full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
I disagree, there should not be andy driverless cars in the future. This is because if there were to be an accident and the car were driverless it were to be on the manufactures and that would mean that the cars were not as safe as it guarenties.
Therefore that would lead to many recless mistakes and companies would lose money which would intintionally lead to not enough funds to fix and make sure that the cars will be safer.
Also, If a car were driverless how would it know the correct and incorrect way to drive without a drivers experience and skill? That would lead to a greater amount of accidents because the car may not know the right way to drive in different countries or cities.
Would the car have to be programmed with all the worlds driving techniques and rules? Not all states and countries have the same laws and road rules, wouldnt the manufactuers have to be able to program all of the worlds rules and techniques to beable to make it safer also? Not all companies will be able to get a hold on all the tech and programing for that so not all of the cars will be able to drive in different places and states because the car would become disfunctional.
Also
there is always the risk of an accident weither the car is driverless or not so therefore the statement of a driverless
car is indeed false advertisement, it is even more false because the driver will not be in control to prevent the accident if one were to happen.
Would it be safer for the enviorment? If driverless cars were to be invented would there be a lot more factories and bussinises opening?
Thata would not be safe for the enviorment because the factories would cause pollution and more trees and forests would have to be torn down in order to creat more bussinises.
Therefore creating a driverless car would be a bad idea at least until it has better and safer ground to be to the attention of the people. | 2 |
From the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile" The Authir talks about how there is new technology that is call Facial Action Coding System or FACS for short. FACS enables computers to identify human emotions in picutres, and aslo videos. In the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile" The author states that in the famous Mona Lisa picute by Copy Leonardo
Da Vinci the renasissance painting. The painting of Mona Lisa her facial expersion was " She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted,6 percent fearful,and 2 percent angry."There is no way that technology can scan a painting from the 1600's and find the painting facial expression out.
In paragraph 4 the author says " "The facial expresions for each emotion universal observes Dr. Huang" " ." even though indivisuals often vary degrees of expression ". Dr. Huang is saying that it is impossible to find out someones emotions in a photo of them. In paragrah 3 the author says " The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face ; all 44 major mucels in the model must move like human muscels." The author is saying that there is no possible way that a computer can scan a persons exspression in a photo because of the the camreas frame and the movement of the person in the photo.
In paragraph 7 the author says " Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." The Mona Lisa painting was in the 1600's it is impossible to figure out what was her expression. The author goes deep into the article to tell the reader that technology can't identify human emotions. In paragraph 6 the author says " Tyhe Mona Lisa demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face while it shows just how much this computer can do." The author is explaing how technology is syncing into students brain and mind.
In parargraph 5 the author says " In fact,we humans perform this same impressive ''calculation'' every day. For instance, you can probaly tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." The author is saying us humans have questions about others expressions. | 0 |
Is it really, good if u dont use a car day to day? People in Europe have started this new trend of having different suburbs to not have cars. Now, Paris is banning driving due to smog. Also, Clolombia now has a car-free day that made people bike, hike and aslo take buses to work making the streets have less traffic jams. The U.S, one of the most car used nations, has been going down, and in April 2013 the number of miles driven per person was the same as in January 1995. Experts are also thinking that if they encourage people to reduce the usage of cars, that it may help the greenhouse gases problem gradualy.
So one suburb that is already been established and made an car-free zone is Vauban, Germany. This suburb has minimal parking spots and people have easy access to stores. A woman said,
"When i had a car i always tense. I'm much happier this way"
. This movement of making places car-free is called
"smart plannig"
. "In the U.S the Envoirmantal Protection Agency is promoting
"car redused"
communities and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously."
In Paris, people were fined if they did not leave their car at home. This was put into place, because smog was intensifying. Also, smog is more in Paris than in any other capital in Europe. Delivery companies lost revenue, but electric cars and public transit was free of charge. After, the smog cleared the odd ruling was rescinded.
Colombia had an idea that was put into place one day and made a change in everybody. They made a program which is a car-free day which made people go hiking, biking and they rode buses to work. It made the streets clearer. It was put into place so that it woulg help the reduction of smog. This peogram helps people to know other ways to transport themselves without cars.
The U.S is the nation that has the most cars used. So, now they are trying to decrease the use of cars. A study showed that driving by young people decreased 23% between 2001 and 2009. Also, people big car business are trying to help. The want to partner with telecommunications so they can create cities with lower emissions and improved safety. | 1 |
The face was just a natural landform made by butte or mesa which were landforms common around around the American West. I know this because it says in the article " As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel, "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.
Even though many scientists thought the Face was a alien artifact, photographing Cydonia became a priority for NASA when Mars Global Surveyor arrived at the Red Planet. People may have thought the Face was bona fide evidence of life on Mars evidence the NASA would rather hide.
The face was just a huge rock formation which looked as to be a human head. The head was formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose and mouth. Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa common enough around Cydonia.
An those are the many reasons why I think it was not created by aliens but created by natural landform. | 1 |
Can you detect a happy person to an excited person would you want to detect if someone has mixed emotions about you well "Making Mona Lisa smile" does that for you.
This computer software can recognize emotions, which was innovated by professor Thomas Huang.
The development of the computer software is a certain pleasant choice because it can detect mixed emotions, can detect trait easily, and it can bring a smile to your face.
The computer software can detect mixed emotions, Dr. huang says that there are many emotions in this universe but with the video movements Mona Lisa can " by weighing different units, the units can be identified mixed emotions , by comparing agai nst a neautral face." saying it can detect mixed emotions by taking it slow with the detection doing it by unit.
The Mona Lisa can also detect faces really easily but there is a process first the Mona Lisa consturcts a 3D computer model face there is 44 major muscles and that must move like a human muscles the movement is called action unit. Stating that its worked on the musclesof the face.
This software brings also a smile to your face. The Mona Lisa can detect when you are sad or happy whenever you are on a computer and it can help you modify the mood you are in. It can change you expression on your face so you can feel better when on the computer.
The compter software innovated by professor thomas huang "Making Mona Lisa smile" is on the excellent idea category becuase of the reason it can modify your mood, can tell when you are having mixed emotions and also it tells you quickly what your trait is. It will be a treat knowing that this idea can recognize someones trait just by a computer and your muscles moving to the expression you want it to be in . | 2 |
The computer software to read a humans' faces can be helpful, but it can also be harmful. It can be helpful to know what kind of lesson plan that your students are interested in and what ads to put up on their computer. It can be harmful, because what if the student does not want to talk about their emotions and they are having a rough day. Not everyone would want to have the feelings known by everyone.
The computer could use your emotion to manipulate you, and make you do things you woundn't normally do. Like bring up ads to make you spend money that you don't nesessarily have. Or bring up ads that make you go on a website that you really aren't supposed to be on. All of these things can cause trouble and the emotion reading software may seem like not such a brilliant idea.
The software may malfunction sometimes and read your emotion wrong. Giving you things on the computer that you do not want to see. You can become irritatible with your computer knowing that it knows how you're feeling all the time. It can become scary, and it may feel like someone is watching you just because your computer knows your emotions.
Not everyone would want this software on their computer, so it may not be as profitable as it was initially intended to be. When you are in a bad mood you don't want little things bothering you. Which means you don't want ads popping up evrywhere; even though you are interested in those ads you may not want them popping up too frequently. The software maybe inaccurate sometimes and that may cause problems. Evidently, this is not a good idea. | 2 |
Driverless cars could be the next big thing. I think having driverless cars will be a sight to see. It doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. Of course they will need more work, but this could change the way people drive. Not only in U.S.A., but also the entire world.
For instance , Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. They aren't completely driverless, they send alerts to the driver to take over when things like a road block or an accident occurs. This just means the driver must remain alert at all times while in the vehicle. The driverless car is the same kind of function of an autopilot for a plane. While the driver is waiting for their turn to take over the wheel , it wont give them enough time to text, or use their phone. This can reduce the crash rate around the world.
Imagine how the future will be in 5 to 10 years. The driverless car could be one of the greatest things to happen in the century! All we have to do, is have a little hope. The Google cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. The Google car is still under maintenance. They are continuesly adding more details to it. Like the 3-D model of the car's surroundings. All of us together, can make this the next big thing. | 2 |
The author does a very good job at explaining and giving details of the passage.They give you the scientific facts and even tells you that NASA has been working on diffrent ways to study Venus.He lets you know that Venus is not an easy planet to study since it has a top degrees of 800 degrees Farenheight. He also gives information about how diffrent metals and other objects melt and liquefy after so long on Venuses surface.
They give very good information on how NASA plans to get peopel to Venus by building a space craft that will hover 30 miles over the landscape of Venus. He gives muliple good facts about the spaace craft and how it will possible work. The author claims it will work like airplanes and a blimp, However it will still be hot 30 miles up. It will still be 170 degrees up there.They also give you the bad parts of having a hover craft over Venus for example the visibility of the landscapes and terrian. They also explain how you can't take samples from the ground hovering 30 miles over the land.
The author also gives creat detail of Venuses surface and how NASA has been thinking of diffrent ways to approach it. They give facts about the ground and the atmospherer around Venus and how the Atmosperic pressure is 90 times greatewr then we have experience with.The author also tells us how it's blanketed with 97 percent Carbon diocide and other gasses. We are even told that the conditions are to extream for us and how the presure would crush a submarine.
In the passage he describes how it's one of the brightest points in the sky. The author even tells us how a amerture could even find it. Venus is also described as our twin planet. It is also wrote in the passgae on how close it resembles our planet even though it could crush and kill anyone. The author also adds on how hard Venus is to examine with all the storms and comotion on its ground.
Venus even has volcanoes that erupt on it's surface. It has Earthquakes and even occasional lightning storms. The author has definetly done a very good job on explaining his point on exploring Venus. He has put the good and the bad facts into the passage. He describes almost every aspect of the planet.The author aslo beleives that it will be good for us to try and explore Venus because we will be able to go one more dangerouse trips in the future. | 3 |
Have you ever wondered about natural formations? You would think that someone or something had to help form it, right? As a NASA scientist, I'm here to tell you that these strange, yet amazing things can happen on there own. There are some people that do not believe in natural landforms in other planets.
In 1976, an image from a satellite-related object took a photograph of a piece of Mars. In the image, there was a piece of land which appeared to look much like a human face. Once NASA reveiled the shocking news, Many people did not believe them. Humans thought that aliens were the ones who contrusted such a thing.
NASA has more than enough facts and evidence to prove that it was made naturally. The article says "Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." This means that the landform was made by natural occurances. The landform is natural. The passage also says "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, reavealing... a natural landform. This means that there was no alien monument after all." There is much more proof of this landform being natural than there is being made by aliens.
Others say, that aliens made this formation. The article states that "Conspiracy theorists say that the Face is evidence that NASA would rather hide." The thing that they do not realize is the fact that they have no proof of NASA "making up" a story like this. Theorists have not studied the landform as much as we have. How can people think that the Face is created by aliens when theres absolutely no proof of their existance?
Making up fake stories for publicity is extremely wrong. If theres no evidence of something being fake, than just belive that it is real. Theres more to the world than people think and believe. | 2 |
In "Making Mona Lisa smile" the author describes a new technology that is called Facial Action Coding System. The Facial Action Coding System is a system that can cacualte your emotions. The technology should be valuable in a students classroom for a couple reasons. One reason is because if a lesson is to boring then it could chnage it up to where you are having fun but still learning. Another reason to why the Facial Action Coding System should be valuable is because sometimes we have to pretend like we are fine when we aren't.
The Facial Action Coding System is a system that can caulate your emotions. Wouldn't it be couls if you could caculate your emotions like a math test? I think it would. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" it tells us how you feel according to the face expression you do. For example, in the article its says when you raise your eyebrows it means you are surprised. The article also says when you force a smile or if you actually mean it.
When you fake smile your mouth is stretched sideways. When you actually want to smile the zygomatic major lift the corners of your mouth.
The Facial Action Coding System should be valuable in a students classroom because if you are trying to pay attention but it's to boring the computer will detect that and it could change it to where you are having fun but still learning. Another reason to why it could be helpful is because if you are becoming confused about the lesson or have a question about it the computer will also detect that and it could offer you extra help. Wouldn't it be nice to get extra help when you need it? I sure would like it.
Having the Facial Action Coding System could help when letting your feelings out. There are some people that have to pretend like everything is fine and pretend they are happy when they aren't. Like it was said in the article people often can tell how you feel with the face expression you have but they don't kmow if you are faking it.
People see you look happy so they never ask "how are you doing?" "Can I help you with anything?" so you have no one to talk to but with the new system it would be different.
There are other reasons to why the Facial Action Coding System should be valuable I just said a coulpe. I think the new system would really help out alot of people and not only in school but also outside of school also. | 2 |
You should join the seagoing cowboys. We have fun, travel, help people, and deliver animals.
One reason is because we travel. We have gone to China, Italy, and even Greece. We will go so many more places to maybe even England. We would be able to go to a lot more places. With you.
We also deliver animals and food. Our animals include horses and young cows. We need help caring for all of our animals. Caring for our animals means making sure they have been fed and watered every hour.
Also we help people. We give them food and animals. They need that after wars. Its such an adventure.
Just because we help people and do work doesn't mean we don't have fun. On our trips back we play table tenis, baseball and, vollyball. We also do fencing and boxing.
Thats why i think that you should join us. I hope we see you on our next trip. | 2 |
Although skeptics are proclaiming that there is life on Mars, NASA has scientifically proven the true, less exciting conclusion: the mysterious face seen on the Red Planet is just a natural landform called a Martian mesa. Photographs from different spacecrafts have revealed an image on Mars that appears to have a "shadowy likeness of a human face". Shadows on the object give "the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Many believe this is a key piece of evidence showing past or present alien life. However, NASA has examined multiple facts to turn down this claim.
In 1976, NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft captured the first look at this mystertious figure. While looking for landing sites for Viking 2, its sister ship, the spacecraft came across the Face in a region on Mars called Cydonia. Scientists conluded that the formation was a Martian mesa with shadows creating facial features. Although the claim was made, the image created suspicion in many. What if the Face was an alien artifact? However, on April 5, 1988, Mars Global Surveyor took another photograph, and this image was ten times sharper than the 1976 picture. Again the Face was shown as the same type of natural landform. Finally, in 2001, a third picture of the Face, taken by the latest Mars Global Surveyor, created solid evidence to the past conlusion. Also, a discovery of life on Mars would benefit the comapany of NASA. Therefore, the organization would not hide a discovery of life on the planet, as many skeptics believe the comapany would do so.
The most plausible theory is that the Face a natural Martian mesa. Three photographs from spacecrafts support this claim, and the fact that the landform is in Cydonia, an area with many of these formations, further backs this conclusion. NASA has no reason to hide new scientific discoveries of life on different planets, and the company is not doing so here. Although the discovery of unknown life would be an extraordinary feat, scientists must continue to research into different areas of space, hoping to find evidence for such conclusion. | 2 |
Dear senator The Electoral College process should be changed. this is the rule of it process consists of the selection of the selection of the electors the meetion of the elecctors where they vote for president and vice president and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. I personally thinck that that is not that smart of a rule,because the president would propally say that he would do all of this stuff saying that we do not have to pay taxes and stuff trying to convince us to vote for him by lying to us.
As well as other presidents could be telling the truth and saying all of this stuff saying that one day they will make people stop paying taxes and poeople right away will thinck ohhh yess no taxes lets vote for this guy wile really they can do that but they will rise the prices on everything and then people will get mad agian.
I thinck that the president should not talk to everyone one by one because then that would be just way to long and tireing. As well as the person could just decide to bribe everyone. thoes are all just one reason that i thinck we should change the rule. There are also some good parts about it everyone will be able to hear the president talk instead of having to hear him through tv and people making adiou changes or people hearing their tv wrong or people haveing their tv volume to low
''And that is all i have to say about that". | 0 |
All of our lives, many people have talked about how there would be flying cars in the future.
You see it in countless movies and shows, the most popular probably being Back to the Future.
Unfortanatly, the flying car is yet to be made. However, many companies are working on driverless cars. Cars that you can just get in and they will drive you where ever you need.
As amazing and unbeleiveable as this idea sounds, is it worth the risks?
To be able to make a safe car that runs on its own seems very difficult.
It is not something that can be made overnight.
In fact, Google has made and is still working on driverless cars since 2009.
So, this idea has been around for long enough, but why do we not see any driverless cars on the road today?
No company can seem to make a car smart enough to drive itself.
BMW annouced 3 years ago the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." This car can drive in speeds up to 25 miles per hour, althought the "not-so-driver" must keep his or her hands on the wheel, and they are alerted when they must take over driving. Meaning that they must pay atttention at all times.
So what is the point of these so called "driverless" cars if they are not completley "driverless"?
This idea can totally change the world. Although, should their really be driverless cars on the roads if they are not COMPLETELY self-driven?
Maybe not.
What if someone isn't paying attention to the road then suddenly the car is put in a situation where it doesn't know what to do, forcing the "driver" to spring into action.
This could be deadly.
Plus, what if people forget how to properly drive after years of a car doing for them? Then when they do need to take over the driving, their driving skills may be rusty, and they defininatly won't know what to do in an advanced situation, such as if the car was skidding and/or going off the road.
Leading to many injurys or even death.
With that being said there are still many injurys and deaths with people opperating cars.
So you may say that the argument is invalid.
Although, you can teach humans to be carful in a car, and yes we make mistakes, but humans, unlike computers, can adapt to complicated situations.
Driverless cars seem very helpful, but is it really worth the risk of death.
Would you really put you saftey into the hands of a computer?
The negative seems to out-weigh the positive.
Not saying that it is an impossible idea, just very unrealistic.
Maybe they should just start working on flying cars instead? | 1 |
Some people complain that by not having a car they aren't allowed to complete certain tasks or it limits their chances for actually "doing better" in life. If only those people knew how bad having a car could be sometimes. I myself is a person without a car, and I already am stressed out. When having a car you have to deal with the constant prices of gas, the troubles of if your car breaks down or not, and being a relaible taxi as they like to call it for those people who are car-free. I do believe there should be some car limitations enorced.
You just read that last sentences of that paragraph and probably thought man this girl is crazy, but no I'm serious. There are actually a great amount of advantages for limitations on car usage. For example the constant worrying about gas. How much is it going to cost? Can I afford it this week? Will I make it to work with only half a tank? as stated here "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way", said Heidrun Walter from
In German Suburb, Lies Goes Without Cars . Think about it this way a giant weight has just been lifted off your shoulders.
Being without a car isn't as bad as it may seem. There's no more having to deposit your life savings when your car breaks down or better yet having to constantly think about that nasty smog that comes out of the back muffler when you need a tune-up. | 1 |
Driverless cars are a good thing. They will have a positive outcome if they are created. Driverless cars are the future of the road. The progress in just the past 15 years is incredible. The next 15 will hold even more.
The future holds many new advancments. And as stated in the text, "Television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves." It's been a making in the works for years. Now the dream is finaly coming into sight. Driverless cars are becoming more and more pluasable.
There is a lot of sensor and equipment that go into making these cars safe. So much, in fact, that these cars may be safer than actual drivers themself. The high tech gadgets attached to the car help it "see" it's surroundings and drive safely. The farther advanced the reaserch goes, the safer and more reliable this technology will get.
Some may say that these driverless cars are not the future. They say it's to dangerouse or to expensive or to advanced. While it is expensive, driverless cars are still the furure. They are very safe, in some cases safer than an actual driver. The technology is not to advanced, it's being studied and develped every day. The technology is right in front of our eyes. The driverless car is the future.
The more advancments made, the closer we are to making this once so far away dream reality. What was just a sci-fi story in movies is now being tested and develpoed. What was said impossible is now within reach. The though of driverless cars is becoming a product. Driverless cars are coming, and fast. | 2 |
To start with, the challenge of exploring Venus is that it's more then just one challenge it's several. There are terrible weather conditions, ninty times the pressure we have on our planets, clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid, and a ton of other challenges.
Frist of all, the heat conditions on the planet Venus are close to eight times the heat that we've ever felt on our planet. The average tempeture on Venus is around eight hundred degrees Farenheit every day. This heat could melt some of the metals that we have on our planet, Earth. On days that are around ninty degrees on our planet it is very hot imagine being in that heat but times eight. People would die from the heat of that planet and this is one reason why it makes it such a great challenge to explore Venus.
Second, according to paragraph 3 of the article it states "the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." Living on this planet seems to be complety insane! The pressure on this planet could liquefy many of our metals.
If a submarine made to dive to the deepest depths in our ocean went there the water would crush and liquify almost the entire thing. Swiming to low in our planet can pop your ears and possibly even burst your ear drum imagine what swimming on that planet would be like; considering if you could even swim due to the weather.
lastly, the heat, and the pressure are not the only things you need to worry about. Venus's geology and weather has additional problems like powerful earthquakes, erupting valcanoes, and lightning strikes that destroy probes. It wouldn't be possible to get a submerine to the water on Venus without it getting struck by lightning first. These weather conditions are terrible and impossible to work with.
The article states "at thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth." These conditions are horrible and the people wouldn't even be on the planet. This is by far one planet that would be very challenging to abserve and even be around.
To conclude, everything about exploring Venus is challenging! The heat is far hotter than anything that humans have ever delt with. The pressure could crush submarines meant for going to the depest depths in our world. Imiagine what it could do to humans.
These aren't even the only problems, clouds cover Venus and these clouds are no regular clouds; they're clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid.
Not only this but Venus has the hottest surface tempetures and it's not even the planet closes to the sun. These are some of the greatest challenges of exploring Venus. | 3 |
NASA would like to start by saying thanks you for your interest. We find it very encouraging to see people so excited about our solar system. I am here to explain to you that, sadly, there is no life on Mars.
As previously stated, there is no evidence of life on Mars. We took a very detailed picture of Mars' surface and saw no shred of life there. When taking this high quality of a picture, you can usually discern things 3 times bigger than the pixel size. As you can blatanly see, there are no shacks, written words, or any other signs of life there.
Having discovered life on Mars' would've helped NASA in a very big way. We would have a lot more funding if we found an alien! We have no reason to mislead you. We would gladly share the existence of alien lifeforms to the rest of humanity. Sadly, there are no alien lifeforms to reveal. Now that isn't to say there won't ever be, but as of now, NASA has not found any alien lifeforms on Mars.
What we have discovered is an excellent example of Mars' geography. This is simply a beautiful mesa on the Red Planet. Although shares a striking resemblence to a face, it is just a silly illusion! It is just shadows playing on the surface, as they usually do. This is nothing out of the ordinary. In fact, this is very similar to many mesas on our planet! Although it is beautiful, it is not an alien lifeform.
I hope that this has debunked any vicious rumors you may have heard. The simple, naked truth is this, it's just a mesa. It's just a piece of land. Again, we thank you for your concern and interest. We also hope that you continue to keep informed on NASA. It really means a lot that there are still people out there who are intersted in Mars. Sincerely, NASA. | 3 |
I truthfully believe this is not created by aliens. Even if the artifact was created by aliens we have no proof of actually seeing them. NASA denies that there is not any other logical proof of aliens, but NASA's budget really wishes there was an ancient civilization. It would mean great publicity and further exploration into science. As a scientist learning about this you may believe anything within earshot. Whatever could seem logical, could not really be what is really right. Confusing as this argument sounds, I really believe that aliens never would have made this artifact. Could something like this happen? Do they really exsist?
Nature is different on mars, how is this effective? Mars has different climates and weather storms that we don't experience on earth. Maybe, the "face" is a weathered rock and when shadows cross over it it really looks like a face. Does that seem truthful enough to you? Or even believable? Sometimes when we look at clouds they can be different shapes as what we think they look like. To you, this is artifact that needs further examination. If we could excavate it from Mars we could further our studies on what truly made this rock really look like a face. How could this happen, you may ask? The cost of getting another spaceship to Mars and having a crew does cost alot of money, I understand. NASA made the last possible missions come true, would we be putting the people in that spaceship in danger?
Mars really isn't that safe, that may be why people dont life on Mars without a suit and oxygen tank. Because something bad could really happen up there, and we need contact with earth to tell whats going on. That may put people in danger sending the crew up there. We can only think and hope that the artifact was created by aliens. The face on Mars is an icon for magazines and movies like "The Martian" and books like "The Lunar Chronicles". A single dicovered thing can turn sellers into money-makers easliy. All these fanatsy in books and movies, really can make us believe what we believe.
Pictures say that shadows make it look like a face. To me the artifact looks like a giant rock, with holes in it. When the shadows of clouds do come along it looks like a face. We may reallly never know who, what, or how this confusing landmark was made. The whole solar system moves around the sun, sometimes they said that they couldnt find Cydonia. Its stuck behind the cloud storms, but this face is really a natural landform on Mars. Now pictures can be photoshopped can't they? If this really was a face why does it look the way it does? From early pictures they turned out blurry and you cant really see the face. I still dont see the face.
Some say the camera doesnt lie, well in this case it may. If aliens were there making these faces wouldnt there be more? it would be a culture to them, or a ceremonial thing. We may never know. All these questions have no answer to them. What is really happening on Mars? Why were the artifacts made, but its really something we will never understand.
If aliens did make the artifact where are they? Wouldnt we see something about them or some weird signals coming from them? Aliens dont really exsist, as much as the subject wraps around our brains, it really leaves us clueless on what we know and what we dont know. Since we really have no proof, I believe that aliens did not make this artifact, found on Mars. I could be wrong to some people, but i believe my claim is true. There really may be a civilization on Mars if we could really think about it and further our studies. But for now i believe this artifact is really just a weathered rock on the face of Mars. | 2 |
Dear, senator i strongly disagree in favor of keeping the electoral collage by popular vote for the president of the united states because the electoral collage is unfair to voters. people selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a canidate who has no hope of carrying their states. It is a disaster factor for the american people.
The electrol collage should not be kept as popular votes for the president of the united states. It is unfair to voters. because of the winner take all system i which where each state, canadiates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen of the stes did not see or heard about the canadidates and voters in 25 of the largest media markets did not fet to see a single campaing ad. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. Abolish the electoral collage!
The electoral college is very irrational. Electoral collage method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state. The republicans in claifornia, knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular votes .
The electoral collage avoids the problem of elections in which no canidate recives a mojority of the votes cast .
The electoral collage is outdated, a disaster factor for the american people. the american people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiascos was the biggest election crisis in a century. The systm allows for much worse. consider that state legislature are technically reponsible for picking electors. That those electors could always defy the will of the people.
Thats why i think that electoral collage should be kept away from elections because they are unfair & because the electoral collage is unfair to voters. people selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a canidate who has no hope of carrying their states. It is a disaster factor for the american people. voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide on a election. | 1 |
The author thinks studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.I think studying every planet is worthy.Learning every planet is good to know for the people who wants to go to space.For the people that wants to go to that certain planet.Learning about planets is very important to some people to understand many think sthan planets.so many people want to go to alot of planets that nobody have went to.
The author says Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet."Even though Mercury is closer to the sun.Beyond high pressure and hear,erupting volcanoes,powerful earcthquakes,and frequent lightning strikes ro probs seeking to land on its surface.That statement shows Venus is the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our system.
The author also states NASA is working on approaches for Venus to get information and see what they can experiance there."some simplified electronics made of silicon carbidehave been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions".Thats saying that NASA actually sent electronics to go discover Venus and when discorving with that electronic for three weeks.
In paragraph 8 it says,"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value,not only because of insight to be gained on the planet itself,but also because human curiosity will likey lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors."The meaning for that sentence is trying to discover Venus is not that easy,they have a limit they cant push because it wont work.They dont want to do so much and cause a problem snd shouldn't cause any harm humans or anything els that they dont want in danger."Our travles on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imaginatopn and innovation".And in this last sentence of pargraph 8 meaning is that they saying That you should be opened minded and go ahead and discover every part of earth beacuse theres so much to see its very fun or cool or can say some beautiful places in Earth. | 2 |
- The author does support the idea very well of studying Venus is worthy of pursuit despite the dangers.
- Venus is a cloud draped planet, it is often referred as Earth's twin because Venus is the closest planet to Earth and sometimes Mars, humans sent spacecraft to Venus but unmanned because not one single spaceship has touched down in Venus in three decades, humans have to study everything about Venus because of Venus's reputation it is a very challenging planet.
- Venus was used to be the most Earth-like planet in our solar system because long ago it was covered with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Venus still has some features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. NASA has a compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus.
- NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiousity will likely lead us into many equally imtimidating endeavors. | 1 |
In the article ''Driverless Cars Are Coming,'' they talk about how there is a new invention coming. As you can tell by the title of the article, they give some pros and cons about the new invention. Some thing's the author of the article mentions is how the car works and what kind of details will be in it.
One of the first things they mentioned was how the car works. It tell's how the car would run on half the fuel we use today. Google has already made a car that is ''driverless' and it has not crashed yet. These cars would run on a track that has an electrical cable that sends radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the car.
Further on, they also explained some details they might add to the car. One of the details is that the car can handle functions up to twenty-five miles per hour, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel. Not all of the cars are completely driverless. In fact, the only main things they can do are steer,accelerate, and brake. All are designed to notify the driver when the road requires human skills. Another detail they have is that the drivers seat vibrates when the vehicle is in dangerof backing into something. One last detail they mention is having cameras watch the driver to make sure that the drivers a remaining focused on the road.
With both of those topics being mentioned, I honestly do not think they should make the cars for public use. They say how it will be safer the driver and those around them, but in all honesty, I do not think they will be. One of the details that does not sound reasonible on the car are the cameras. The idea of someone watching you while you drive just does not sound pleasant. Yes it may make sure the driver is staying focused, but I do not think that should be on there. One of the only things about the car that sounds excellent, is the lower fuel usage. With lower fuel also mean less polution which I think is great. | 1 |
I am against the development of these cars because I do not think everyone should have them. These cars could be a great idea, but there are some things that could turn this good thing into a bad thing. There are people out there that mess these types of things up, there are safety concerns, and I just think this is unnecessary for some people.
There are a few reasons on how humans could turn this good idea bad. There are people that do drugs and alcohol and drive afterwards. These are the type of people that would mess this technology up. In the article it says how the BMW would need human control over the car sometimes and if there is a driver that is drunk, they cannot do a good job of control. I think there would be a lot more crashes with this. People could also fall asleep or get very distracted while sitting there waiting for their turn to drive.
One safety concern I have about this technology is what would happen if the robot car messed up. Technology is not perfect and has major issues. Although these cars would have some safety features, it can always mess up. The in-car system that has entertainment for the driver is also a distraction. Things happen in split seconds and this kind of system would leave the driver distrated and unaware of the things going on around them.
This technology is also unreasonable to me because the only reason i think someone should have this type of technology is if they are handicap and cannot drive. People that can drive should drive on their own, I see no point to having a computer driven car. It is something that is not needed and extremely lazy. I do not think anyomne needs a car to drive them around if they can do so themselves.
Overall I think this is a bad idea. There would be too many issues and people would take advantage of this. I think the more advanced you try to get in technology, the worse things will get because people can not handle themselves. | 2 |
I do not think that the technology to read the emotional expressions of a student in a classroom is valuable because the coast is proably astronomical, how people feel inside is personal information, and it might not even be completely correct.
Facial Action Coding System is a new technology that is still in trial and error. You can not use the program on just any computer which means you have to buy special software to be able to use it. Not only would you have to buy the software to use it you would also have to buy the computer program, and because its still not completely finished you would be buying something that could crash which means you're pouring your money into something that might not even function properly.
Your emotions are personal and sometimes you dont want everyone to know how you feel. With the Facial Action Coding System you would be able to know how everyone feels. That seems like an invasion of space and unfair to those who do not want their business out in the open for everyone to know. if schools did end up having this program i think there should be rules and guidelines to prevent invasion of privacy like you can only test picture of peoples faces who consent.
There is no solid proof that the Facial Action Coding System is always correct. in the passage they never said wether or not they had a testing trial to prove the acuracy of this program. If the passage provided information on how they tested it on people and the results came back correct that would make it more desirable, but there isnt anything in the passage that shows that we can trust this software program.
I do not believe that this program would be valuable for students in a classroom, the price is more then likely out of budget and there is no proof that this program is even reliable. The program doesnt seem like it would help with very many subjects in school and there is still no proof of it working. | 3 |
In a class room situation it would be so amazing to be able to see how everyone is feeling and how they feel about a certain subject. So, As a example if you used this system in a math class you could give out equations and make the students solve them. Another way this could be used is if you put it in a musical classroom and let the students play music would the music have a effect on the students emotions? I think a amazing place to put this system would be in the cafe during lunch periods just to see what the effect of food does to the students. So, In a math situation where you give students equations to solve and see what their emotions are about the equations it would be great to know how well they feel about the problems.
So, If the students where sat down for a hour and a half with a math problem and where confused the system could alert the teacher and the teacher could provide extra help. While in a musical classroom we could see what the effects of a musical piece has on students to see if musical classes are worth keeping in school systems. In lunch periods where we get to talk to all our friends and relax seeing what kind of emotions that adds to a students day could be really helpful.
I think overall adding a system like this into a classroom situation would be very helpful. As long as it was accurate it could help students out a lot more and provide better grades over all. Also, This system could be used a teachers asssistant and help the teacher know who needs help. These are some reasons I think adding a system like this into a school enviroment would be very helpful. | 2 |
I think that driverless cars should be accepted. Theses cars arent really much dangerous. The cars can since when its in danger so it sends vibration to the seats and also, has blinking lights. They also, state that drivers have to stay alert and they have cameras to make sure that the driver is paying attention so, furthermost these cars should be acceptable. I also,think that the driverless cars are a bad idea because everyone isnt as alert as others.
If the car has to pull into the driveways and out of them this is very safe you will be focused on paying attention to your surroundings. If your not paying attention to your surroundings others would be alert of whats going on due to your lights blinking. Alll of these things makes it really safe to drive a driveless cars. When your backing into something the car will alert you and your seat will vibrate that is really getting you more alert. The car also announces when its time for your part so people will be notified that its there time to take the will.
There's also some bad about driverless cars. What if a person who buys a driverless car is death and cant hear? What if someone who buys a driverless car cannot feel? Those are some negative affects. What if someone getsinto the car not knowing that you will have to know how to drive and get into a car wreck beacuse they dont know whats going on? These cars can really be a positive and negative affect on peoples lives.
I personally think
that the person who buys a driverless car should have a drivers license and be aware of whats going on. I think that everyone with this car should be tested with the car also so people can know whats going on in the cars and when your not paying attention. These cars can really change hidtory and be a positive impact on peoples lives and also negative depending on how you treat your authority with this car. I think this car should be a privledge. | 1 |
The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," stated that meeting the challenge of exploring Venus is valuable because it will provide more knowledge of the planet, but also because humans will be curious about many dangerous things in the future. The author stated many dangers and doubts of exploring the planet, but then described solutions that may or may not work. It is contradictive that he decided to include facts and data that went against his own thoughts because he came back and listed data that went against the negative statements. The author created confusion to what he actually believes.
The author of the article described Venus as Earth's "twin." That suggests that we already know some facts about Venus such as it's density and size, which is enough to make people curious to how much about Venus we already know. He said that we know that Venus has many similar structures to Earth, such as mountains, valleys, and craters. If Venus is Earth's "twin," doesn't mean that it is extremely similar to Earth? The statement could make people curious about how close Venus really is to Earth, or it could make them wonder why we should bother risking people's safety if we already know that Venus is just like Earth. The author needed to be clearer on which way he wanted people to view that statement.
The author also brought up the dangers of visiting Venus multiple times. Then, he would proceed to follow the statement with tested and untested solutions. It was hard to tell which way he sided. According to the author, "Venusian geolegy and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes..." He later stated that NASA has a possible idea to send blimp-like vehicles to travel the surface of Venus, but that would not provide a detailed enough view of the ground. In order to get his point across to the audience, he should not have kept going agianst information.
The author went off topic throughout the article. The different information created slight confusion as to what the message he was trying to convey. The author stated that NASA is working on an approach to studying Venus that involves mechanical computers. He then said, "The thought of computers existing in those days may sound shocking, but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers..." It is irrelevant to the message when the mechanical computers were envisioned or the fact that it is shocking to hear that computers existed in 1940. It was hard to understand why computers were important to the article at all. The author made it difficult to focus on the message when he was stating random facts that were not important to the idea he was trying to support.
The author did not make it extremly obvious as to what he was truly trying to convey. If he would been more clear and less contradictive, then it would have been more obvious that he supports the idea that Venus is worthy of being explored. Also, it would have been easier to understand the point he was trying to put across if he would have stayed on topic throughout the article. The message of the article should be obviously supported by the author. | 5 |
Residents in Vauban, Germany have done the unthinkable; they have given up their cars. It's streets are completely car-free. You can still own a car, but the problem is their is only two places to park: large garages at the edge of the development and where a car-owner buys a garage with a home.
Automobiles in France were to have caused a near-record pollution in paris. Diesel fuel was blamed. In paragraph 16 it says "Diesel fuel makes up 67% of vehicles in France, compared to 53.3% average in the rest of Western Europe."
In Bogota, Columbia only buses and taxis were permitted for the day without cars. The goal for this capital city was to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. In paragraph 28 it says "Parks and sports cemters 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."
Research has shown that citizens in the United States are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses each year. In paragraph 32 it says "As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9% below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995." In paragraph 43 it says "Bill Ford laid out a business plan for a world in which personal vehicle ownership is impractical or undesirable. He proposed partnering with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, coserve resources, lower emmisions, and improve safety." | 0 |
Some of us couldn't imagine going to work without a car. Well in some parts of the world, they are completely getting rid of cars. There are many advantages of not using cars all that much, some like, there would be a lot less smog and polluted air. People's moods may change, and there are plenty of other ways of transportation.
To start off, Paris has had near record pollution. There has been times of five day intensifying smog. The smog rivaled Beijing, China, which is known to be one of the most polluted cities in the world. Just imagine what that is doing to our ozone layer. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. So if we stopped using cars for a while, maybe the smog around the world would start to clear up, and maybe if we stopped using cars for even longer we would be completely smog-less.
Secondly, people would probably start to be in a better mood and feel happier. Driving a car can be stressful and even sometimes intense. Heidrun Walter says "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way. She walks the streets of Vauban. The chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional sound of a distant motor.
Lastly, there are so many different ways to get from place to place. In some Colombian cities they have replaced pitted sidewalks so people can ride their bikes instead of drive. In Bogota in the mid-1990s they began to make bike paths, to this day it has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle pathways. In New York there is a new bike sharing program that is skyrocketing. People needing to get to work can walk or take public transportation, they can even car-pool with a friend or another family member.
To conclude, laying off the use of cars could be a pretty good change to our environment, to us, and to other people and even our health. Walking, riding a bicycle and riding on public transportation is woven into a connected network to save time, conserve our resources, lower the toxic emissions to the air, and to improve our safety and the worlds safety. | 2 |
Luke joined a group called the Seagoing Cowboys. Being a Seagoing Cowboy sounds really fun. I would LOVE to travel the world.
If I could join the Seagoing Cowboys, I think it would be really fun. It would be amazing to travel the world. It could only allow guys to join though. If it only allows guys I would not rest until they let me become a Seagoing Cowboy.
I would join the program because, I would get to explore the world. Also, I would get to travel. I love to travel and explore. One time when I was exploring in my woods, I found a HUGE deer stand and a family of racoons. Then when I was traveling to
Missouri, me and my little sister PROPER_NAME were getting ready to watch a movie in the car when we saw this GIGANTIC jail house. It was CRAZY!!!
I wouldn't join the pragram because, I would have to leave my family and they probably don't have good food. I have never left my family.
only left them when I was going to a friends house to stay the night. Now about the food. One time I had to eat something so bad it made me sick. If the program had that kind of food, I would probably either DIE, get REALLY sick, or jump over borad (even if the water below is FREEZING cold).
So, that is what I would do if I joined the Seagoing Cowboys or I had to join the Seagoing Cowboys. It would be fun or it could be terrible. | 1 |
Driverless cars are a futuristic thing that everyone has always been dreaming of. They are cars that can drive themselves while the passangers just relax and sit. Now, although this may seem like a very good and helpful thing us humans could use, it has its problems. Which is why i think we should not have driverless cars.
One of the reasons that I believe we should not have driverless cars is because a lot of taxi drivers would lose their jobs. Even though in the passage it says that it would use
"half the fuel of todays taxis". If the cab drivers lose their jobs, we could patentially be hurting a family. Although it does not seem like a very big issue it is still a problem that comes with the car. Unemployment rates are already low. Having people lose jobs due to a car? It doesnt seem very fair to struggling families.
Another reason i believe we should not have driverless cars is, its patentially more dangerous. Even though the car could have more knowledge of what to do, because thats what it was made for. See the problem here is that with all of the computers involved with the car it is easy for hackers to hack into them. If a hacker messes with the computer software it could really mess up what the car was designed to do. If someones computer in the car starts to glitch and fails while driving this will end badly. Multiple wrecks could happen all at once. Just like the passage says "if the technology fails and someone is injured who is at fault".
One argument a person could use is that the cars would have more knowledge about driving than an actual person would, which could be helpful in reducing car accidents. People drive wrecklessly all the time. Which yes, this is true. Think about the future though. If we have only driverless cars in the future no one would even have the slightest idea on how to drive. I am sure they would at least get the basics of driving but what if one day the computers just fail and the internet is no longer of use? People who are on the road when this could occure may die. With with this kind of problem, their would be far more fatalities than a couple of wreckless drivers on the road.
In conclusion I believe that we should stick to our regular cars. So many things can go wrong with driverless cars. Wrecks could happen, and many people could die. Although even with regular driving fatalities can happen I just think it would be much safer to stick to our regular cars. | 3 |
Venus is a place that all scientists these days are completely interested in. The reason why they are so into Venus is because first off, how Venus is called "Our Sister Planet" which means that Venus has some similar living conditions as Earth does. For example, Venus was origionally filled with mostly oceans that could've supported various forms of life, just like Earth. The planet according to the article used to or still has familiar features such as Valleys, mountains, and even living/moving creatures. Which makes Venus sound like it was origionally Earth, but you'd be worng there, because Venus has extreme weather conditions such as temperature getting up to 800 degrees Fahrenheit, or the atmospheric pressure is 90 times more greater than what we experience on Earth. This is my story.
Venus is an interesting planet that scientists have been studying for generations on generations. With the information I gave from the article above would bafle any person in the world. A claim that I'm about to tell you will support the author of this article's idea that we should look more into Venus. For example, the information I gave above in the intro are some reasons why we should look into it more. Another reason why scientists should look at Venus more is, because even though it had all of those similar living conditions as Earth has, there's some drastic conditions that'll still make it non-livable. Some things that'll make a difference is Venus' weather conditions, Temperature is at an average of 800 degrees Fehrenheit. Another is because the air pressure would be at the same amount Earths Ocean's are at, which is not livable at all. And another example is that Venus has extreme thunder/ lightning and rainstorms which frequently hit the ground and would cause a lot of fires.
My final thoughts on this topic is we should study Venus because even though the thing I'm going to give as an example is not on the article. We should study Venus a lot more because, Venus used to or still does have some of the same living conditions, but when the planet has storms or has other negative issues, the planet Venus can get extremely violent naturally. And their weather conditions compared to ours on Earth are drastic, and make our hurricanes or other form of a storm that we think is terrible and powerful (which they are), will make us and Earth feel incredibly weak. | 1 |
Have you ever wondered what the face on the moon actually is? It is a huge rock formation. The rock formation certianly looks like a face, but this does not mean that there is life on Mars. The rock formation has been brought very much attention. The attention has people asking if the face is evidence for life on Mars or just a natural formaion.
As said in the article, "Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." This tells us that the defenders of the NASA budget tells you that if NASA found life on Mars; they would most likely tell it. "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform." This sentence is telling us that a web surfer found the image of the face to be a natural formation. Both of these support my claim of the face being a natural formation.
Evidence that supports my claims are in the article. "There was no alien monument after all." "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform." "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists." NASA also unveiled an image for the people to see and it was captioned, "huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth."
When some people keep saying that it looks like a face; it sure does, but it is not one. The "Face on Mars" is nothing more than a natural rock formation. The rock formaiton doesnt show any evidence for life and if it did, NASA would tell everyone.
When someone is reading things from magazines, the internet, etc, it does not mean they are always going to be true. People need to not blindly trust the internet, magazine, etc, they need to do more research.
The face is a natural rock formation. It has had lots of questions raised about what it is, but we have figured out now that it is a rock formation. This is no evidence for life on Mars, we still have yet to find that. NASA has let us with the truth of what the face actaully is. The face we see on Mars is a rock formation; now kids know the truth about what it truly is and now so do you. | 3 |
Venus is one of the closest planets to the earth. It is called the "Evening Star" according to paragraph one. It was refered to as Earth's twin because it is almost Earth's size and density. Venus also has on of the harshest conditions such as surface temperature, weather, and pressure. These are some reasons why NASA hasn't been able to land or stay on Venus.
It is worth going to Venus? It is worth going to Venus because NASA thinks that at some point in history, Venus was a planet like Earth. Venus shows that it has valleys, mountains, volcanoes, and craters. This planet can show us what happened to it and what might happen in the future to Earth. Some might think that it is still dangerous to go to Venus.
It is dangerous to go to Venus although we have already tried Venus is on the most interesting planets to go to because of it conditions. If we can land on Venus and examine it, we can study what type of rocks it has and why it is worth it. If it has minerals that are stronger than Earth's minerals, we could start a minning expedition to it. NASA has tried but failed in many ways. They have tried making probes that try to show images of the planet but can't because of the dense atmosphere.
The atmosphere is one of the reasons we haven't been able to land on the planet. The atmosphere is think and is compossed of mostly carbon dioxide. It also has deadly lightning stikes that have destroyed some drones that tried to land on the surface. It is a big risk but might be worth it. Most of Venus hasn't been explored and it might be interesting going there.
In conclusion, going to Venus might be dangerous but might also be worth it. This planet is one of the most interesting ones in the galaxy because of its atmosphere. It is also interesting because we don't know what is on it. Venus shows characteristics that are close to Earths and it might be worth investigating what happened on the planet. Venus has many clues to what might happen to our planet if we don't take care of it. | 2 |
Driverless cars are obviously cars without drivers. Many have envisioned such an idea as revolutionary like Sergey Brin. As a matter of fact google has bulit such cars since 2009. However some people see this as a flawed idea and see this as a bad thing. I'm honestly split about each side.
Driverless cars do have a lot of positives. They are ecologicly friendly, so they save both gas and money. Also, they are way more flexible than a bus could be, since it can go anywhere. Not to mention they are way more safer than normal vehicles, alerting people who are distracted by anything while on the road. Speaking of safety, that seems to be a marjor area that is adressed. For instance, when there is a problem the car would state it and giver the passenger the option to take over. Another way is the cars expensive sensors that detect when there's going to be a problem, and automaticly breaks the car to avoid any damage.
However, there is some glaring issues that must be adressed. First off people will get bored beccause they are passengers. Plus being alarmed of this everytime your dozing off, by the car itself, isn't going to help anyone, just annoy them. On top of this driving cars is a rite of passage into adulthood. Taking that freedom away is just wrong. Not to mention, whos to blaim in an accident involving two of these things from different companies. It's stated in the paragraph that new laws must be made for these kinds of cases, and that could take years.
In conclusion, I'm split about this idea. Driverless cars might be the next evolution for the motor companies, but it is flawed in some rather serious degrees. | 3 |
With so much technology already being developed for the analysis of human tendencies, what could one more hurt? Nowadays, manufacturers and creators of products are using technologies and algorithims to analyze everything from shopping preferances, to the economic strengths and weaknesses that characterize a specific a consumer. Not to mention, with facial recognition, and widespread survelliance, complex human interactions are beginnning to be broken down into code. While some may argue against this simply because the idea of being "watched" does not appeal to them, these advancements have real-world applications that could actually be quite beneficial to society as a whole. The concept of the FACS program being implemented in classrooms is a concept that really should be taken into heavy consideration. The practical applications of something such as an emotional analysis program within schools, have no end. For this reason, it is concievable that the FACS program should be introduced into the fabric of the modern schooling system.
Imagine if a computer was able to comprehensively custom-tailor lessons for struggling students, based solely on their unconscious reactions to other lessons. Often times this is exactly what a student needs, and what many student activist groups have been proposing for years. The notion that a student could have a lesson that was customized to fit his or her personality, might be exactly what some parents of stuggling (and academically adept) students have been craving. In the article, Making Mona Lisa Smile, by Nick D'Alto, it is stated that, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored... Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This is a compelling argument for a fairly simple reason; most students that do not do well in school, claim that it is because they do not enjoy it, or that they do not appreciate the way that information is conveyed to them. However, this can be remedied. The implementation of the FACS program within schools would provide an alternitave to traditional teaching, and could improve the overall experience of students. Besides that, the FACS program could also be used to analyze the general student reaction to a specific topic or concept. This would provide teachers with more insight into the lives and emotions of their students, and allow them to better prepare lectures, and their coverage of that topic. The article also states that, " Most human communictation is nonverbal, including emotional communication." Not only would the gathered information be beneficial to other parties for the betterment of schooling, but it would also allow school systems to pick up on particular emotional cues that may only be visible to someone who is emotionally close to a particular student.
This program, without a doubt, offers many helpful options when it comes to its use within school systems. The FACS system should be implemented into the fabric of modern schooling. With so many applications, It would be foolish not to at least experiment with it in a school setting. While it is true that privacy and reliability are great concerns for many people, convenience and better academics are also great concerns in today's modern society. In a culture that is beginning to value knowledge over all else, it is important for schools to employ every method available to them, to better prepare students for the life ahead of them. Technology should not be viewed as an enemy in an academic world. Rather, it should be percieved as a tool. A tool that gives humanity the ability to accomplish whatever can be dreamed, and gives it the resources necessary to lead its people into a golden era of knowledge and education. | 4 |
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," we're introduced to the idea of Venus being like Earths "twin" in terms of density, size, and distance. The author shows us that Venus is a dangerous place, but that it is worthy of studying because Astronomers have the idea of Venus being the most Earth-like planet in the solar system, Venus is probably the hottest planet on earth, but in the
past it was probably covered by large oceans and various froms of life, just like planet earth. Scientists have the hope of Venus being a place esxplored by humans some day in the future and maybe with new technology that would be possible.
On my point of view, Venus is worthy the studying not only beause it is the closest to Earth but also because when Earth is destroyed by humans Venus can be the new Earth, hopefully humans will change their minds when Earth is destroyed and they won't want the new Earth to be destroyed. If scientists are succesfull in sending humans to study Venus, probably in a future th planet can be saved, it won't be as hot as it is now and it won't be as dangerous. Althought because of the dangerous it is at this point Venus won't be able to get reached and studied.
In conclussion Venus is a dangerous but studying worthy planet that may or may not be explored by humans in a distant future, Venus itself can possibly be discovered with advanced technology, it's surface it too hot for the technology we have now but hopefully Scientist will discover something to explore and get to know earth's twin, who knows maybe in a far away future we may be living in Venus, and hopefully humans will change for good. | 2 |
Have you ever wished you could just sit back and let your car do all the driving? Well that may happen sooner than you might think. Driverless cars technology is improving everyday and soon it will be more accessible to more people. Driverless cars are cars that do all the driving for you. You still have to be in the car ready to take over in case of an emergency. Driverless cars may sound like a cool idea but there is a lot of debate over this topic.
Personally, I think driverless cars would be a good idea. I think since we have the advancing technology we should give driverless cars a try. You would still have to be in the car ready to take control and I think that is a good idea. The problem with driverless cars is that they won't be ready for unexpected danger on the road. A good way to solve this problem is to have a driver ready to take the wheel.
A benefit of driverless cars is that they would use half the fuel taxis use and be more flexible than a bus. Reducing how much fuel we use would really help the environment. I think more people would supprt the idea of driverless cars if they knew the benefits like reducing the use of fuel.
The biggest negative effect of driverless cars is the safety. Since there is not a person behind the wheel ready to react there is a bigger risk of collisions. A computer doesn't have the time to react in that type of situation. Right now California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Comumbia are the only states allowing semi-autonomous cars to be driven. Manufacturers of these cars believe that other states will follow as soon as driverless cars are proven more reliably safe.
I really think driverless cars will be here soon in the future for everyone to drive. With developing technologies it will probably happen sooner than you might think. There are many positive and negative effects, but I think the manufactures will work them out. Driverless cars will be a positive effect on the environment and society. | 2 |
Do you think they should bring driverless cars?I think they should bring these driverless cars but I also think they should'nt.If you want my opinion I think they should because they have had their driverless cars drive half a million miles without crashing,but I also think they shouldn't because these cars can only handle driving functions up to up to 25 mph, and also a human could get bored waiting on their turn to drive.
First of all, I think they should bring these driverless cars because it keeps safety on the road like in the second paragraph it states,"Their cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash." So that could be a good opinion to bring the driverless cars.
Second of all, however I think bringing the driverless could be a bad idea because these cars can only handle drivg functions up to 25 mph.Which i'm sure alot of people would want to not go that slow.
Lastly, my last opinion on not bringing these driverless cars is that i'm sure humans could get bored on waiting on the monitor to tell them when to take the wheel.
With all that said I do not think they should bring the driverless cars because,a human could get bored waiting on his/her turn to drive,the cars can only handle funtions up to 25 mph but I also think they should bring the driverless car because it bring safety to the streets. | 2 |
I, one hundred percent agree with the creation that was approached. By the way they explain the technology and advancement in the project it sounds legit, I mean it does have its flaws and improvement But the flaws isn't anything bad, Its just certain area on the rode you have to help more. I think its an wonderfuk idea.
The way they say it assist you is very helpful for the elderly. Some people are handicape and was waiting for an idea like this. Everybody isn't able to move around and do alot of things because they are disabled but a invention like this will change all of those problems.
I gave as many reason as I can about the wonderful invention. The main reason is it will help the commuinty and maybe the robbery rate will go down because alot of people wouldn't have to walk anywhere for them to get ran up on an rob or worse murdered. | 0 |
I disagree with you that it "The Face Of Mars" was formed by aliens. I think it is a landformation that just happens to look like a face. From 1976 to 2001 we have found zero life on Mars. We have made many missions to it and we still have found nothing. Besides those reasons i still disagree with you about it and i do have proof of my reasons why.
The article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" tells me that scientist Jim Garvin was one of the men that took the picture of the "face" inApril 8, 2001. After Jim takes the picture and tells everyone, "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Eygptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" Jims says this because, each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
Also there are unusual shadows to make it look like the landform has eyes and a nose. The shadows also made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. But you have to remember that these are shadows and they dont tell always make out to what things look like. Sometimes your shadow makes you look taller than what you really seem to be. Shadows also dont always make you look the same either.
Plus Martian Mesa, are common enough around Cydonia. This could be just another Martian Mesa. Also if NASA wishes there was an ancient civilataion on Mars, why would they hide it. If they even thought that the "face" could have been formed by aliens im sure that they would want the world to know of there discovery.
In other words im sure NASA would let people know if they even think that the "face" could have been formed from aliens. This is like a mountain on Earth that just at a height and where the camera is at or the sun iot just so happens to look like a face. This is an unusual landform but i am very convinced that, that is all it is. | 3 |
The voting system is a very interesting thing. The electoral college is a good system that represents the population in the United States. The electoral college takes into considereation of how big the state is. Based on the population of the state is how many House of Representatives. The more House of Representatives the state has the more impact it will have on the Presendential election due to population. When you think about the presendential election and where the people that are mostly at in the United States the electoral college is a great system because it takes into considerationn where most of the population is.
There is also some wrong with the electoral college. It does have problems as most things do. The single best arguement against the electoral is what some people call the "disaster factor". The disaster factor is that the state legislators are responsible for picking electors, and electors can always defy the will of the people. For example, in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. Therefor a popular vote for Kennedy would not have acually gone to Kennedy. Soem electors have also occasionally refeused to vote for their party's canidate and cast their deciding vote for whoever they want. The worst possible thing with the electoral college is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In thisw case, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives. Many people do not like the electoral college.
The popular vote is probably the most logical and most simple way to have the presedential election. I think the popular vote shows which president the people of the United States actually want. The popular vote voting system simply counts up all the votes and see which president wins. It is a very simple process. However, the Popular vote means nothing to the Electoral college vote. If a presdident wins the popular vote but gets beaten in the Electoral college vote, the president who won the elctoral college vote wins because that is just how it is.
Both of these voting systems are very interesting. I think the Popular votes barely beats out the electoral college vote for me. The popular vote just seems more accurate and more simple. You should change the voting system to the popular vote for more accuracy. The popular vote is better and will make the United States voting policies better. | 2 |
I belive that driverless cars are a good idea. Personaly, I don't trust people on the roads. People get distracted easily, can have slow reaction times, and sometimes just are not safe. Driverless cars can fix all these problems easily.
One issue is that people easily get distracted. Smart cars, on the otherhand, are complety built for the purpose of diving and analizing the roads. The feature most appealing to me and that fixes this issue is found here in the passage, " Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings.".
The second issue with drivers in cars are the drivers reaction times being to slow. Some people just do not have the reactions to be able to use the breaks fast enough to avoid accidents. These cars do it instantly, as stated in the passage, " The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply breaks on individual wheels and reduce power from ethe engine, allowing far bettter response and control than a human driver could manage alone.".
Finaly, sometimes people just are not safe. Doing anything from texting while driving or taking erratic turns without signal can be extreamly dangerous to themselfs or anyone around them. These cars can prevent that by even forcing people to watch the road constantly or alerting us when danger is ahead. " GM has developed driver's seats to vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object.". This is only one of many safty enhancing developments to smart cars and the protection of the "driver".
In conclution, smart cars are a great idea. With these cars people will be safer than ever. No more driver error, distraction, slow reactions, or danger to themselfs or to others around thm. | 3 |
Untill now we have never had a very clear picture of what is exactly that thing is. With the new high-resolution images the give us a better idea of what we are looking at. What this face on Mars is acually ia A mesa.
This human like face is nearly to miles in length and seems to be staring back at the camera. NASA was using the face on Mars to attract attention to Mars. While some say that the Face is bona fide evidence of life that NASA would rather hide. Defenders of NASA say that they wish there was an ancient civilzation. If there happened to be an acient civilzation on Mars just think about all to stuff that scientist could learn from Mars that could help describe all of the other planets.
The picture captured by Global Surveyor was ten times sharper than any of the other pictures ever taken. As the world saw this picture for the first time revealing a natural landform and that there was not alien monument after all. Some still belive that the face on Mars is an acient alien civilzation, but proven by scientist this Face is just a natural lanformation. | 1 |
Driverless cars are exaclty what you would expect them to be. Cars that will drive without a person actually behind the wheel controlling the actions of the vehicle. The idea of driverless cars going in to developement shows the amount of technological increase that the wolrd has made. The leader of this idea of driverless cars are the automobiles they call Google cars. The arduous task of creating safe driverless cars has not been fully mastered yet. The developement of these cars should be stopped immediately because there are too many hazardous and dangerous events that could occur.
One thing that the article mentions is that the driver will be alerted when they will need to take over the driving responsibilites of the car. This is such a dangerous thing because we all know that whenever humans get their attention drawn in on something interesting it is hard to draw their focus somewhere else. The article explains that companies are trying to implement vibrations when the car is in trouble. Their are some people out there who do not feel vibrations and therefore would not be able to take control of the car when needed. The article also states that companies are trying to put in-car entertainment into the car while it is being driven. This is just another thing that will distract the person who is supposed to be ready at all times to take over driving when asked to do so.
Another thing that can go wrong with these cars is any type of techological malfucntion. Every person with any kind of technological device has experienced some sort of error. Now imagine if your car has an error technologically and it takes the life of one your loved ones. The article talks about sensors around the car that read the surroundings of the car and that is what helps he car to drive without a true driver behind the wheel. Those sensors could have a malfunctions and be sensing something that is that even there and make a left turn into a 100 foot deep lake. The vibrations that cause the driver to be notified to drive could malfunction and now the driver has no way of knowing that the car is in trouble and now you, the driver, and the rest of your passengers are being buried in your local cemetery.
One last thing that the article mentions is negative about the developement of driverless cars is who to blame for the wreck if there were possibly some sort of technological malfunciton or even some sort of human error when taking over the driving aspect. Should the manufacturer of the car be blamed or should it be the driver? No one knows because there is so many different factors that attribute to who to assign the blame to. Some of what will have to be made is a judgement call. When it comes to insurance and having to pay for any damages you do not want someone to have to make some sort of judgement call. What if that judgement call that was made was the wrong call? Now there are going to be even more lawsuits today in our courts than there already are. This problem alone will just lead to many more issues today in the world that should not have to be dealt with.
With all these things that could possibly go wrong with these driverless cars there is no way that the developement of them should continue any further. In today's society if something bad COULD happen or something COULD go wrong, it WILL happen, and it WILL go wrong. There are just way too many safety hazards that come along with these driverless cars. Becuase of all of these problems that arise with the cars it is just a gargantuan risk to implement these cars into our lifestyles. | 4 |
I dont really know what my choice is, like i know alot of poeple like to drive an control thereown car. But i dont understand how alot safer an more controlled it would be it would be cool if you just had a gps an typed in where your going an the car drives stops turns and does all that by itself. But also you gotta know if all the people in world had that type of car you dont know if its running on electrecity or solar power or wind power. If it used on elecrtecity bam you already know there is gonna be so much power outtages and balls of spark going everywhere cause literally we drive by phone pole and electecity boxes everyday dnt you think if one of those things blew it wouldnt be like a cercuit. im just saying ya it would be coo just to fall asleep in yo car if your going somewhere really far an just have your car drive. But it is also risky cause what if they just made em that year or what ever year an they only tested a couple million do you know how may people are in the world ya theres alot more than a couple million, what im trying to say is what if it does its own thing diesnt stop or doesnt turn your either gonna get yourself killed or someone else killed. that is all i have to say about these new driverless cars they sound cool but reality is it worth it? | 1 |
Smog. Gas. Pollution. Many countries dont allow for people to have cars because they destroy the air that they are breathing. People and animals become sick from there being an abundance of pollution in the air that they are breathing. Another factor that can be taken into consideration is that it can reduce the amount of traffic jams as well. Do you think that the community that you live is effected by the pollution from cars.
To start off, many districts are forbidding people have cars. In places near French and Swiss boreders, citizens are forbidden from parking on streets, driveways, and home garages. Citizens say that they feel less tense and happier without having their car. Source 1 states that " Vauban is seperating surburban life from auto use as a component of "smart-planning." In Elisabeth Rosenthal's passage it says that "Passenger cars are responisble for 12%(percent) of greenhouse gass emissions in Europe..... and up to 50% in some car-intensive areas in the United States. In Europe forbidding car use it is drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes. Over the past couple of decades, maybe even centries we have been centered around the automobile that has effected out health and daily lives because of the increase of pollution.
Also, the streets in Europe are not as crowded as the streets in the United States. Paris, more smog than any other European capital, has began to enforce a partial banning of cars to help clear the cities air. Cars that run off of diesel gas tend to create more pollution than cars that run off of regular gas. Sixty-five percent(%) of France's vehicles are fueled with diesel gas. By limiting the usage of these cars they will be contributing to the decrease of gas in the air. The increase of pollution has created a solution to help and decrease polluted air by making plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars that are able to transport more than one person at a time. Records and studies show that Beijing,China is one of the many polluted cities in the world.
Another fact that is an advantage of limited car usage is little to no traffic jams. In Colombian millions have began the day without cars where they use alternative forms of transpotation such as walking, biking, skating, and riding buses. "Day with out Cars" has promoted the use of alternative forms of transportation and smog reduction. Since adults children and teens have reduced the limit of car usage the Mayor of Mockus has began the construction process of an 118 miles of bicycle paths, new parks, sidewalk, restaurants, and upscale shopping districts have been created for them to go to on their free time.
Many people have began to not be as interested in driving because gas prices, as well as pollution. Their are many advantages to not limiting the usage of the automobile. It has reduced the amount of money that we spend, pollution and much more is also has helped us notice that there are alternatives to driving a car such as walking, riding the bus, and bike riding. You are also able to interact more with friends because the topic of car pooling has became very important and noticable. Those are just a hand full of ideas and ways that limiting the usage of cars is effective. | 3 |
Are driverless cars the next big thing ? And are they gonna actually be helpful ?. In my own opinion i belive my negative opinions about driverless cars over power my postive opinions about them.
Driverless cars are being talked about alot lately , i belive they could really be on our very own streets one day and i belive that one day i could own one. This new evolution of cars could be very helpful to a persons everyday life , because driverless cars take less gas , less energy on a person and stress. Although i believe more in what we have today by which humans drive themselves everywhere without depending on technology to take you places. Yes the driverless car is cool and satisfying to scientist but what about the people who love to get behind the wheel and take off on their own journey or those who love to race.With these new generations of cars we will not be able to take the joy out of teaching our own children to drive and eventually people are going to depend on these driverless cars and after generations adults will not even know how to operate a vehicle by themselves. In the future when we have these driverless cars these people will not get to enjoy these things we have today. To me i would want to have a car where i can operate it myself and be able to trust myself with my life behind the wheel not a computer.
So these "driverless cars" may be the next big thing , and may be helpful to others but i want to enjoy my time behind the wheel , and take in the values of life without advanced technology. | 1 |
Dear State Senate,
The Electoral College is insane. There should not be an Electoral College, the vote should be by popular vote for the presidents. People feel less important when they know that there vote does not go to the entire 538 votes. If you are in a democratic state, like Texas, but are republican, then your vote is not going to matter because the votes are just going to go to the democratic president. When looking back in 2000, Gore had more popular votes, yet he lost the election because of the Electoral College. Thats insane that he lost, because more people wanted him to be presidents, yet that is not how the Electoral College works.
With the swing states, they can really hurt one of the presidents. Lets say Florida, for example, is very close in which president is going to be voted for. That is 29 votes just from that state! If you eliminate the Electoral College, it will be more balanced and that will not make or break one of the presidents. The presidents do not bother with the states that they know they are going to lose, and they do not even visit those states. If we eliminate the Electoral College, then everyone will get to hear from the presidents, and that could give them several extra thousand votes.
Also, the less populated states, like Wisconsin with only 3 votes, feel like they are not important toward the overall votes. If there was no Electoral College, then there 500,000 votes would be a huge boost toward either president. When voting for president, the voters do not even vote for the president! They vote for the state of electors who vote for the president. Who knows if the electors will lie and represent the Democrats or Republicans and then vote for the other side.
Finally, I leave you with my last reason of why we should get rid of the Electoral College. More people in the United States want a popular vote instead. Even Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bob Dole think we should. 60% of the United States would prefer a direct election!!! That is a direct message to you that we need to get rid of the Electoral College and start using a popular vote!
I hope you consider these changes to the voting system, as I have listed some of the best reasons. The majority of the country would like to see these changes take affect, not just me. I appreciate the consideration, thank you. | 3 |
I believe driving should be in the hands of humans along with the assistance of a machine.
Having autonomous care can enbale us to do different things while driving.
With the extra control over the car, we can make the roads safer while we multi-task on the road.
Semi- autonomous cars can help us get to a hospital if we are sick or injured and are unable to drive.
If a parent needs to take care of a child in the backseat, she can reach back and take care of the child without having to worry about the road as well.
These systems can also teach people how to drive behind the wheel; and if there is a problem, the car can take control and keep others safe as well as the driver.
Kids that are working to get their liscense could have more experience driving alone since the system in the car is there to help in case of a problem.
But that wont completely destroy the purpose of needing a liscense to drive becasue people will still need to know how to drive since the car is not always in full control.
In conclusion, fully automated cars may not be the best thing due to their inability to judge and react to situations.
Semi- autonomous vehicles can assist us in the vehicle, but can still be controlled with our quick reactions in case of a problem.
Instead of giving all control to the machine, the driver and the car should work together to preserve the safety of themselves and others around them. | 2 |
The cars are coming, the cars are coming! The future of cars is said to be driveless cars. The future of cars in every kid's eyes were supposed to be flying cars or cars that travel back in time; however, our technology is nowhere near those vast advancements. Our next biggest step, to say blatantly, would be driverless cars.
Imagine a long day on the road and the driver needs a break; however, everyone else that's able to drive is asleep. So, the driver uses his driverless car so that he can sleep. Since no car has been proven to be one-hundred-percent driverless, the car notifies the driver that he needs to take the wheel. He doesn't catch the notice and they crash. According to the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming,' "..their cars have driven half a million miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless." This makes the cars dangerous.
Using the example above, someone may see that driverless cars are unsafe. In fact, the article even states, "the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern." In the article it also says that some scientists are said to believe that cars driven by humans are safer than these driverless cars. A lot of good things come with the car, unfortuantely one of those goods things is not safety.
In conclusion, my stance on driverless cars remains unbudged. I myself oppose driverless cars, deeming them to be too unsafe. These cars could cause so much damage in such little time. If safety is our number one priority then sticking to human driven cars is our best bet. | 2 |
NASA discovered a mysterious picture twenty five years ago that changed how people looked at Mars forever.They were using viking 1 space craft as they were trying to find possible landing sites of his sister viking 2, while they were looking, they found a blurry human like face on a region called Cydonia.
NASA quickly showed it to the public to show how interesting Mars was. People quickly became obssesed
with "The face on Mars" and started making theories that Mars had or even that it has life on Mars. Because of the graphics of the viking 1 scientists weren't sure what it was exactly, some scientists believed it was actually alien evidence existence but the rest of them belived to be a mesa.
Everything was ruined in September 1977 when
global surveyor (MGS) came to Mars to take some photos at the "Face on Mars" to finally put an end to this. Finally when the aircraft arrived to Cydonia it took various pictures that had ten times sharper shots than the viking 1
so then when it was revealed it
was a natural landform on Mars so there was no alien life after all, but were not satisfied acoording to NASA "The face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April '98 a cloudy time of year on the red planet. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze. Because it took so long to locate Cydonia, it took them years to take pictures again. On April 8, 2001 it was a summer day where there was no clouds, they took an amazing picture showing what it was called "The human face" it was a mesa just like any other structure on mars.
After all everyone makes mistakes, even rocket scientists. | 2 |
This is from the NASA facility er do not have fool proof on what made the crator in mars we don't have full evidence on what happend on mars. The face on mars is a mystery and very intersting phnominon and leads to very meracisly things in the future but for futher notice we cant say it was aliens. NASA scientist dont believe that this was alien trying to send a signal or a message to us for all we know a astroid may hit mars and we didnt know.
On the flip side people and scientis have belived and wondered if aliens are real and there is many cases to make people believe there are alien living amungst human along with movies, games, and toys. We are all fasinated by space and still think aliens are real and some think that aliens are not real.
We may never know what amde the face on mars if it was aliens or just rocks making shadows and if we ever find out why there was a face it will be a sight to see in the near future. | 0 |
How could we get the reduction of Greenhouse Gas? We can simply do this by reducing the number of cars on the road. In the city of Vauban, Germany, they gave up cars completely. If you still own a car in this city you have to buy a large garage that runs to about $40,000. This expense doesn't include your house. Up to 70% of the cities population of 5,500 have given up their motor vehicle. The passenger cars in the city are responsible for 12% of the Greenhouse gas. I believe that if we, in the state of Florida, give up our cars that we can literally save the world.
First, Today in the sunshine state, we love to sit in our air conditioned motor vehicles. We love to take a joy ride by the beach, but do you know the real damage you're doing to our world? In the United States alone we produce about 50% of the Greemhouse gas. With how many citizens we have, what would that number be if we cut out all motor vehicles? We would be saving the Earth. How does that make you feel? Like a hero? That's what you would be.
Secondly, We all own houses that cost so much! To be able to park your car you could have to buy a large enough garage, that would be at the end of your comuntiy that could cost up to $40,000. Why pay this outrageous amount to be the only one driving around your car-free city? If we do take this comitment on reducing our driving, how would you get to work? This is a common question asked. We would be forced to put work establishments within walking distances.
Lastly, we as americans are one of the most obiese countries. We sit in cars and drive around daily. Our government has actually made it even more easy to acess fast food, they put in drive threws. Some thought that this awesome, new, cool invention could help us save time, but in reality it just make it more simple to get these bad habits. If we really want to eat these bad foods, we would have to walk there. Thus we would be getting more exercise. Getting rid of cars would be the best thing that has happened to us in a long time.
In conclusion, We need to take a stand and stop all motor vehicles. With these powered automobiles we are damaging the earth with Greenhouse gas, Saving money, and giving us what we need. I believe that this change needs to be made soon, or who knows where we could end up. Lets get all states to get rid of all motor vehicles. This stand could change everything as we know it! | 3 |
Feelings, we all have them, whether you are happy,sad, or angry, friends or family members can mostly tell when you are in a certain mood,but what if a computer could do the same exact thing.
Author Nick D'Alto wrote an article called,"Making Mona Lisa Smile" which is about computers that can read emotions, thats crazy! Nick talks about how computers can spit out precents of feelings like in paragraph one he sated,"She’s 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." Thats a computer scaning the Mona Lisa picture created by Leonardo da Vinci. NIck stated,"The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles." So, these computers use musclkes in your face to figure out the emotions you are felling. So, how is this helpful to students in a classroom? Well, Nick gives an example by stating from Dr.Huang from Beckman Institute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinois,"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.” Not only would it see if a student is bored or confused but the computer would help make the lesson more interseting to the student.
The big downfall of all of this would be prices, such as video games because, the computer would help better tell a story line and have the player thinking how the character feel ( let them feel more in the game). The article stated,"The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive—for video games or video surgery." But, other than that these computer can be very valuable to humans in the future and example more about humans emothions towards school, eachother, etc. Not the mention teenage boys can be excited and if they are in the middle of class on youtube or something, how would that be stopped so the student doesnt get embrassed.
Wrapping all of this up, computer are used on a daily schulde whether its at home or school, computer could help slove depression by putting students into a great mood, help humans on tests or problems in life. Computers do alot of things for us and this could be a big step into sloving problems and emotions people are feeling. | 2 |
Cars have been part of our daily lives for decades and have become somewhat idolized in American culture. But cars are slowly killing our planet and are speeding up the Greenhouse effect taking place within our Earths atmosphere. We've become entirley too dependent on cars to get us where we wish to go, making many people lazy. Cars also emit gasses that can harm our internal body structures, causing problems with lung diseases and just the simple act of breathing. Many cities from all over the world have taken measures to limit the use of cars in daily life, making their homes cleaner and healtheir to live in. More cities should start to do this as well to help save our planet and oursleves.
Environmentalists have hated cars for a long time because of the harmful effect it has to air we breathe. When near-record levels of smog filled the air of Paris, they enforced a temporary driving an in efforts to reduce the smog and within five days the smog cleared enough to allow citizens to start driving once again. In America, the number of drivers and car owners has been steadily reducing since 2005 and many experts belive it will continue to. A revolution could be started if enough people stop driving personal vehicles and instead walk, bike, or even just use public transportation.
People have adjusted over the years to things being given to them without them doing much to get it. Cars contribute to this and have caused laziness in many car owners. In Bogota, Columbia they have initiated and annual car-free day where everyone has to get to their jobs by means of biking or walking or taking public transportation. Carlos Atruro Plaza rides his two-seat bicycle with his wife to work and both like the idea of limiting air pollution caused by cars. Pollution from cars can be dangerous for humans as well as the environment. By breathing in harsh gases we could aquire diseases such as COPD and lung cancer. Cars allow people to live unhealthy lifestyles in comfort while unknowing of the harm its causing. They are an insidious problem.
Cars have been gradually degenerating the planet and harming the people who use them. Thankfully many officials are working hard to limit this but we all have to contribute. Our planet will die if we dont do something to stop it, and if our planet dies, whats to become of the human race? | 3 |
I think this technology which is called the '' Facial Action System'' is valuable because it would help out teachers and students.
i think it would be cool if the technology really do can read students feelings because it would be really helpful for teachers. It is because when students are in bad mood teachers don't understand it so having the technology would help the teachers know that he or she is not in a good mood. Those are the reasons why the technology could do this. In paragraph 8 it said that when you have a false smile you can tell because the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle the risorius which is called the orbircularis oculi pars palpabraeus. In a real smile the zygomatic major which is the muscles that begin at your cheeks bones that lift the corners of your monuth. In 6 paragraph it said that the computer can determine how you feel. for example if you smile then the web ad appears on your screan and if you frown the next ad will be different. it also said that a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. In that same paragraph it said that the same technology can make a computer animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery alos it said that most humans communtication is nonververbal including emotional communication. | 1 |
Driverless cars are too expensive, trivial, and dangerous to be developed for public use. The development of these cars would require extensive funding, and this money could be much better spent. Some of these cars would only be partially automated and would still require a capable driver at all times, so what would be the point? Finally, driverless cars would be concerning from a safety standpoint - would these cars really be able to safely maneuver out of dangerous situations?
First, the development of driverless cars would be expensive. Automated cars require many sensors and cameras that regular cars do not need, and even with these sensors, the cars are not capaple of completely driving themselves. In order to achieve a reliable driverless system, all of our roads would have to have electricity or magnets installed, which even the article admits would be "too expensive to be practical". Furthermore, the money spent on developing these cars could be spent to help those who are less fortunate rather than creating new things for ourselves.
Another issue with driverless cars is the idea of cars that only assist the driver. These cars would drive most of the time, but they would, "notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents". These cars would certainly be helpful, but what would be the point of having a self-driving car if you still have to watch the road as if you were driving yourself? Some manufacturers talk of adding, "in-car entertainment and information systems," but if the driver were focused on these systems, would they be able to react quickly enough if the car approached a dangerous situation?
This question leads to what is probably the biggest issue with these cars: many developers of driverless cars claim that these vehicles would improve public transportation and, "use half the fuel of today's taxis," but what about the safety of the passengers? A truly driverless car would leave its passengers helpless in the face of an impending accident, and the addition of entertainment systems for part-time drivers would likely not give the drivers enough of a warning to react in the case of an emergency situation.
In conclusion, driverless cars should not be developed on a large scale. The huge amount of money that would have to be spent to make these cars safe would be much better spent helping those in need. Furthermore, cars that only partially drive themselves seem to defeat the intended purpose of the driverless car, as well as raising some safety concerns. It would be extremely difficult for the car alone to avoid dangerous situations, and the addition of entertainment systems would limit how much time a driver would have to assess and respond to danger. In all, driverless cars are far too expensive, needless, and dangerous to be developed or produced on a large scale. | 4 |
Car-Free Cities
Humans almost feel the need to own a car almost as much as they feel the need to own a phone. The automobile industry has been a growing industry since World War 2. There are so many advantages to limiting car usage. Saving on gas and getting good exercise are just a few of the great advantages of limiting car usage.
Vauban, Germany understands that according to Source 1 which talks about how they have given up their cars! Not only is it saving them a ton of money on gas, car insurance, car payments, and fixing parts, it also gives them all great exercise. If everyone walks everywhere everyday the whole city will be fit in no time. Another advantage to the loss of cars, no car accidents. 180,000 people die a year due to car accidents. The death's in this city will be reduced drastically due to no cars. This no car movement is a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere as a component of a movement called "smart planning".
Source 2 talks about how Paris has banned driving due to smog. Congestion went down 60 percent in the capital of France. Delivery companies in Paris complained of lost revenue, while exceptions were made for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers. The advantages of limiting car usage here is the you'd never have to worry about there being smog outside or snow etc. Limiting car usage, you wouldn't have to worry about the weather being so terrible that you can't drive in smog or heavy rain and have a car accident.
Bogota, Colombia joins the no car movement for what is known as "Car-Free Day". Source 3 discusses the day without cars in Bogota, Colombia. It is an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. It's seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to their city's mayor. Limiting car usage in this city could be great for a lot of reasons. One being they are the only Latin-American city to have covered 118 miles of bicycle paths. Their parks and sports centers are now blooming throughout the city. It's uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks.
Source 4 talks about the End of Car Culture. Studies have shown that as the years go on, driving is becoming less and less popular which is sad for many automobile industries worldwide. In America, the partial cause of the decrease in car usage is the unemployment rate being so low, it's not like someone has to go to work. Gas is becoming to expensive, why would people even want to have cars if they can barely afford them? Riding a bicycle is beneficial for more money in your pocket and more healthiness for your body. | 3 |
People have been dreaming of driverless cars for a long time now. Not having to do anything but sit there and relax, but is it always safe? Just because there is enchanced technology that makes people lives easier, that doesn't always necessariy mean it's safe. There are positives and negatives having driverless cars. Driverless cars would be a great pleasure to have. Just remember it does have it's downsides.
Driverless cars would make majority of people's dreams come true. Not only will people not have to drive as much anymore but it also makes their lives a whole lot easier. A lot of people are probably wondering how they could possibly just sit there in their car doing nothing as this car takes them to their destination. In paragraph 2, Google studies show, "They still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." The driver is still aware of everything that the car is doing. It alerts them to let them know what is going on and keeps the driver aware of their surroundings better than the driver do alone. If something does happen the driver always has the choice to take over or not.
Driverless cars use sensors to help the vehicle move and prevent accidents. With technological sensors, the car would have better view on the road rather than the driver itself. Their sensors are so enhanced that it replicates the human skill of driver. Some cars now actually use sensors to hep the driver. As stated in paragraph 4, "Google's modified Tayota Prius uses position-estimating
sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and a inertial motion sensor." All these sensors to keep the car and passagers safe. The more sensors there are the more alert the car is from any danger. This helps the car see more than the human ability of seeing.
The idea of driverless cars seems so well to not have a downside. There is always a catch when it comes to things like these. Sensors and alerts on a car may seem helpful but what happens if something goes wrong and that person gets into an accident? Technology isn't always perfect. There are glitches and with glitches things could go terribly wrong. In paragraph 9 it states that, "New laws will be needed in order 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?" There is a really good chance that this could happen. Are people really going to risk this?
There are pros and cons to having driverless cars. It could either make people's lives easier or risk it. It all depends on the person whether they are going to get the car or not. Even though driverless cars will help an individual, it could also go wrong. | 3 |
The face on Mars is something found commonly in American West or Mars. There have been people who dislike what NASA had to say about this picture, because at the beggingn NASA didnt know what it was for a fact.
NASA started focusing on this more and more. as it says in the article "Its not easy to target Cydonia, says Garvin."
Well they beggingned to take a photo of this object every year and the more they study on it the more it came to there minds that it wasnt a face and had to be something else. Many scienctists were taking a shot and believing the face was an alien artifact. Well as this got more interesting and popular to the world NASA had one day many years later, found out that this Face that people were saying it was had been a landform. In the article it states "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This proves that NASA has proof for this picture, that the people that had been disagreeing with NASA can no longer disagree because of what NASA put in for this to be proved it wasnt a face. | 1 |
It is suitable to argue for the development of driverless cars because they could easily be the newest innovation to improve the future of automobiles. Not only would they be more fuel efficient to aid economic aspects and contribute to conservation and improvement of the environment, but they would also greatly improve upon current systems of public transportaion.
Ideally, the Google Cofounder, Sergey Brin, could create the automoblie that he envisions. This would mean that the cars "would use half the fuel of today's taxis" (Passage 1).
Shortening the usage of fuel contibutes towards economic benefits because it would require less spending for the gas. As well as this, the decline in usage of fuel would benefit the environment both by using less natural resources from oil reserves, but also by emitting less harmful gases into the atmosphere which are currently destroying the ozone layer and causing issues such as global warming.
Improving upon current methods of public transportation, Sergey claims that he envisions these fuel efficient, driverless cars forming a "public-transport taxi system" and offering 'far more flexibility than a bus" (Passage 1). This would be an improvement because buses currently have limited range of motion and also move slower and use much more fuel than these new cars would. Also, public transportation would become a more attainable luxury for working class citizens who may usually rely on buses. With driverless taxi-like poublic transportation, a more suitable and enjoyable commute could be possible for those who can only pay a small amount for the service.
Although some may be concerned about the safety of driverless cars, the Google car has been opperating on the roads for 7 years without any accidents or crashes (Passage 2). It seems this would be even better statistics without crashing than most actual drivers today. This technology could be designed to be alert and tentative, reacting to every mishap, something that even some actual drivers today have trouble with due to distractions.
Driverless cars would greatyly improve the lives of people wanting to commute and use public transportation and aid the environment and economy with its benefits. | 3 |
Mars is a wonderful planet with many chacteristics. One of these characteristics is the "Face on Mars" which was discovered in 1976. Different people have different opinions on it. Some people think it was made by an ancient civilization on mars well others say it is a martian mesa. Which is exactly what it is but some conspiracy theorists like to disagree. Although there is plenty of information to prove them wrong.
First, the original picture was taken in 1976 with a not so sharp camera. Later though in 1998 a Mars Global Surveyor flew over and took a different picture and there was only a blur of a face with non-definant features. At that time people were anxious to see the picture and when they did they were disappointed. People started saying that it was winter and foggy so you couldn't see it. NASA disagreed but went along with what they said.
Next, three years later NASA went up yet again. It was a cloudless summer day in April. They were on the Mars Global Surveyor and captured the photo with the absoulute maximum resolution. With that time of camera you would be able to see a airplane on the ground or any type small shafts or Egyptian-style pyramids. That made most of the rumors end but there was still a few.
Finally there was a group of people who said NASA is hiding evidence from the community because they don't want us to know about it. That was a lie if NASA had found it they would want to tell the world. NASA space exploration fund would have gotten so much that they could study Mars for many more years to come. Some people at NASA were even hoping to find an ancient civilazation. In the end no one got what they wanted.
Therefore almost all the rumors were put to rest. Everyone now believed it was a mesa not a face. Although a face made by a far away ancient civilzation would have been cool to. Now a days people compare the mesa to a butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. So now they have a natural landform comparison. | 2 |
"Against Driverless Cars"
In the future we will need our own cars it's not neccesary to have that types of cars or traportations car like those kind. Everybody needs their own traportation to go to work,store,hospital,etc. For some reason it would be a good idea because it would save fuel because they will only used half the fuel of today's taxis and offer more far flexibility.
But,instead why don't they do they same cars now days people used and do it as the driveless cars it would be the same only thing that would be differnt is that everybody would have one it would be much easier and it wouldn't be public they would have to ride with other peopl or go all squish together because it's full.
Driverless Cars can be dangerous,How? well it couold cause accidents it can lose it's control anything can happen because their are that 100% reliable,plus google cars aren't truly driverless;they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of drivewaysor dealing with complicated traffic issues.
My opinion is no. I don't want for the future to have public cars like those. | 1 |
The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. This face has only come out once and we have not found any other faces planted on Cydonia, the region the face was located at. The face has been fading, There is no real proof of the face being kept there by aliens, and there was no alien momunment after all.
One reason is that the Face on Mars is just a natural landform because the face has been fading. The text states that they have tooken pictures of this Face on Mars and both times they have the face becomes unnoitcable. For Example: When one of the people went out and took a picture, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa - landforms common around the American West."
Another reason for the Face on Mars to be just a natural landform is because of no real proof leading to aliens being there. The passage states that no aliens have interloped the area or anything. The text showed that overtime the face has deceased of showing up. The Garvin states that the Face has come down to looking like "Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, that's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."
My final reason that the Face on Mars is just a natural landform is that there was no alien momunment or alien archifact. The text states that on April 5, 1998 they got the first really well took picture of the Face on Mars. When they uploaded the picture, nothing of the sort of alien industry being there. The text also stated, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien monunment after all."
The Face on Mars was incredible to see. The people were craving to see the alien life become on Mars and as so was the NASA people. Everyone was stoked to have maybe a new set of living creatures come out. " The 'Face on Mars' has since become a pop icon. It has starred in a Hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows - even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years!" Although, the Face on Mars was the only face that could be seen on there. The more pictures taken of this Face on Mars the more everyone found out that the face was more of a natural landform. "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." | 3 |
My friend and I decided to go to Mars just to have a lot of fun in space and we came down on Mars I saw a face and he says "Aliens" and i go "Aliens where did you get that from?" But it is a 3D fugure "New high-resolution images and 3D altimetry from NASA's Mares Global survey, and spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is", and he goes thats coo and tries to touch it and i said "dont touch it" just in case cause if its not our we shouldn't touch it at all. But every since its been found its been revealing its self over the yea, itsbeen there every since 1976 or maybe longer but thats when they discoverd it. Some scientists believe that is was an alien artcraft and most of them were shocked to see that. they say it looks like Mesa whatever that is. | 0 |
Changing The Future
Times are changing. Driverless car technology is being created, with slow and steady progress. The technology for these type of cars has only been developed over the last few years because of a lack of technology. There are several companies trying to develop these cars, but they're pretty much at the same step. Knowing how driverless technology works, who is liable for damages, and how it will effect drivers is crucial to the possible future use of driverless cars.
Driverless technology has to be understood by the consumer. If the consumer does not know how this technology works, it could cause some serious damage.
The consumer has to realize that driverless cars aren't completely driverless, the consumer has to know that they have to remain attentive while being in the driver's seat. "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." (Driverless Cares Are Coming paragraph 7). Without the realization that they have to be attentive, some bad accidents could occur.
Liability for the accidents caused by driverless cars has to be settled. The companies that make the driverless cars, or the driver, it is yet to be determined who would be at fault. The company for making flawed technology, or the driver for being in the car. "Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order 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 manufacturere?" (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 9). This will be a huge issue if driverless cars do become legal. Driverless cars could effect the people in more way than one.
The effect of drivers in the future if cars become driverless. Their is a great possibility of issues coming with driverless cars, some subtle, and some severe. Also, who would want a driverless car if you still had to driver it? That does defeat the purpose of the name of the car. "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 8). Being occupied while sitting there is imperative. People will become bored if they have to just sit in the seat all day long. Companies have to come of with entertainment systems, but an issue with that is losing attention. While being in the driver's seat of a driverless car, being attentive is imperative. There may be situations where the car cannot handle it, and it requires human skills. "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 7). There is a double whammy right there. Companies have to balance out occupying the driver and keeping them attentive; but there is no way to be distracted and attentive at the same time.
The risks involved with driverless cars are way to high for the potential payoff. The technology that is being developed might have a future, but in the near future, there is no way it'll work. Right now, they aren't even driverless cars, the cars still require a driver. Surely there will be progress on that aspec of the cars. Just simple knowing how the cars work is the first obsticle. Also, being able to figure out who is liable for damages between the manufacturer, or the driver of the car is a huge issue that comes with this. Lastly, how it will effect future driver's skills, and attentiveness while driving. Will there be a future in this industry, or not? Only time will tell. | 4 |
Everyday the world makes advances in the frield of techonology. But what would the world look like with driverless cars? The results can be only one of two outcomes, a world that is a ittle bit easier or a world of complete chaos. Driverless cars only make for more lawsuit cases, job loss, and dangerous glitches. Yes, the correct, safe technology could eventually be worked out and perfected, but that calls for trial and error, a risk the world should not take. Driverless cars are not something the world is ready for and this will only cause more problems.
An accident in a driverless car has occured, and who is to blame the owner or the manufacturer? Driverless cars are just lawsuits waiting to happen. The owner nor the maufacturer are going to want to take the balme when things go wrong. This then leads to a long drawn out court case of several individuals wasting time and money on something that could have been prevented. Several accidents happen everyday between cars with drivers, but there is already a set way on how to handle these accidents. Driverless cars will have to have a whole new set of rules and regulations. Just as the article states, there will need to be a new set of laws initiated to handle liability. The only problem, no one wants to be liable for wrong doing. But there is a simple solution, forget the driverless car and let the driver do the work.
The next issue with the driverless car is the fact that it will only create job loss. The economy already struggles with job loss as it is and with driverless cars it will only suffer more. The car will of course bring in engineers to work out glitches and fix software, but what about mechanics and taxi drivers? Sergey Brin elaborated on how he felt the driverless car would create a whole new form of public transportation. The mechanics will be replaced by engineers, and only visited every so often, if at all. The taxi system will be jsut about extinct, no taxi driver will be needed because the car will drive itself and give the passenger plenty of warning when needing assistance. This new technology will only destroy what is already working conveniently now.
Finally, all around the world there are struggles with technology. In the case of a driverless car, what happens if the car begins to glitch? There have been several cases in which a company has released a "perfected" product only to have it glitch or mess up in the long run. No matter how many test there are, you can never be sure that the car is one hundred percent safe. There is also no promise that a car with a driver is one hundred percent safe either, but at least that person has control. Why should someone trust a car with their life? There are so many things that could go wrong at any moment. There are hackers, glitches, and a whole list of technolgy failing things. The engineers at Berkley have made advances with a magnetic road, but the magnets could easily malfunction at any time. A car with a driver in full control is the best bet, driverless cars are just to risky.
There are so many amazing things the world has done with technology, but a driverless car is just not one of them. There are to many faults that could occur, and people's lives could be the consequences of these faults. With all the hackers and glitches out there, people can harldy trust that their cell phone will work at times, so why would anyone trust a car? A driverless car is a big risk, accidents will happen they happen with drivers behind the wheel. These accidents will only cause huge, drawn out lawsuits. Also a driverless car will take jobs away from the people. Just remember the next time you are asked to support a driverless car say no. Do not let a car make the decision of life or death for you, choose to drive the car yourself. | 4 |
I think you should join the program and become a seagoing cowboy because you get to go to unique places and do easy and hard work.
When you work for the seagoing cowboys you have a funtime. You also get to play sports like volleyball and soccer.
I think you should go and become a seagoing cowboy becuse of a article I
"read called A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves ". Some details that show to help support for this article are,that on line 5 it sates "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable oppurtunity for a small town boy" he says. "Besides helping people I had the the side of the benefit of seeing Europe and China but seeing the Acropolis was special. this part of the text gives evidence to show that you get to go to unique places.
This text also states that it took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic ocean from the Eastern coast of the United States, and a month to get to the China. Carring for the animals during the crossings kept Luke busy they had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. This shows evidenece to support that some parts of the job keeps you busy, and makes the work hard too.
Heres my last text evidence to show you why you should become a seagoing cowboy and this part of the text hel[ps understand how it could be casy and have freetime during work. " Luke also found time to have fun on board, espicially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table tenis tounerments,fencing,boxing,reading,whitiling an games helped pass time.
This is why I think you should be a seagoing cowboy too. | 2 |
Dear State Senator,
To be honest we should not keep the Electoral College because there unfair, outdated, and irrational. There unfair to citizens and the states who vote. In my opinon I think all the electors care about is just the winnings from the presidential candidate. I would like to call the Electoral College the disaster factor. I agree in Mr. Plumber saying. Bradford Plumber said in his writing of The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wong, "In the vein, "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for there party's candiate and caste a deciding vote for whomever they please...." I think there heartless. That's another reason why I don't like them. Now look all they care about is themselves. I pretty sure most of the voters or the states don't know this but did you know when we the voters "vote for the presidental canidate" we're actually voting for a slate of electors? Electoral College lack democratic pedigree, also there practical reason, liberal and conservative reason. What I found out that is also not fair is to the citizens and state who vote, is that the winning candiate's share his share of popular vote with the Electoral College. First of all, we voted for the candiate not for the electoral. We don't know the electoral. Knowing this, we the citizens just might not vote anymore. The electoral is not sharing the presidential house, we choose one person to look up too. Not the greedy electoral. Some states don't even vote anymore because they know that there vote has no effect. It's hard to say this but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the Electoral College!
Sincerely, PROPER_NAME, A citizen of Florida. | 1 |
The use of this technology to read the emotionl expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because it helps the teachers know the students feeling. When a student is confuse in a class, the technology can make it easier for that student. The computer knows when you're happy or sad. A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. The same technology can make computer animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgery.
The technology is intended to bring smile to your face. If you smile on a Web ad appears on your screen. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and forced one. The instruction are very simple, all you do is lift corner of your mouth and the computer knows the results. Moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them.
Facial Action Coding System has classified six basic emotion- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness and then associates each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. The coding system could tell if the student is telling the truth or lying. To an expert, faces dont lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling politician or celebrity isnt being truthful. By weighting the diffrient units, the software can even identify mixed emotions.
The technology can help the students get beter grades. The technology could make understand the lesson. This technology is very valuable in a classroom. It can read students feeling and make it understand for them. The technology can bring happiness to the students. This technology helps students develop more.
The computer knows when you're happy or sad. A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. By weighting the diffrient units, the software can even identify mixed emotions. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and forced one. This technology is very useful. This technology is somthing you must have in a classroom. | 2 |
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author explaines all the dangers of Venus and how to over come them. He gives you good evidence on how you could explore our sister planet without suffering the harsh weather of Venus's surface. Venus is the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, and it may have even had large oceans long ago, but today Venus's surface is inhospitable for humans.
The author states that "Astronomers are facinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." Venus is no longer Earth-like, its surface temperature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times the pressure we experiance on Earth. And with that, there are many other factors making Venus inhabitable for humans. The author did offer a solution to these dangers, which would allow the scientists to float above the dangers. NASA said they would take a "...blimp-like vehical [that hovers] 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." It would make the conditions survivable for humans, but how much research could you do on the planet when you're 30 miles above the surface? The author goes on and writes that researchers are working on machines that could possibly go in the ground of Venus and collect data about the surface,and could return it to the scientists for them to study.
The author of
"The Challenges of Exploring Venus," supports their idea that studying Venus is worth the risks. They take in account all the dangers Venus has to offer, and they come up with a solution that would make the planet explorable. | 2 |
The question is: created by aliens or just a natural landform? To the uninformed citizen, their answer would most likely be that the Face is created by aliens, and that we should all prepare for Earth's destruction. However, a well trained scientist at NASA, (like me), knows that the Face on Mars is obviously a natural landform.
You might be wondering how the Face on Mars got it's features. It might seem as if it was manmade because no amount of corrosion could make it look like an "Egyptian Pharaoh." That answer would be half correct because even though this natural landform is not manmade, the Face's features have not been created by corrosion. Shadows simply appeared in the picture, making it seem as if it were a face of an ancient pharoah. The Face is just another Martian mesa that is commonly found around Cydonia.
Although it is important to know how the Face got it's features, it is also important to know why NASA promoted this Martian mesa as "the Face on Mars."
NASA decided that promoting the pictures of the Face could make the public more interested in Mars. We were correct in this sense because it definitely attracted people towards Mars and it's peculiar landform. However, we were incorrect in the idea of promoting it as a Martain mesa that had the features of a pharoah. This image confused the public, and people started believing that there were actual aliens on Mars and that these aliens had made the Face. No matter how many times scientists released research that demolished the idea of life on Mars, the public twisted the story so that it was more interesting.
Even though there was an abundance of research showing there were no aliens making the Face, NASA went out and took more pictures. These images showed that it was only a natural landform, and that there are no actual features on the Face. As I said before, the features were merely created by shadows.
Of course, people still argued that NASA was wrong. People kept saying that the "markings" were hid by the clouds, and that these images were simply a failure on NASA's part. This failure being that they somehow forgot to take into account that there was clouds. However, as NASA was more than careful taking these pictures, the images were as accurate as possible.
The Face on Mars may just be a hoax, but NASA's research is nothing of the sort. NASA has proven that their detailed research is used to make sure that the public is well informed. The Face may have just been a natural landform, but the public's enthusiasm for these images, (no matter how skeptical), is something that can never be recreated with shadows. | 3 |
There are many dangers on venus. The atmosphere of venus is 97 percent carbon dioxide, which mean there isnt alot of oxygen and we need oxygen. the clouds on venus are made up of sulfuric acid. So if it were to rain we wouldnt be able to live becuase it would be raining acid. The planet earth is a nice comfortable temperature the we are used to. The planet venus has a surface temp of 800 degress fahrenheit which would make the planet inhabitable. The temperature of venus would melt metals. The pressure there could crush whole submariens. We do need to figure out a way of getting on that planet because our planet earth is slowly diteriating and we treat it wrong
The planet earth is a very comfortable planet. The ground on earth is a temperature that wouldent melt us to pieces instantly. Their is water, food, etc that can be here at earth so we can live here. their are jet planes that can fly low to the ground with no hazard but in venus you have to fly 30 miles above the ground because its to hot. Either way our curiosidy will het the best of js and start risking lives of many people to go and try to get someone on that planet. But that doesnt matter we need to make something that is heat resistant enough to be able to land on venus for exploration.
This is the reason why i think that venus is a worthy but dangerous pursuit. venus is a inhabitable planet at this moment. Earth is all we have right now. We are not treating this planet right and at the rate we are doing it weill make us have to migrate to a new planet mosy likely. This is my reasoning | 1 |
The author is positive about the idea of studying Venus; believeing that NASA should confirm bringing a scientist to Venus. Going to Venus has risks when is comes to going to a different planet with different conditons than earth. However, those decisions can come to weather someone goes to Venus could come back with great results of experiments that NASA is researching.
The atmosphere of Venus is a dangerous enviornment for human kind to be in. " ...(T)empertures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater that what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth..." This shows that Venus' tempertures have the risk of a scientist unable to survive in the atmosphere.
NASA, however, is coming up with ways to send a scientist to Venus with a safer way of getting information. "... (A) vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way... Not easy condtions, but survivable for humans." This reveals that there is still a chance that a scientist can go to Venus with not much to worry about.
The author gave details of why a scientist should go study Venus. The details show that a scientist can go to Venus, but they cannot enter the atmosphere. A scientist can however, go above the atmosphere and get research. | 2 |
If we start having driverless cars, then there are many pros and cons.
Driving cars that we currently have already have many positive and negatives.
In my opinion, driverless cars seem easier to work with almost like they would be safer because of all the improvements that a regular car doesn't have.
As the article mentions, the driverless cars would "need a whole lot of sensors, on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver and an inertial motion senser.
That being stated the driverless cars have a lot more look out than regular cars do.
Because, the driverless cars have more lookout than regular cars do, they would be more aware of what was going on, where the car was, how close it was to an object and better your safety.
Many cars that aren't driverless have a back sensor for when they are backing up, and will beep if the car gets to close to an object and that alone helps people out a lot so driverless cars that have sensors all around could help people out a ton by making them more aware of their surroundings.
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" states that they would "have a better response than a human driver can do alone."
The car would have a better responce because "furhter improvements in sensors and compter hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more driving tasks on their own."
By the article saying that, driverlss cars would be a huge help out to many people.
You wouldn't have to worry about getting lost or not knowing where to go because the car would know for you.
Also, with driverless cars they allow breaks to stop when needed so if you were in a sitution where you needed to use the breaks you for sure would be able too.
All of the "driverless" cars now arent fully driverless.
"They can steer, accelerate and break themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents."
That being said, the driverless cars that we have now are already smart enough to do their own thing but yet warning us when it comes down to needing human attention.
In driverless cars "the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over whenever required... the car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over by vibrating the seat, flashing lights on the windshield, and other heads up display."
There are many ways to get ahold of a driveer if needed to with th cars already, so hen they remake them into newer and greater cars... the cars should almost be smarter than us.
Would you rather have a car that drives itself?
Or would you want to have all control?
There are many important reasons you could mention for either side, but driverless cars sound a lot more interesting and safe to me.
Either way the car gives alerts when needed, has sensors to monitor angles around it and has better response and conrol than humans. | 3 |
Aliens! Ha not true. In the article Unmasking the Face on Mars. we have put out an image of the face on Mars. This Face was not made by aliens becuase its like a normarl landform found on Earth, authors made it so the public would be attracted to Mars, and it was proven to be a landform just like any other. This is not made by aliens it look alot like common land forms found on Earth.
From the ship point of view its just as if it were a landform found on Earth. First, in the text it states "the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesalandforms common around the American West." Showing that is just somthing found normally on a landmass. Second, the unusual shadows in the photos make it look Egyptain. Like something that would naturally form in that kind of climate. Lastly, on the JPL web site it revealed as a natural landform and not an alien monument.
Authors who put out the photos of the Face on Mars made it so the public would be attracted to it. First of all when people try making something interesting they could lie. In the article it states "The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars. It certainly did!" Then, somthing they said made it a huge hook. This was put into a Hollywood film, in books, magazines, radio talk shows and even haunted grocery store checkout lines. Lastly, All of this got people thinking that NASA would rather hide anything they really have about life on Mars. In what case we have nothing to hide because the face is just a normal land mass.
The face was proven to be a landform. First off, befor it was put out to the public it was said to have looked like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Nothing had to do with any other life form on Mars. After, It was all put out to the public and made into a huge deal people started to think we were hiding somthing at NASA. When really we stated it could be a landform befor all of it was in a Hollywood film, in books, magazines, radio talk shows and even haunted grocery store checkout lines. Lastly, it states "On a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." Proving it was never anything made by aliens. | 3 |
Have you ever wondered what people are feeling? well now you can. Their is this new software than can tell you what people are feeling eve tho they are hidding it. Dr. Huang's computer sinces a 3-D model (human musles). it can even read a painting, it want tellwhere your eyebrows should be and where they are and hiw suprised are you in that moment. It can tell you six diffrerent emotions, happiness, anger, fear, sadness, surprised, and disgust.
Dr. Huang's invention is very interesting. one day I would love to use this meachine. its just so diffrenet from looking at your friend and seeing what you think their feeling that actually feeling what they are feeling. In this article they were testing da Vinci and they named a code for it. it is called "da Vinci code."
It's so crazy to think that a computer can tell if your sad or happy. if you did a lab on if your partner can tell if your happy or sad. the comouter can tell if your faking a smile and if your really smiling, but in a humans eye it hard to see sometimes. people say that your faking a smile until your cheek bones move and tightin up.
They should do one in a classroom to see if the kids are bored and what time they get bored and intertainded. I wonder what peoples thoughts about seeing things online and see what their emotions are when their looking at stuff online. or like if you can read someones face when their walking into a interview and what they may be feeling.
Whoever can revel so much of this tecnology could maybe make more things in the future and maybe make more products of the face reader and study peoples faces and show what they could be thinking somedays. i think this idea is pretty cool and they should be spending more time studying and making more products for the future to show people what is amazing in this world. | 1 |
Wouldn't it be great to be able to drive to places without anyone actually driving? I think that would be fantastic! Today, I am going to talk about driverless cars. I think that driverless cars should continue to be developed because, they would make the world a more productive place, the cars are still in development and they would be cheaper in the long run.
First, I will talk about how they would make the world a more productive place. While we are driving we spend so much time paying attention to the road, but what if didn't have to? We would have that time to do other things, like maybe work on a new great project that could change the world. With driverless cars, taxi drivers wouldn't have a job. That means that they would have to find something else to do. They could become doctors and bring us back to health; They could become officers and protect us from the dangers in the world.
Next, I will talk about how they are still in development. I think that a lot of people are judging driverless cars by the way they are working now. We shouldn't give up on them so soon; Scientific discoveries happen all the time. Someone will find something that completely changes driverless cars for the better. Besides, they already show so much promise. In test drives, these cars could survive more than half a million miles without a crash. Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have driverless cars by 2020. Let's wait until then to judge driverless cars.
Lastly, I will talk about how they are cheaper. The driverless cars that Google cofounder Sergey Brin foresees would use half the fuel we use today. Fossil fuels are becoming an issue, but what if we had one less use for them? Without the need for so much fuel that wouldn't be so much of an issue anymore, and we would have more time to plan for whenever the time may be that we run out of fossil fuels. Also, if we perfected the driverless car there will be a lot less crashes. Without so many crashes we wouldn't be paying for repairs as often. We also wouldn't pay for the medical bills and such associated with an automobile accident.
In conclusion, I think that we should keep working on driverless cars. We should keep developing them because, they would increase the world's productivity, they are cheaper in the long run and because they deserve a chance. It would be great to be able to drive somewhere without anyone actually driving. | 3 |
In the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile ," the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. Now for this techology to be used in the classroom I have mixed feelings on weather this is appropriate to use. In the other hand it could potentially increase the student body to be more compatiable with being in school and truly enjoying the enviorment and space that they are in. Due to the fact that the teachers know how the students feel or mentally react to on what is happining.
The reason that I feel that this should not be used in school is the fact that it violates all of the personal and private feelings of a student and the lack of emotions it can tell, According to the text it states " Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happiness, surprise, anger , disgust, fear and sadness". There are more emotions than that. One out of the six actually represent something good and happy the other five are more on the sad and unhappy emotions. Another quote from this article states " In fact, we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day". If that is true then there would no point in for an emotion to tell you how they truly feel. There is nothing better than another warm blodded person with emotions aswell to say something such as hey i can understand what your going through I feel the same way you didn't have to tell me but I knew.
On the other side of the spectrum and saying how this could benifit the students and the teachers is how to make the class or more engaging to the students. As stated in the article " " A classroom computer could recpgnize when a student is becoming confused or bored ," Dr. Haung predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructure." " That could help a lot of students especially the ones eho normally dont like school. Plus this machine will potentially make you happier stated in the article " The Mona Lisa demonstration is realy intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows you just how much this computer can do." This coul help people with persay deppresion and confusion on making a choce or big decision on something.
This manchine the " Facial Action Coding System" could help with you arround your freinds or a crush/ significant other on how they truly feel twoards something. Aswell as trying or attempting to make them feel better. In the article stated it sites " For instance, you could probably tell how a freind is feeling simply by the look on her face. of course, most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc" This could say help the autistic kids who cant read emotions or conversation ques, and understand them so they dont hurt somebodys feelings. Furthermore, the text states " According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only express emotions, but also may even help produce them. " Doing so could help your freind whos having a bad day have a happier one or a loved one because thinking and trying to be happy will actually make you happy.
In conclusion in the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. I have personaly mixed emotions about this being used in schools as seen. Then again my overal feel of this is posiitive and sholud be regulated within schools. Due to how this may impact the teaching area and enivorment to best help the student or just a person in general. | 4 |
The article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" Describes the wonders of a new technology known as the Facial Action Coding System, which enables the computer to identify human emotions. This article brings to light the idea that this could be useful in a classroom environment to make computers more effective in teaching lessons as it could recognize if the student is bored. This is a good idea, because not only will it keep students on task, it will also encourage students to pay more attention in the future.
The main reason this technology could prove useful to a classroom environment is, as the article states, the fact that the student's computer could notice if he/she is becoming bored or confused. This allows the computer to react accordingly to grab the students attention just like an effective teacher. Keeping the student focused on the computer makes the lesson more through and easier to learn.
Some may argue that the computer can misunderstand or even tricked by false expression. However, it says in the article that by studying how the muscles act when revealing a normal vs a fake smile, the computer easily identified what a fake smile was. This renders the use of fake expressions obsolete, allowing the computer to affectively teach and recognize student needs.
In conclusion, this technology is may not only keep students, it will encourage student to devote more time to their education. The tech will not only recognize genuine sign of boredom and confusion, it will also identify whether it is being decieved or not. | 2 |
Venus sometimes called "Evening Star". This nickname is misleading since Venus is actually a palent. In our solar system, venus is the second planet from our sun, while venus is a simple to see from the distant but safe vatnage point of Earth.The Atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Onthe planent's surface, temperature average over 800 degrees.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration of
"NASA"
has particulary compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientistic to float above the fray. NASA is working on other approaches to studying venus. Like some somplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of venus's surface and lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Striving to meet the challange presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many aqually intiminating endeavors. Our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the every edges of imaniation and innovation. | 0 |
This is the stupidest thing to put in a class room. whats the point in having a
machine that can read emotions, maybe the kids dont wanna tell people how they feel because we havee been tauht not to trust people. so if a machine is gonna tell people how we feel or what we are feeling then whats the point of a counsleor.
one of the main reasons i wouldnt want tis in my school is because i dont want everyone to know if im having a bad day or if im mad. like if i come to class and im depressed and the machine tells that to my teacher then ill probably be put in counseling. and we are kids the only person that sould be able to read our emotions is or parents. Teens have a lot going on like the machine may not be right then we could get put in counseling or tutoring for no reason.
One thing i dont understand is what happens if were doing fine we just over hear a student say something confusing? would we be put in tutoring for that, and a lot of kids have stuff goig on at home so they dont neede a computer pointing out that they're upset or depressed. this iws why i think having a machine like this would not be a good thing to have in a class room. | 2 |
Driverless cars are clearly the newest innovation that will most likely affect human life.
Not needing to stay awake for an entire roadtrip sounds like an amazing idea.
Being able to take a nap while you are stuck in traffic would make it enjoyable.
But the only problem with self-driving cars would be the price and maintanece required.
They would most likely be too expensive for the average home so the only reasonable answer would be renting the vehicle.
Driverless cars would be a great innovation for people with disabilties.
Someone who was severly injured and is now incappable of driving by themselves would greatly benefit.
A senior who can't rely on their own motor skills could now easily travel to visit family. Transportation would be much simpler when the vehicle is able to pick you up, drive you to your destination, and ounce its delivered you it would drive back to maintanence.
There are plenty of benefits of a driverless car, but the largest benefit would be its impact on the economy.
These new cars need to be manufactured, which will create new jobs in factories that wil create these new cars.
It will also require people who repair or enhance the technology.
But the only setback of a self-driving car would be its ability to sence the world.
It would have to be programmed to deal with any situation which takes time to prepare for, because any new situation that the car hasn't dealt with would shurely be a problem.
Self-driving or assiting cars are the future, but of course the future takes time.
Many laws set in place would have to change for any business based on driverless to be a feesable idea.
The largest hill to overcome would be winning over the average person, they need to be convinced that driverless cars are safe and reliable.
Driverless cars sound like science fiction, but they in fact are a reality and people will want this new innovation that will make their lives simpler.
These cars would be a great inprovement in transportaition that would forever change the world. | 2 |
The advantages of car limiting car usage is simple. the passage" In german Suburb,Life goes on without cars ". It says the Vauban's families do not even own a car anymore ,because when I had a car i was allways tense ,but im much happier this way without a car. also passengers cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in europe and up to 50 percent in car-intensive ares in the united states. They are also trying to change the suburbs vauban home to 5,500 residents within a rectangular square mile. This would be the most advanced experiment in the low-car suburan life. And have been apoted all around the world to make suburbs more compact and more accessible all around the world.
Next," the passage paris bans driving due to smog". Tt talks about how after days of near-record pollutins,paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air global city. even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine. also congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of france,after five-days of intensifying the somg.
And the passage car-free day is spinning into a big hit in bogota. is talks about some great ways to limiting car ussage. Have a free car day is where u can just get out have fun while doing all different types of actives like hiking ,go ride on a bike, and even go swimming,this is the stuff that millions of the colombians did some even to took buses to work during that day. End got to work early not considering the traffic jams that they us to have .The only thing that are permitted on this car free day is the buses in the taxis the gas station was even close. This day was for a good cause the goal was to alternative transportation and reduce smog. i think it alos give u bounding time with ur family. And a good way and opportunity to take away stress and lowe air pollution.
Finally, in the end to a car culture ."President Obama's ambitous goals are to curb the united states'greenhouse gas emissions "a good this is that recent studies shows that americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. but people are also thinking how! when the united staes is the birthplace of the model T some explanations are that .Because of the cash-strapped americans could not afford a new cars and the unemployed weren't going to work anyways. | 2 |
The studing of Venus is worthy pursuit despit the dangeres because Venus it is one of the brightests points of light in the night sky. Venus is often refered as Earth's twin. Venus is 97 percent carbon dioxide. It challanges for clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere.
Venus is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, it makes it easy for an amateur stargazer to be spotted. Venus is the second planet from the sun, Venus is easy to see from eaths veiw point.
Venus is offten refered to earths twin because it is the closest to earth by size and density. The speed when they orbit differently around the sun.
Venus is about 97 percent of carbon dioxide. It challenges clouds of high corrosive sulfuric acid in the atmosphore of Venus. The tempature on Venus is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, also the presssure of the atmosphere is 90x greater then what we have here in our own plant.
The studing of Exploring Venus is a worthly pursuit besides the dangers such as Venus is at one of the brightest night point in the night sky.
Also Venus is often referd as earths twin. Last but not least Venus is 97 percent of carbon dioxide. | 1 |
Venus needs to be study, because we may need it later. Venus is the most like Earth in the solar system. Some of it's difference are pretty bad, but it's closest and maybe best opition for planetary vist. It's known about some of Venus diffculties, but if there is even a chance we could survive on Venus, shouldn't we try? One of the good things about Venus is that it's same size as Earth. If not the unbearable heat and carbon dioxide blankets we all would be able to be a on Venus. Another thing is that density matches ours, so we could stand on it. And then is basely our neighbor planet so we wouldn't have to travel that far to get there. But now you have to know the bad things about Venus. Firstly the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's, so we wouldn't be able to walk on there. In fact the would crush us completely. Then there's no water on Venus so we have to brings our own. Finally it's just too hot, with temperture of 800 degrees. So w/ all that in mind, Venus has it's ups and downs, but it's still worth studying to see if we can make it better. | 1 |
Driverless cars should have a driver my reasons for this is if theres a accident it cant move itself it needs a human so why not have one there and driving in the first place?. My second reason is why would there be a person in the driver seat if the car is driverless. If there are people walking in the street they can hit them on accident because the car is desingned to let the person drive whene there is a accident or to back in and out of drive ways
or to navigate on hard roads. My thrid reason is some people might get bored not driving some people enjoy driving snd they will soon get tired of waiting there turn to drive. Having a droverless car can be very dangerous. The car is not really driverless if it still have a person in it these are my reasons why there should not be a driverless car and the car should have people in them at all times because you never know whats going to happen. | 0 |
Throughout the decades of humans being on earth, we have evolved into a higher innovating society. We have designed technologies that ceased to exist one hundred years ago. Us humans designed "touch-screen" phones, the internet, and much more. Througout the decades we started advancing through technology and we keep perfecting every device and/or engine on the planet. For example, a car is a major part of the human society. We use cars to get from place to place and we're always making new versions. If you look back during the 1930s-1950s, cars weren't used as often we use them. If you were to look around, you would see families, men, and women walking alongside the road. During that time period, cars were not used constantly unless it was neccessary. Presently, many people believe that humans should limit car usage. There are some countries that banned cars for a short time period. such as, Paris,France and Bogota, Columbia. There are also some areas that completely banned car usage forever. Take Vauban, Germany as an example; they have decided that no one should use a car because it would be better for them. I second that motion; We should most definitely limit car usage because it is better for the earth and we would be saving loads of money. Not to mention that limiting car usage IS safer.
Limiting car usage would be making a statement. Many people would never stop using their car, but what they are not considering is if we stop using cars, we would be helping the earth. Pollution has become so horrible throughout the year. Now that there are scientists and experts that are making new cars every day, we cause a lot more pollution then you know. Beijing, China is known as the most polluted city in the world. The people that live there have to wear a mask so they don't inhale the smog. Smog consists of smoke and fog from engines and exhaust I would think that people should take that to account because who wants to live in a world where you can't even breathe safely in? Instead of making more fueled engines, we should be making more electric powered engines, or "hybrids". There are a handful of Hybrid cars around, but they are insanely expensive.
Moreover, limiting car usage would save us money. Instead of paying gas fees of 70 dollars and up, we can just carpool, ride the bus, walk, or even ride a bike.
Although, If we do limit car usage, it would be a bad busnes for car dealerships like Ford, Honda, and much more. Saving money can go a long way in America. With all the money you save you could pay for college tuition, buy enough food for multiple families, or anything that you want (depending how you save or spend the money).
Many people also believe that limiting car usage will help with stress and worries. People should take the time to walk to a closest friend's house and relish the nice oxygen that you breathe in. With the way it's looking now, we won't be breathing in oxygen for long, but mainly car emissions.
Furthermore, no cars equals safety. Many people pass away or becom seriously injured because of car accidents or getting hit by a car. If we do stop car usage , it would be safer to walk alongside the road and not be afraid of reckless drivers. There are people out there who won't even come out their house from fear of getting hit by a car or getting in an accident. There are many other safety precautions and dangers in the world, but limiting car usage could help a lot.
To conclude, every citizen across America should take account that fuel powered cars are a hazrd to the earth. Without fuel powered cars, we could do so much for the world and for ourselves. We would be saving money and we would be making the streets a safer place to be. | 3 |
I think that the "Facial Action Coding System" may actually be valuable. The machine detects emotions from using a picture and that can help with knowing how a person feels. The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect your emotions, it calulates all emotions found, and has most of the common emotions so the FACS has a very good chance of being accurate and valuable.
The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect emotions. This is useful because different muscles makes different emotions, In the article the athour explained how the machine can tell if someone was happy or not. "To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isn't being truthful." That explains that even if the person tries to change their emotion the real one will still be seen because of the muscles that they are using.
The "Facial Action Coding System" calulates all the emotions found in the persons face. Since the machine can calulate all the emotions it has a better chance if getting the right exact emotion the person is feeling and get all the emotions. This machine would be about to detect how any person is feeling and can show up at 6 emotions.
With the machine being able to caluate your emotions its able to detect up to 6 different emotions that people use everyday. "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. That was a discription of the Mona Lisa painting that the FACS gave. This shows how many differnt emotions she had and the machine was able to pick them all up.
The Facial Action Coding System is usefully when it comes to trying to figure out someone elses emotions. The machine uses the muscles in your face to detect your emotions, it calulates all emotions found, and has most of the common emotions so the FACS has a very good chance of being accurate and valuable. I personally think this device is a good idea and that it may be really accurate in finding emotions. | 2 |
People should join the seagoing cowboys program because you get to go to nine different trip.
Also they give you a lot of supplis so you can take care of the animal good and so they don't run out of food.
another reason you should join is becuase some jods can be hard but some are easy like, just checking on the animals every hour that was lukes jod.
Some details from the article to support luke's claims in why you should join the seagoing cowboys program are seagoing cowboys are more than adventure for luke bomberger.
luke opened up a new world to him.
''I'm grateful for the opportunity.
also another claim is you can go to Europe luke couldn't say no.
He know it was an opportunity of a lifetme.
also being a seagoing cowboy means to take care of the horse, young cow, and mules that were shipped overseas luke and don signed up. luke bomberger said ''it made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs,''and awareness stayed with his family to a numder of international student and exchange visitors of many years. | 1 |
Dear Senator,
Do you really think the electoral college should stay? The second source states that Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency. Does that make any sence to you? That even though the majority votes on one thing but they dont get that in a democracy?
The electoral college is just a waste of time. Why would i want to do what the second source says and vote for a guy to vote for who i want to vote for? Reald that sentence again. Makes absolutely no sence.
The only part that makes sence is that no matter how large of an area or the bias of an area, the electoral college can not be bias.
I think we should not have the electoral college. Mostly because i dont think i want to learn about swing states and run off elections and stuff.
Thanks for the consideration,
PROPER_NAME | 0 |
There are many people that are for having driverless cars, but I am against it. I am against it for many reason. First reason is because it will make people lazy. Second reason is because a computer cannot think like a human brain. Last reason is because they are not safe.
My first reason I am against these cars are because they will make people lazy. America already has enough lazy people. So why will we waste money on sensors to make a car drive by itself when we can control it ourselfs. According to paragragh 7
"They can steer, accelerate, and brake by themselfs." But paragraph 7 also say
"road ahead requires human skills such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." Which proves the only time you will actually have to drive is if you run into those situations.
Another reason I am against driverless cars ae because we can't trust technolgy to get us out of every situations. For example say you are riding and you car comes out to oncoming traffic and it wont stop. There will be nothing yuo can do to stop it. But if you can actually control the car than you wont have to worry about that because you know when to stop our car. Technology wise we are not ready for a driverless vechical.
My final reason I am against these cars are because the just arent safe. There are so many things that can happen while driving this car. For example a glitch can happen in the systemor you cars brakes stop working and you wont be able to stop and you could have nothing to do about it. In paragragh 6 it say a radar cost "two hundred million dollars." Why can't we use that money to make cars we can frive by ourselfs safer other than wasting money on a computer that can glitch out and stop working on us?
I am against driverless cars because they will make us lazier as a nation. They cannot think like a human brain. And finally because they just are not safe enough to be on the roads. | 2 |
The authors supporting details is pretty well. The author want to study the planet. His supporting detail are pretty good. The text states "Often referred to ss Earth's 'twin,' Venus is the closet planet to earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance to." The deatil really inetsting. A third grader can be really interested and would like to read more.
" A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus... On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater thn what we experianceon our own planet." I usually get lost to half the paragraph by now, but because it's so well written, ijust want to ead more.
The authors has really good supporting details. Th reader will know what he would be talking about what he mean. i would think that a lot of student would be interested to study other planets because if thus article is well written. | 1 |
The author well supports their idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite its dangers. They give evidence supporting the importance of Venus's past, its general beneficiality, and how it could positively affect our future.
Exploring Venus is useful because its past is similar to Earth's present state. The passage states that Venus is closest to Earth in density and size, then that "astromomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." By exploring the planet and its past, more understanding on its inhospitable fall would be known, and potentially used in the research of space travel and comprehension. Since Venus and Earth were so similar, it is likely that at some point Earth will have the same result as its sister planet.
Studying Venus also offers general beneficiality to space research. In the passage it says that Venus is occasionally the closest in distance to Earth. Because the distance is the shortest, the time neccessary to travel to, and thus, get feedback from, is also the shortest. Whether that be general information about interplanetary travel or information specific to Venus itself, the quickness alotted due to the distance is very useful since traveling in space has a very large time scale.
The future of technology and inhabitants on Earth can greatly improve with the study of Venus. By creating technology durable enough to withstand the intense weather and atmospheric conditions of Venus, it could prove to be durable enough for other planets that we could colonize. The author describes Venus's conditions as, ". . .temperatures averaging over 800 degreen Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric preassure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." To create machines and substances that can withstand these circumstances can be used for a multitude of things, both on Earth and in space.
The author has clearly proven that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit through these points, and more. Much evidence was given like general facts or statistics, along with a series of inferences that explain how Venus has the potential to be a large benefactor in interplanetary travel. | 3 |
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto we can see different studies such as the Beckman Institute for Advance Science at the University of Illinios and experts like Prof. Thomas Huan and Dr. Paul Eckman are saying that a computer software "Facial Action Coding System" can recognize emotions, the process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face with all the 44 major muscles they had classified 6 basic emotions which are happiness,surprise, anger,disgust fear and sadness.
"the facial expressions for each emotion are universal"
Dr. Huang observes, In my opinion computers should not learn or know how to read your emotions even thought it could help in a classroom by recognizing when a student is becoming confused or bored, i don't think every single human expressions of each emotions are the same, in the introduction of this article we can read that the "New software has been developed that improves accuracy in perceiving the emotions of other" but how accurate can it be? for example when your not making any face expressions or when you're not feeling any of those 6 expressions listed what is the computer going to say, In paragraph 7 and 8 we can see how the computers "can indicate the difference between a genuine smiled and a forced one" this is possible by using the Zygomaric major muscles but what about when you're making a forced sad face can the computer recognize that too?
because it doesn't really clarify in the article. Other reason why i think computers should not be able to read or recognized your emotions is because even if it does help teachers and advertisers see what the other people is feeling i don't think it would be very usefull.
In conclusion the software Facial Action System should not know how to recognized what you're feeling beacuse is not very usefull and it doesn't say how accurate it is also not every single human express their feelings, emotions or face expressions the same futhermore i think it is usefull for some people but not everyone would like a computer to tell them what they feeling. | 1 |
First, while I was on the boat with the Seagoing Cowboys, we had many things to do. One of them was that when the animals were off the ship we played baseball. The ship was big enough for it which was great for us. When the animals were on we learned new things about the animals. The male horses were the hardest to feed. They always kicked, but the females were nice and gentle while I feed them.
Next, when we went to China I saw so many cool buildings. Even some that have not even been seen no where else. I also saw the Acropolis in Greece. That was a great thing to see. In Venice, Italy I took no a gondola ride though the city with streets of water. I never saw anything so beautiful in my life.
Then, what I learned on this trip was that helping others that lost something in a war is pretty fun. I got to learn new lauguage and what they ate before everything was taken from them. Doing this will help u see how hard it can be when a we come and you never know that one of the days you live you will feel how they felt when they lost food and a home and even loved ones. Doing this your becoming a better person and people will look up to you for that.
Last, with the honor to do this wonderful thing I became a honorable person. Even though something like this can change things and the way people look at me. I was just a average boy until I went to the Seagoing Cowboys which changed how I even looked at people and myself. Doing this program will change your life and teach people how to be a great person. | 2 |
Dear, senator the Electorial College should be riden of. The people do not have much of a vote. We actaully vote for our candidates electors, the defenses of the system is wrong, and the winner-take all system is unfair. The people should make their own decisions and not be fooled about it.
We are told our vote counts. We have been fooled. We do not vote for the president directly. We vote for the state of electors who elect the president. These electors are our candidates electors. The electors could turn the other way and vote for the other candidate. It almost happened in 1960. The Office of the Federal Register states that the Louisiana legislature almost used new electors for the Demeocratic electors who would have opposed John F. Kennedy. He would have not had a popular vote. So, ask yourself, who do we really vote for?
The defenses of sytems is a joke. The most popular vote of a candidate should be who wins. The Office of the Federal Register described a situation in 2000 Al gore won the popular vote, but lost the presidency. It is a shame that this can happen. Now, ask youself, why can we not have the say on who is president?
Candidates do not spend any time in states they think will not win due to the winner-take-all system. Their main focus are on the "swing" states. As if we do not matter. The Office of the Federal Register says in the year 2000 campaign seventeen of the states did not see the candidates, and twenty-five of the largest media markets did not see a campaign add at all. Again, think about it and ask yourself, do we really matter?
It is not fair that we are underminded and fooled. we should have a say and not the electors. The people should have the power. The electorial College is outdated and should be riden of. It is our time. | 2 |
limiting car usage would be great for all of us around the world. It would be good for us to function regurlaly without a car. It would show us how people a long time ago got to different places by waliking or public transportation. I think by all of us not using cars will make us see how grateful we are for having cars. By us not having a cars it would help with our air pollution,help us get daily excercise,and help us spend less money on technology.
Although cars are a great benefit to our lives it can harm us as well. For example in Paris they had a near record breaking smog problem due to all the cars. The people of paris thought that diesel was the problem. Paris has more air pollution than any other European capitals. In recent recorded data paris had "147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in brussels and 79.9 in london" (paragraph 17 line 2-4). This shows that cars have a big advantage in our society today and a big part of our health as well.
Not having a car is good for us because it gives us daily excercise. By walking or riding a bike to work or school is good for our bodies. It allows us to take a breath of fresh air and enjoy nature and clear our minds. By walking to work it allows to take away stress and focus on what you are going to do that day. Not having a vehicle is good for us and makes us take advantage of life.
Lastly not having a car saves money. Being carless saves us money on gas and oil changes. If your car breaks down;thats extra money you have to spend on for car parts. If you got into a car accident you would have to pay for not only your car ,but the other persons car as well. You could save tons of money for yourself and your family by not having a vehicle. Not having a car quickly improves your health and your pockets.
This lifestyle will be healthy for all of us and shows us all we maybe missing out on. We as people rely to much on technology and put our everything into these devices. By us doing this it will improve our way of living. | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.