many other countries that were left to ruin maybe you should join today.
To conclude joining this program is good sense you help others. You could be like Luke and help others in this program and go many places. Join today to be like him and help otherss in need.
| 2 |
58ce9cc
|
I beleive that driverless cars would be bad idea. In the article "Driverless Cars are Coming", the article would talk about "sensing the world", "driving or assisting" and "waiting on the law". The driverles cars would still need the driver, they would have to fix roads, and make new laws. The dreiverless cars are pointless, there is no need for them.
The driverless cars would be bad because they would still need the driver to take over the car."They can steer, accerlate, and brake themselves,but are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills"(paragraph 7),
The car can't make turns itslef. The still has to take contol when asituation arrives, so its pointless to even have a driverless car."The human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires".(Paragraph 7)
The driverless cars would be a bad idea becaue the roads would all have to be fixed. In order to create the cars you have to have the infrastrucure redone which would cause a lot of money. Money that we don't have the resources to do. "These smart-raods sytems worked surprisinly well, but they required masssive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical."(paragraph 3)
The driverless cars are bad beacuse lawmakers would have to change laws consorning who would get the blame for an accident, the individual or the manuftor. "New laws will be needed in order to cover liabilitt in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer?"(Paragraph 9) The cars would to mauch of hassle to evr have. That could lead to, too many law suits and fines.
Driverless cars are bad. They would ruin the infrasture of the roads. They would be lawsuits conserning who would get the balme for accidents. It would n't be a true driverless car, it would just be a smart car, that needsd the driver wfor the most serious of isssues. The article,"Driverless Cars Are Coming", was basically saying that it is pointless to have driverless cars it is just a hassle, and annoyance to have them. We don't need them. They would cause to much money, and time for their use.
| 3 |
58d338b
|
Ah Venus, the planet who happens to be the second closest to the sun, is the hottest planet we know right now. Dispite Mercury be the closest to the sun, Venus proves to be the most troubling planet to learn about. No spacecraft survived more than a few hours on the land over there. Ever since then, Venus is left alone, but.. What if there was a chance Venus was like Earth at one point? It is often called Earth's "twin" after all. I shall state my opinion on this matter on this very essay.
Is Venus a worthy pursuit despite all of their dangers? Is it truly worth it? Yes and no,
this is rather difficult to explain. In one case we will gain more knowledge of it, but is there more to say about it? We, humans, are very curious in nature. Wether you like it or not, Venus will be explored in the future. The worth will be difficult to determine as of right now, but perhaps we will know later on. Then again, knowledge is knowledge.
So where is my proof you may ask? Well, NASA is a big one for sure. They are trying to get photos, samples of rock, gas, and literally anything else, but it is rather difficult from a distance. Doesn't help that Venus's atmosphere is not all that friendly either, photos and videos can't do much with that. But that does not stop NASA to make technology to survive those difficult conditions. They were even thought of in the 1800s!
Basically, I do believe we will explore Venus someday. It may be a challenge, but it did not stop us from going to the moon back then, right? WE will get past more intimidating endeavors in the future.
| 3 |
58d709b
|
The scienties are trying to put humans on the planted venus they say its human temp there so we can live there. They say there are dangers stuff in venus they still have to see ow would they grow food and kill animals and take it down there. I think this is a good idea becuase it would make the earth a lot smaller in population and not so packed acrroding to the artical venus is big. Sometimes where closer to mucrey then venus and sometimes were closer to venus, venus is one of our plantes and someday some people will live on them its cool how we never thought these planets would be used and now people are so smart. That they make rockets to see how it looks and deel like on other planet of cours it nothing on there yet one dsay weveryone should be able to go there and live and see how it is but a lot of people will get sick because of water issues not the same water u been drinking waether is gooan not be the same.
| 1 |
58d9bb2
|
What is that thing on Mars?
Well, some people believe that it was something made by aliens. I am here to prove that it was not.
The thing on Mars first was photographed in 1976. It is a huge rock formation that resembles a human face. There are shadows that give it the illusion that it has eyes, a nose, and a mouth. Some believe that it is real evidence that there is life on Mars, well it is not. On April 5, 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor flew over the "Face." The new cameras snapped a photograph that was ten times sharper than the original one. The new image revealed that it was a natural landform. Some skeptics said that maybe the alien markings were hidden by the clouds, but in 2001 a newer image was taken. This image was captured on a cloudless day, so there was nothing obstructing the view. This image also shows that the presumed face was a landform, and not the ancient work of aliens.
So, in conclusion, the famous face on Mars was a natural landform. This is supported by the pictures taken in 1998 and 2001. The image captured in 2001 could also possibly see other objects if there were any. So, the face not a sign of life on Mars.
| 3 |
58daaa3
|
A huge precentage of Americans want the Electoral College abolished. Their views are justified when the Electoral College fails to reflect the population's opinion. Does it make sense to base our Democracy on this down-trodden way of electing the president? The Electoral College should be abolished for not reflecting the public view,having the chance of making an elector with no intrests for those who elected him,and giving equal power to a state with a lower population to the same as a high one. Although the college gaurantees a victor the other reasons outweight it in comparison.
First of all,the Electoral College should be abolished for failing to represent the population majority. When an American goes to vote it's "not for the president,but for a slate of electors,who in turn elect the president."(10) Upon seeing the results with the popular vote cast aside by the elector and voting something else entirely how could an average American feel anything else then betrayed? It's due to this that many Americans don't even consider going to vote feeling as if it is a waste of time due to the elector deciding for them. Going to vote for our president should be what represents America seeing as Americans always talk and brag about the amount of freedom we have. Instead it's more of "who's the elector going to vote for this election"?
In addition, the electors chosen are not even required to vote for who their state has approved of. Giving this power to the elector could possibly make them corrupt and go against the population. An example would be Republicans sending a Republican elector but the elector instead votes for the oppsosite party. It doesn't happen very often but making it even a possibility is a huge risk to the population of that state and could easily incite unrest among the population. It's very possible and the electors"could always defy the will of the people."(11) Letting someone have that kind of power goes against the very principals of our democracy and should be erraticated.
Finally,the college is not equal when it somes to states and population. When a tie would happen the representatives from smaller states become equal to the bigger states such as Texas. Basically with this equal voting power "the House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people."(12) This could go as far as the minority getting the president they want and most of the country's people being dissatisfied,this could lead to a catastrophe not seen by America throughout its existence. It also seems irrational that a state with fifteen times less of a population would still have the same power as the bigger state.
To conclude,the Electoral College fails in many places where an attempt at Democracy is made. It doesn't even represent Democracy when the voting that matters is made from a select group of individuals instead of the population itself. These individuals are not even required to oblige to the majority of the state making voting at the poll seem useless. Where the college does give equal power it is misplaced by giving minorities a chance of overruling the majority. No doubt this "Electoral College" should be abolished.
| 5 |
58e1214
|
Driverless cars are going to be a hassle. People would have to first, learn how to use all the different buttons, and learn how it all worked. Then, if there were to be a wreck, whose fault is it? The driver's or the driverless car? I have a feeling that the so called "driver" would get blamed, unless they actually have it proven right that it was the "driver". It would take longer for people to get places, because it can only handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph. I feel as if these cars will be a distraction to society, and more wrecks may be caused. People are not going to be alert with driverless cars because they are going to think that because it has all of these warning signs and sensors, that they won't neccessarily have to pay an attention. So, therefore I do not think that driverless cars are a good idea.
| 2 |
58e47e2
|
I am against the value of using this technology to read students emotional expressions. The technology is something that for a couple of years before has evolve, and it is very advance right now; but it's not 100% dependable because is not perfect. Like the article said, "people can imitate another person's expression. I don't think that a computer is going to read someone who don't show his feelings. In my opinion it is not dependable and it is unusable.
I'll want to test one of that computers to know if that really works, but like I said, it is not dependeble. The technology is advance but it is hard to believe that a computer can read all your emotions exactly like they are. Dr. Huang said that computers need to understand that most of the human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. I don't think a computer is going to understand somthing like that.
I'm against because the technology is not 100% dependeble; technology is very useful but not very fiable. Some people can just do fake emotions and the computer is going to read it like normal I think. In my opinion it is not a good idea to use it with students, they just can express theirselfs by talking and telling what they like or what they not.
| 3 |
58e7768
|
Do you want to elect the president? The electoral college doesn't allow that unless you're an elector. Voting for president should be done with a popular vote rather than an electoral college. An elecotoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational.
An electoral college is unfair. In source two, it says, "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know have no chance of winning..." This shows that candidates don't treat everyone the same. They spend more time in states that have a chance of winning. Some states never even get to see who the candidates are.
Not only are electoral colleges unfair, they're also outdated. The electoral college has been being used since 1960. In source two, it says, " It happened in Hawaii in 1960." This proves that the electoral college has been around for many years, and it's time for something new. Things change along with time, a new system would improve voting.
The electoral college is irrational. In an electoral college, you don't vote for the president, you vote for a slate of electors that then vote for the president. In source two, it says, "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." This proves that the system doesn't make sense and citizens should be able to directly vote for the president of their country.
To conclude, the electoral college system should be abolished. It is unfair, outdated, and irrational. Abolishing the electoral college would improve voting and make citizens want to vote.
| 4 |
58ec073
|
There is no prof that and alien could have done that. If they think that they need to have prof that they are right. I might not have evidence that an alien could or couldn't have done that. But I know that if an alien did that there would have been life on Mars and we could or would have known by now. Here is my evidence to what I think about this situation.
Like i said if an alien did this we would have know by now. In various researches they have said and wrote that this is a natural cause. I actually do have prof and evidence about my opinion. On April 5,1998 they took a picture, it was ten times sharper than other pictures they took in the past. Although I get it that lots of people want it to be true that an alien did that, but with what prof?
I also see why you all think this. Many of you think that there are alien markings hidden by haze. But I think this is wrong, because they again took another picture and again it showed nothing of alien like. All that was in the picture was a big landform that is also common in the United States. Like i've said this is just natural occuring stuff.
This happens on earth because of lava when it gets cooled. The same thing happend on Mars. There is absoultly nothing to lie about or freak out about. Even if they wanted to have an alien to have done that they know that there would have been signs of life on Mars, and because there wasn't many people that think that there were actually aliens they didn't have a choice but to agree with us. So this is my opinion on what I think of the Face on Mars.
| 3 |
58edf73
|
Online school lessons are not always the most exciting, nor uplifting. Students groan and moan about how boring or useless they are to their general knowledge. There could be a way to fix the boredom and overall spirit of learning. Nick D'Alto has written an article stating the positives of using new technology to find the emotions a face can hide. The usage of technology to read students' emotional expressions is a positive and efficient way to help them because it can prevent inefficiency, make students happier, and has the ability to cater to the emotions of the students.
D'Alto gives examples that reducing boredom can create a more efficent classroom. Dr. Huang of his article suggests that lessons could be motified in the benefit of students. He states, "'A classroom computor could recognize when a student is becoming confused of bored...'" Dr. Huang later states that, "'Then it could modify the lesson, like and effective human instructor.'" New technology can create a better lesson plan that in individualized for each student, making classrooms more efficient.
Classroom learning is not always happy or fun. Students are often prone to sleeping, procrastinating, and obstaining from the work because it is not interesting enough. The new technology D'Alto studied could make happier to learn or quicker to finish assignments. The text states that the emotion scanning technology could, ..."know when you're happy or sad."..."Then it could modify"..."like an effective human". These new lessons created by the technology could make more interesting or fun topics for students. Dr. Huang states, "'The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video cames or video sugery.'" This shows that the rise of new technology could potentially create a happier more efficient classroom.
Everyone knows students are a melting pot of knowledge. Each student has
strengths and weaknesses in learning. The processes of each teacher may not be able to efficiently cater to each students' needs. Nick D'Alto's article states, "'Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication.'"..."'So computers need to understand that, too.'" This note, by Dr. Huang in in response to his opinion on the modification of lessons for students. The new technology is stated to easily cater to the needs of each student by changing lessons and learning processes.
New technology is everywhere. Students and teachers may be able to utilize a new kind of technology that can increase the quality of lessons and learning. Nick D'Alto covers the topic of emotion reading technology that may become a great way to learn. New emotion scannning technology used to read students' emotional expressions is a positive and efficient way to help them because it can prevent inefficiency, make students happier, and has the ability to cater to the emotions of the students.
| 4 |
58ef980
|
You are smile, but you only 80 percent happy, 15 percent board and 5 percent angry. Do you now how can i calculate you emotions? I use the some new computer software that can recognize emotions. that sounds really cool. and i think that technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a claaroom is valuable.
If a classroom computer could recognize students emotional. That will be really helpful for the class and for the student and teacher. Becasue if when student use the computer play video games or watch the video, the computer recongnize they are doing that, so that computer will tell the teacher, and the teacher will coming to stop what are you doing now, and then you will listen the class careful.
And if you during the class you becoming bored, the computer recongize that and will tell teacher that and if a lot of student being bored, the teacher will try to know why lot of student in his class is bored and the teacher will change that, make the class more fun for the student, that is a really good things for the student. When you during the class you fell something not understand,the computer will recognize that and tell the teacher, the teacher will coming to help you let you understand that, that software is reallt helpful during the class.
That is a really good software for the class room that is very useful. so that technology to read the emotioal expressions of students in a classroom is valuable.
| 3 |
58f18bb
|
I think that we should have this Facial Action Coding System. It can make teaching much easier for a teacher and learning much easier on students. The FACS can change just about everything we know about human emotions. This could be a new way to help people in classrooms and people with depression.
Since this FACS was made we are able to better understand how people are feeling. Wethier its in the classroom helping the teacher better engage his or her students into there lesson, or its helping someone who dosent want to show emoting get help with something thats bothering them.Since the face can show so much more emotion than we can normally see we are able to see deeper down at what they are actually feeling. As in paragraph 6 it quotes "A Classroom coumputer could recognzer when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr. Huang predicts. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instrutor." Knowing that many people dont want to be in a classroom there whole day this system will be able to change there action of study to where its more enjoyable for the student to sit there and actually learn about the material.
As it goes to show the FACS would be a great thing to have because it would greatly help out in so many different ways. With this new technology we will be able to better our school learning systems. We will be able to better our world with better learning systems.
| 3 |
58f1cae
|
i think the use of the technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is vauable.
i think its vauable because it would be a good idea if a computer can see what im feeling because if i feel confused it could help me understand what i dont get. Once it sees that im starting to get it, its going to keep on doing what its doing so it can help me out. It could see that im happy if i see something that i really like and show me more things about it. It would see if i dont like something its going to make sure for me not to see the things i was seeing. It is going to see every emotion i have towords something.
it would be easier for a teacher too because some of the students wont get what the teacher is saying so once they get on the computer the computer is gonna be able to see if he or she gets whats the teacher talking about and if they dont the computer will ba able to pull something out the internet so it couldhelp the students.
I think its a idea to have technology rad our emotional expressions because it will help us understand things and make things easier
| 3 |
58f273c
|
Luke Bomberger was a man who worked for a seagoing company thats a person who goes over seas during World War ll to help people and there towns , and citys.
He was in a program called Seagoing Cowboys. In the story are reasons to join the program here are some. You can travel the world and go to places that you have never been. You will travel in the oceans like the Alantic and Pacific. While you do this job if you like animals this would be a good job for you because Luke had to check on the animals every hour so u could sign up for that part .Luke's claim was that being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an job. I know this because the passage says that Seagoing was much more than an adventure " it opened up the world to him".
In all Luke Bomberger was a man who thought that that Seagoing was a lifetime opportunity and loved it.
| 2 |
58f3ec0
|
Imange going to Venus on winter time because you are tire of the cold and the snow too much, scientest recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. Venus is the closest planet to Earth, well sometimes because Venus orbit the sun at different speeds. These differences in speed mean that we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus.
First, Scientists recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. After hearing this any one would be interesing on going to Venus? Well Venus a very dangers planet, On the planet's surface, temperatues average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans.
Next, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particulalrly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution is allow scientists to float above the surface of Venus. The Temperature would still be a little bit hot at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, and the air pressure would be at or close of sea level. Vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans.
Last, In Paragraph 3 it says "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth. Why are scientisit talking about going to Venus for a visit if Venus is inhospitable? One of the reasons si the Venus has a lot of similar things as the Earth. Venus has erupting volcanes, pwerful earthquakes, and frenquent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
In conclusion, the author suggest that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents beacuse image one day the Earth gets a temperature of 800 degrees, most of the people would not have any idea how to survive. Good thing NASA has the idea of having vehicle float.
| 3 |
58f5eb3
|
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states how many car companies are considering switching to driverless cars. There are many postive and negative aspects to driverless cars. I personally think that driverless cars is an awful idea.
One example of why I think that we should not have driverless cars is people will stop paying attention to what is going on around them. These days there are millions of wrecks happening because people are too busy on their phones or messing with the radio. They completly ignore that they could risk hurting themselves and hurting the passengers that is riding along. There is already a problem with teen texting. With these driverless cars the teenagers will think it will be an easier way to text while in the drivers seat and not get pulled over or cause a wreck.
In the article it states that there will be an alert to let someone know when to take over. But, there is always going to be the chance that the way of the alert could break or not notify the person in time to take over. This could cause danger to people inside and outside of the vechicle. I also think that if people were to think they were going to be alerted, they would be able to drive home after drinking. This could cause a huge amount of danger to everyone around them.
Since the car is a driverless car and it is going to be very rare the vechicles will be very expensive. I personally think that it could be two times the cost of a regular car. Also if a piece in the vechicle was to break it would be very costly to fix. These pieces would be made to go into a driverless car and without them everyone could be put at risk. Since they are so rare it would cost a lot of money and time to find excatly what you need.
Many people may agree that driverless cars will be more efficient to helping people out who have kids or even the elderly. But I personally think that they are wrong. Driverless cars will not help improve the life we have today. They will make people think that it is okay to not pay attention to what is going on outside of the car and cause more wrecks. The cost to purchase or fix a driverless car would be highly expensive. I highly reccomend not purchasing a driverless car.
| 4 |
5904738
|
Limiting car usage would be great for people in a big city, not so much the country. It would be good for people in the city because everything is right beside each other and if it wasn't you can have taxis so it saves gas. Its also good to cut down on car usage because it will make us healthier. If we don't drive all the time its better for the environment.
The first reason for cutting back on car usage is because everything is right beside each other in a city. There is no reason to waste the gas to drive right down the road. In the country its different because it may be a small town yes, but everything may be 15 to 20 miles away. And we don't have taxi's or buses.
Have you ever thought about walking everyday to school or work? Everybody would be in great shape! We would walk everywhere and if you're running late then you will most likely fast walk which is even better. People would start eating better because they would get cramps walking to work, they would start exercising more. Even if they didn't like walking to school or work they would have to so they wouldn't have a choice but to exercise.
We harm the environment everyday with the cars we drive. Why not just stop using cars so we can help our planet and maybe make it a better place to live? All it would take is you walking a couple blocks to school, work, or the store and that would already be helping us.
The thing is people today are so selfish and take everything for garnet. The things we could accomplish if we only cut back a little bit. Just save gas, if you are going to the store that is two blocks away, don't call a taxi, don't crank your car up, just walk there. People would be so much healthier if they walked everyday, and we would help the environment. I'm not telling you to start being a tree huger or anything, just think about it. Would you rather live in a polluted environment or a healthy one? The choice is yours.
| 2 |
590d353
|
Have you ever seen an alien? No? Exactly because aliens are not real. After NASA shared with the world their images of the "Face on Mars," conspiracy theorists were excited that it was an alien monument. And why do you think they were? Because they had never seen anything from an alien civilization before. The text states that "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." said Jim Garvin, chief scientist of NASA's Mars Exploration Program. "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!" This proves that the face was not an early martian civilization.
The images also show a resemblance of a butte or mesa, which are landforms found on Earth, and Earth does not have aliens here. If they are natural landforms found on Earth, then why are there ones just like them on Mars? Earth and Mars are very similar planets, so they most likely form on both. All of these things prove that the Face on Mars is not an alien monument from an early martian civilization, just a landform that can also be found it's sister planet, Earth.
| 2 |
590ddca
|
Having no car may seem really bad but in all reality it might not be bad at all. People become happier without having to do with the stress of driving cars, and it makes cities denser.
People driving cars have alot of stress to deal with when they're in a vehical. They have to pay attention to they're surroundings and also to themselves. Some people have a lack of attention, and that also makes things harder on them. Walking places would make a person happier not only because they don't have to deal with all the traffic and the stressfulness of dealing with other drivers, but it gets them in great shape. Cars seem to rule the world. They mess with the density and the pollution has gotten out of control. Cars take down so much gas, and it isn't good for the enviorment. Americans are buying fewer cars, and driving less each year.
If we lower the usage of cars the Earth will be healthier, and the people would be happier. And everyone wants a happy, healthy life.
| 2 |
59101f7
|
Driverless cars should not be made, because so many things could go wrong with the vehicle and then who would get the blame for the problem the company or the person in the car? Honestly its such a big deal nowadays to have automatic, robotic stuff but really their is no reason for America too have all these robotic things doing stuff for us. I mean yes they are all really cool and such but they also can be very dangerous and can malfunction very frequently and eventually someone is gonna get seriously injured. But this is a bigger deal because we are talking about driverless cars. I mean how can you possibly make a driverless car safe? Because their are so many stupid people out driving wreckessly and if someone gets injured while someone is in the driverless car then who's fault would it be, the company's? The person in the car? That is the big question because i doubt the company is gonna want to take responsibility for what happened if their was a wreck. All these companies are building all these new robotic things and it isn't safe at all. Their is a kid that had a drone and the drone malfunctioned and it shot up in the air and almost hit a helicopter but luckily the pilot turned away in time now that incident could have costed a life and now you want too make driverless cars. Their are more people who drive and you think that would be safe?
Well with all this stuff going on in the world why would we need driverless cars that should be the last thing we worry about i mean we are spending millions of dollars on these new things but we still have world hunger and we have homeless people in the world still but we choose to make a car that is driverless just because we are too lazy too drive ourselves. Plus why dont we use the money that we have too pay off debt or get homes for the homeless and food so we dont have people starving. Their are so many things we could be doing with this money but we choose too use them for stupid things like cars, drones, robots, etc. Their are wars that are going on why cant we use some of the money too help end the wars so people can see their husbands and wives, and sons, and daughters. But apparently all that matters right now is cool toys right? See we make these things that are cool for now but eventually we will all forget about them and begin building something else. But the thing we really need too be fixing is getting people jobs, and food, polution problems all that kind of stuff. So we can make the world a better place instead of just letting forgetting about all those things why dont we push towards fixing them. Plus the article even says that the cars arent completely driverless so whats the point of calling it driverless and wasting all that money on something that really isnt completely driverless. So now you are going too put more money into it and keep puting more and more and more until finally you figure out how too make the vehicle completely driverless, but until then you have too keep putting all this money into it when you could use that too make more jobs and get food for people who are needy and give them shelter and warmth. But no I think driverless cars should not be made unless its for a specific reason that will help the world but otherwise I dont think they should be made for just anyone cause that is extremely dangerous and could cause even more accidents. And it could cause deaths and destruction.
| 3 |
5912bde
|
Join The Seagoing Cowboys! by Xander
Huge waves crashing and hundreds of scared cattle. This is my job as a seagoing cowboy. I want you to join the Seagoing Cowboys because you get to visit exotic locations, you can have fun with other Seagoing Cowboys, and you get to help people and animals.
First, you get to visit exotic locations and see places that you probaly wouldn't see any other time. You can see places like Greece or China. You can see historical places like the Acropolis. These places can be dangerous though because of the war going on so you can possibly injured or worse, killed.
Second, you can have fun with other Seagoing Cowboys or by yourself. You can play sports like volleyball or baseball and many other sports. You can also do fun things by yourself like whittling. The trips to get the animals can be very long and boring and you won't get that much free time only on return trips do you get free time.
And third, you get to help many people and animals. You help hundreds of people get their cattle back. You help save hundreds of cattle from getting killed. You have to clean the animal's stalls and be in very dangerous storms.
You should join the Seagoing Cowboys because You get to tour many exotic locations, You can have fun with other Seagoing Cowboys, and you get to help many people and their cattle. You can help hundreds of people get their cattle back. So join the Seagoing Cowboys today!
| 3 |
5913470
|
You should join the UNRRA for these good reasons, you can see amazing sights while on the seas, when the ship ride is over you not only can help people in need but you get to explore the ruins of Greece and China. Other reasons you should join the UNRRA are, you can join at the early age of 18, and you could be military drafted. In addition to all these reaons not only is being a sea cowboy a opprotunity of a life time it feels special to help people in need!
Joining the UNRRA only has a few simple steps you can start at the age of 18 and sometimes you will need to travel over the seas more then once. The trip to China and back will take a month and sometimes you might get sea sick. You also need to feed the animals aboard three times a day and they need to get water too. At times travling among to ship can be dangerous in result of storms and difficulties but not to worry just remeber what your here for.
But after you work has come to an end its safe to say that you helped people after world war 2. Also its a good feeling to do so and have a great adventure as well. in addition to that you get to meet new people along the ride and tell them about your adventures along the sea as well.
| 2 |
5919090
|
How would you feel if I knew your emotions all the time? Would you like it? Would you hate it? Yes, I think we should use the facial coding system to students actions to prvent something bad from happening, such as depression.
One way that this facial coding machine can also help is by detecting whether someone is happy, sad or angry. Some textual evidence that supports this is "She's 83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry." These are just a couple things this facial coding device can detect.
A couple other things that this facial coding can detect is whether you are lying and fake smiling. Some text evidence that proves this facial coding machine can do that is "But in a false smile, the mouth isTo an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling politician or celebrity isn't being truthful."
In conclusion, I think all these ideas of this facial recognition device is a good idea because it may help us atch earlier signs of bullying or people fighting. I think this is a great idea.
| 2 |
591a352
|
Dear Senator,
We should change to the election of popular vote. I believe we should do this because, it'd be more fair to the person who got the most votes. If one canidate gets the most votes, but doesn't become president, is extremely confusing, and down right unfair. If you're having the whole United States vote for who we want to be president, but have the electors choose who's president is pointless, it just shows that you don't care what our opinion is for our leader. If the voters have to waste their time to vote for someone who probably be elected is, like I said before, pointless.
Let's say you were running for president, and you got the most votes, but the electors, their almighty wisdom, voted for someone who got the least amount of votes, would you think it's fair for that person to become president? I don't think so. I think you would be able to be president because the people who voted for you would rather have you as president than the others who ran against you. You would've been the best choice to those who voted for you.
Therefore I think we should change to the most popular votes for electing the president. I appreciate you taking the time to read this letter. have a wonderful day.
| 2 |
591c12a
|
I am Cristal, and well the idea of smart cars is pretty awesome, I am aware of the "Driverless cars," malfunctions and the defects it has. I believe that it is a great idea and should be inforced. The car has many great features that can help us be safe and have lower fuel prices. We could make the future better and safer. Even though the price of the car,and the road work that needs to be adjusted will be expensive but will be totally worth it.
First of all, i agree with the making of the car. It is a great invention for the future. It has good perks of course such as, not driving, being quite safe, being able to text without driving,and it also would reduce the fuel of a normal taxi cab to about one half. The smart cars have" driven more than half million miles without a crash," this is saying that the cars have driven far without causing any accidents. Secondly the cars have" position-estimating senors, GPS receivers, radar sensors, motion sensors, 3-D model of the cars surroundings." All of these things that the car has are more than enough to be great on roads.
The good thing is that the smart car would be able to take you anywhere you desire. I think it would be a great idea if your a begining learner and dont have that much expiernce and or if you are under the influence of alcohol. It is a good car for thoes who like to text while they drive you will finally be able to text without killing yourself or getting pulled over by the police. You will be able to return home or to your destination safely. It uses less fuel which is great we wont use all of it and have to raise prices on fuel if we use less. The car will be pricey and all of the new work that would have to be done to the roads all over the world or country. But dont you think that your life would be more safe if your not in conditions to drive then isnt car is the best idea?
In conclustion, i cristal believe that it would be a great invention for the future. You will be safe getting to your destination. Its great for the economy of the people, and its safer than one driving. It will be expensive but in the end it will all be worth the price it took to make the car and to do all hard work on the roads to make the world a better place. Our life is in great hands will the smart cars that will soon do a great job taking us places.
| 3 |
591c21a
|
Today, technology in classrooms is huge. Almost all classrooms use technology nearly everyday. However, not everyone of them is effective because they are easier to slack off on without having a human to tell them to continue on even after they are bored, tired and even confused. Dr. Thomas Huang decided to create a system to help with this problem. He made a system called FACS or Facial Action Coding System. This system on a computer, reads emotions that on displayed on peoples face.
There are 44 major muscles in the human face. Each one of these muscles helps researchers find new ways to read emotions. Dr. Thomas Huang is one of these researchers. Dr. Huang says, "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal,". He means by this that because there are so many different muscles in your face, and them all being able to show different emotions, there is an endless amount of expressions to be made. For example, you can probabaly read your friends face and see what kind of day they are having by reading the emotion on their face. Unlike the smart Facial Action Coding System, we are not able to completely describe each facial trait showed by our friend, although we can still tell their state of emotion. For example when using FACS, researchers were able to tell that Leonardo da Vinci's Renaissance painting, Mona Lisa was 83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful and 2% angry.
It is thought that the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) could help students better in the classrom. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr Haung predicted. He also stated that if the FACS could recognize taht on students faces, it could also modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor would. Dr. Huang also states "Most human communication is nonverball, including emotional communication,". Even though this system could prove to be effective, not all students are only learning on computers and are learning verbally from a teacher. A teacher is unable to identify the exact percent of each emotion you feel but can still read your emotions just as your friend would.
Nick D'Alto, the author of Making Mona Lisa Smile, gives us an example of demonstration we could try. "While looking in the mirror: 1. Raise your lips at the corners of your mouth. 2. Then squint your eyes slightly, to produce wrinkling ('crow's-feet") at the corners of your eyes. 3. Holding that, raise the outer parts of your cheeks up, toward your eyes.". By having a partner guess which emotion your are portraying, he is doing as the FACS would. Your partner probabaly would have guessed happy. The computers would have been able to tell that you are feeling happy, and continue on with your work. However, if you were to have been looking confused, the computer would stop, and try to help explain the problem to you.
The computers could very easily help in the classrooms to make students work to the best of their ability. By being able to read emotions, the computers will make it harder for students to slack off while previoulsy it would have been moderatly easy. Humans perform these face "calculations" everyday without realizing it. Now the FACS system can join along with us and then some by creating a better work environemnt for the students.
| 3 |
5920041
|
I think the technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. The Facial Action Coding System (FACS) can prove how a person is feeling due to having a 3-D computer model, an electronic code, and a facial software.
First, the FACS has a 3-D computer model to help it figure out a persons emotion. In the text it says, "all 44 major muscles in the model must move like a humans muscles." This evidence shows that a humans facial muscles shows how a person is feeling and each emotion has their own charateristics.
Second, the FACS also has an electronic code which helps the system understand better the emotion just kanda how us as humans can tell if our friend is upset or happy. For example in the text it says, "His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code." This evidence shows that the software has the same kind of thing that lets us humans know how our friend is feeling.
Lastly, the facial software helps FACS by using human features on the face understand the emotions. In the article it says, "muscles called orbicularis oculi palpabraeus makes crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius." This evidence shows that even a computer software can tell what you're feeling by your face features.
I think the FACS should be used to read the emotion expressions of students in a classroom. Having a 3-D computer model, an electonic code, and a facial software sure can all help Facial Action Coding System recongize a humans emotion.
| 2 |
5921b89
|
Presidents, they are the most powerful people in the United States of America. They are the people who make the tough calls for the masses to make sure the benifits of the majority are met because the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few. Some people think that the way our presidents are elected today are not very practicle methods but some people do. Presidents are elected using two processes, those processes are popular vote and Electoral College. The Electoral College is not very practical in my book because they don't spend time in the places that they know they are going to win or not going to and Electoral College is not by majority.
Presidents are like superstars of the political world but they don't spend any time in the places they are know they will win or lose. Source 2 states "Candidates dont spend the time in states they know they have no chance of winning." The candidates for the presidential election don"t even try to sway some of the states that either they know aren't going to vote for them or the opponent has already been there and gave them his idea on cetain matters. Voters are usally more thoughtful when they dont know who to vote for so the listen to both sides, but there is also the problem of majority in some places and not others.
Majority also plays an impact on the vote of the presidency. Look at how many Electoral College votes California has, they have a total of 55 votes thats more than Wyoming by a land slide because Wyoming only has 3 votes total. If one side got Florida, Califronia, Texas and Massachusetts then the opposing side would have to get all of the other states just to catch up. The distrabution of the votes is a problem because some states are humongus but they dont have a large population. Some states are really shrimpy but have a abundance of people. These are just two reasons why the Electoral College process should be tossed out of the election decisions in general.
Some people say the Electoral College process is just fine because this process aviods run off elections. Source 3 states "Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate recevies the majority of the votes cast." They say this because of what happened in the Nixon and Clinton race in 1992. Neither one of them got the majority the both got 43 precent of the votes cast. This doesn't help the real problems at hand like the time management and majority issues in the states that have large amounts of people and little land and vis versa. The amount of votes each state gets is based on its population and its not fair to the staets that have less people just because of there location to suffer while the smaller more populos states don't.
In future election the Electoral College should be taken out of the process in which the president is elected because of the miss use of time and the distribution of population. The popular vote process would eliminate both problems if it was the only process. It would eliminate the time spent in states by making them go to every single one or close to that. They would do this to make sure they got as many votes as possible. It would also eliminate the population aspect because every state would get to make a diffrence in the election of the president instead of having 3 votes and most of the other states having twice that or more. This election process is to complicated you should dumb it down or simplify it to increase the impact of each state and the simplfication for the soon to be president. We don't want him to change his mind about doing this important job for us as a country.
| 4 |
59222be
|
The question is Electoral or Election. Well i choose election because the election is a better way of letting the oters express their ideas. In such ways as they could compare and contrast. They could also pick wich one they think is the most proficiant. Unlike the electorals they choose the people that will decide the president so there for they could and may lie to the judges and tell them a certain thing but then do a different thing that is also a well asked questions.
Electoral could have a positive outcome sometimes as such it can have a negative outcome. Election can also have positive and negative points. But i think that election could have a better chance of succeding because of the voters. Stated in paragraph 11 says ( The single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor.) well there we have it people are already questioning that choice. Some proses that ties that vote could and may not be acurate.
Election also has some bad features like some might say its the most basic level but it also is unfair in some ways. That statement or opinion is based on each individuals point of view. We dont all look at the choices in the same way. That is very important to try to undestand each choice and look at them closely. To be honest i think both have good ideas but election has a better outcome from my point of view.
Electoral or Election. I say Election both are extremely simialar but also very different. Deciding a president is very important in any situation. The Outcome of choosing then turning out that it was a miss understanding is very ploral. We have to put the outcomes of both out there and examine each and every one closely.
| 1 |
59244d5
|
I believe that the election for our president of the United States should be chosen by popular vote and not by some random people we don't know. If I wanted to have someone to be in charge of what goes on where I live I would want to have a say on who should be in charge. I think that if a popular vote wasn't the determining factor in whom won the election; then that person didn't really win the election.
in the election of 2012 Barack Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Mitt Romney. the amount of electoral votes should not determine which of the nominees will win the election i should be whomever receives the majority of popular votes. in the election of 2000 Al Gore received more individual votes than George W. Bush nationwide, but Bush won the election, he received 271 electoral vote compared to Gore's 266 electoral votes.
There are many people who travel to vote for our president and it would not be fair to them if their votes didn't really matter because someone else made the final decision. If our president isn't chosen by the citizens of the united states then the person that was chosen by unfair terms and bias choices isn't really the president of the united states; but is truly the president of the men and/or women in the electoral college who chose he or she.
The president should be chosen fairly by a just and unbiased vote cast by the people of the united states. Only then is it truly fair and right to the citizens of the United States to call that man or woman our president!
| 2 |
5924b69
|
Since the car was first created there has been many innovations to different types of cars. However, studies have shown that in the last few years the percentage of people getting a license has dropped. There are many advantages in limiting car usage not only in the city but also in the suburbs.
The first of these advantages has to due with our never ending problem with our environment. For example, as stated in source number 2 the city of Paris had been very polluted. To solve this problem the ruling party in France enforced a driving ban. After five days of this driving ban being in effect the smog in Paris had gone down by 60%. Becasue of this ban the city of Paris is a cleaner place to live now and another result of this ban is that people truly can see how much pollution these cars create.
Another advantage of limiting car use is that once these cars are gone people are much more sociable. In source 1, the government of Germany has created a suburban community where there is no cars. Car ownership is allowed however there are only two places to park and it is very expensive. Because of this 70% of families in this community do not own cars. To get around in this community you are able to walk, ride a bike, skate, etc. As a result, you do not hear cars on the streets but you do hear bike swishing and kids playing with eachother. Many studies have also shown that a day without a car is a very effective stress reliever, as stated in Source 3.
Now a world without cars is very hard to imagine because of all the different places that everybody has to get there however, there are many alternatives to using cars on a daily basis. These alternatives include public transportation, bikes, skates, walking, and also car pooling. If there is a reduction of car usage the environment will recieve a very large benefit.
As the articles provided has shown, there are many advantages to the limiting of car usage and it will not only benefit us as humans but also our environment.
| 4 |
59267c3
|
The author suports the idea because in the text he says that Venus is kind of earths twin cause its the same size. The author also wants to do that because he says that although Venus is a dangerous panet that it could still be studied.He puts in there that even though Venus is the second-closet planet to the sun that it has many different features than Mercury. Considering the fact that Mercury is the closet planet to the Sun, but it has different qualities than Venus. The Earth is different from Venus because Venus has a temperature of 800 degrees. Also the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth, also is has almost 97 percent carbon dioxide on the surface of the planet.
The author explains that the atmosphere of Venus can crush a submarine and that, that is why no aircraft has landed on the planet because they can't survive for long periods of time. He also explains that Venus could've been different from what it was 12,000 years ago? But, anyway the author
| 2 |
592c884
|
This is why I am for and against the development of all of the new cars they are making.The driverless cars are very interesting and sound like fun.You are still driving but your car is also driving by itself.The only thing i disagree with is when it comes to the law the person driving and the manufacturer should have fault.The person driving should have the most fault for driving recklessly but the car could have done it by itself also.I think the cars should aslo be tested so we know what it is capable of doing in certain situations.The cars should have crash test like the other vehicle's do.
They say that they want the cars to be safe for the people to be able to drivve in them.But how are the cars going to be safe if they are not tested or anything.The cars are changing while the years go by they are just getting better and better.The cars have very like human minds and do what human do when they
are driving.But when there is an accident no body wants to take the blame for what happened.
Google can make all of this good technology for things like cars and everything but is it going to be safe to use.Even though the person driving the car doesn't have to do much they should still have control.They should have control over everything if their is an accident or not.The sensors for the car might work a couple of times doesn't mean they will work all the time.The cars are going to have camera's in them to watch what the driver is doing.The camera should see that the driver is watching the road while driving the car.This is why i am for and against the car.
| 2 |
592eec0
|
Today im goin to tell you about why you shoud join the seagoing cowboys. One reson is you get to go place. the secon reson is the it a avantr. The thrid reson is it well be fun.
One reson you should join is you get to go place. Like in the article Luke get to go to the panmala conal, Europe and China.there one reson you should join the seagoing cowboys.
The secon reson is it trelreting. Luce
was on pontrel one night and the, catin slip becuse of the rain and broke a rib. Also you at sea so it make it even more exsiting.that the secon reson you should go join the seagoing cow boys.
the third reson is it funny. It fun becues after after droping of the hores
you and your crow can play gane in the pins where the horses was cep .there the the third reson why you shoould join the seagoing cowboys.
This is why i think you should join the seagoing cowboys.
| 2 |
5931bf7
|
I just graduated from high school , my name is Luke Bomberger.
I work two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank. My best friend works with me , his name is Don Reist. I was working when Don invited me to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Why wouldn't I say yes , I mean it's a lifetime thing so why not go? World War I I
Was over in Europe many countries wear left ruined or tone apart.
Many animals where stuck with no home or food. The animals had no one , nobody feeder them. UNRRA hired ''seagoing Cowboys'' to take care of the young cows , horses , and mules
That got shipped over sea. Once Don and I heard about UNRRA we wanted to sign up , so we did. We really need more ''Seagoing Cowboys''. The amazing thing about working and helping these animals is seeing the happiness on there face.
Come join Don and I , I'm telling you it is very joyful.
You would get to travel on the boat maybe even see some
Tourist , or maybe you would be able to see the places we are going. Don and I have made some trips to Greece , castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China.
It would be a great , you would travel around the world seeing some amazing places , while helping animals and seeing the joy on there face. Who wouldn't want to be helping in the UNRRA.
Join now for a once and a lifetime chance!
| 2 |
593324f
|
Limiting car usage is helpful into reducing stress and helping the enviroment. "When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way" a mother of two said. Street parkng, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental near the French and Swiss borders. Vauban's streets are completely "car free", car ownership is allowed but there are only two places to park. This is smart planning.
There have bee efforts in the last two decades to make cities denser. Vauban home to 5,500 residents are the advanced experimented in low car suburban life. With more space not being used by cars, stores can now have a walkway to the main street rather a mall next to a highway. Ever since world war 2 everything has been based on a car, well that's going to have to change.
4,000 drivers were fined for driving in paris after told not to because of smog, they did'nt listen. Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france, after five days of intensifying smog. Diesal fuel was blamed. Paris has more smog than any other European capitals. Delivery companies complained of lost of revenue, while exceptions were made for pul in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers.
While in colombia they have a day when you don't use your car in order to prevent smog. Millions of colombians hike, bike, skate, or took the bus to school and work, whoever violated that day they were fined with $25. 7 million did'nt use their car. Colombias goal is to promote alternative transportation, and the rain has'nt stopped them it's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower pollution. 2 other cities joined the event.
In the united states each year drivers have been becoming less and less, we're buying fewer cars and getting fewer licenses too. A study of last year found that driving by young people deceased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Pedestrain, bicycle,private cars,commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety.
| 2 |
594117c
|
"The Challenge of Exploring Venus", this is a challenge because of Venus's reputation. Venus is the closet planet to earth due to density and size, it orbits the sun at a different speed. Because Venus is Earth's neighbor, somebody wanted to explore it. Trying to explore Venus has failed for over three decades. In paragraph 2 it writes, "and for a good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The author came to the conclusion that Venus had a reputation that's challenging for humans to study. The author writes, " A thick atmosphere of almost 97 persent of carbon dioxide blankets Venus. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." Humans can not survive in carbon dioxide, Venuns's air isn't breathable, the pressure that it has keeps and spacecraft from leaving after it comes in. Paragraph 2 explains "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 occens and would liquefy many matals." Venus is so hot that it will melt the finest metal into liquid.
The author wants to know why would any one still want to go to Venus if it's too dangerous to vist anyway. The author explains that long ago Venus had been a fit planet for humans to live in. He says, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." Just because Venus is hot doesn't mean that it didn't have some form of life before it got that way, something had to of happened. The author explains that Venus could be "our nearest option for a planetary visit, acrucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." This infoprmation explains that they have a way to explore without any physical issues. NASA came up with the idea that someone would go in and hover in the air to aviod the damages. The temperature of where they will be wouldn't be as hot as the ground but it would less than 800 degrees Fahrenheit. NASA explains that it's a risk to get on the ground to "get up and personal" but they can't take any objects from the planet. NASA is working on another approach to study Venus, in the mean time they're currently using "mechanical computers" to physcially pick up things with strength but that's also a risk but it can melt during the process. The author gives many reasons as to why exploring venus is a challenge to explore because it's climate is so hot that anything and anybody will melt. Spacecrafts and other materials are not able to survive during the process of exploring venus.
| 3 |
5942172
|
intro: Today ill be telling you the pros and cons about having this technology in our schools from counslers being able to tell whats with the student to invading the privacy of what we humans have to preventng suicide and to be able to maybe stop someone from commiting suicide or knowing someone is going through depression.
body: so me personally think this would be some great technology to have in our schools espically for consoulers so say someone is really sad and depressed but they are to scared to open up about how they feel or whats going so you put the computer on there face and it shows they are depressed sad and scared well now you know how your student is feeling so then you cheer them up and work to make things better you dont know it but you just saved a life because who knows weather or not that student was about to comit suicide or say someone was threatned and they will not tell you that so they act like there fine but you put the computer on them and it shows that they are scared now you know they are scared and can try to work with them to open up, but from other people perspectives i can totally see how this is a total invading of privacy because we all have secrects and we dont want people knowing if were depressed or sad and alot of people dont like to communicate or open with anyone and also what if things get passed around about you being depressed the generatin today are bullys so i can see someone making fun of someone for being depressed.
conclusion: inconclusion i think it would be some great technology to have in our schools just think about how many lives we can change or how many lives we can save by just knowing how the person next to you is feeling it would save a lot of time trying to get the person to tell you whats wrong when you can just take a picture of there face so yes i do think it would be great because itll make life better, you would save more time, and you could change alot of lives and save alot of lives with this type of technology.
| 3 |
59421c0
|
Professor Thomas Huang, of the Beckman Insitute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinios has been in collaboration with Professor Nicu Sebe form the University of Amsterdam. They have changed how art is looked at and hope to expand into everyday life. They want for for the connection between humans and technology. The use of such technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom may change how the school ciriculum leading to missing lessons, risk of teachers losing thier jobs, and how high the price of such technology is.
If the student does not like the lesson, the computer program may inform the teacher, This may lead to the school board taking out important lessons that will help the student later in life. But, how are they supposed to teach if the student does not like the lesson? If per say, the student finds nothing of the lesson interesting, the student will most likely learn nothing. That leads to the student not being as succesful in the future merely because they not learn the key lessons due to the fact that they thought it was "boring". If the computer does end up changing the way the student is taught, then the student will most likely get the idea that in life things will be altered to fit thier ends and desires. When inreality, that is not how life works. The student will be "sugar-coated" with all these advantages and have a change in character.
Not only does it put the risk of the student's future at risk but also the jobs of the teachers. If the computer alters the teaching is done then how will they know when to help the student? The computer program will eventually become the teacher putting the teacher out of a job. As if we already do not have high unemployment rates.
In the article, Dr. Huang predicts that "Then it could motify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."(Par. 6). Dr. Huang gives off the idea that the teacher will no longer be a human but rather a computer. Sure it may alter the lesson, but if that teacher put a big amount of time into that lesson only for it to be change, then what is the point?
Lastly, the whole cost of installing face-reading technology can come at a big price. Many schools do not have that kind of money in thier funding. I know that my school most definitely does not have the money to supply all the computers and laptops with this type of technology. Not even a students PC at home can "handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile. But we can write down some simple instructions that "encode" different emotions."(Par. 7). So basically not only would the school board spen lots of monety on installing the technology but also buy new computers that can handle such algorithms. Including the student , in order to get taught at thier pace and style would have to spend a lot of money on this technology.
In conclusion, the use of the technology to read emotional expressions of students in the classoms is not valuable due to the risks and failures that come with it. Such technology can have a negative impact on students, teachers, and others.
Also, doing so would invade an individuals privacy.
| 5 |
5945c3f
|
Are cars becoming more of the past and less of the future? People arent driving as much as they used to, and might be of some benifit to our everyday life. Places like Germany, Paris, Columbia and more are joining up to use less cars and use more pedestrians, public transportation, bycycle, ect to form a connected way of transportaion to save money, save resourses, lower polution percentages and improve safty.
According to the passage "In German suburb, life goes on without cars" written by Elisabeth Rosenthal " passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissionsin Europe. And up two 50 percent in some car-intesive areas in the United States." Imagain what would happen if we reduced the car rate use in just the US. We could conserve a large amount of fuel. That can be used for public trasportation, and also reduceing the price per gallon. It can also protect our enviromet. Alowing us to protect wild life, and breathing in chemicals that shouldn,t be inside our bodys. Just by doing this it could greatly effect or life lives in a positive way.
This means for a new way of live. A connected network that relies on everything and everyone doing there part. In doing so, it provides a safe and money saving enviroment. First of all you dont have to worry about paying those incompetent car bills. And you dont have to pay insurence for the car. Second you save money not paying for gas every week. alowwing yourself to move from place to place in your community, by public or comercial transportaion, or even bike riding is good, and safe. you dont have to wory about hitting somone or something. Or mabye someone hitting you. this could cause less trips to the hospitals and prevent less death. In the passage written by Elisabeth Rosenthal it says " public transit was free of charge from friday to monday, according to the BBC" So as you can see limiting car use is very effective, efficiant, and enviromently safe.
This is also a time savior. No worries about your car breaking down, cause riding the bus ensures you that ist regularly checked and regulated. walking asrrues you that its exercies so there is no need to waste time. All around limiting car use is better for life. You save money, help the enviroment and the communites wich you live in, and improves safty. So I ask you are you willing to not drive?
| 3 |
5947d1d
|
In my opinion I think driverless cars are kinda cool because of the fact that the driver doesn't have to do much of the driving. Alot of people can get tired while they are driving to where their destination is. Man people have to pull over and stop at motels or hotels to get siome rest, but with a driverless car the owner can be at their destination without having to stop anywhere.
With driverless cars you have to think about the facts that agt any time the car shut down and stop working but the car can alert you at anytime telling you that there is a problem with the system or something. The text provides a lot of interesting facts about theses types of new cars and on how several companies are in the process of testing them out. The text states that Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. After Google did it many other places started to follow after them like BMW who created the " Traffic Jam Assistant" which the car alerted the drivers when they needed to take over. Then, GM developed driver seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object. The driving laws focus more on keeping the drivers , passengers, and pedestrians safe and that was one of the major goals these companies wanted to achieve and they did. Tesla made a project that in 2016 this year a release for a car capable of driving on an autopilot 90% of the time. The cars they plan on working on are Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan to drive themselves by 2020.
Hopefully in the future people will be for driverless cars like me because the have some good benefits of human life in the future. People can read articles about the cars if they want to do background checks if they want to. I would love the fact that we would not have to drive the entire time if I was planning on a long trip, a lot of people will change their minds about driverless cars in the future because I did.
| 3 |
5948fc6
|
Have you ever heard of FACS? FACS stands for Facial Action Coding System. This type of technology can supposedly read your facial expressions. When I heard of this I wanted to believe but I just couldn't. I didn't think it was valuable enough to consider. I found too many flaws in the system from the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto.
In this article I found many things that I need to point out. The article states "New software has been developed that improves accurracy in perceiving the emotions of others. The reason I include this is because there is a key word that some of us might skip over. The word that they use is improve. But before in the passage they claim it can detect the emotion. Now it is saying it can only improve on what we as humans can do.
What is not right about it either is it only includes major muscles, 44 to be exact. But thats not the point, the point is that it doesn't include many small features in the face. So this system isn't as accurate as it sounds. The small features if they included them would make it more accurate and then they could make the claim that it is 100% accurate.
In paragraph 6 they do have an ok point. The passage states that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could change the lesson." If this was the case you would still have many students that would get bored for any lesson. Those computers aren't garunteed to teach them the standards that mybe the state requires. We haven't even talked about expenses. This must cost a fortune for a whole school and some schools would be left out of this. They wouldn't be given the same education of many other students around the United States.
So to wrap this up I don't think it is very valuable to have this in a classroom setting. Maybe in the future we might be able to have something like this where everything is changed. With the circumstances right now no way could this work. Too much effort has to go into this and technology is getting out of hand anyway.
| 3 |
594a437
|
In the passage that we are presented with the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit by telling us of the similaraties between it and the earth. Venus is of a similar size and distance wise is not very far from us at all. No spacecraft has ever had any human pilots on it due to the fact that the spacefrafts never last very long once they land of the planet. The planet's stmosphere is made up of 97% of carbon dioxide and corrosive sulfuric acid. The temperature of the planet of on average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atomspheric pressure is almost 90 times greater than our own.
Long ago Venus was proably covered by oceans and may have supported various formes of life similar to those of earth. It has similar geological features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Due to its close proximity it may be the nearest option for a planetary visit. NASA in particular would like to send humans to study the planet. They thing that if they have the space craft hover about 30 miles above the planets surface they may be able to avoid the brunt of the problems. The temperature would still be about 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth.
| 2 |
594ab7d
|
Driverless cars are seeming to become more of a reality than an idea. With todays technology driverless cars would be possible and there are even some right now. Personaly I think driverless cars could be a good idea but there are many complications at the moment. These complications involve mostly law issues like if a driver were to get into an accident, and who would be put at blame.
Through out history driverlesss car have been made going all the way back to the late 50s. This proves that the technology is availiable and it is possible. I think they could be benefitial to our society because if the driver gets distracted then there would not be a crash because they are not actually driving. The cars today, however still need a driver to be ready to take over in certain conditions. "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents,(Paragraph 7)". The cars need for assistance would reduce the number of crashes because if the driver didnt take over and the car got stuck there would be a large traffic build up that could lead to injury. The driverless car would remove the risk of human error when tired, distracted or even under the influence. They would also be nearly perefect when it comes to driving because of certain sensors in the vehicle, "The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone,"(Paragraph 5). Theses sensors not only make the car safer but they also help the car handle more tasks on their own. "Further improvements in sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more driving tasks on their own,"(Pragraph 5). Many of the cars that are meant to be driverless will also be using half of the fuel used in cars today. This is also reducing the amount of polution in the world to making it eco freindly as well. The cars can also monitor the driver to be sure that they are paying attention to the road and not texting or sleeping. There have been many developements to make sure the driver is alreted when the car comes up against a road block, "GM Has developed 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 the car. Other options under consideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays," (Paragraph 7). These would be sure that the driver is prepared to take over the car at all times and is not distracted.
In conclusion driverless cars can greatly benefit the comunity increasing vehicle saftey and being eco freindly. There may be some consequences at the moment but in time they will be sorted out and delt with. The driverless car is one of or if not the safest option for the drivers and pedestrains at this age in time.
| 4 |
594c67c
|
Technology and enhancement in vehicles have come a long way. Each year companies come out with new cars and new features that gives people the desire to but them. Driverless cars have been in discussion for many years and have been worked on for those many years. Corrperations, such as GM, have developed a system that vibrates the driver seat when the vehicle is in danger of hitting another vihicle while backing up. Other ideas, such as the windshield having flashing lights, have also been discussed. But this is just the beginning of driverless cars. Driverless cars should not yet be implied in today's society due to lack of technology developement.
Driverless cars cannot be released into the world because of lack in testing the cars to see if they function correctly. Many states have made laws that provent companies from testing these cars due to safety laws. Another point to look at is how much the driver would actually pay attention if they have a driverless car. If one is behind the wheel of a driverless car, they would not want to operate, but rather do something of importance to themself. If the driverless car is put out there, the driver would not want to have to take over, which they would have to at some points of the journey. Most laws are made to provide safety for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. If the technology and functions behind the driverless car fail and cause injury, whose to say is at fault? The driver or the technology could both be at fault for causing injury. Of course driverless cars would be convenient and better for gas usage, but our technology is not developed enough to pursue driverless cars.
Although driverless cars have been in discussion and worked on for many years, we are not yet ready as a society to begin the idea of letting them on roads. Because of lack in technology developement, safety, lack of testing, and the careless drivers who would be behind the wheel, our society is not ready for this function to be on the road. Yes, the car itself has benifits, but the negatives out weight the positives.
| 3 |
595980e
|
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. However, some are not aware of the dangers of exploring Venus. It's so dangerous that NASA wouldn't dare send anyone to Venus with such harsh conditions.
The reason why exploring Venus is a dangerous thing to do is because of the fact that every spacecraft that was sent to Venus did not survive landing for more than a few hours, luckily for NASA, no one was in that spacecraft. I feel as if these spacecrafts didn't survive because of Venus' daily temperature, which is 800 degrees fahrenheit. Venus even has 97% of carbon dioxide in the air. If that weren't enough, Venus' environment is so Extreme, it could "crush a submarine accustomed to driving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." All of this states why Venus is a dangerous planet to explore.
Venus has not been explored yet, and it probably never will due to it's conditions. No man can ever experience the harsh and unsafe environment of Venus. The conditions in Venus is not stable enough for humans to explore or survive on. The conditions are even tough for the spacecrafts to handle. This explains why we can't explore Venus anymore.
| 2 |
5959a28
|
Have you ever heard of the Face on Mars? It's a landform on Mars that, from certain angles, gives the illusion that it looks like a face. Some people believe, however, that this was actually an alien creation. The Face on Mars is just a landform because it looks similar to landforms on Earth, only at certain angles does it look like a face, and high quality pictures taken of the Face show it's just a landform.
The Face on Mars is similar to landforms here on Earth. One scientist, Garvin, states, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho" (12). Only at certain angles does the landform look like a face. The author of the article states, "The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face" (8). High quality ppictures taken of the Face show it's just a landform. In paragraph 11, The scientist says, "...you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size...if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egytian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were" (11).
The reasons that the Face on Mars is just another landform are that it looks like landforms on Earth, only certain angles show the Face, and high quality photos of the Face prove that fact. conspiracy theories are wrong because they don't have any facts to back up that this could be created by aliens. This is why the Face on Mars is not created by aliens, but by natural forces on the red planet.
| 3 |
595e8d2
|
Voting, one of the most American things I can thing of. This is a democracy, and we have the right to vote for our leader, but not really. There is a thing called the Electoral College, and the electors that you vote for actually vote for the president. Although this does not seem fair, it is a great system. Almost every time your state votes for an Elector, he picks the President that your state wants. So it really is a great deal.
My opponents belive that the president should be voted by popular vote, but i disagree. Richard Posner, writer for slate magizine writes that this method is non-democatic, and should be overruled(source 3, paragraph 15). Although you are not actuially voting for president, you are voting for who votes for president. This method equals out the playing field for states. Insted of all the power going to states like California or Texas. Presidents have to fight for every state. Posner also writes, sometimes the person with the popular vote will not win the election, like in 2000(source 3, paragraph 16). Although this was a huge disaster, it was the first time something like this has happened since 1888. Also, 4 years later George Bush won the election again, but for real.
Some may say that America is not filled with the smartest, or brightest people. So you belive that we should hold the fate of who will be president in the hands of an adult who cant spell his own name. Someone ike that has as much power as a guy who has watched every debate, and has done research. So by voting for a democrate elector, your state will vote for a democratic president, if your state votes in a republican elector, then your state will vote for a republican president. It is as simple as that.
The Electoral college provides a point system for every state. the biggest are California with 55, and Texas with 38. The smallest are the Dakotas, and they each are worth 3 points. The point system is based on population, and how many representitives you have. One of the best parts of this is that every state get attencion. Without this system, the candidates would only go to campien at the highest populated states. Then this would cause the smaller states to think that their votes don't matter, and then one day we are going to have a bad guy as our leader.
In conclusion, I belive the Electoral College is a great system, and I hope it lives on. Although it is not really Democratic, it still is a better system than what my oppents belive we should do. This gives us a certantity of oucome, a president that everyone supports, swing states, big states, and helps to avoid run-off elections. So Senator, if you back the Ellectoral College, maybe we will vote you as our next President.
| 4 |
595ebd3
|
It is just a landform, I mean we find so many of these things and usually we think nothing about them? What makes this one so special? The fact that it's shaped like a face? That's really the only thing that makes it so special is its shape. We have proof, we have photos, good photos, extrordinary photos of this, and they prove that it is just a landform. We even have these things on Earth. The only thing that makes this so special is its shape. If it weren't shaped like that, people wouldn't even give it a second thought.
Also don't you think that if it were created by aliens we'd have more proof? All we have is a weird shaped landform? That's all we have and we see them all the time. Erosion that's what made your face on Mars.
That is why its nothing but a landform, We've found plenty of them and nothing as ever been special about them. We have proof that ti is just landform. We have not proof of alien life.
| 2 |
595fec4
|
Children are full of emotions, and therefore are confused alot. So it comes as no suprise why some children struggle in school. It is apparent that what schools are doing now isn't helping these children. All teachers are different, they have different points of view, different styles on thow they teach. These opposing views make all teachers different and could confuse their students. With a computer however, there could be meximum proformance. The children would learn better and more than they were before. Computers that read emotions could benifit schools and the nation.
Computers reading emotions could be a huge step in the right direction. Children could easily learn what is going on and if they do not the computer can evaluate that and change what it is doing. Dr. Haung explains "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal, even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression". The computer knows alot of different facial expressions and therefore can easily and quickly evaluate what the child's problem is, and fix it. The computer knows the students emotions and could easily diagnose problems and help the child to better understand what they are doing.
The computer could also learn to take disiplenry action to the child. Which if the child has violent tendencies could lead to some major conflict. If the child knows that the ocmputer is expensive he/she is less liekly to hit it. The computer may even be able to stop a bad situations before it even begins by anylising the situation by reading emotion. "Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness". Anger is one of the emotions the computer can detect and could rush into a situaltion(granted it have some way of getting around) and fix or mediate the problem with facts. For diciplenry action computers would bring grat dicipline to the classroom.
Teachers in the future could be more like operators, if something happens to the computer the teachers could work on or fix the computer. Over time this could lead to the teaching industry dissappearing. Children may not think this is good and there would definently be a lack of emotion from the "teacher" in the classroom seeing as it is a computer. But there is too much advantage obver disavantage. All in all teachers would still have jobs but wouldnt be as active. Which would put less stress on teachers, which in turn, would maximise proficiency.
Emotion reading computers would not only benifit schools but the nation as a whole. Computers could read the emotions of each individual child and see chat works and what dosen't. The computers can also mediate arguments and take diciplenry action when needed. And teachers would have a much easier job at managing and teaching the students. Schools around the world need this new state of the art computer system to help read emotions and prepare children for the brightest future.
| 4 |
596359b
|
For many years now people have been cutting down on the usage of their cars. Their are many advatages to limiting car usage like you become happier, less pollution, and money is spent wisely. many different outcomes come from limiting the amount of time you use your car.
In many countries around the world people have reduced the amount of time they use their cars and the outcome has been phenomonal. Heidrun Walter was asked about how she felt about taking cars out of her life, she answered "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," (Rosenthal par3). Cars have been liked stress and when cars were taken out of Carlos Arturo Plaza's life he said "It's a good opportunity to take away stress..." (Selsky par24). When cars were taken out of their lifes they felt happier and stress free.
In these last few centuries we have polluted the world more than anyone else has. This is due our technological advances. One of the biggist advance in these centuries is the motor vehicle. The car has now become a houshold item. Cars are one of the main reasons why our ozone layer is open and we responsible for "50 percent...of greenhouse gass emissions" (Roseenthal par5). It's shoking to see how far we have advanced but to see how much we have destroyed in the world at the same time is crazy. Paris has become so poluted that they had to get a "partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (Duffer par10). "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france, after five-days intensifying smog" (Duffer par14). Imagine what would happen if cars were recuced in use for a month.
For many people in these countries they have gotten many benifites back. The government has always used "80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport" (Rosenthal par9). Its shocking how much money goes to bulding roads and not things for the development of our comunities. The people in Bogota,Colombia have cut back on their use of their cars anf the money the government usually uses for cars or gas is now going to other things. "Parks and sports centers also have boomed throughout the city."(Selsky par28). many of the "uneven, pitted sidewalks have been repaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramaticly cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" (Selsky par28). When the goverment did not have to pay for highways or streets they used that money for parks or smooth sidewalks.
Their are many advantages to limiting car usage like people become happierand stress free, less pollution, and money is spent wisely. If everyone cuts back on the time they use their cars the world would be healthier, the population would be heathier and happier, in addition the government would use money for more important things. Reducing the use of cars is step one in the world becoming healthy again.
| 4 |
59669b6
|
There are many advantages of limiting car use. Have you ever thought of just how much gas we use and how bad it is for our air. All the driving we do as teenagers is a way of showing our freedom for most, others just need a ride. I drive myself but i do have to say i couldnt give up my car, i dont live close enough to anywhere so that i could ride a bike or walk, otherwise its a great idea. Some advantages are not as much greenhouse gasses are emmitted into the air.
I also see that without driving some can get more excersize that is well needed and it also gives people the chance to see the things they dont see everyday because they are in such a hurry. It can aslo help use save our resources that have been having shotages. In america not many people are worried about driving and getting thier liscences as there use to be. Another advantage is that we can save money that could be used for other things.
Some places are having days rthat people cannot drive and if caught the get fined. I think its neat seein g a community coming together and doing stuff together. It shows just how are humanaty works. Anothe advantage iss that you can slow down, and see those around you that you havent seen before or in a while. I could go a day without driving, maybe even two. Could you ?
| 2 |
5967002
|
The Face on Mars is not an alien creation. It is a natural landform. Evidence to support this claim includes: this landform is similar to ones found on Earth that were created naturally, the technology is extremely advanced to where we would know if alien life existed, and NASA would share any evidence of life on Mars if any is found.
The Face on Mars is much like natural landforms found here on Earth, specifically in the western part of North America. It is called a mesa. In the article, "Unmasking the Face on Mars," Garvin says, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." Because the atmospheres and climates of Earth and Mars are similar, it is very possible that the same type of natural landforms could be created on both planets. There has even been evidence supporting the claim that water previously existed on Mars, which could have caused erosion that formed the Face.
Technology has improved drastically within the last few decades. Specific to this research, cameras are part of that new and improved technology. NASA was able to capture outstanding photographs of the Face. It is stated in the article, "Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." With these sharper images, the Face no longer looked like a face. The conditions were different as well. On a cloudless day, Mars Global Surveyor captured more images of the Face. It looked like an ordinary landform.
There has never been any solid official evidence of life on the Red Planet. People think NASA may be hiding their findings of aliens on Mars. However, in paragraph five of the article, it says, "... evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." NASA would definetly share any evidence of alien life with the public because that would be great publicity for them. It would be huge news that would spread across the world. NASA would benifit greatly from this because of all the money it would bring in.
In conclusion, the Face on Mars is not an alien formation, but a natural landform that happened to resemble a human face at one point. Some people will continue to believe that aliens do exist, but as of right now, no solid evidence has proven that theory. These are just a few reasons that support the Face as being a landform that was created naturally, but NASA has many more. As more technology is developed and NASA delves deeper into uncovering the secrets of Mars, we will anxiously await any new discoveries.
| 5 |
596b93d
|
Voting is one of the hardest choices a person has to make because in reality the votes for the american perident can be decided by one or two votes sometimes. The two deciding factors in voting are the electoral college and the popular vote of the people. They both make the elections fair but also unfair. Without one the whole election process would not be as good as it is today.
The Electoral College is comprised of a total of 538 electors and to elect a president you need a majority of 270 votes from the 538. This electoral college is comprised of one vote for each representative from your state plus two for the senators. Obviously this gives every state a fair chance to vote but even if lets say Hawaii, North Dakota, and South Dakota wanted republican and Texas wanted democrat Texas' votes would cancel out the others because of the amount of representatives they have compared to the other three states. This is one thing that makes this form of voting very unfair. Obviously it is smart to give somestates more representatives because of their population but that completly defeats the purpose of making it fair because the small states stand no chance against the densely populated ones like Florida, Texas, California, and New York.
The popular vote is the percentage of votes that the president recieves form the people, citizens that are voting for them. The popular vote does not haver as much effect as the Electoral College but it still does make an effect. For example in 2000 when Al Gore had 60% of the popular vote but did not win the presidency because George Bush had the majority of the Electoral College. This is when the popular vote should be more emphasized because obviously the people which is over about 20 Million wanted Gore but the Electoral College vote of more than only 270 people wanted Bush. That is an issue but also some people voting don't really understand what the two people are offering and just vote because one sounds better, looks cooler, your friends are voting for him/her. This is why the popular voting system cannot be fully trusted.
The compare the two topics not one is better than the other and not one can fuction woithout the other. In my perspective it was smart of the founding fathers to create both systems so that the voting would be somewhat fair. In reality even though the popular vote doesn't make a difference it can persuade the representatives of the state to change their mind or it can make them realize that they are making the right decision because of how their state is chosing to vote. This should change their mind because the people elected them knowing that they will vote for who they promised to vote for and will most likely stay true to their state and to their party.
In conclusion both system are great together but apart cannot funcion. The founding fathers and leaders of this country cannot be blamed for making this system because there is really no way to make it fair and they did their best to do so. Now think if you were to design the voting system for the United States of America what woudl you do differently or the same.
| 3 |
596bc3d
|
Ther are 3 main supportive reassons why this "face on mars" is just a natral landform. One, there is a posibility that the face is just a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth"-paragraph 3. Two, if the face on mars was evidence of life on mars that would be ''evedence that NASA would rather hide"-paragraph 5. Three, paragraph 12 explains that the face on mars is equivalent to a butte or mesa.
First of all there is a posibility that the face is just a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth"-paragraph 3. I believe this beacuse NASA does not come across it veary often. Therefore, every time NASA did see the face then they might of just cought the rock formation at the right time, therefore cetching the right light. In a better picture taken in 1976 by Viking 1 you can clearly see shadows wich might be the scource of the face formation.
Second if the face on mars was evidence of life on mars that would be ''evedence that NASA would rather hide"-paragraph 5. I think this very much makes sence because if it were evidence that would be somthing surely to keep out of the media. If there were other evidence of life on mars then why would NASA let just one piece of evidence out if it could easaly be mistaken. Then you would have a fake story going around that could possibly spark tension between countries for lieing about life on mars.
Third, paragraph 12 explains that the face on mars is equivalent to a butte or mesa. A butte is a lava bome that takes the form of an isolated mesa. Therefore creating a figure that, with the right light, will creat a face loking feature. Also since a better picture was taken it would be easeier to "discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size". "So if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"-paragraph 11
Ther are my 3 main supportive reassons why this "face" is just a natral landform. One, there is a posibility that the face is just a "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth"-paragraph 3. Two, if the face on mars was evidence of life on mars that would be ''evedence that NASA would rather hide"-paragraph 5. Three, paragraph 12 explains that the face on mars is equivalent to a butte or mesa.
| 4 |
596c46a
|
Dear Senator,
We the people, of the United States of America..... These are the first words written upon the Declaration of Independence. This is our very earliest document showing our democratic tendencies, and how we act as one. It also shows how we make decisions among ourselves as a people, as opposed to having other make decisions for us. This leads me to what I wish to discuss with you. Others do not vote for us. We vote for ourselves. We decide who leads us, who will help us get to a better place, who will decide what to do about the national debt, who will pass laws concerning immigrants and the minimum wage. We do. Not you, not the House of Represenatives, and most certainly not the Electoral College. Which is why there should be no Electoral College.
The Electoral College is a group of people whom elect the president(2). How many for each candiate there are is decided by us, the voters. But heres the thing- most voters think they're voting for the president. They dont even know what they're voting for! And even if some do, its easy to get confused and accidentally vote for the wrong candiate(10). While one vote may not skew the entire election, a couple thousand can.
Many who support the Electoral College will say that voting by popular vote is a bad idea becuase of the possibility of a tie(18). But in reality, it is just as easy to tie in the Electoral College. Its happened recently too, in 1888 and again in 2000(18).
This isn't the only thing thats broken about the Electoral College. The possibility that a president could win by popular vote, but lose the campaign due to the electoral vote is filthy. It is unfair to the people, and far from democratic. The Electoral College is an anachronism(15). It reminds me of the Roman Republic really, and we are not romans, and this is not a republic. Or, at least, its not supposed to be.
Something else that is unfair to the people. Due to the Electoral College canaditates only focus on large states, or swing states(13). Voters in small states, such as Wyoming, will never see the candiates and may see only one or two camaign ads. They can't get to know the candidates and make an informed decision. And even in the regional states, democrats should always be trying to convert republicans to their side and vice versa. But becuase of the large swing states, this rarely happens.
The possibilty of corruption among the Electoral College, is also a present danger. I'm sure you remember form history class how party bosses took advantage of naive immigrants. I can imagine republican electors being paid off or threatened so that they vote democrat. Can you really trust the electors?
According to a poll in 2000, 60% of people want to activate a popular vote system. Popular soverignty worked well for awhile when it came to the topic of slavery, why won't it work for us now? And why would anyone want such an outdated system like the Electoral College in place? Think upon my words Mr. Senator. The Electoral College needs to end.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME
| 5 |
5970470
|
How accurate is a computer? Answer? As accurate as it is programmed. When it comes to facial expression the technology used is programmed by one psychologist Dr. Paul Eckman. How can one man be responsible for knowing and understanding every human emotion? How could recognizing the face of a student in school help them to learn better? Using the technology from "Making Mona Lisa Smile" for emtional scanning in school may not be as valuable as it seems.
In my OTHER_PII experience you can never actually tell how a person is feeling just by looking at them. I am a pretty good example myself. I have some pretty bad "dead" face. People ask me all the time if I'm ok and I always say, "Yea I'm just tired", because I am just tired. I'm fine but others don't seem to think so because of the way my face is. Other kids and teenagers probably have this problem too. Having a computer try to cheer them up if they're ok isn't going to help. In the text they describe the situation as such, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." I find that line amazing. "Effective human instructor". That could mean many things. But how exactly could it modify the lesson to be more interesting and who is to say what an effective human instructor is?
How exactly is the modified lesson even going to help interest the student? Pop up a short game for a break or show a funny piture and tell the student to cheer up? Each child learns differently so how can a computer detect that? If computers started becoming "effective human instructors" what would happen to future teaching jobs? All of these questions are left unasnwered. As respectful as Dr. Huang puts it in paragraph 6, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," notes Dr. Huang. "So computers need to understand that, too.", I can agree with the computers learning about us but who would teach or program them?
What about flaws in the computer system? What if it reads certain faces wrong such as those with disabilities or who have been in accidents where the face is not recognizable by the system? Those children would not get the full effective education as those around them and it also derives a sense of difference from other students and leaves them subject to outcasting and even bullying. There are times in a school system where the teachers and administrators need to think about the good of the students before their education sometimes. The cost to implement this new technology could also be an issue. To install the technology they would either have to go through every computer in the school system or get rid of them and buy whole new sets of computers to be able to use them effectively. How much would a school system be willing to pay to boost the education of a student and give them the best opportunity to thrive in school.
As I have previously stated there are too many questions left unanswered. I see the potential it might have in the future. And how it could be used for the better but unless solutions to the questions I have asked are not answered then how can the system that recognizes facial emotions truly be trusted in schools?
| 4 |
5972f6f
|
I think they should keep the Electoral college because what's the need of changing it if it was the same way back in the day. I could be wrong but i also think many things shouldn't change like trying something different whether it's new or not. many things shouldn't change just because it feels right or it may help with your problems because 9 times out of 10 it may go all wrong when you try it but all worked out in your head perfectly. The electoral college consists of the electors where they vote for president and vice president and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. the electoral college consists of 538 electors but a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. And in my own personal opinion i think there's absoulutely nothing wrong with the electoral college i think it gives good advice and helps motivates you. the winner take all method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign. I sometimes think many people are aganist electoral college because the way it seperates the votes and only half will be required to go to the election and be seen. And others may have their opinions on this but it's ok to have your own opinion also different opinions don't hurt nobody it's just that different people believe in different things.
| 2 |
5976379
|
Dear State Senator,
I disagree with the Electoral College and believe we, the voters, should be souly responsible for determining our President. The Electoral College is not fair to the citizens of our state. When we vote for something, we want our vote to determine our President, not determine who our electors will vote for.
When a member of their party votes, they may not always vote for that particular party's candidate. For instance, if the Democratic elect for 2016 had an aspect he planned to bring to Washington D.C., that a member of the Democratic party didn't agree with, they should be able to vote for whoever they please. Same goes for the electors, who may swing to the opposite party that particular year.
In the case of a tie, I do however agree that it should then be up to state senators to take into consideration both candidates and go over their key aspects. Then they can choice what will be most beneficial to our country and what will in the long run help our great state and country as well.
I do not think their should be swing states. I think that the exact votes of the citizens should be counted and go only on that. It should not matter the state or region the voter is in. Instead of voters supmitting a ballot at the local voting site, I think the voter should be able to vote online at a local voting center. In the past, voting has got miss-counted and I think that a more accurate means of voting would be to do it online. That way papers cannot get lost and a computer can count vote so human error does not occur.
I also highly agree with the statement from paragraph 23 that states, "It can be argued that the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state..." This is true with states particularly in the North who are made up of mostly Democratic and the South being mainly Republican. After the decisions made by the current president Obama, I think many Democratics will want to try something different after seeing all that has not been accomplished under Obama as of 2015.
I hope Senator, you will take into consideration my statement.
Best Regards,
Hannah Strickland
| 3 |
597a56a
|
The electoral college, despite being established by the constitution, is a corruptable system that should be abolished. The ultumate duty of the government is to protect and serve the people of America, yet our votes must go through this extra step to pick what will ultimately affect us most.
When we vote, we choose who will be running our affairs for the next four years. America needs a president who can govern us in this world of problems, so why would the system overlook portions of the public? What keeps the Members of the college in line with public interests? there is too much instability in the college for it to always align with the best interest of the American people because in its "winner takes all" policy it overlooks all members of that state who voted otherwise. The college looks at us like divided pieces, when we really are a whole puzzle. For example, when the majority of Floridians vote for one candidate, while just over half of the population of Texas votes for the other, looking at these two states only texas would win, despite more people in total voting for the other candidate. This may not seem like a common occurence, as article three stated it has happened only twice since 1888, but there is nothing to keep such actions from progressing.
What service does the Electoral college serve that the people cannot? its only purpose in the govenment is to elect the president. The public, however, is the life and soul of America. The government exists solely to keep order among us. There is no reason why a popular vote wouldn't show the best interest of the people, and a popular vote doesn't overlook any vote.
The greatest problems lie with the tie-breakers, because inthe event of a tie, the election's result goes to the legislature. a few people in congress are looking to fuel their own desires. when presented with the chance to earn more money, they would rather choose the option that will earn them more, even if it means going against the interest of the public.
The electoral college isn't a complete public enemy, however. The electoral votes are decided based upon a popular vote, so they reflect the public's interest, if a little distorted. Maine and Nebraska have an alternate setup of "proportional representation" as explained in article one. If anything is to be done, a simple reform would suffice. if electoral votes were awarded per a set number of people, it would better reflect the population than if votes were awarded entirely based upon the will of a state as a whole.
| 5 |
597f576
|
The technological age has advanced to the point of being able to calculate the complex emotions of the Mona Lisa, and there's proposal for moving into classrooms as well. However, this is a sentiment that must be rejected wholeheartedly. Despite possible learning benefits, facial recognition technology in the classroom would be ineffective and would constitute an invasion of privacy.
Facial recognition software would be an ineffective addition to the classroom environment. In paragraphs 5 and 6, D'Alto writes of how the computer can sense emotions just like humans can, stating, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive 'calculation' every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." The human body has a natural ability to sense emotions within others by performing calculations based on the subtle body movements of others. Even if a machine could replicate this, as the article suggests, it doesn't dimish the face that humans already possess this capability. No emotion detecting software currently available provides anything that a human being couldn't detect, therefore adding them to the classroom would only be providing information that the teacher could already know. Teachers can detect boredom, stress, and enjoyment just like the computer would, and, if they so wish, they can change their lesson appropriately. Technology that reads emotions would be innefective and unneeded in the classroom.
Software that can read emotions could, in a classroom, invade the personal, privite lives of the students its watching over. Due to the nature of being a computer, the technology could, as stated in paragraph 6, "'...recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.'" The level of understanding stops at simply recognizing the emotion; a computer cannot discern the reason behind each emotion because it only detects that the emotion is there. Now place that into a classroom, where students from all different backgrounds are coming together to learn, and there will be some students that have had a rough day. Something happened outside of school that was out of their control, and they're just trying to make it through the day and avoid conversation about it. Sadly, they walk into class, and a computer, which a teacher is giving a lesson, notices that the student is distracted and continually pesters them to pay attention, even though the student's interest is not on schoolwork at all. Life is not contained to just the classroom, and external factors will effect a student's emotion before, during, and after class. Those factors could be incredibly personal, but the technology, not being able to sense anything other than emotion, analyzes this personal part of someone's life as much as it would do a bored kid in class. This is a blatant invasion of students' privacy and needs to be prevented from doing such.
D'Alto argues that the technology could provide substancial benefits to the classroom by creating personalized programs for each student to remain interested, but this process would just prove overall inneffective or exhorbitantly expensive to implement. To provide reason for this technology being implemented in classes, D'alto states in paragraph 6 that "'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'" This has to be looked at in two different scenarious: a group class and a personalized class. For the group class, modifying the lesson would be overall inneffective because it would cause other students that used to be enjoying class to become bored and lethargic, thus prompting the computer to modify the lesson. The cycle would continue until the end of class, with the technology switching teaching methods so often that calling the class coherent would be blatant lying. This modification method would only work if each student had their own computer modifying the lesson. In that scenario, each student would be personally invested into what they were learning. However, it also means that each student would need their own computer that holds this technology. For technology that currently is too complicated for ordinary computers to comprehend, that would require schools to invest exhorbitant amounts of money purchasing new computers that could hold this software. For every student to have a computer would be way too expensive for any implementation to be cost-effective. Despite possible learning benefits, the technology would either be too expensive to be implemented or too innefective to be used.
It's an interesting concept to imagine a world where computers are able to sense emotions and create a personalized program for each person on Earth. However, this imagination is riddled with expenses, invasion of privacy, redundancy, and overall inneffectivity. As the technology age progresses, it's important to remember to leave teaching to the teachers.
| 6 |
598318b
|
The Electoral College is a process, The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is requierd to elect the President.
Under the 23rd amendment of the Constitution, the Distict of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College.
Also each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors.
You help choose your states's electors when you vote for president because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors.
Personally, I think that the Electoral College has to stay because how else are we the people vote for the cadidate that we want, I think that the Electoral College is doing us the people a favor of electing our candidates.
I also think that is better that we have Electoral College to help us and help the cadidates tu become president and return the favor to us by making the world a better place to live.
The point is that if we did't have Electoral College we would't have a president to help our lifes to be better,so that why I belive is better to have Electoral College in our favor
| 1 |
5984580
|
I believe driverless cars are a good start for a more modern future. Although I don't believe they are such a great idea for us. It could be great to have a car that drives you around but will you really enjoy the fact of not being able to drive anymore? Teenager dream of the day they get their permit just do they are aloud to begin to learn how to drive. That way they don't have to depend on others for rides to school, work, or other activities. I know this because I am a teenager myself and I dream of the day that I will be able to get my drivers license and be able to drive my friends to the movies or to the mall. So what about drivers license will those not be required to be in a driverless car or will you need a special permit to be able to own a driverless car?
In the case of an accident and someone is injured who will be at fault the driver or the manufacturer? I do believe this will cause alot of conflict between the manufacturer and the individual because if an accident occurs how will anyone know what cause the accident. This could become a million dollar problem. Plus you can never really trust a piece of machinery because sometimes something just goes wrong and taking the fault for something that you did do could become very annoying and frustrating. Its like getting in trouble for something that your sibling did and your sibling is just standing by laughing at you because you got in trouble and they didn't.
I believe that having driveless cars become a new thing in our world is a bad Idea not only are the expensive but the roads will have to be smart to. Updating all the road in the world that is also very expensive. Although it is expected in 2020 to have a completely driverless car, alot of traffic laws will have to change but what about the people who don't have a driverless car will the same rules be applied to them? I personally don't see myself in a driverless car unless my best friend is a rich millionaire. May be instead of driverless cars we can have self conducted trains, subways, buses, or other forms of transportation. Why don't we make our bikes and motorcycles driverless too. What fun will we have when everything is done for us. At first it all these things could be fun to have but later we could feel completly useless.
| 4 |
59860b0
|
Venus is our closest planet to us besides Mars (sometimes) but does that mean that we should start to think about the possiblities of us landing there? The author of the article "The Challenges of Exploring Venus" is suggesting that we should go forward and try to study and hopefully go to Venus despite the dangers that are capable of happening. Venus may be our "twin planet", but it is very different from Earth. I think the author of this article supports this idea very much.
There are a couple reasons on why I think the author supports this article. One is because he talks about how Venus could have been. Venus is the most Earth-like planet that we know in our solar system but they don't exactly know if it once was like us or not. Astronomers think that Venus was once covered with oceans and it could even have supported forms of life. The author also talks about the features of Venus today. The author points out that the plant has some siliar features as us like valleys, mountains, and craters. The author ends the paragraph ,where he talks about this, with this sentence, "The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making a mission both safe and scientifically productive." This makes me think that the author is trying to get us informed about the options that it could take to make this Venus situation be safer.
This information we know about the planet is very different than ours. One of the details that the author points out is that it has a thick atmosphere of amost 97% carbon dioxide. Another thing he says is that the clouds are made up of sufuric acid and that the tempature is 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The author makes it clear that the conditions on Venus are very extreme and it would make a bad environment for us. With this information, the author makes it clear that NASA is still trying to find a possible solution for saftey reasons and informational reasons.
One of the ways that NASA is trying to study venus is by sending a "blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." They would have to be in the air to fly over storms and get out of the way of the unfriendly ground conditions. In the air, the tempature would still be way too hot but they think that humans would be able to survieve that condition. The air pressure in the air will be close to the same pressure thats on the earth. At the end of the paragraph that talks about this , the author says that obviously these are not the best conditions but they are survivable for humans.
These are my claims on why and how the author is telling us that he supports the idea. He talks about the similarities and differences about the planet and Earth. He also talks about the possibilities this could happen in the future once we get more information. This is why I think that the author is supporting the idea of studying Venus even if the conditions are bad.
| 4 |
5987254
|
Every theory needs to have proof, or else no one will want to believe the idea. Theorys though, are just ideas or thoughts people have. Its hard to link a day dream to scientific facts. The statement that the Face was created by aliens is nonsense. There are no facts to back the idea up. Aliens haven't even been proved to be real! People need to understand that the Face is just a mesa, a type of landform that be found on Earth aswell.
If the aliens were real, don't you think something would have changed by now? There is absolutley no sign of any life near the mesa; not even on the planet. If the aliens did exist then we should have noticed some sign. The statement that the Face is only a landform is clearly correct, unlike the idea that creatures formed it into Mars.
The statement that the Face is just a mesa has lots of proof to back it up. There are many sets of pictures, including the pictures from the original Viking itself. The Viking was the spaceship on Mars that helped capture the landform on camera. There are also pictures from recent explorations that further prove that the Face is just a landform.
I think one of the reasons people like to dream up conspiracys is because of the other ideas spread by celebritys. People like talk show hosts spread there ideas for large groups of people to hear, causing people to further think on those ideas. Plus the movie that was made about the Face doesn't help by mixing the facts up. If I were to give you one piece of advice it would be to stick to the facts. Late night dreams won't get you far in a lab or other place of scientific study. The Face is just a landform, nothing more, nothing less.
| 3 |
59901f2
|
Are driverless cars simply good or bad? You could argue either way, driverless cars are improving every year, but they are also cautious because its up to you to put your life on the line by letting the car drive you around. Driverless cars are not aproved in alot of states, simply because other states dont know whether to trust theses cars with traffic laws and etc. These cars are trying to be proven that can could make you driving experience easier and more safe.
I believe this cars need more improvment, they seem to be very good technology but I wouldnt trust theses cars. Traffic laws are also stopping driverless cars, it states that, "traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." I truely based on my knowledge absolutely believe this satement. There is no need to have technology control your car, because technology will always have some kind of flaw with it. If the car cant completely drive through any kind of circumstances then I wouldnt trust it.
"In most states it is illegal even to test computer driven cars." If i have no evidence that these cars could drive through traffic then I would also prevent theses cars in my society as well. Not only because i havent seen them in traffic but also because i have some kind of fear in these cars, such as accidents, reckless driving by the car, and also any kind of technical difficulties that could cause the car to mess up in traffic jams. There has been accidents by regular human beings but there could even be more with driverless cars, "who knows?" we wouldnt know until we have some type of prove that they can do just as fine as humans on the road.
These cars cant be trusted at this moment in time. "Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themsleves by 2020." Until then I wouldnt allow them on streets. If you had an accident, "whos fault is it, the driver or the manufacturer?" You have to create all these new laws for just one type of car. Its going to take some time, but for now you have to just keep on improving them until you have an argument theat theses cars should be allowed. Also you have to have some type of evidence that these cars could be really good drivers on the road.
"Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?" Eventually drivers could possibly get bored and decide to drive on their own. These cars could also bring to mind, "A waste of money". In the article it says "We have to interpret the driving fun in a new way."This is absolutely correct, you have to have some type of way to keep the passengers alerted and also interactive in the car.
For me, I just would want to see how this car could last more in future. I want to see manufacturers bring in car entertainment and information systaems that use heads-up displays. I would also want to see more evidence on how these cars could drive in traffic, and expand in more states. Most important thing to improve is simply the safety of the cars. All of this information would have to improve for me to trust these cars. Would you trust these semi-autonomous cars?
| 4 |
5992b7b
|
Seagoing Cowboys:Helping others and so much more
Do you like traveling, caring for animals, and helping others? Then, the Seagoing Cowboys program is just for you. Luke Bomberger, one of the members, loves his experience with the Seagoing Cowboys. He has done so many things to help the people in need of desperate help. Seagoing Cowboys help others, have to take care of animals, and people who join get to travel often.
First, this program helps others who are in need of help. Some may say, neighbors in their neighborhood could help them. However, some of the people the program has helped were just in a feirce war, you can't even tell it was once a beautiful neighborhood. The progam helped people in Europe just after World War II. I belive the program is really thoughtful, even to people in other countries.
Secondly, the program takes care of animals. Others may believe, they don't need to take care of the animals to help the humans. On the other hand, the animals provide meat, milk, and eggs. The animals will also provide clothing to the humans, the sheep give them wool. I infer animals are really useful animals and good to take care of.
Lastly, people who join travel often. Others may say, you might get injured with all the wars going on. However, most people who go arrive after the war ends so saftey is not a problem. The only time you might get hurt is when you mess around on the ship. This shows, traveling is not a problem, unless you get seasick.
The Seagoing Cowboys program helps others, take care of animals, and they get to travel often. Luke Bomberger has crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean 2 times just to help people in need. So I suggest that you should join the Seagoing Cowby program don't wait, come on down, today!
| 3 |
5992dc7
|
The development of driverless cars should not be allowed. Driverless cars would not be good in the United States. It wouldn't be good for the simple fact that it could leave a gas in the air that would pollute the world. It would be dangerous to the people who do not own a driverless car. Also the driverless car would cost billions of dollars, so most people wouln't even bother to spend their money on something like that.
Driverless cars would not be a good idea for the world because it could pollute the Earth with a gas that many people could get sick from, and potientially die from. These "Driverless cars" will have to run on some type of fuel, they will not be able to run on solar power for the simple fact that some people work, and do other things at night time. The fuel that the cars will run on could get the people who are walking by the cars sick because of all the toxic fuems in the air. If everyone is sick or has passed away because of the fuems, how would the people who built and worked on these cars make money?
Also another reason "Driverless Cars" shouldn't be allowed is the cost of the car. Driverless Cars will be expensive to buy, let alone the cost to have it worked on, if the car has a few issues with it. Most citizens in America are middle class citizens, meaning are not rich. So basically, only the rich, and famous people will be buying these cars. Its poitnless to spend all of your money on car, that could possibly cost more than the house you are living in.
As stated in paragraph three, "General Motors, in the 1950s, tried to creat a concept car that could run on a special test track." That idea did not work because the roads the cars would have to drive on, are the ones we use, and our roads are not upgraded to that point yes. It also states in paragraph three that, "Engineers at Berkeley tried something similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity." Once again it worked to a certain degree, but on the roads most cars drive on, they would have to do major upgrades on them. Both these ideas were very good, but will not work because of our roads that we drive on today.
Many people would like to own a "Driverless Car," but cannot because of the roads we drive on today are not up to par. Driverless cars should not be allowed in the World. The gas fuems could pollute us, they would cost lot of money, and they have already tried something like that before but it did not work due to the roads we drive on. The people who built and worked on these cars would not make a lot of money due the fact that most people are middle class, and will not spend more money on car, that could possible cost more than their house they are currently paying for, or own.
| 4 |
5993357
|
Luke Bomberger works at a grogrocery store and a bank, he wants to get a better job. His good friend Don Reist gave him an opportunity of a lifetime. Don had invited him to got to Europe on a cattle boat, he excepted the invite. Luke just knew that this would change his life.
In the middle of the story people realized that people, animals, and more looked dried out, so 44 nations had joined to form UNRRA and hired "Seagoing Cowboys."Luke and Don had signed up for it, knowing that they were going to help animals. When they had arrived from taking the animals to New Orleans the day the Pacific War had ended. They had 335 horses plus enough oats and hay to feed them. Luke had recently turned 18 before arriving to Greece. He had made 9 trips before being discharged.
I think that thanks to Don, Luke had gotten a great job just for him. I also think that Luke enjoyed the buisness he was in and what he was doing. Don is very encouraging, helpful, nice, and thanks to all of that he had gotten his friend,Luke, a job. Luke had later began helping his auntie on the farm and it prepared him for hard work. This story or passage is something that I would read again and again. It is very interesting and different. You should definetely think about joinin the "Seagoing Cowboys", it has made a great affect on Luke and his friend Don.
| 2 |
5997fe1
|
Amazing! Venus often referred to as Earth's twin. Venus is the only planet that has a simlairty of Earth, a thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbon dioxide, and sending humans to study Venus.
Venus is the only planet that has a simlairty of Earth. The size, and density are quite alike. Scientists believe that Venus, "Could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." Venus has water just like Earth does too. So this tell us that Venus and earth have many things that make them alike.
Venus got a thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbon dioxide. "Have clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." This tell us that Venus have much more carbon dioxide then earth has. Venus is much more hotter then Earth. Venus has temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Venus is some what alike to Earth, but it has many difference to it too.
Scientists are planning to sent humans to Venus to learn more about Venus. Scientists believes that, "The surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." To get into Venus is going to be hard because there's a thick hot atmosphere. As in Earth, we don't have a hot thick atmosphere. Witch gives it a more difference.
Overall, there's many things that venus show it's a great planets for people all around the world. It has a simlarity to Earth, it has a thick atmosphere, and scientists are thinking to send humans to learn more about Venus. What other more planets is more alike to Earth?
| 1 |
59993ff
|
The article "Driveless Cars Are Coming"
presents the reader with positive reasons and negative reasons of having a computer driven car ,or what people call smart cars.I believe that self driven cars should be allowed because the postive reasons behind it.It states that they have
sensors or even brake asist options.It even states that google has had a self driven car since 2009 that have driven half a million miles without crashing,but they really arent driverless yet becouse the driver can take over in any situation.Without a doubt I see this as an oppurtunity to benefit us in the future.
The positive things about having self driven cars are various such as less accidents,a more organized and safe street, and its better for the environment.The self driven by Google have proven that they can be trustworthy stating that its droven half a million miles without driving.The smart car will allow you to take control at complicated issues.The Google car includes four radar sensors, a gps reciever,and an internal motion sensor.The sensors could help you by can help the car apply brakes orthe individual to reduce power from the engine.This could help out civilians in many ways.
The self driven car has inspired people to devlop ideas toward this concept.BMW has devloped a "Traffic Jam Assistant"
which allows the car to go up to 25 mph ,but need the driver to hold the wheel.The human driver has to remain alert to take over at any situation.Even GM have devoloped a drivers seat that vibrates when in danger of backing up on an object.On the other hand the google car simply announces when to take over.Manefacturers have considered implementing camaras to watch drivers remain focused in the road.BMW wishes to use head up displays to give enertainment and informative systems.This is a safe feature, becauses safety is the priority.This has inspired Tesla,Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan to coninue devolopment.
A self driven can follow the laws of keeping drivers safe,and pedestrians safe.Driving these vehicles are allowed in California,Nevada,Florida,and the district of colombia.New states should follow soon as soon as they prove that thses cars are safe.New laws will devolop in the feature but they trust that the cars will have no problem.If their is a problem the thing is will the driver be in trouble or the manefacturer.
My view on this is im for this cause of self driving cars.These cars have been in devlopment since 2009 by google and there hasnt been a problem yet.Other car manefactures have continued their work in this idea.This idea is already allowed in some states.This idea can also inspire opther ideas in the near future.
| 4 |
599dc3f
|
In the article, the author states that, while Venus may be extreamly dangerous, studying Venus would be a worthy persuit for scientists. In paragraph 3 of the article the author describes the many dangers on Venus and how those dangers would effect attempts to study it's surface, these dangers include an atmosphere that is almost 97 percent carbon diocide, clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venuses atmosphere, a surface temperature of over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and an atmosheric pressure level that is 90 times greater than here on Earth. While the author clearly explains the dangers of Venus, in paragraph 4 he states reasons of why Venus should be studied. In his reasons he states that Venuses surface is a lot like Earths, with valleys, mountains, and craters. The author also states that some scientists believe Venus, at one point of time, may have been able to support various forms of life like our Earth,
In paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 the author explains scientists theories on how to send humans to study Venus without having to worry about the ground level dangers. One of these theories consists of having the scientists float 30 or so miles above Venuses surface and studying the planet from there. While this theory keeps the scientist safe from Venuses harsh conditions it also provides them with very limited information about Venuses surface, provided that most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere rendering photography and videography records of Venuses surface useless. While this theory seems unable to work out, that doesn't stop scientist from thinking of more ways to study Earths "twin".
In the final paragraph of the article the author states that studying Venus will not only allow us to learn more about the planet itself, but it is likely to lead us to discover newer ways to conquer the harsh enviroments of other planets and continue to learn more about the vast universe we live in.
| 3 |
599e45f
|
The face is simply a landform that ended up looking as if it were a face. If it were to be an actual face, I'm positive that the texture of the rock face wouldn't feel like it is made of rock. The face would decay and what would be left would be nothing but bones. The odds of finding an Egyptian Pharaoh's head on Mars is highly unlikely, or if there's any odds of that even happening at all.
In paragraph one, it states that the face is nearly two miles from end to end. If this were to be an Egyptian Pharaoh's face, it would have to travel all the way from Earth to Mars. How would the face even be put into space in the ancient Egyptian time period? Again, highly unlikely that a face traveled millions of miles through space and appeared on the surface of Mars. Just looking at the picture below paragraph five makes me want to believe that the face is really a face rather than a natural landform. The significant detail and shape of the face is so human like that it's hard to believe that is was naturally created over time. For example, the Washington Monument was hand carved with pick axes and with the use of dynamite. The detail is much more significant than the Mar's face, but yet how nature created it, I don't know and I don't quite understand how this was done. Considering this is two miles big also makes me wonder if this did come from outer space; the face's impact of hitting the crust of Mar's would ruin the structure of the face. The thought also of the face being made by craters hitting the face also doesn't quite make any sense. Could NASA possibly have made this up? People at NASA are very intellectual as they could maybe trick the world into believing that the formation of a human face on Mar's really happened. The odds of it being a natural landform is hard to believe, but also the thought of aliens creating the face is also highly unlikely.
In paragraph two, it states that scientists figured out it was just another Martian mesa, which is common around Cydonia, but somehow turned out looking as if it were an ancient Egyptian Pharoah's face. How this happened, nobody knows, but in my opinion, this is just a very odd coincidence. Maybe someone outside of Earth carved this? As people even have believed that aliens were the creators of the masterpiece. Nobody will ever know but it is sure that the face isn't an actual Pharaoh face like people hypothesized it was.
From reading the article, it seems as if NASA used the gossip about the face to try and make money off of the coincidential face that appeared on Mars. At the end of paragraph five, it states that, "defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." Why might they wish there was an ancient civilzation on Mars? Simply so that NASA's discovery could make them millions of dollars. NASA bringing in the word alien is just dumb in the first place. Are you serious? We haven't even found one thing about aliens existing and you try and tell the public that aliens made this? NASA's purpose of the face in my opinion is for the money.
The idea that the face is bona fide evidence on Mars makes sense, maybe the people on Mars were giants with two miles wide faces? From only seeing pictures, there isn't evidence of anything, we can only state what we believed happened for a face to appear on the crust of Mars surface. As many people believe multiple different hypothesis, we need to do more research to see if there is any faces buried in Mars just like the one we discovered. More evidence that there is possibly life on Mars being similar to the face found would make people really believe that life outside of Earth is possible. We as people could believe that the face is really a Egyptian Pharaoh's face, or a natural landform created by either craters, erosion, or the face possibly being relocated and reaching Mars. As already being stated, we need more evidence of this being a real face. If this is really a face then there would have to be other pieces of the rest of the body somewhere, or more faces in Mars below the surface. The coincidence of a Pharaoh's face appearing on Mars is almost impossible, considering that Pharaohs were people that weren't exactly giants as a two mile wide head would demonstrate. Up close picutres of the face showing if there is possibly more detail than what is shown in the picutres provided would help the fact that this is actually an ancient Egyptian face. There is no way to prove this other than finding other evidence of faces so that this coincidence doesn't seem so much like a coincidence. Being created by aliens would be hard to prove, also using you're common sense that we have yet to find anything even close to the fact that aliens exist. We would first have to prove aliens are real, then somehow prove that aliens came to Mars, carved this face, then left without doing anything else. The chance of aliens carving out this face is also very highly unlikely, in my opinion there is no chance of aliens carving out a human face on Mars.
| 4 |
59a00f0
|
I as a highschool student disagree with the idea of putting emotional facial recignition in school. Us as a society already have lost a grip on society when it comes to technology. Our youth can't even have a true conversation face to face and struggle expressing emotion or creativity due to technology growth. I think we should have less technology and teach or youth how to ask when they want something, if there bored or confused then they should express that on there own not have a machine do it for them. We should teach our youth the confidence in being able to express feelings not make it easier for our social to be wiped away with this facial recigniton. We already rely on our basic tecnology such as cellphones, and computers to get homework done, cheat, solve the most basic math equations, and as I expressed before take away our ability to be social with our peers. With this facial recignition it will most likely be avaible to most people so in that will might lose almost all social activity in the future if we keep relying on technology to do it all. Instead lets make your be proud and confident in say they don't understand, lets make them understand that theres more then a screen, more then what we type and to see what is around us. This is what i feel is best for our youth. A life without any smart technology at all.
| 1 |
59a4420
|
Is venus dangerous? "Let's find out," " Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size." "Earth,venus,and mars is our planetary neighbors,orbiting at different speeds." "If a spacecraft landed on venus, the spacecraft wouldn't have survived no more than a few hours." "Humans have sent many spacecrafts to venus but none came back or survived." Venus's surface temperature average is 8oo degrees fahrenheit,and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience than our 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 wouldf liquefy many metals." "Also notable Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system and even Mercury is closer to the sun." "Venus was once like Earth planet in our solar system." "Lomg ago Venus was probably most covered largely with oceans and could have supported the forms of life,Venus today has some features that are analogous to those on earth." "Scientist's are sending humans to study Venus,NASA's possible solution to the hostlie 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 roling venusian landscape." "A vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying uo abd out of their way."
| 2 |
59a7bad
|
Exploring Venus seems very interesting when thinking about it. All of the beneficial things that we can study and analyze. Studying other planets have always been helpful to mankind and helps people gain insight on our solar system around us. But at the same time exploring these planets are very dangerous too. Not because of animals or humans but because of the harsh living conditions on other planets. So I will tell you why I think exploring Venus is not worth the pursuit of exploring.
My first reason of why I think Venus is not worth the pursuit is because of the difficulty of exploring Venus. In paragrpah 6 it states that ships orbiting over Venus with lights can't see the ground because of the dense atmosphere. Which makes it hard for scientists because if you can't see anything you can't analyze any data that you get because of Venus's features. But it does state that NASA is trying to find new ways of exploring Venus but it's not as good as hands on exploration. Which is good but most likely not good enough to find out what they want about the planet.
My second reason of why I think Venus is not worth the exploration is because of Venus's conditions and features. When reading about Venus the conditions are very extreme compared to the conditions on Earth. Such as clouds filled with highly corrosive sulfuric acid or temperatures that average over 800 degrees. Making it the planet with the hottest surface temperature even though Mercury is closer to the sun. Also the atmospheric pressure is great enough to crush an accustomed submarine that would be able to dive into the deepest parts of the ocean and liquifies metals. But having similarities to Earth such as erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes and etc.
So in conclusion I feel that Venus should not be a planet we heavily invest in and scientists should try other planets before Venus. Because of the harsh conditions that it would have on humans. Because of the difficulty in analyzation. Making Venus a non-reliable source compared to others. So that is why I think that Venus is not worth exploring.
| 4 |
59b0500
|
Driving can be a fun time and a bad time. Driving has its advanteges but there are many disadvanteges which makes people not want to drive. Limiting car usage can be an extremely good thing and there are plenty of reasons as to why thats true. Life will still go on without cars and it might even go on in a better way. People have voted and more have voted on less driving because it is less stressful.
For starters, limiting your car usage means less accidents. United stated has the highest death amount due to car accidents. Almost 80% of deaths are from a mistake made behind the wheel. You never know what might happen when you least expect it, especially when youre just going to a drive to the grocerie store. Alot can happen in 5 minutes, In fact it is proven that most accidents happen within a mile of your home. Limit your driving and save your life as well as someone elses.
Also, limiting your car usuage means saving gas money. On average you soen about $40 dollars to fill a gas tank. That is about $80-$100 in one month. If you save that you will have over a thousand dollars saved in a year. Gas prices raise and drop but are high most of the time, which is a primary reason why people run out of money.
Lastly, limiting your gas usage means getting more exersize. Driving around will not help keep you healthy, in fact almost everyone eats behind the wheel. Drop your keys and walk to your destination. If you walk everyday to where you need to be your body will stay fit as well as expanding your lifetime. Americans tend to be lazy and not go out and exersize but without a car they have no choice. It will increase the amount of healthy people and decrease the fat on your body.
Many advantages come with not driving. It is not something impossible to do, many have done it and many can continue to do it. It will also keep comments from other people held back. No one can judge what your driving whether youre less fortunate or not. It helps keep the community closer, money saved, better health and less accidents.
| 3 |
59b254f
|
Use of technology has been changed over the past decade. Technology has been grown a lot. People use technology in regular basis. The article, Making Mona Lisa Smile by Nick D'Alto introduces a new idea of technology to read peoples emotions. This idea is very helpful and can use in any places like hospitals, schools, etc. Using technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable due to it's ability to recognize need of help, to get desirable results, and to save time.
First reason why using technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, is due to it's ability to recognize need of help. According to the article, "A classroom computer could recognize when a students is becoming confused or bored." The author meant to say that the emotion reader has the ability to recognize a emotion. Using this emotion reader in classroom computer, it is easier to identify whether a students need help or not. Due it's ability to recognize need of help, classrooms should have the technology to read the emotional expressions of students.
Second reason why using technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, is due to it's ability to get desirable results. According to the article, "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." The author meant to say that this emotion reader has the ability to find what an individual like or not by just looking at that individual's face. Due it's ability to get desirable results, classrooms should have the technology to read the emotional expressions of students.
Final reason why using technology to read the emotional expression of students in a classroom is valuable, is due to it's ability to save time.
"It could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." The author meant to say that the, this emotion reader have the ability do the job of a teacher. While the teacher is busy, the computer can help the student identify what they need help with. This save a lot of time of both the students and the teachers. Due to it's ability to save time, classrooms should have the technology to read the emotional expressions of students.
Due to the ability of recognizing need of help, getting desirable results, and saving time, technology should be used in classrooms to read the emotional expressions of students. Now technology has the ability to recognize whether an individual need help or not. It can give the results that an individual like by identifying their emotion. It can save a lot of time for both students and teachers by doing the work of a teacher and helping the student. Technology has been greatly influenced people over the past decade.
| 4 |
59b2a7f
|
Think of a clear world, no smog, no pollution, just a beautiful day everyday. Now wouldn't that be nice. What if I told you that you can make it happen? It's as easy as snapping your fingers. This thing you have to do is, drum roll please..... not using your car. I know it sounds crazy right now but let me tell you about all the good that comes out of it, and maybe, just maybe you'll change your mind.
Now as most of you know there is alot of pollution all over Earth, and this pollution is caused by alot of things, but the two main reasons are cars and power plants. Pollution caused by cars affects alot of things including greenhouses. When smoke from a car reaches a greenhouse it produces a gas that negativly affects the enviroment. Your probably thinking that it's no big deal because "theres not alot of greenhouses", but that's where your wrong. As Elisabeth Rosaenthal says " 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".
Another thing that is caused by cars is smog. Robert Duffer, the writer of
Paris bans driving due to smog , wrote that " Paris typically has more smog than other European capital ...[Last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found". Congestion in France was down 60 percent after almost a week of intensifying smog. They had to stop using cars of course, but it was the only way to get the smog to go down.
Now that we've talked about the bad stuff caused by cars, let's talk about the good that can come out of not using a car as much or not at all. alot of people who participate in not using a car, weather it was for a day or for forever, have said that it reduces alot of stress and air pollution. Lower air pollution makes for more clean and clear air. Which means you get to see the day better than before, and who wouldn't want that. Overall it not only helps you, but it also helps the planet you live on, so give walking a try, you might even find seeing nature around you better than driving by it.
| 3 |
59b6075
|
Dear Senator of Florida,
Recently I have begun to research the difference in effect on the people of Ameirca, between the Electoral College and the result of popular cote for President. I have found out that our founding fathers created the Electoral College in the Constitution, so that while the votes between Congress and the people may be different, ther could be a compromise. Our country; well our world, is evolving with the changes in generation. 2015 has come upon us, and with this year brings a whole new change in cutural diversity and tehcnology. So while I believe sticking to our coutry's Constitution is vital for some reasons, I also believe it is outdated in others.
Today, people are slowly coming out of the shells of the past and embracing the change of the future. Every year, children grow older, new children are born, and people pass away from our fine Earth. Though this new generation we have built is going to, one day, become the generation that decides who leads our country and who doesn't. I believe that the Electoral College puts a restraint on the freedom our people, new and old, should possess. Our people have to vote for a party, a group of people that don't show either their faces or their true personalities, to trust well enough with their vote to go for the President they think is right for the Country. Although that is very rarely ever betrayed- as noted by my recent research -I do believe that it is against our certain rights as a United States citizen not to know who exactly we are putting our faith in. Also, even if we do put our full faith in these mysterious political parties, like we have for years and years, who's to say that our vote will even matter? Al Gore, in the year 2000, had more popular votes from the people than Bush, yet he received fewer electoral votes, which decided the winner of the election. Why have us put in our vote at all, if it means nothing to 538 politicians?
Our country is made up of millions, upon millions of strong women, men, and children and they should be the deciding factor in the elections. It's our country just as much as it is the men that make up the Electoral College. A requirement of 270 electoral votes must be made in favor for one presidential candidate over the, though why should such a small number mean more against the millions from the citizens of this great country, the same people that make up the great state of Florida.
I understand the need for the Electoral College, when it comes to some decisions. Like avoiding a national catastrophe when it comes to the nuber of swing-votes. While I am a woman of passion, I do allow myself to see both sides of the story and I think while the Electoral College can do good, it can also do bad for this country. It is outdated, overused, and wrong.
Our founding fathers built the Constitution and this country we call home, and while that is a great thing...times are changing and the power of the House, and the Senate, should now be moved on to the people. Some states, like North Carolina and Rhode Island were even unable to know close to anything about the current eection between Gore and Bush in 200. I say every state deserves to know the news circling around their country and how it may affect them. The power should now be given to the people, allow them to decide and make decisions. Let the people know they are heard, they have the freedom that our founding fathers gave them in the Constitution. They can speak and let their minds roam for the good of this country.
The Electoral College should be taken down and gicen too the hands of the people, for the good of our future.
Sincerely,
A woman who cares both for her state and her country.
PROPER_NAME
| 3 |
59b98b0
|
The use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classrom is valuable. The technology would help to see what a student is feeling. If a student is sad, a peer or tecaher can help them get through what they're going through. If a human can't read facial expressions that good, a computer can. Technology is a good source for reading students' emotions.
Technology could help an individual see what another individual is feeling. In the text it states that, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," that's what the Facial Action Coding system is there for. If someone can't tell how their peer is feeling, they should use this technology. Computers are smart. Technology can tell how you're feeling. The Facial Action Coding System is a good way to communicate your emotions.
If a student is not in the best mood, a peer or a teacher can help them with what they're going through. "Each expression is compared against a neutral face," humans can't tell what people are going through that wears a neutral face. The Facial Action Coding System reads all of your face muscles and movements. "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar add might follow," this tells the audience that computers can tell how you're feeling. Computers can read emotions better than humans.
If a human can't read facial expressions, a computer can. "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your muscles not only expressed emotions, but may even help produce them," the Facial Action Coding System tells you to smile in a certain way and it may make you happy. An individual may look at another individual and mey think nothing's wrong when there really is something wrong. Computers are capable of uplifting your mood if you're sad. Humans aren't good at reading facial expressions.
Technology that can read your face in classrooms are valuable. You never know what a student is going through. That student or teacher may need somebody to comfort them. You can make somebody happier with this certain technology. Do you think people would be less sad if this technology was used?
| 4 |
59ba1a1
|
Do you think driveless cars are dangerous if so why? I think driveless cars are a better oppournity for drivers to get around easier, sensor and safer! The driver could get around easier instead using brake when stop or either steer the wheel when its hard to turn. In the text it says " They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents". Drivless cars could help you through difficult times even if you drive past road rage!
Driverless cars technology is a good idea I think because it has an sensor! It tracks what your feeling or what you could detect while your in the car driving In the text it says "Fruther improvements in sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their own." The idea of having the a sensor sense you when your in danger or need of help if your car breaks down is another postive impact of driverless car. The sensor contains deep inside the car for example the creation of the speeding of antilock brakes. Smarter manufacturers turned to smarter cars because not only the speed of the brakes but the engine can be reduce power and allowing for better response and control than a human druver could manage alone.
Driverless cars as can detected whether your in danger or not! Safety is important if you have an automated car driving you! Who knows what the case maybe? In the text it says " GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object." Referring when the vehicle sense another car been touch the car automate is going to be aware something is wrong. The google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over other options under consideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays. Driverless cars manuafacturers are aslo safer because inside the car while the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver!
The manufactures is driverless cars is not only a good service of work with making cars but different oppournities could be with just testing out how things would be different with someone controlling the car! Its like the car knows where to take the driver as soon as someone sit in the driver seat. The smart idea of the gps of the car is a good motive for the driver just have to seat back and relax! The driverless car still alert the driver to take over when pulling or may pulling out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues. Autonomous car is a good way with not dealing with car wrecks or even navigating through roadwork.
Another impressive thing is the law depend on the driver to always mistakes or either just going over the speed limit! That is never the case with driverless car As stated above safety is acheived witht he alerted driver. Presently, the law thinks assumption of the driverless car is safe car human in control at all times. The law still change the laws, will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident.
| 4 |
59c1a55
|
Have you ever wondered about cars that can drive without a human driving it? Cars that can drive themselves will not be good for this world. Driverless cars will not be good for this world because they will not be as safe as humans driving cars, it would cost too much money for the driverless car to work at its full potential, and drivers will get bored sitting in the car. These are reasons why the development of driverless cars needs to stop.
A driverless car will not be good for drivers because the cars would not be as safe as a human would be driving the car. If the car is driving itself and it sees an accident, how will it know how to drive around it. If there is road construction, the driverless car would not know what to do in that type of situation. In the article, the text says,"Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." The text also says,"Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" This shows that even driverless cars can get into car accidents. If the driverless car got in to a car accident-would it be the driver's fault or would it be the car's fault?
Another reason that a driverless car should not be introduced to the world is because it would cost too much money for the driverless car to work at its full potential. For the driverless cars to work correctly there would have to be huge upgrades to all present roads we have right now. If we tried to upgrade all the roads we have now, that would simply be too expensive. In the article, the text says,"These smart-road systems worked suprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, somthing that was simply too expensive to be practical." This shows that for the driverless car to really work the builders had to upgrade the present roads we have now. If upgrading just a few roads was too expensive, how will we be able to upgrade all the roads for the driverless car?
Lastly, driverless cars would not be good for the world because the drivers would get bored sitting in the car. For the car to drive itself, the driver must keep their hands on the wheel at all times. The driver must also have to stay focused. Most drivers would rather driver than sit in the driver's seat doing absolutely nothing. In the article, the text says,"Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for theri turn to drive? 'The psychological aspects of automation are really a challenge,' admits Dr. Werner Huber, a BMW project manager driver." This shows that even if we did have driverless cars that someone would need to be at the wheel paying attetion to the road. This would bore drivers very quickly. Why would we want a driverless car if we have to keep hold of the wheel at all times?
In conclusion, we should not have driverless cars because they will not be as safe as humans driving cars, it would cost too much money for the driverless car to work at its full potential, and the drivers would get bored sitting in the car. Driverless cars will not help the world. The development of driverless cars needs to stop.
| 5 |
59cec78
|
This is a story about a young man who is 18 years younn and he works two part time jobs with his friend "Don" and one day Don asked Luke if Luke would like to go to Europe and China with him. Luke new he couldn't say NO! Because he really wanted to go. Well Luke of course said, "Yes!" He didn't know why he was going to Europe and China? They sent him on a boat with Don and he had to help animals have shelter, food, and water. So when Luke and Don arrived to their destination, Don told Luke why they were going to Europe and China ... and Don said, "Luke we came to Europe and China so we could fight in the war." Luke was actually really excited and Don didn't understand why he was excited. Luke said, "This is awesome! I've always wanted to fight in the war!!" Luke said. Don was really happy that Luke was happy and so they went back to China and went to their military academy and started to get prepared for the war that they were gonna fight in. Don and Luke wished eachother good luck. When war ended in China they had to go back to Europe to get to fighting down their. When they arrived back to Europe, Luke and Don were really nervous and happy because they've heard good and bad things about Europe. Finally when the Europe and China war was over they could go back home, to their family and where they lived. And that's the story about "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves."
| 1 |
59d8128
|
Dear State Senator,
In my opinion, Im in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. At first I was all for keeping the Electoral College. But after reading the reasons why we shouldn't keep it I completly agree that we should change it.
"At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight racs in the "swing" states." So basically the electoral college doesn't give a fair chance to voters and that's not right. All voters in every state should get a fair chance. "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. It's hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college!"
"The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense . . . it is the electors who elect the president, not the people." Which once again is not fair and isn't right. If people are taking the time to vote then they're the ones who should be picking who the president is. Not the electors. "When you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors."
"The single best arguement against the electoral college is what we migh call the disaster factor. Consider that the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people." This is an example: "In 1968, a shift of just 41,971 votes would have deadlocked the election; In 1976, a tie would have occurred if a mere 5,559 voters in Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hawaii had voted the other way. The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe."
Those are a couple great reasons and examples why you should change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States instead of keeping the Electoral College.
Sincerely,
Alexandria Longoria
| 4 |
59d98c3
|
Driverless cars would not be a great idea. There are many issues and concerns against the development of these cars. There are reasons why people have a driver's license. It makes having one pretty obsolete. All the work people have done for them and the practicing of driving will no longer be needed. The driverless car seems to be a lazy way of transportation and can cause problems on the road. The driverless car can cause and have problems such as navigating through roadwork or accidents and laws about faults.
The driverless car can have problems fucntioning and navigating through roadwork or accidents. So far they are not yet perfected in going completely driverless. Someone still has to be behind the wheel in case of something the car cannot do. The closest thing they have to driverless is not as one would expect. The cars can only do so much. As stated in the article, they still have to alert the driver to takeover whenever the car cannot do it itself. This is not very efficient considering its called a driverless car. The cars would need to be completely self aware in order to surpass these obstacles like road construction or accidents that have occured on the road.
The way laws would work are not yet established and if someone were to be in an accident, who would be at fault? This is another issue concerning these cars. Laws pertaining to this subject would need to be made. If someone were to crash the blame would be on the driver, of a normal car. When you birng a driverless car to the conversation the question then becomes, was it the driver or manufacturer of the car. As stated in the article traffic laws would change and new ones would be added. This branches off to more problems with the manufacturer and driver. The driver could make the argument that the manufacturer's vehicle is defective, and that is why they crashed. The manufacturer could say that the driver let his guard down and was too careless. Either way laws would be of concern.
The driverless car can be seen as a good thing, but the problems and defects it still has are a big concern. The car can have problems navigating through roadwork. It can also struggle driving around an accident that may have occurred nearby. There would need to be new laws and changes to the already made laws. The driverless car would be a pretty unefficient thing and could be dangerous.
| 4 |
59dcb0c
|
Technology to read the emotional expressions of students shouldn't be used because someones facial expressions of students in a classroom well be like there mad but they won't be mad . Sometimes facial expressions are not always right , they can look upset and not be upset at all . Sometimes people just don't wanna smile or show any emotion . Sometimes the "Facial Action Coding System" might work but sometimes it might not . Not everyone face say how they really feel . Can't no computer tell you how you feel because a computer is not you and is not in your head . Can't nobody say how the Vinci was feeling at the time of him painting Mona Lisa . A computer is used to look up things , found out information , video chat , email , do homework on but having a computer read the emotinal expressions on a teenagers face is going have the system broke nobody know's how a teenager feels at that time not even the teenager . Teenagers have so many emotions in one second so how can a computer read a students facial expressions .
| 2 |
59e32c9
|
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring venus" the author
suggersts that studying Venus is a worthy pursit despite the dangers it presents. Venus is a dangeros because is gets to hot, the atmosphere is dangeros, and pressure.
One way that Venus is dangeros because the temperature on the planet gets too hot and it is hotter then Mercury even though its closer then the sun. A quotoe that
''on the planet serface, temperatures average 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.'' This quote states that it gets really hot on venus and the pressure is more higher then earth.
Another way that venus is dangerous because of its atmosphere is that safe.
A quote that states this is that '' A think atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus amosphere.'' This quote states that the atmosphere has a lot of carbon dexide and there is sulfuric acid in atmosphere of Venus
Another reason why venus is
dangeors
planet because of its pressure. A quote is that " Beyonf high pressure and heat,Venusian geology and weather presents additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful eartquakes,and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." this quote states that it has high pressure for it to have more storms and really powerful natural disasters on its surface from earthquakes to volcanoes.
In conclusion Venus is a dangeros because is gets to hot, the atmosphere is dangeros, and pressure. Venus will be a very hard planet to get details and research from the planet from its atmosphere and how hot Venus can get.
| 2 |
59e3ebc
|
My position on the driverless cars are definitley a no. While the whole idea is interesting and fascinating it is also exteremly dangerous. Maybe the daythey actually perfect it and it is deemed safe i would accept it but as of right now my opinion on the entire things definitley a no, because while people would need to have alert drivers alotof them arent and even when we have driverless cars the cars are going to still need some human amount of interaction and if the person for instance is drunk they aren't going to be seen as very useful to it.
People are most likely going to take advantage of this car and this whole thing and i know its not going to be pretty when they do, im just really not for it.
There are companies such as General Motors trying but they would have to change all the roads for it which is obviously way to expensive to ever do. Engineers at Berkeley tried something similar they used magnets with alternating polarity and it still also wouldnt work out because of the road expenses.
Everything that has been done still needs somekind of human interaction and i believe that is the way that it should be so that nothing bad happens because like in paragraph 9. They talk about " Even if traffic laws changed, new laws would be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. if the technology fails and someone is injured who is the one at fault? the driver or the manufacturer?" i agree with this, no one would know whose fault it would be it's honestly just taking an unnecessary risk, putting live in danger to those around the smart cars and to those in them.
There is alot to be done and there is alot to come because these companies are making several advancements and several attempts, they aren't going to stop. it isn't just to make things easier i believe that alot of these people just think it would be cool, it's less work for the person and thats just going to start revolutionizing the fact that " humans don't need to work" let's have someone else do it for us. I don't like it at all.
| 4 |
59e5c22
|
Ford, Volkswagen, Kia, and Chevy's... while these car brands may have been a massive part of the American culture, its significance in our lives may be declining. According to recent studies and stories from around the world, car transportation popularity is decreasing dramatically. Some advantages of limiting car usage that the United States will benifit from include: reducing greenhouse gases emitted making for a better environment, and less usage of cars can lower stress and is safer.
By limiting the amount that the citizens of the United States operate their vehicles, the condition of our environment's atmosphere will improve. As stated in Source 1, "and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." This passage is referring to the amount of greenhouse gas emitted here in America because of passenger cars. By not using car and taking advantage of other methods of transportation such as buses, walking, and riding a bike that number can be reduced significantly. In the United States we are also learning from mistakes made by other countries and cities. "After days of near-record pollution," Source 2 says, "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." A lesson can be taken from Paris of how we do not want to end up in a situation like that. By limiting our driving currently we can avoid having to take major steps to clean and clear our environment. "It will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants," a sociologist predicts in Source 4. Environmental advantages of reducing greenhouse gas is a major way we can benifit from limiting car usage.
A decent amount of stress comes with owning and operating a motorized vehicle. You are constantly worrying about if you will be late, or if you have enough gas to make it from point A to point B. Children are another concern and trying to keep them safe around roads and driving by themselves. Limiting the use of cars can create a less stressful, and safer society. In Source 3 it explains that, "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." Lowering the use of cars can make life a little less busy because it is one thing less that you have to worry about throughout your day. Heidrun Walter said, in Source 1, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Reducing the usage of cars can promote a less stressful and safer lifestyle here in the United States.
Although the use of cars may be convienent, the benifits of limiting the usage may be beginning to outweight the inconviences. Between reducing the greenhouse gas creating a cleaner environment as well as lessening stress and making the roads safer, the advantages of limiting car usage in the United States are major.
| 4 |
59e7f71
|
Is the face on Mars an alien artifact of just a natural landform? So far we have no real proof that aliens even exist. Also in 1998 the JPL website revealed that it was just a natural landform and not made by aliens. Also NASA would be just as excited to reveal that another life form has been found, that wouldn't be a kept secret.
So far we have no real proof that aliens exist. If there were aliens wouldn't we know by now? There are lots of alien conspiracies but nothing that proves aliens exist. UFO spottings are just the same. You may think theres an alien in there but whos to say its not just a flying frisbee. And the crop circles how do you know the farmer doesn't just like to have a nice looking crop.
Lots of people believe in aliens but what are they basing these beliefs from, one blurry picture? We can say there may be evidence of aliens but no proof.
When the next Mars Global Surveyor flew over we got an even better picture. Lots of people were anxious to find out what the story behind this face was. Later theJPL website revealed something that shocked, relieved, saddened, and angered the people. The website had said that there was no alien artifact just a natural land form. How after all of that can you still think there are aliens? Well some people still believe. There are all kinds of things people think that show us there are aliens. But just about every one of them is some kind of misunderstanding.
If we had found aliens we would be eager to share our discovery not try to hide it. People say that NASA is just trying to make us think there are no aliens. The truth is we wish we had found them. It would have been much more exciting to find aliens than some sort of natural landform. Some people think that this is evidence that we are trying to hide our discoveries. I really do wish that we had found aliens. Talk about a pay raise! But, there is still no strong evidence of aliens.
I think by now it is safe to say that aliens don't exist. So far we just have no real proof of aliens. Not to mention that JPL already confirmed that the face was just a natural landform. Also theres that part about how we would benifit even more for finding aliens. People can still have their conspiracies but that can't change the facts. THERE ARE NO ALIENS!
| 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.